International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews Vol (2) Issue (9) (2021) Page 917-920

International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews

Journal homepage: www.ijrpr.com ISSN 2582-7421

Assessment of Nutritional Qualities of Chinchin Produced From Blends

Of Cyperus Esculentus and Triticum Aestivum Flours

1
Ajiboso, O.M. & 2Ajiboso, S.O. (Ph.D.)
1
Nutrition & Dietetics Department, Federal Polytechnic Bida, Niger State – Nigeria.
2
Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, Nasarawa State University, Keffi – Nasarawa State, Nigeria.
1
Corresponding Author

ABSTRACT

In this study, tigernut flour was formulated with wheat flour at different formulation ratios of 0%, 10%, 20% and 40% to blends, these blends were used to
produce chinchin, a traditional snack. The nutritional qualities revealed that moisture was detected higher in sample A (4.9%) and least in sample B (3.1%) than
other samples C and D, the moisture of samples C and D was 4.4%, moisture was generally low in all the blends. Ash was generally low in the samples and
within the range 1.0% to 1.2%; crude fat and fibre were in the range of 3.1% to 4.7% and 3.5% to 4.9% respectively. The ranges of crude protein, energy value
and carbohydrate by difference of the samples were 10.6% to 11.9%; 73.9% to 75.5% and 360.1kcal to 384.6kcal respectively. Samples A and C scored higher
than other samples in taste and appearance respectively while sample D scored higher in flavor, texture and overall acceptability. Sample A was fairly like in
terms of flavor, appearance, texture and general acceptability. Sample B taste and texture were scored like and fairly like respectively, the flavor, appearance and
general acceptability were much like. 80% of sample C sensory attributes (taste, appearance, texture and general acceptability) were scored ‘much like’ while
flavor was scored ‘fairly like’. 60% of sample D sensory attributes (taste, appearance, and texture) was scored higher than other samples. Flavor and general
acceptability were ‘extremely like’ appearance and texture were ‘much like’ and taste was ‘fairly like’. In conclusion, chinchin produced from wheat and tigernut
blends, particularly sample D (60% : 40%) mixture of wheat and tigernut flours respectively showed higher nutritional quality and acceptability than other
samples. The use of wheat flour and tigernut formulation for cost reduction and optimal utilization of tigernut is hereby recommended.

1 INTRODUCTION

Wheat flour is one of the grains in the diet of a vast proportion of the world's population. It has a great impact on the nutritional quality of the meal
consumed by a large number of people and consequently on their health, wheat has the ability to produce high yields under a wide range of condition,
this thus accounts for its popularity among other cereals, the most important factor is the capacity of wheat gluten protein in the production of the great
variety of foods associated with wheat around the world. The total annual production of wheat for year 2016 as at June is put at 724 million metric tons.
Wheat is one of the oldest and most important of the cereal crops, there are different varieties known, but the most important ones and their uses
include wheat that is used to make bread; spaghetti and macaroni commonly consumed pasta in Africa and Asia are made from drum wheat and cake,
crackers, cookies, pastries, and flours can be made from another variety of wheat known as club wheat.
Wheat is also a good source of carbohydrates, protein, antioxidants, fiber, some vitamins and minerals. It is used by industry for the production of
starch, paste, malt, dextrose, gluten, alcohol and other products (Britannica encyclopedia, 2016).
Chinchin is a fried snack popular in West Africa. It is sweet, cookies like product made from wheat flour and egg. It is kneaded and cu t into small sizes
prior to frying. Wheat flour is the main raw material and therefore there is need to enrich it with adequate protein and fibre sources. Snack can be used
to increase nutritional status of consumer by incorporating nutrient such as protein and fibre (Abioye et al., 2020).
Chinchin is a traditional Nigerian snack prepared using wheat flour, butter, milk and eggs from which a stiff paste is made which is then deep fried until
golden brown and crisp. It is sweet to taste, slightly hard and may be equated to a harder tension of a doughnut. Occasionally, the chinchin may be
produced by baking rather than frying (Abaejoh, 2016). It is an important local snack in Nigeria, its richness is attributed to wheat from which it is
made and can be enriched with many enrichers such as butter, egg etc. the high cost of wheatb being a non – tropical grain made the production
expensive thus a dire need to source for an alternative complementary tropical crop or grain.
Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the nutritional and sensory qualities of chinchin produced from tigernut and wheat flours blends.
 International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews Vol (2) Issue (9) (2021) Page 917-920 918

