4.1 Proximate composition of pumpkin seed flour
The proximate composition showed that moisture content of pumpkin seed flour was quite low and was found to be (6.4 ± 0.64%), which may be advantageous in view of the product’s shelf life. The result seed flour was rich in protein (38.5± 0.69%), which shows that seed can serve as a source of protein considering the level of protein deficiency in the society. The ash content of seed was (5.3± 1.11%), giving an idea of the inorganic content of the seed flour from where the mineral content could be obtained. Highest amount of fat content was exhibited in seed flour (37.9± 0.01%). Fats are essential as they increase the palatability of foods. The fiber and CHO content were found to be (0.4± 0.09%) and (11.7± 1.12%) respectively. The energy content of seed flour was found to be (542.8± 0.81) Kcal per 100 gm seed.
4.2 Mineral and Vitamin A composition of pumpkin seed flour
The result of nutritionally valuable minerals is presented in Table 4.1. Seed flour contained moderate concentrations of minerals. Although only fair amounts of zinc and iron were present, seed flour was a good source of some other minerals, especially magnesium (380 mg/100g), phosphorus (260 mg/100g), potassium (114 mg/100g) and calcium (58 mg/100g). The sodium content was quite high. The Vitamin A content of pumpkin seed was found to be 397.55 µg RAE per 100 gm. These variations may be occurred due to soil condition, seed condition and methodology.
Table 4.1: Mineral composition of pumpkin seed flour
Minerals Amount (mg/100g)
Calcium 58
Magnesium 380
Sodium 137
Phosphorus 260
Iron 6.5
Zinc 7.98
Potassium 114
Chloride 34
24 | P a g e 4.3 Chemical properties of pumpkin seed oil
To identify the edibility and stability of oil, chemical properties play an essential role.
The high iodine value indicates that the oil has a high content of unsaturated fatty acid, which enhances the nutritional value of food products in which it is used. High saponification value indicates oil suitability for industrial use. The mean value for chemical properties, saponification value and iodine value are showed in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Saponification and iodine value of pumpkin seed oil
Chemical parameters Value
Saponification value (mg KOH/g) 194.7 ± 2.21 Iodine value (g I2/100g oil) 107.3 ± 2.11
Legends: All values showed ME ± SD of data. ME = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation
4.4 Antioxidant activity of pumpkin seed flour
Antioxidant capacity of pumpkin seed flour at different wavelengths is shown in Table 4.3. From the table, the mean value of antioxidant capacity of pumpkin seed flour was found to be (2.7 ± 0.07) mg TE/100gm. (This value showed ME ± SD of data. ME = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation).
Table 4.3: Antioxidant capacity of pumpkin seed flour Sl. no Conc (mg/100g) WL 517.0
1. 2.722 0.071
2. 2.729 0.070
3. 2.735 0.070
25 | P a g e 4.5 Nutritional composition of Baked Tortilla Chips supplemented with pumpkin seed flour
Nutritional value of Baked Tortilla Chips is shown in Table 4.4, almost all samples are significantly different. Sample A had the highest moisture content (1.5 ± 0.19) %, whereas Sample B had the lowest (0.5 ± 0.38) %. The highest value of ash content was found in Sample B (14.7 ± 1.00) % and the lowest value (9.9 ± 2.16) % was for sample D. Fiber content was higher in Sample D (3.1 ± 0.02) % and lower in Sample A (0.2 ± 3.14) %. Protein content was higher in Sample D (18.7 ± 0.09) % comparatively than Sample A, B and C. Fat content (9.6 ± 1.05) % was also higher in Sample D than other formulations. Carbohydrate content was higher in Sample A (64.7 ± 7.03) % and lower in Sample D (58.2 ± 0.71) %.
