4.5 Article

Effect of fermentation and dry roasting on the nutritional quality and sensory attributes of quinoa

期刊

FOOD SCIENCE & NUTRITION
卷 7, 期 12, 页码 3902-3911

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.1247

关键词

dry roasting; fermentation; minerals; phytate degradation; quinoa; sensory attributes

资金

  1. Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundQuinoa is a pseudocereal with relatively high content of proteins and minerals that also contains mineral inhibitors such as phytate. The aim of the present study was to evaluate lactic acid fermentation and dry roasting on the nutritional quality and sensory attributes of quinoa. Various processes were evaluated, and quinoa grains were dry-roasted, milled, and fermented, either with or without the addition of wheat phytase or activated quinoa phytase (added as back-slop starter), for 10 hr. In other processes, raw quinoa flour was fermented for 10 hr or 4 hr and dry-roasted. Hedonic sensory evaluation was then performed to evaluate the acceptability of the fermented flours prepared as porridges. ResultsThe combined dry roasting and fermentation processes significantly (p < .05) degraded phytate between 30% and 73% from initial content. The most effective process was fermentation of raw quinoa flour followed by dry roasting, which improved the estimated zinc and iron bioavailability. Particularly, estimated zinc bioavailability improved from low (Phy:Zn 25.4, PhyZn:Ca 295) to moderate (Phy:Zn 7.14, PhyZn:Ca 81.5). Phytate degradation was mainly attributed to the activation of endogenous phytase during fermentation. Dry roasting was effective in improving the sensory attributes of the fermented quinoa flour. Porridge made with raw quinoa flour fermented for 4 hr and dry-roasted was more favorable to overall acceptability than that which was fermented for 10 hr and dry-roasted. ConclusionFermentation of quinoa flour for 4 hr followed by dry roasting was successful in improving both nutritional and sensory attributes of the final product.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据