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MATERIALS
Collection of materials
Tigernut (Cyperusesculentus) seed and Wheat flour were purchased from Modern market in Bida - Nigeria. Other materials used were sugar, salt, milk,
baking powder, margarine, egg and vanilla flavor were purchased from Modern market in Bida - Nigeria.

Other materials
All equipments used such as mixing bowl, frypan, cutting table, spoon, knife, tray and other tools were obtained from Department of Hospitality,
Leisture & Tourism, the Federal Polytechnic Bida - Nigeria.

METHODS

Production of Tigernut Flour

Tigernut flour was prepared using the method described by Adejuyitan (2011). The nut was sorted in order to remove unwanted materials like pebbles,
stones and foreign seeds before washing with water, the cleaned nuts were oven dried at 180oC temperature for 3 hours, milled, sieved through 100µm
aperture size sieve and the resultant flour was packaged in a cellophane until ready to used.

Formulation of Blends
Wheat and tigernut flours were mixed at different proportion of 100%:0%; 90%:10%; 80%:20% and 60%:40% respectively, the samples were mixed
together using a hand mixer (Kenwood HM 430, South Africa) to achieve uniform blends of tiger nut and wheat flour.
Determination of moisture contents of wheat and tigernut flour
The moisture content of the sample was carried out according to AOAC procedure (2006). An empty moisture dish was washed and dried in an oven at
80 0C and cooled in desiccators. The dishes were weighingalong with covers (W1), 2g of samples were weighed into the dish and rew eighed again
(W2). The samples with the content was placed in hot air oven at 102+8 0C and dried for 5 hours till a constant weight was obtained. Dishes were then
transferred into desiccators and cooled and then reweigh (W3). The % moisture content was calculated as shown below.

𝑊2 − 𝑊3
% moisture = 𝑥 100
𝑊2 − 𝑊1
Where;
W1 = Initial weight of employ crucible
W2= weight of crucible+ food before drying
W3= final weight of crucible + crucible + food after drying

Determination of fat content (oil extraction)

The fat content of the sample was carried out according to AOAC (2006) 2g sample was weighted into the thimbles and plugged lightly with cotton
wool. The thimble was inserted into a refracted extractor holder. A 100ml flat bottom flask of known weight containing 25ml petroleum ether (bpt 40 –
600C) was fitted into extractors. The apparatus was heated gradually b hot plate at 80 – 1000C for about 4 – 6 hours. At the end of extraction, the
solvent was removed from oil by heating in a hot air oven at 105 0C for 30 minutes. The flask was allowed to cool inside a dissector and reweighed. %
oil content was calculated as shown below:
Weight gain by flask
% Oil = 𝑥 100
Weight of sample

Determination of Crude fibre

The crude fibre content of the sample was carried out according to AOAC (2006) about 2g of defatted material with petroleum ether was boiled under
reflux for 30 minutes and filtered through filter paper washed with boiling water until no longer acidic. The residue was transferred to beaker and again
boiled for another 30 minutes with 200ml of 1.25NaOH and again flittered through another filter paper with washing until no longer NaOH. The final
residue was then transferred to a crucible and dried in an oven and the dry weight taken and transferred to a furnace and incinerated, cooled and
weighed.
The crude fibre was then calculated as shown below:
dry weight − ash weight
% Crude fibre = 𝑥 100
Weight of sample

