Journal of Food Science and Technology

, Volume 52, Issue 6, pp 3219–3234

Reduction in phytic acid content and enhancement of antioxidant properties of nutricereals by processing for developing a fermented baby food

  • Prasad Rasane
  • Alok Jha
  • Arvind Kumar
  • Nitya Sharma
Original Article

Abstract

Cereal blends containing pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) and oat (Avena sativa) in different ratios were processed (roasted and germinated) and also used as unprocessed flours followed by fermentation with Lactobacillus sp. (Lactobacillus casei and Lactobacillus plantarum). They were screened for total phenolic content (TPC), phytic acid content (PAC) and free radical scavenging activity (FRSA). A formulation with the highest TPC, FRSA and the lowest PAC was selected to optimize a nutricereal based fermented baby food containing selected fermented cereal blends (FCB), rice-corn cooked flour (RCF), whole milk powder (WMP), whey protein concentrate (WPC) and sugar. The optimized baby food formulation contained 37.41 g 100 g−1 FCB, 9.75 g 100 g−1 RCF, 27.84 g 100 g−1 WMP, 5 g 100 g−1 WPC and 20 g 100 g−1 sugar. It had high protein, vitamin, minerals, as well as good quantity of carbohydrates and fat, to fulfil the nutritional needs of preschool children of age 1–3 years. The nutricereal based fermented baby food showed high water absorption capacity, dispersibility, wettability and flowability indicating good reconstitution properties.

Keywords

Cereal blends Free radical scavenging activity Functional properties Phytic acid content Total phenolic content 

