Optimizing tigernut flour inclusion in wheat bread for enhanced nutritional, functional, and sensory quality

Figures (3) Tables (3)

Figure 1.
(a) Total phenolic and (b) total flavonoid contents of bread with tigernut flour supplementation. Values are mean ± standard deviation. Bars with different superscripts are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour).
Figure 2.
Antioxidant properties of bread with tigernut flour supplementation: (a) ABTS, (b) DPPH, (c) FRAP, and (d) hydroxyl radical scavenging. Values are mean ± standard deviation. Bars with different superscripts are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour).
Figure 3.
Inhibition of (a) α-amylase, and (b) α-glucosidase potential of bread with tigernut flour supplementation. Values are mean ± standard deviation. Bars with different superscripts are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour).

Sample	Moisture	Protein	Fat	Ash	Fibre	Carbohydrate
A	13.00 ± 0.56^a	12.00 ± 0.48^a	5.00 ± 0.32^e	2.00 ± 0.09^d	2.00 ± 0.26^e	69.00 ± 0.35^a
B	11.55 ± 0.65^b	11.50 ± 0.02^b	5.50 ± 0.06^d	2.10 ± 0.02^cd	2.20 ± 0.42^d	68.20 ± 0.56^ab
C	11.20 ± 0.37^c	11.00 ± 0.48^bc	6.00 ± 0.31^c	2.18 ± 0.12^c	2.40 ± 0.32^c	67.40 ± 0.24^b
D	10.50 ± 0.01^d	10.50 ± 0.02^c	6.50 ± 0.04^b	2.30 ± 0.06^b	2.60 ± 0.58^bc	66.60 ± 0.26^c
E	10.17 ± 0.66^e	10.00 ± 0.04^d	7.00 ± 0.26^a	2.40 ± 0.02^a	2.80 ± 0.62^a	65.80 ± 0.47^d
Values are mean ± standard deviation. Means with different superscripts within columns are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour). All values are expressed on a wet-weight basis.

Table 1.

Proximate composition of tigernut-supplemented wheat bread (%).

Sample	Calcium	Iron	Zinc	Potassium	Magnesium	Phosphorus
A	23.40 ± 0.41^a	2.10 ± 0.39^a	1.40 ± 0.69^a	180.00 ± 0.89^a	80.00 ± 0.05^a	120.00 ± 0.05^a
B	22.50 ± 0.02^ab	2.00 ± 0.48^ab	1.30 ± 0.00^b	171.00 ± 0.74^b	76.00 ± 0.25^b	114.00 ± 0.09^b
C	21.60 ± 0.10^b	1.90 ± 0.15^b	1.20 ± 0.01^c	162.00 ± 0.84^c	72.00 ± 0.40^c	108.00 ± 0.32^c
D	20.70 ± 0.31^c	1.80 ± 0.24^bc	1.10 ± 0.10^c	153.00 ± 0.42^d	68.00 ± 0.71^d	102.00 ± 0.04^d
E	19.80 ± 0.11^d	1.70 ± 0.50^c	1.00 ± 0.07^d	144.00 ± 0.86^e	64.00 ± 0.36^e	96.00 ± 0.07^e
Values are mean ± standard deviation. Means with different superscripts within columns are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour).

Table 2.

Mineral composition of tigernut-supplemented wheat bread (mg/g).

Sample	Crust colour	Crumb colour	Taste	Aroma	Overall acceptability
A	6.40 ± 1.32^a	6.00 ± 1.71^a	5.80 ± 1.60^a	5.50 ± 1.48^a	5.90 ± 1.40^a
B	6.30 ± 1.42^ab	5.85 ± 1.68^a	5.75 ± 1.87^a	5.00 ± 1.65^ab	5.65 ± 1.38^ab
C	5.92 ± 1.44^ab	5.71 ± 1.52^ab	5.68 ± 1.39^b	5.00 ± 1.65^ab	5.58 ± 1.40^a
D	5.64 ± 1.29^b	4.68 ± 1.40^b	4.70 ± 1.46^c	5.20 ± 1.74^a	5.05 ± 1.50^b
E	5.20 ± 1.89^b	4.50 ± 1.80^c	4.50 ± 1.42^d	4.80 ± 1.55^a	4.75 ± 1.58^b
Values are mean ± standard deviation. Means with different superscripts within columns are significantly different (p ≤ 0.05). Key: A (100% wheat flour), B (95% wheat flour, 5% tigernut flour); C (90% wheat flour, 10% tigernut flour); D (85% wheat flour, 15% tigernut flour); E (80% wheat flour, 20% tigernut flour).

Table 3.

Sensory evaluation of tigernut-supplemented wheat bread (n = 20).