Table 4.4: Proximate analysis of Baked Tortilla Chips
Parameters Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Moisture (%) 1.5 ± 0.19a 0.5 ± 0.38d 0.8 ± 0.50c 1.3 ± 0.01b Ash (%) 13.4 ± 3.14b 14.7 ± 1.00a 10.5 ± 0.92c 9.9 ± 2.16d Fiber (%) 0.2 ± 0.06d 1.4 ± 0.01c 2.3 ± 0.06b 3.1 ± 0.02a Protein (%) 14.8 ± 0.85d 16.5 ± 0.07c 17.7 ± 0.15b 18.7 ± 0.09a Fat (%) 5.1 ± 1.77d 5.4 ± 1.37c 6.1 ± 2.45b 9.6 ± 1.05a CHO (%) 64.7 ± 7.03a 61.8 ± 2.52b 61.8 ± 1.31b 58.2 ± 0.71c
Legends: All values showed ME ± SD of data. ME = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation. The presence of different superscript along a row indicates a significant difference and the same superscripts are not significantly different at P<0.05.
A, B, C and D represented Formulation 1 (0% pumpkin seed flour), Formulation 2 (5% pumpkin seed flour), Formula 3 (10% pumpkin seed flour) and Formula 4 (15% pumpkin seed flour) respectively.
26 | P a g e 4.6 Energy content of Baked Tortilla Chips supplemented with seed flour
Figure 4.1 shows the energy content of four formulations of chips. Energy content in Sample D was calculated in the highest amount (390.73 Kcal/100 g) and lowest (364.07 Kcal/100 g) in Sample B.
Figure 4.1: Comparison of energy content in Baked Tortilla Chips
4.7 Vitamin A content in Baked Tortilla Chips supplemented with seed flour The findings for Vitamin A content in baked chips were presented in Table 4.5. From the table, a significant increase was observed. Sample A (Control) had the lowest value where Sample D had the highest value which was supplemented with 15% seed flour.
Table 4.5 Vitamin A content in Baked Tortilla Chips
Formulations Vitamin A (µg RAE/100g)
Sample A 409.6 ± 0.01d
Sample B 413.6 ± 0.02c
Sample C 416.6 ± 0.01b
Sample D 432.6 ± 0.01a
Legends: All values showed ME ± SD of data. ME = Mean. SD = Standard Deviation. The presence of different superscript along a row indicates a significant difference and the same superscripts are not significantly different at P<0.05.
350 355 360 365 370 375 380 385 390 395
Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D
365.14 364.07
375.79
390.73
Kcal/100gm
Formulation
Energy (Kcal/100 gm)
27 | P a g e 4.8 Sensory evaluation of Baked Tortilla Chips
In Table 4.6 highest (ME ± SD) score for appearance, saltiness, crispness, hardness was recorded 6.1 ± 0.83, 5.4 ± 1.36, 5.9 ± 0.76, 5.8 ± 0.89 respectively in the case of Sample D. Sample C scored highest in odor (5.5 ± 0.95) and taste (5.6 ± 0.99). On the other hand, lowest score for all attributes was recorded in Sample A. Sample D had the highest acceptance rate (5.8 ± 0.86). However, Sample A scored the least acceptance (4.6 ± 1.05) compared to other samples.
Table 4.6: Hedonic rating test for sensory evaluation of Baked Tortilla Chips Parameters Sample A Sample B Sample C Sample D Appearance 5.1 ± 1.82c 5.4 ± 1.04b 5.6 ± 0.74b 6.1 ± 0.83a Odor 5.3 ± 1.13a 5.4 ± 1.23a 5.5 ± 0.95a 5.4 ± 1.14a Taste 4.3 ± 1.27c 5.2 ± 1.11b 5.6 ± 0.99a 5.4 ± 1.05a Saltiness 5.0 ± 1.21b 5.2 ± 1.41a 5.4 ± 1.31a 5.4 ± 1.36a Crispness 5.2 ± 1.48c 5.6 ± 1.23b 5.8 ± 0.95a 5.9 ± 0.76a Hardness 4.3 ± 1.78d 5.2 ± 1.33c 5.5 ± 1.00b 5.8 ± 0.89a Overall
Acceptability
4.6 ± 1.05c 5.1 ± 1.12b 5.6 ± 0.93a 5.8 ± 0.86a
Legends: All values showed in ME ± SD of data. ME = Mean, SD = Standard Deviation. The presence of different superscript along a row indicates a significant difference and the same superscripts are not significantly different at P<0.05.
28 | P a g e