Development of finger and banyard millet based fortified nutri-mix powder: A sensory acceptability, nutritional value and microbial load (shelf-life)

Introduction

Millet's grain plays a major role in alleviation and malnutrition among the children and adult. Barnyard (Echinochloa spp.) is oldest domesticated minor millet; it's also called Sanwa (Hindi), Kuthiravaal (Tamil), Oodalu (Kannada), Udalu/Kodisama (Telugu) and Kuthiravaali (Malayalam) in India (Harinarayanan et al.,2023) [5] . Among many cultivated and wild species of barnyard millet grow in the world, most popular species are Echinochloa frumentacea (India) and Echinochloa esculenta (Japan) (Sood et al., 2015) [23] . Barnyard millet grains are a rich source of dietary nutritional fiber, iron, zinc, calcium, protein, magnesium, fat, vitamins, and some essential amino acids (Singh et al., 2010; Saleh et al.,2013) [17,19] . The approximate composition of barnyard millet in 100 gm grain is 10.5% protein, 3.6-3.8% fat, 51.5-62 g/100gm carbohydrate, 398 kcal/100 g energy, 5.41-6.8% crude fiber and total dietary fibre content is 12.6% including soluble (4.2%) and insoluble (8.4%) dietary fibre (Ugare et al. 2014; Singh et al. 2022) [20,27] . This composition contributes to improved digestive health by preventing constipation, reducing blood cholesterol levels, and enabling a slow, sustained release of glucose during digestion. Barnyard millet grains are gluten-free, offering significant potential for use in health foods (Hoshino et al., 2010) [6] . Finger millet (Eleusine coracan) is recognized as one of the most nutrient-dense minor cereals. In India, it is known by different names like Mandua (Hindi), Ragi (Kannada), Kelvaragu (Tamil), Ragulu (Telugu), Moothari (Malayalam) (Harinarayanan et al.,2023) [5] . Its 100g grain is contain carbohydrates 66.82%, Protein 7.16%, Fat 1.92%, rich in dietary fibre 11.18% with insoluble 9.51% and soluble 1.67% (Rishitha, P. & Soni, D. 2024) [14] .

