Physical, functional and sensory profile of buckwheat-based health mix

Introduction

Buckwheat is often mistaken for a cereal grain, is a unique and versatile pseudo-cereal with a distinct set of characteristics. Buckwheat, scientifically known as Fagopyrum esculentum gets its name from the combination of the Anglo-Saxon words "boc" (meaning beech) and "whoet" (meaning wheat) due to its resemblance to beech nuts (Ahmed et al., 2014) [2] . Buckwheat is grown in Japan, Korea, China, Belarus, Moldova, Poland, Yugoslavia, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, Italy, France, USA, Brazil and some other countries (Ikeda, 2002) [7] . As per the findings of Farooq et al. (2016) [5] , buckwheat cultivation is observed in the following Indian states: Jammu and Kashmir, Uttarakhand, West Bengal, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur. Buckwheat has a powerful ecological adaptability that allows the plant to grow in almost all kinds of extreme environments (Ahmed et al., 2014) [2] . Buckwheat can flourish in practically any type of harsh climate due to its remarkable ecological adaptation (Li & Zhang, 2001) [8] . Buckwheat's distinctive earthy, nutty flavor sets it apart from conventional grains like wheat and rice. Its versatility shines through as it can be milled into flour, prepared as whole groats or used in the form of noodles (known as soba in Japanese cuisine) or pancakes (such as blinis in Russian cuisine). Sindhu and Khatkar (2016) [11] at Hisar analysed the physical and functional properties of tartary buckwheat grain flour. The results revealed that the flour had swelling power of 6.54 g per g, solubility of 15.52 percent, water absorption capacity of 119 percent, oil absorption capacity of 126.66 percent and bulk density of 0.68 g per ml. Baljeet et al. (2010) [10] at Haryana assessed the functional properties of buckwheat flour and observed that the water absorption capacity (133.67 %) and swelling capacity (15.77 ml) of buckwheat flour was lower than that of refined wheat flour (151.00 % and 16.37 ml) respectively. But the oil absorption capacity (181.37 %) and bulk density (0.81 g/ml) of buckwheat flour were significantly higher than that of refined wheat flour (16.37 % and 0.73 g/ml) respectively. The present research was conducted to study the physical, functional and sensory attributes of roasted buckwheat-based health mix.

Physical properties of roasted buck wheat-based health mix:

The physical parameters such as weight and volume were determined by using methods of (Amerine et al., 2013) [3] , bulk density such as tapped bulk density (TBD) and loose bulk density (LBD) was determined by following formula of (Goula et al., 2008) [6] , colour was assessed in spectrophotometer (Konica Minolta spectrophotometer of model CM 2600/2500d) and viscosity was measured by using method illustrated by Abdalla et al. (2009) [1] .

Functional properties of buckwheat-based health mixes:

Functional properties like water absorption capacity was determined by the method of Quin and Paton (1983), oil absorption capacity was assessed by using Sosulski et al. (1976) [12] method, swelling power and solubility were estimated as per Schoch (1964a) [9] and gelation temperature was analyzed using the method illustrated by Abdalla et al. (2009) [1] .

Sensory profile of roasted buckwheat-based health mix:

The sensory evaluation of roasted buck wheat-based health mix was carried out using method of (Amerine et al., 2013) [3] .

Statistical analysis:

The data was computed for mean, standard deviation and ANOVA. The experimental results were carried out by using SPSS statistical package (version 23).

Results and Discussion

As displayed in Table 1. no significant difference was observed among control and RBWBHM in physical parameters such as weight, tapped bulk density, loose bulk density, viscosity (hot paste and cold paste) and a* value ranging from 10.00-10.00 g, 0.91-0.93 g/ml, 0.81-0.82 g/ml, 6.93-6.94(cP); 8.58-8.62 and 2.33-2.44 respectively. Significant (p<0.01) difference was found in volume and colour values such as L* and b* ranging from 12.17-13.33, 41.87-59.33 and 14.58-16.47 respectively. volume was more in case of roasted buckwheat-based health mix (13.33) than control (12.17) and bulk density (g/ml) such as tapped and loose was less (0.91 and 0.81) in comparison to control (0.93 and 0.82). The pre-treatment process of roasting induces moisture removal and concurrently triggers dextrinization reactions, culminating in a reduction of volume (Srilakshmi, 2006) [13] but the porosity of buckwheat is more than wheat which resulted more increase in volume in case of roasted buckwheat-based health mix in comparison to control. Swaminathan et al. (2018) [14] reported that the instant rice beverage mix contained a bulk density of 0.56 g per cm 3 and bulk density depends upon the particle size of the samples. Sharma et al. (2020) [10] reported that the novel Sattu beverage enriched with beetroot juice had the color values such as lightness L* (-6.3), redness a* (3.2) and greenness b* (0.8), the value elucidated by them had low L and b values compared to the results obtained in the present study which may be due to the different ingredients and different processing methods used. The results pertaining to functional parameters are shown in Table 2. Significant difference was observed among control and RBWBHM in parameters such as WAC (p<0.05) and final gelation temperature and time at (p<0.01) ranging from 2.14-3.37 (g/g), 94.03-95.03 °C and 723.37-750.44 seconds respectively. The WAC and OAC was found highest in control followed by RBWBHM. Baljeet et al. (2010) [10] at Haryana assessed the functional properties of buckwheat flour and observed that the water absorption capacity (133.67 %) of buckwheat flour was lower than that of refined wheat flour (151.00 %) respectively. Organoleptic evaluation of roasted buckwheat-based health mix and control [wheat: green gram: rice flakes: milk powder: sugar powder: cardamom powder] was done to know the acceptability of roasted buckwheat-based health mix w.r.t control. The results are shown in Table 3. The sensory scores obtained viz., appearance, colour, flavour, taste, consistency and overall acceptability of control were (8.8, 8.6, 8.87, 8.73, 8.93, and 8.87) and scores for RBWBHM were (7.2, 7.2, 7.2, 7.4, 7.67 and 7.13) respectively. All the values were statistically significant at (p<0.01).