Determination of Crude Protein

0.2g of samples was weighed into kjedhal digestion flask and a tablet catalyst was added. 5ml of concentrated H 2SO4 (sulphuric acid) was added into
flask. The content of kjedhal digestion flask was heated in a digestion chamber contained in a fume cupboard for about 4 hours until a clear digest was
obtained. The sample was allowed to cool and the content was added with distilled water (100ml) for distillation process. The digest was then
transferred into 10ml of boric acid containing 5 drops of bromocresol green methyl red indicator until 50ml of distillated. T he distillate was
standardized/titrated with 0.1 NaCl until pink colour was observed. The % crude protein was then calculated using
S − B 𝑥 0.1𝑁 𝑥 14.01
%N= 𝑥 100
Weight of sample
% crude protein = %N* 6.25
S = sample titre value
B = Blank titre value
 International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews Vol (2) Issue (9) (2021) Page 917-920 919

Determination of Ash Content in food sample

Weigh crucible and record the weight, then weight 2g of sample into crucible of known weight. The crucible and sample were then pla ced in a muffle
furnace at 5500C for 4-6 hours until a whitish grey was obtained. The crucible was then removed and placed in desiccators to cool to room temperature
before weighting, each sample was determined in triplicate and % ash was calculated as shown below:
Weight of ash
% ash = 𝑥 100
Weight of sample
Determination of carbohydrate
The % CHO was calculated by difference according to AOAC (2006). The summation of the proximate valves was subtracted from 100% as thus:
% carbohydrate=(100-100%-%crudeprotein +%ash content +%fat +%crude fibre+%moisture.

PRODUCTION OF CHINCHIN

First the blended flour was put in a bowl by the addition of one tea spoon of salt and one sachet of ground nutmeg. After this, margarine was added
together with it evenly. Eggs, sugar and other ingredients were also added to make firm stiff dough. The thick dough was rolled, cut into cubes on a
board, followed by frying in deep hot vegetable oil until it was baked into golden brown colour. The oil was allowed to drain, the chinchin was allowed
to cool followed by packaging in high density polyethylene bags for storage and this was repeated for all the flour blends samples.
SENSORY EVALUATION
The sensory attributes of the chinchin were determined using a 9 - point hedonic scale as described by Larmond (1977). This was done by 25 untrained
panelists comprising of Students of Department of Nutrition and Dietetics Federal Polytechnic Bida, Nigeria. Where 1 represents dislike extremely and
5 represents like extremely.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Data collected was subjected to analysis of variance using SPSS (version 15), and was presented as Mean±SEM .