References

  1. Abdelrahman SM, El Maki HB, Idris WH, Hassan AB, Babiker EE, Tinay HELA (2007) Antinutritional factor content and hydrochloric acid extractability of minerals in pearl millet cultivars as affected by germination. Int J Food Sci Nutr 58:6–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adebayo-Oyetoro AO, Olatidoye OP, Ogundipe OO, Akande EA, Isaiah CG (2012) Production and quality evaluation of complementary food formulated from fermented sorghum, walnut and ginger. J Appl Biosci 54:3901–3910Google Scholar
  3. Adeleke RO, Odedeji JO (2010) Functional properties of wheat and sweet potato flour blends. Pak J Nutr 9(6):535–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ADMI (1965) Standards for grades of dry milk including methods of analysis. American Dry Milk Institute Bulletin, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. AOAC (1980) Official methods of analysis, 13th edn. Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  6. AOAC (2000) Official methods of analysis of the association of official agricultural chemists. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, pp 125–139Google Scholar
  7. Beevi SS, Mangamoori LN, Gowda BB (2010) Polyphenolics profile, antioxidant and radical scavenging activity of leaves and stem of Raphanus sativus L. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 65:8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blandino A, Al-Aseeri ME, Pandiella SS, Cantero D, Webb C (2003) Cereal-based fermented foods and beverages. Food Res Int 36:527–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buma TJ (1972) The cause of particle porosity of spray dried milk. Neth Milk Dairy J 26:60–67Google Scholar
  10. Bvochora JM, Reed JD, Reed JS, Zvauya R (1999) Effect of fermentation processes on proanthocyanidins in sorghum during preparation of Mahewu: a non-alcoholic beverage. Process Biochem 35:21–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrispeels MJ, Varner JE (1967) Determination of amylase activity in germinated grains. Food Nutr Bull Suppl 9:293–306Google Scholar
  12. Craft BD, Kosinska A, Amarowicz R, Pegg RB (2010) Antioxidant properties of extract obtained from raw dry-roasted, and oil roasted US peanuts of commercial importance. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 65:311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dewanto V, Wu X, Liu TH (2002) Processed sweet corn has higher antioxidant activity. J Agric Food Chem 51:6657–6662Google Scholar
  14. Dordevic TM, Siler-Marinkovic SS, Dimitrijevic-brankovic AI (2010) Effect of fermentation on antioxidant properties of some cereals and pseudo cereals. Food Chem 119:957–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Egounlety M (2002) Production of legume-fortified weaning foods. Food Res Int 35:233–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El Khalifa AO, EI Tinay AH, Ali AM (2007) Fermented sorghum foods of Sudan—a review. J Food Sci Technol 44:343–349Google Scholar
  17. Ghavidel RA, Davoodi MG (2011) Processing and assessment of quality characteristics of composite baby foods. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 59:2041–2043Google Scholar
  18. Greiner R, Konietzny U (2006) Phytase for food application. Food Technol Biotech 44(2):125–140Google Scholar
  19. Hols G, van Mil PJJM (1991) An alternative process or the manufacture of whole milk powder. J Soc Dairy Technol 44:49–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hotz C, Gibson RS (2001) Assessment of home-based processing methods to reduce the phytate content and phytate/zinc molar ratio of white maize (Zea mays). J Agric Food Chem 49:692–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hussain I, Uddin MB, Aziz MG (2011) Optimization of antinutritional factors from germinated wheat and mungbean by response surface methodology. Int Food Res J 18(3):957–963Google Scholar
  22. ICMR (2008) Nutrient requirements and recommended dietary allowances for Indians. A report of the expert group of the Indian Council of Medical Research. National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) Press, HyderabadGoogle Scholar
  23. Jha A, Patel AA, Singh RRB (2002) Physicochemical properties of instant kheer mix. Lait 82:501–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kelly AL, O’Connell JE, Fox PF (2003) Manufacture and properties of milk powder. In: Fox PF, Mc Sweeney PLH (eds) Advanced dairy chemistry, vol. 1, proteins. Kluwer Acad/Plenum Pub, New York, pp 1027–1054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ledesma RGG, Santos FF, Briagas KB (2005) Spectrophotometric determination of phytic acid levels in plants feedstuff for GET-EXCEL tilapia feed formulation. Bulletin of National Fisheries Research and Development Institute, Metro ManilaGoogle Scholar
  26. Leland JV (1997) Flavour interactions: the greater role. Food Technol 51:75–80Google Scholar
  27. Lopez HW, Leenhardt F, Coudray C, Remesy C (2002) Minerals and phytic acid interactions: is it a real problem for human nutrition? Int J Food Sci Technol 37:727–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Masters K (1979) Some properties of instantized dry milk. J Dairy Sci 62:253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mettler AE (1980) Chemical and physical aspects of powder quality. In: Milk and whey powders. The Society of Dairy Technology, Middlesex, United Kingdom, pp 92–116Google Scholar
  30. Muers MM, House TU (1962) A simple method for comparing wettability of instant spray dried separated milk powder. Copenhagen, Denmark: XVI International Dairy Congress, p 8:299Google Scholar
  31. N’Dri D, Mazzeo T, Zaupa M, Ferracane R, Fogliano V, Pellegrini N (2013) Effect of cooking on the total antioxidant capacity and phenolic profile of some whole-meal African cereals. J Sci Food Agric 93:29–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nout MJR (2009) Rich nutrition from the poorest—cereal fermentation in Africa and Asia. Food Microbiol 26(7):685–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Polycarpe-Kayode AP, Nout MJR, Bekker EJ, Van Boekel MAJS (2006) Evaluation of the simultaneous effects of processing parameters on the iron and zinc solubility of infant sorghum porridge by response surface methodology. J Agric Food Chem 54:4253–4259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rasha Mohamed K, Abou-Arab EA, Gibriel AY, Rasmy NMH, Abu-Salem FM (2011) Effect of legume processing treatments individually or in combination on their phytic acid content. Afr J Food Sci Technol 2:36–46Google Scholar
  35. Renner E (1988) Storage stability and some nutritional aspects of milk powders and ultra high temperatures products high ambient temperatures. J Dairy Res 55:125–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sanz-Penella JM, Laparra JM, Sanz Y, Haros M (2012) Bread supplemented with Amaranth (Amaranthus cruentus): effect of phytates in in vitro iron absorption. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 67:50–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SCF (2003) Report of the scientific committee on food on the revision of essential requirement of infant formula and follow-on formulae. SCF/CS/NUT/IF/65 Final, European CommissionGoogle Scholar
  38. Sedej I, Sakac M, Mandic A, Misan A, Tumbas V, Hadnadev M (2011) Assessment of antioxidant activity and rheological properties of wheat and buckwheat milling fractions. J Cereal Sci 54:347–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sindhu SC, Khetarpaul N (2005) Development, acceptability and nutritional evaluation of an indigenous food blend fermented with probiotic organisms. Nutr Food Sci 35:20–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sinha R, Kawatra A (2003) Effect of processing on phytic acid and polyphenol contents of cowpeas [Vigna unguiculata (L) Walp]. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 58:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sjollema A (1963) Some investigation on the free flowing properties and porosity of milk powders. Neth Milk Dairy J17:245–253Google Scholar
  42. Sodipo MA, Fashakin JB (2011) Physicochemical properties of a complementary diet prepared from germinated maize, cowpea and pigeon pea. J Food Agri Env 9(3–4):23–25Google Scholar
  43. Sweetsur AWM (1976) The stability of instantized skimmed milk powder to hot coffee. J Soc Dairy Technol 29:157–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. VICH Steering Committee (2002) Testing of residual formaldehyde. VICH International Cooperation on Harmonization of Technical Registration of Veterinary Medical Products. pp 4–6Google Scholar
  45. Waniska RD, Hugo LF, Rooney LW (1992) Practical methods to determine the presence of tannins in sorghum. J Appl Poult Res 1:122–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Prasad Rasane
    • 1
  • Alok Jha
    • 1
  • Arvind Kumar
    • 1
  • Nitya Sharma
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre of Food Science and TechnologyBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Farm EngineeringBanaras Hindu UniversityVaranasiIndia

Personalised recommendations