Finger millet is providing essential amino acids such as isoleucine, phenylalanine, leucine, and methionine, also with key minerals including calcium, phosphorus, and iron. Finger millet is a good source of vitamins, particularly Bgroup vitamins (1.71 mg) and vitamin E (22 mg). Due to its rich nutritional profile, finger millet offers a wide range of health and medicinal benefits (Chandra et al., 2016) [1] . Millets, known as "Nutri-Cereals," has improving nutrition, supporting environmental sustainability, and enhancing food security. Health benefits associated with millet consumption, emphasizing their role in addressing hidden hunger and malnutrition. Despite these benefits, millets face barriers in cultural acceptance and require improved processing techniques. Indian government is declared year 2023 are 'International Year of Millets'. The main purpose was to launch innovative schemes that promote millet cultivation and production as well as health benefits. Recommendations for these future policies aimed at ongoing millet promotion include advocating for millets as climate-resilient crops, enhancing farmers' access to better millet varieties and technologies, creating a conducive environment for millet processing and marketing, and encouraging international cooperation for millet research and development. Millets such as Finger millet and Barnyard millet are rich in minerals, fiber and calcium, while pulses and legumes play significant protein content for health benefits. Incorporation of oilseed such as flaxseed and sesame enhance the content of essential fatty acids and micronutrients. The use of functional and test improvement ingredients such as moringa, carrot, and beet root powder due to their high level of bioactive compounds, vitamins and antioxidants. These ingredients not improved only nutritional profile but also add value in health benefits, enhance the immunity and prevents of chronic diseases. Additionally, the use of Jaggery, a traditional sweetener produced from sugarcane juice, forms an important dietary component of health benefits. It is considered a natural nutraceutical due to its content of essential amino acids, minerals, vitamins, and antioxidant compounds. As a functional food, jaggery provides substantial amounts of carbohydrates (sucrose, fructose, and glucose), minerals (such as calcium, potassium, sodium, iron, zinc, and magnesium), and vitamins (B, C, D, and E), all of which support normal growth and physiological functioning [13,18,19,22] . The poor health outcomes among the tribe and village population in India, particularly women's and children's, are attributed to the lack of dietary diversity. Financial circumstances, shifts to lucrative crops, dependency on a Public Distribution System (PDS) that failed to incorporate traditional food patterns. A community feeding pilot study conducted among school-going children in India proved that millet-based food formulations are not only acceptable, but also help to improve the growth of children compared to regularly consumed rice-wheat based diets (Saikat et al., 2024) [16] . Value addition in millet-based food products has emerged as a promising approach to enhance the nutritional quality, diversity, and marketability of these traditional grains. Millets, such as sorghum, pearl millet, finger millet, foxtail millet, kodo millet and proso millet, have been staple foods for millions of people worldwide for centuries. Value addition in food products refers to the process of enhancing the quality, nutritional value, shelf-life, and overall appeal of raw or minimally processed foods through various techniques and interventions. Value addition plays a crucial role in improving food security and nutrition outcomes by enhancing the availability, accessibility, and affordability of nutrient-rich foods (Smith & Johnson, 2021) [22] . This will be assessed through a variety of indicators, including anthropometric measurements, body composition analysis and biochemical parameters. Early initiation of a safe, reliable, and sustainable nutrient-rich diet, especially from plant-based traditional food, represents a promising approach to treating malnutrition. Both Finger millet and Barnyard millet-based value-added products powder are micronutrient rich which can further address hidden hunger among children. This research will serve as a proof of concept for a larger randomized nutrition trial that includes the use of millets, grain and incorporated products to address undernutrition in village school children and health improvement.

Material and Methods

The study on developing finger millet and barnyard milletbased value-added product Nutri-mix powder was carried out in the Food Laboratory of the Department of Food Science and Nutrition, CSA University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur.

Procurement of raw ingredients

The raw ingredients required for product development: finger millet (ragi), barnyard millet (sanwa), beetroot, carrot, pulse grains (gram, mung and soybean), refined oil, flax seeds, sesame seeds, and jaggery powder-were procured in bulk from the local market of Rawatpur, Kanpur and moringa fresh leaf from research farm of CSA university.

Product development

The value-added product, nutri-mix powder was formulated using multigrain flour comprising finger millet flour & barnyard millet flour, sprouted grain powder, beetroot, carrot & moringa powder, jaggery, dry fruits and peanut seed were incorporated as respectively. The formulations were standardized by incorporating ingredients in different proportions across with product codes. The composition ratios for the Nutri Mix Powder variants (T0-T4) were as follows: Where each treatment (T1-T4) ratio represents the proportion of millets flour, sprouted grains powder, beetroot powder, carrot powder, moringa powder, and jaggery respectively. Their control treatment (T0) ratio represents wheat flour, sugar, and oil respectively. The formulation of Nutri-mix powder prepared with different combinations of cereal, millet, pulses, vegetables, seeds and sweeteners. Five product codes with T0 (control), T1, T2, T3, and T4 represent increasing levels of nutrient-rich ingredients (Table 1). The control sample (T0) contains only wheat flour (50%) as the main base and sugar (30%) as the sweetener, without any millet, pulse, vegetable or seed incorporation, from T1 to T4 wheat flour is completely replaced with a combination of ragi (finger millet) flour, sanwa (barnyard millet) flour, and small quantities of pulse flours such as roasted gram, green gram, and soybean. As the formulation progresses from T1 to T4, the level of ragi flour increases from 10% to 25%, enhancing the calcium, fiber, and iron content. Conversely, sanwa millet flour decreases from 20% in T1 to 5% in T4, balancing texture and nutrient density. The addition of pulse flours (1-4%) contributes plant-based protein and improves amino acid balance. Carrot powder, beetroot powder, and moringa leaf powder are incorporated in small but nutritionally significant amounts (1-4%), enriching the mix with natural vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and colouring pigments.