Buck wheat and green gram were cleaned, washed and dried 

Roasted at in a wok  Buckwheat, green gram, rice flakes, milk powder, sugar and cardamom powder were in the ratio of 50:30:10:5:4:1.  All the ingredients were pulverized and sieved to 150 µ mesh size to obtain roasted buckwheat-based health mix  Health mix was packed in aluminium laminate pouches and stored at 26⁰c for further analysis Values are the mean of three replications ± SD. *-Significant at 5 percent level, **-Significant at 1 percent level, NS-non significant. RBWBHM-roasted buckwheat-based health mix, BWBHM-buckwheat-based health mix, Control-(wheat: green gram: rice flakes: milk powder: sugar powder: cardamom powder) Sensory evaluation done by nine-point hedonic scale, Values are the mean of 15 replications ± SD. S. Em-Standard error mean, CD-Critical difference, **-highly Significant at 1 percent, *-Significant at 5 percent level and NS-non significant. Values with a different superscript in the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05). RBWBHM-roasted buckwheat-based health mix, BWBHM-buckwheatbased health mix, Control-(wheat: green gram: rice flakes: milk powder: sugar powder: cardamom powder)

Conclusion

The outcomes of this current study have unveiled that the roasted buckwheat-based health mix exhibited no noteworthy distinctions in various physical and functional attributes, indicating its potential as a substitute for wheat. Consequently, our findings endorse buckwheat as an excellent candidate for inclusion in dietary formulations. Furthermore, the sensory evaluation confirmed that the developed roasted buckwheat-based health mix performed comparably to the control, affirming its palatability and suitability for broader consumption. This underscores the promising versatility and nutritional value of buckwheatbased products.

References

1. Abdalla AA, Ahmed UM, Ahmed AR, El Tinay AH, Ibrahim KA. Physicochemical characterization of traditionally extracted pearl millet starch. Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 2009;5(11):2016-2027.
2. Ahmed A, Khalid N, Ahmad A, Abbasi NA, Latif MSZ, Randhawa MA. Phytochemicals and biofunctional properties of buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum). The Journal of Agricultural Science. 2014;152(3):349-369.
3. Amerine MA, Pangborn RM, Roessler EB. Principles of sensory evaluation of food. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2013. p. 235-241.
4. Baljeet SY, Ritika BY, Roshan LY. Studies on functional properties and incorporation of buckwheat flour for biscuit making. International Food Research Journal. 2010;17:1067-1076.
5. Farooq S, Rehman R, Bilal T, Malik B. Cultivation, agronomic practices and growth performance of buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum). In: Molecular Breeding and Nutritional Aspects of Buckwheat. 2016;23:299-320.
6. Goula AM, Adamopoulos KG. Effect of maltodextrin addition during spray drying of tomato pulp in dehumidified air: II. Powder properties. Drying Technology. 2008;26(6):726-737.
7. Ikeda K. Buckwheat: composition, chemistry, and processing. Advances in Food and Nutrition Research. 2002;44:395-414.
8. Li S, Zhang QH. Advances in the development of functional foods from buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum). Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2001;41:451-464.
9. Schoch TJ. Swelling power and solubility of granular starches. In: Methods in Carbohydrate Chemistry. 1964;4:106-108.
10. Sharma A, Mazumdar B, Keshav A. Formulation, standardization and characterization of novel sattu beverage enriched with beetroot juice. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2020;57(5):1936-1943.
11. Sindhu R, Khatkar BS. Physicochemical and functional properties of starch and flour of Tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum). International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology. 2016;6:315-320.
12. Sosulski F, Humbert ES, Bui K, Jones JD. Functional properties of rapeseed flours, concentrates and isolate. Journal of Food Science. 1976;41(6):1349-1352.
13. Srilakshmi B. Nutrition Science. New Delhi: New Age International; 2006.
14. Swaminathan I, Guha M. Protein-rich instant rice beverage mix and its quality attributes. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2018;42(6):e13628.
15. Qin P, Tingjun M, Li W, Fang S, Guixing R. Identification of Tartary buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum) tea aroma compounds with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Journal of Food Science. 2011;76:401-407.