Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative study on nutritional and sensory quality of barnyard and foxtail millet food products with traditional rice products

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Food Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Millets have the potential to contribute to food security and nutrition, but still these are underutilized crops. The present study was undertaken with a view to analyse the physico-chemical, functional and nutritional composition of foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice and to compare the sensory quality and nutritive value of food products from foxtail and barnyard millet with rice. Analysis of physico- chemical and functional characteristics revealed that the thousand kernel weight of foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice was 2.5, 3.0 and 18.3 g, respectively and thousand kernel volume was 1.6, 13 2.0 and 7.1 ml, respectively. The water absorption capacity of foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice was 1.90, 1.96 and 1.98 ml/g, respectively and water solubility index was 2.8, 1.2 and 1.0 %, respectively. Viscosity was measured for foxtail millet (1650.6 cps), barnyard millet (1581 cps) and rice (1668.3 cps). Analysis of nutritional composition showed that the moisture content of foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice was 9.35, 11.93 and 11.91 %, respectively. The total ash, crude protein, crude fat, crude fibre and carbohydrate of foxtail millet were 3.10, 10.29, 3.06, 4.25 and 69.95 %, respectively, for barnyard millet were 4.27, 6.93, 2.02, 2.98 and 71.87 %, respectively and the corresponding values for rice were 0.59, 6.19, 0.53, 0.21 and 80.58 %, respectively. The energy value for foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice was 349, 407 and 352 Kcal, respectively. The foxtail millet contained 30.10 mg/100 g calcium and 3.73 mg/100 g iron whereas barnyard millet contained 23.16 mg/100 g calcium and 6.91 mg/100 g iron. Values of 10 mg/100 g calcium and 0.10 mg/100 g iron were observed for rice. The formulated products viz. laddu, halwa and biryani from foxtail millet, barnyard millet and rice (control) were analysed for their sensory qualities. Among the products prepared, there was non significant difference with regard to the colour, flavor, texture, appearance and overall acceptability of foxtail and barnyard millet laddu and halwa when compared to control. Foxtail millet biryani was most acceptable compared to barnyard millet and control biryani. Nutritive value of formulated products was calculated and it was compared with the rice. The protein, fat and fibre content of the formulated products from foxtail and barnyard millet were higher than the rice products. Thus from the present study it was concluded that the foxtail millet and barnyard millet are superior in nutritive value to rice and have potential for use in traditional food products.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agarwal P, Singh G, Srivastava S (2005) Effect of incorporating foxtail millet (Setaria italica) on the cooking characteristics of noodles. Beverage Food World 31(12):18–19

    Google Scholar 

  • AOAC (1990) Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical chemist, 15th edn. The Association, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  • AOAC (1995) Official methods of analysis of the association of official analytical chemist. Association of official Analytical Chemists, Washigton, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Arya C (2008) Formulation, nutritional evaluation and Glycemic response of millet flour incorporated breads. P.hd. thesis. G. B. Pant Univ. of Agri. & Technol, Pantnagar

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, R. D. 2003. Millet production. Guide A-114. New Maxico state University, Extension Agronomists, College of Agriculture and Home economics. At: http//www.google.com.

  • Chandrasekara A, Naczk M, Shahidi F (2012) Effect of processing on the antioxidant activity of millet grains. Food Chem 133:1–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande HW, Poshadri A (2011) Physical and sensory characteristics of extruded snacks prepared from foxtail millet based composite flour. Int Food Res J 18(730):735

    Google Scholar 

  • Devi PB, Vijayabharathi R, Sathyabama S, Malleshi NG, Priyadarisini VB (2011) Health benefits of finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) polyphenols and dietary fiber: a review. J Food Sci Technol. doi:10.1007/s13197-011-0584-9, [http://www.springerlink.com]. Posted November 22, 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Gopalan C, Ramasastri BV, Balasubramanian SC (2007) Nutritive value of Indian foods, Hyderabad, NIN, ICMR

  • Griffith LD, Perez Castell ME (1998) Effect on roasting and malting on physico-chemical properties of selected cereals and legumes. Cereal Chem 75(6):780–784

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hadimani NA, Malleshi NG (1993) Studies on milling, physico-chemical, nutrient composition and dietary fibre content of millets. J Food Sci Technol 30(1):17–20

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hulse JH, Laing EM, Pearson OE (1980) Sorghum and the millets: their composition and nutritive value. Academic, London, p 521

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawless HT, Heymann H (2010) Sensory evaluation of food: principle and practices: food science text series. Food Sci Nutr 2nd ed, 2010. XXIII, 596 p. Ed

  • Mittal M, Srivastava S, Singh G (2004) Nutritive value of native and malted barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacea). Beverage Food World 31(12):50–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajyalakshmi P, Geervani P (1994) Nutritive value of the foods cultivated and consumed by the tribals of South India. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 46:53–61

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ranganna S (1986) Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruit and vegetable products, 2nd edn. McGRaw Hill Publishing Co. Ltd. xvit, New Delhi, p 122

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith AR, Circle SJ (1974) Soyabean. Chemistry and technology. Wesport. Connecticut. Vol. 455–456.

  • Snedecor GW, Cochran WG (1967) Statistical methods, 6th edn. Oxford IBH Publishing Corporation, Calcutta

    Google Scholar 

  • Veena B, Chimmad BV, Naik RK, Shantakumar G (2005) Physico-chemical and nutritional studies in barnyard millet. Karnataka J Agril Sci 18(1):101–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Verma T, Raghuvanshi RS (2001) Uncommon plant foods of India. All India co- ordinate reacher project in Home Science (Foods and Nutrition). ICAR, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams PC, Nakoul H, Singh KB (1983) Relationship between cooking time and some physical characteristics in chickpea. J Sci Food Agric 34:492–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong (1923) J Biol Chem 55:421

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yadav RB, Khatkar BS, Yadav BS (2007) Morphological, physicochemical and cooking properties of some Indian rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. J Agric Technol 3(2):201–210

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Neha Tiwari.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Verma, S., Srivastava, S. & Tiwari, N. Comparative study on nutritional and sensory quality of barnyard and foxtail millet food products with traditional rice products. J Food Sci Technol 52, 5147–5155 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-014-1617-y

Download citation

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-014-1617-y

Keywords

Navigation