The sweetener in T1 to T4 is jaggery, replacing refined sugar to increase iron content and provide a natural caramelized flavour. Its concentration rises from 30% in T1 to 45% in T4, improving sweetness and binding properties. Nutrient-dense seeds such as flaxseed and sesame are added in increasing amounts (0.5-2%), enhancing omega-3 fatty acids, lignans, protein, and healthy fats. Dry fruit powder and peanut powder are kept constant at 10% each across all enriched formulations, supplying energy, essential fatty acids, micronutrients, and improving the taste profile.

Overall, as the mixture progresses from T1 to T4, the nutritional value significantly increases due to higher levels of millets, pulses, vegetables, and seeds. T4 becomes the most nutrient-dense formulation, while T0 remains the least enriched control sample. [7] . In the evaluation to assess taste, colour, aroma, texture, after-taste and overall acceptability. Sensory tests were carried out under laboratory conditions with white-light illumination, neutral odour environment and controlled serving temperature. Panellists were instructed to cleanse the palate with water between samples.

Proximate analysis

The proximate analysis of Nutri mix powder was estimated following the method recommended by NIN (2003), Moister content, Ash content, Protein content, Fat content, Carbohydrate content, Energy value and Fiber content.

 Moisture content Moisture was estimated following the method recommended by NIN (2003). The moisture content was calculated from the loss in during drying and expressed as a (%) age:

Weight of the sample (g) × 100

 Ash content Samples were charred on a hot plate and incinerated in a muffle furnace at 600°C for 3-4 hours. The crucible was cooled in a desiccator and weighed repeatedly until a constant weight was achieved. Ash content was calculated using the formula:

Weight of sample taken (g) × 100

 Protein content Protein was estimated by determining nitrogen content using the Micro-Kjeldahl method (NIN, 2003). A Kel Plus nitrogen estimation system was used. Nitrogen content was calculated using:

Fiber content

Crude fiber was estimated using the acid-alkali digestionmethod as per NIN (2003) and AOAC guidelines. The fiber content was calculated from the loss in weight after ignition:

Crude Fiber ( g 100 g ) = Weight of residue (g) -Weight of ash (g)

Shelf-life assessment

It is critically important to estimate the microbiological safety of food products. Thus, in the present experiment, the total plate count of bacteria and fungi of the produced products was assessed storage in at 0 to 75 days, used serial dilution poured plate method (Chaudhary et al., 2020) [2] . The value-added millets-based product (packed in polyethnic begs) was kept at 100 g of each sample and grind with the help of pestle mortar for the homogenization. The homogenized each sample were taken 1g and put in the test tube with 9 ml of distilled water (10:1) mixed gently. There suspension was transferring next 9 ml distilled water test tube were using the serial dilution method @10 -1 , 10 -2 , 10 - 3 ,10 -4 , ……10 -9 . The fungal and bacterial colony count in food product sample was used 10 -2 dilution and kept 1ml of suspension were transfer in culture plate medium (Potato dextrose agar medium, and nutrient agar medium) and spread with the help of glass spreader. This inoculated culture plate was covered with parafilm and pleased in the BOD incubator 2 to 5 days at 30 ℃ ±1 for bacterial count and 25 ℃ ±1 for fungal count.

Statistical analysis

Data collected from sensory and nutritional assessments were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). When significance was observed, mean separation was performed based on Critical Difference (CD) values at a 0.5% probability level. Results marked with (S) indicate significant differences, whereas (NS) denotes nonsignificant variation. Total microbial count data analyzed by OPSTAT, PAU software.