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results of proximate composition of tigernut and wheat flour blends were presented in Table 1. Moisture was detected higher in sample A (4.9%)
and least in sample B (3.1%) than other samples C and D, the moisture content of samples C and D was 4.4%, moisture was generally low in all the
blends.
Ash was generally low in the samples and within the range 1.0% to 1.2%, crude fat and fibre were in the range of 3.1% to 4.7% and 3.5% to 4.9%
respectively. The ranges of crude protein, energy value and carbohydrate by difference of the samples were 10.6% to 11.9%, 73.9% to 75.5% and
360.1kcal to 384.6kcal respectively.
Moisture content is the amount of water present in the sample which may determine the shelf life of the product. Sample b moisture content is within
the range reported in a similar study of Oladele and Aina (2017). Crude fiber is measure of the quantity of indigestible cellulose, pentosan, lignin and
other component of this type present in the food for food bulking and colon disease prevention. Ash content is the amount of mineral present in the food
component.
The results of sensory quality of tigernut and wheat flour blends were presented in Table 2. Samples A and C scored higher than other samples in taste
and appearance respectively while sample D scored higher in flavor, texture and overall acceptability. Sample A was ‘fairly like’ in terms of flavor,
appearance, texture and general acceptability. Sample B taste and texture were scored ‘like’ and ‘fairly like’ respectively, the flavor, appearance and
general acceptability were ‘much like’. 80% of sample C sensory attributes (taste, appearance, texture and general acceptability) were scored ‘much
like’ while flavor was scored ‘fairly like’. 60% of sample D sensory attributes (taste, appearance, and texture) was scored higher than other samples.
Flavor and general acceptability were ‘extremely like’ appearance and texture were ‘much like’ and taste was ‘fairly like’. The panelists adjudged
sample D produced from 60%:40% mixture of wheat and tigernut flours respectively as the most preferable sample.
Table 1: Proximate composition of tigernut and wheat flours blends %
Sample Moisture Ash Crude Crude Crude fiber CHO Energy
Fat protein value(kcal)
A 4.9+0.8 1.0+0.9 4.5+0.5 10.6+0.1 3.5+0.5 75.5+0.8 384.6+0.3
B 3.1+0.0 1.0+0.9 3.3+0.3 11.9+0.2 4.7+0.3 75.9+0.5 381.1+0.1
C 4.4+0.4 1.1+0.1 4.7+0.3 11.0+0.9 4.8+0.3 73.9+0.2 382.4+0.1
D 4.4+0.8 1.2+0.4 3.1+0.0 10.9+0.6 4.9+0.0 75.3+0.1 360.1+0.1
Results are mean values of triplicate determinations and are presented in Mean±SEM
A=100% Wheat: 0% tigernut blend; B= 90% Wheat: 10% tigernut blend; C= 80% Wheat: 20% tigernut blend; D= 60% Wheat: 40% tigernut blend.

Table 2: Sensory quality of tigernut and wheat flour blends

Sample Taste Flavor Appearance Texture General
acceptability
A 9.0±0.0 7.0±0.0 7.5±0.7 7.5±0.7 7.5±0.7
B 6.5±0.7 8.5±0.7 8.0±1.4 7.0±0.0 8.5±0.7
C 8.5±0.7 9.0±0.0 8.5±0.7 8.0±1.4 8.0±1.4
D 7.0±0.0 7.5±0.7 8.0±0.0 8.5±0.7 9.0±0.0
Results are mean values of triplicate determinations and are presented in Mean±SEM
A=100% Wheat: 0% tigernut blend; B= 90% Wheat: 10% tigernut blend; C= 80% Wheat: 20% tigernut blend; D= 60% Wheat: 40% tigernut blend.
 International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews Vol (2) Issue (9) (2021) Page 917-920 920

CONCLUSION

The proximate composition and sensory evaluation carried out on the products showed the nutritional richness of Chinchin produced from wheat and
tigernut blends, mostly sample d that was produced from 60%:40% mixture of wheat and tigernut flours respectively.

RECOMMENDATION
From the research carried out, the use of wheat flour and tigernut formulation for cost reduction and optimal utilization of tigernut is hereby
recommended.

REFERENCES

AOAC (2006). Official Methods of Analysis. Vol. I & II, 18th Edition, Revision 3.

Abaejoh, A. K. (2016). Characteristics of tigernut (Cyprus esculentus) tubers and their performance in the production of a milky drink. J. Food process
and preservation., 30:145-163.

Abioye, V.F., Olodude, O.A., Atiba, V and Oyewo, I.O. (2020). Quality evaluation of chinchin produced from composite flours of wheat and
germinated finger millet flour. Agrosearch, 20(1): 13-22.

Adejuyitan, J.A., (2011). Tigernut processing, its food used and health benefits. Am. Journal food technology, 6(3):197-201.

Britannica, the editors of encyclopedia. ‘wheat’. Encyclopedia Britannica, 7 may2021, https://www.britannica,com/plant/wheat. accessed 19 september
2021.

Larmond, E. (1977). Laboratory methods for sensory evaluation of food. Research Branch, Canada Department of Agriculture, Publication No. 1637:
19-63. MakhuOladele and Aina (2017). Composition of dry Tigernut. Journal of Food Technology.74:82-88.