Results and discussion

Sensory evaluation

The sensory evaluation of control product and value-added Nutri-mix powder presents the mean sensory scores (± standard deviation) for six key sensory attributes-taste, color, aroma, texture, mouthfeel and overall acceptabilityacross five formulations coded as T0 to T4. Also includes the Critical Difference (CD) at 0.5%, Standard Error of mean (S.Em), and F-value, all marked as Significant (S), indicating that the differences among the treatments were statistically meaningful (Table: 2).

Test

The evaluation of test was control sample (T0) scored 6.50±0.66, while the highest score (9.45±0.55) was recorded from product code T2. This clearly shows that the valueadded formulation T2 was most preferred by sensory panel for its flavor balance and palatability. The other samples (T1, T3, and T4) received moderate taste scores, with T1 (7.40±0.61) being slightly more acceptable than T3 and T4, indicating that certain ingredient combinations in T2 provided a more desirable taste profile.

Color

In the terms of color scoring, which reflects visual appeal, T2 again achieved the highest rating score (9.50±0.97), while the control and other formulations had less score in rating. The control (T0) scored 6.65±0.62, and T1 (7.55±0.49) also performed well, but T3 (6.80±0.91) and T4 (6.05±0.64) were less appealing. This suggests that the incorporation of natural ingredients in T2 possibly enhanced the appearance and brightness of the nutri-mix powder, making it more visually attractive.

Aroma

The aroma scores best rating with product code T2 again leading (9.25±0.67) compared to the control T0 (6.35±0.74). Product code T1 (7.65±0.52) is slightly more acceptable compare to T3 (6.60±0.69) and T4 (6.30±0.63). Aroma plays a crucial role in overall liking, and the results suggest that value-added ingredients contributed pleasant and distinctive aromas, likely from roasted grains, pulses, or nuts, which elevated the sensory experience.

Texture

For texture, product code T2 scored (9.5±0.55) the highest among all formulations, while the control (T0) had (6.6±0.41). Other product code less sensory scored was T1 (6.30±0.63), T3 (6.65±0.70) and T4 (6.65±0.70). Texture is an important factor in dry mixes like nutri-mix powder, influencing how easily it blends with milk or water and its mouthfeel when consumed. The higher texture rating of T2 suggests that it had an ideal fineness and smoothness, enhancing ease of mixing and overall product quality.

Mouth feel

Regarding mouthfeel aftertaste, which reflects the flavor left in the mouth after consumption, T2 again stood out with a score of 9.45±0.55, while the control (T0) recorded 6.7±0.53. Where T1 also performed well (7.15±0.69), suggesting that the value-added formulations improved flavor persistence and pleasantness after ingestion.

Overall acceptability

Finally, the overall acceptability-a combined measure of all sensory parameters clearly indicates that T2 was the most favored formulation, receiving sensory score 9.70±0.34, compared to 6.20±0.71 for the control (T0). T1 also had good acceptance (7.80±0.58), but T3 and T4 were less preferred, with scores of 6.45±0.83 and 7.10±1.14, respectively. Similarly, Nutri mix was prepared by Srivastava, K., & Vijayakumar, P. (2025) [24] , Sensory evaluation was conducted a 9-point hedonic scale by a panel of 10 semitrained members. Treatments T1 and T3 received overall acceptability scores of 5.96 ± 0.50 and 6.00 ± 0.40, respectively, while T2 (cocoa) achieved the highest score of 7.26 ± 0.33. These findings (T2) were the most preferred among consumers, highlighting its potential as an appetizing and nutritionally augmented health beverage.

Proximate analysis

The proximate composition (table:3.) of the control and value-added nutri-mix powder provides detailed information on its basic nutritional constituents-moisture, ash, crude protein, crude fat, carbohydrate, energy, and fiber for different incorporation coded as T0 to T4. The table also includes the Critical Difference (CD) at 0.5%, Standard Error of Mean (S.Em), and F-value, all marked as significant (S), confirming that the variations observed among samples were statistically meaningful.

Microbial analysis (self-life)

Microbial load in different product code is Total Bacterial Colony (TBC) and Total Fungal Colony (TFC) present in table: 4, microbial population is increase progressively in all product during storage period of 0 to 75 days. The bacterial count is very low in initial day is 0.00× 10 2 cfu/g in all product (T0 to T4), after 15 days slightly increase bacterial population 0.33 to 1.00× 10 2 cfu/g. at the storage of 75 days TBC is ranging from 3.67 to 8.33 the lowest TBC was recorded in T0(3.67×10 2 cfu/g) followed by T1 (5.00×10 2 cfu/g) and highest TBC was observed in T4(8.33×10 2 cfu/g) followed by T2(7.66×10 2 cfu/g) and T3 (6.67×10 2 cfu/g). The TFC in all product code were not recorded population of fungi with initial to 45 days of storage, fungal colony was initial appears on after 60 days of storage. After 75 days Total Fungal Colony (TFC) was lowest recorded in T0 (2.00×10 2 cfu/g) followed by T4 (2.33×10 2 cfu/g) and the highest fungal count was recorded in T1 (3.33×10 2 cfu/g) followed by T3 (3.00×10 2 cfu/g). similarly, Tangariya, et al. (2018) [25] , formulated composite flour and reported, bacterial count of 2.210 2 cfu/g at one month storage which increased to 5.510 2 cfu/g after two months of storage period Geetha, et al. (2019) [3] developed millet-based fiber mix food recorded increasing trend in total bacterial count as the storage period increased (0 to 90 days). The initiation of fungi was noticed at the storage period of 75 and 90 days. The Geetha, et al., (2023) [4] was developed millet composite mix noticed TBC and TFC during storage period 90 days. Initial load TBC was 4.510 2 cfu/g which increased to 8.110 3 at storage period. Mould count was less than 10 throughout the storage period whereas E-coli was not detected.

Conclusion

The present study demonstrated that the incorporation of finger millet, barnyard millet, sprouted grain flours, vegetable powders and oil-rich seeds effectively enhanced the nutritional, sensory and functional qualities of nutri-mix powder. Significant improvements were recorded in crude protein, crude fat, dietary fibre, caloric value and antioxidants content in the value-added formulations compared to the control sample. Sensory evaluation indicated that formulation T2 was the most acceptable in terms of taste, texture, aroma, after-taste and overall acceptability, while T4 exhibited the highest levels of nutrients enrichment. Therefore, T3 and T4 have strong potential for large-scale production and commercialization as healthier alternatives to conventional wheat-based products. The self-life of nutri-mix was good quality and acceptable at the 45 days of storage.

References

1. Chandra D, Chandra S, Pallavi, Sharma AK. Review of finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) and its nutritional importance. Int J Food Nutr Sci. 2016;5(3):24-31.
2. Chaudhary JK, Mudgal S. Effect of incorporation of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) on the antimicrobial, ACE inhibitory, antioxidant and antidiabetic potential of a milk-millet composite probiotic fermented product. Indian J Dairy Sci. 2020;73(3):222-230.
3. Geetha K, Yankanchi GM, Hiremath N. Microbial quality and storage stability of millet-based high-fiber food mix. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2019;8(7):5357.
4. Geetha K, Yankanchi GM, Hiremath N, Yatnatti S, Sajjan JT, Veena BM. Nutritional composition and shelf-life evaluation of millet-based composite mix. Asian J Dairy Food Res. 2023;42(3):340-347.
5. Harinarayanan CM, Haritha V, Geetha S. A review on botanical, phytochemical, nutritional and pharmacological properties of major millets in India. Aryavaidyan. 2023;36(3):41-49.
6. Hoshino T, Hara T, Yabuno T. Nutritional and functional characteristics of barnyard millet. Jpn J Crop Sci. 2010;79(3):345-351.
7. Kortei NK, Odamtten GT, Obodai M, Akonor PT, Wiafe-Kwagyan M, Buckman S, et al. Sensory evaluation, descriptive textural analysis, and consumer acceptance profile of steamed gamma-irradiated Pleurotus ostreatus (Ex. Fr.) Kummer kept in two different storage packs. Sci Afr. 2020;8:e00328.
8. Krishna Kumari S, Thayumanavan B. Characterization of starches of proso, foxtail, barnyard, kodo, and little millets. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 1998;53(1):47-56.
9. Modgil R, Rajni. Sensory quality evaluation of valueadded traditional snacks. Int J Home Sci. 2020;6(1):1217.
10. Mundhe SD, More BH, Shinde KS. Influence of vegetable powder fortification on sensory quality of traditional recipes. J Food Process Technol. 2022;13(2):111-116.
11. Raghuramulu N, Madhavan Nair K, Kalyanasundaram S. A Manual of Laboratory Techniques. Hyderabad: National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research; 2003.
12. Padulosi S, Mal B, Bala Ravi S, Gowda J, Gowda K, Shanthakumar G, et al. Food Security and Climate Change: Role of Millets. Rome: Bioversity International; 2009.
13. Rao P, Singh S. Nutritional and health benefits of jaggery: a functional food review. J Food Biochem. 2022;46(1):e13987.
14. Rishitha P, Soni D. Finger millet: nutritional profile and potential health benefits. Res J Agric Sci. 2024;15(1):153-158.
15. Rodrigues LB. Impact of vegetable-fibre fortification on moisture and texture of bakery products. J Food Struct. 2024;11(2):88-95.
16. Saikat DM, Victor AS, Aravazhi S, Priyanka D, Anitha S, Tamilselvi N, et al. Effectiveness of millet-pulsegroundnut-based formulations in improving the growth of pre-school tribal children in Telangana State, India. Nutrients. 2024;16(6):819.
17. Saleh AS, Zhang Q, Chen J, Shen Q. Millet grains: nutritional quality, processing, and potential health benefits. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2013;12(3):281-295.
18. Sharifi-Rad J, Painuli S, Sener B, Kılıç M, Kumar NV, Semwal P, et al. Revisiting the nutraceutical profile, chemical composition, and health benefits of jaggery: updates from recent decade. EFood. 2023;4(2):e75.
19. Singh A. Jaggery: a traditional Indian sweetener with health benefits. Int J Food Nutr Sci. 2013;2(3):50-54.
20. Singh A, Bharath M, Kotiyal A, Rana L, Rajpal D. Barnyard millet: the underutilized nutraceutical minor millet crop. J Pharm Innov. 2022;11(6):115-128.
21. Singh KP, Mishra HN, Saha S. Moisture-dependent properties of barnyard millet grain and kernel. J Food Eng. 2010;96(4):598-606.
22. Smith A, Johnson B. Value addition in food products: enhancing quality, nutritional value, and shelf-life. J Food Sci Technol. 2021;58(9):3423-3434.
23. Sood S, Khulbe RK, Kumar RA, Agrawal PK, Upadhyaya HD. Barnyard millet global core collection evaluation in the sub-mountain Himalayan region of India using multivariate analysis. Crop J. 2015;3:517525.
24. Srivastava K, Vijayakumar P. Sensory evaluation of a dairy-based millet nutri-mix: a preliminary consumer study. Int J Plant Environ. 2025;11(3):636-642.
25. Tangariya P, Sahoo A, Awasthi P, Pandey A. Quality analysis of composite flour and its effectiveness for chapatti formulation. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2018;7(4):1013-1019.
26. Thakur A, Sharma P, Kaushal V. Fortification of traditional Indian snacks with millets and micronutrient-rich ingredients. J Nutr Food Sci. 2023;13(1):112-121.
27. Ugare R, Chimmad B, Naik R, Bharati P, Itagi S. Glycemic index and significance of barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacea) in type II diabetics. J Food Sci Technol. 2014;51(2):392-395.
28. Yabuno T. The improvement of barnyard millet and its cultivation. Jpn J Crop Sci. 1987;56(4):582-588.