Tigernut tubers were processed in different ways to formulate two new products: product 1-Orange Tigernut Beverage (OTB) and product 2 - Tigernut Drink (TD). OTB was formulated from a blend of Orange Juice (OJ) and Tiger Nut Milk (TM) by substitution at ratio (OJ:TM) 100:0, 80:20, 60:40, 50:50, 40:60, 20:80 and 0:100. TD was formulated by drying tigernut tuber (8% moisture) and milling to obtain a powder. Spices were added. TD samples were obtained by reconstituting the powdered tigernut with cold water at a concentration of 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25% (w/v). The samples were evaluated for their sensory, proximate composition and microbiological status. Significant differences (p<0.05) existed between samples under various parameters. All the samples of OTB were highly acceptable but the sample (OJ:TM) 40:60 received the highest (8.3) over all acceptability. In TD, reconstituting the sample from 20 to 25% (w/v) was most (8.3-8.6) acceptable. Carbohydrate (38-50%) and moisture (39-60%) were quantitatively the major component of OTB. The samples were deficient in crude fiber. Samples (OJ:TM) 40:60 and 20:80 with carbohydrate (46%), protein (2%), ash (2-3%) and fat (3-4%) had the highest nutrient values. The reconstituted TB sample of 25% (w/v) had the highest (carbohydrate 46%, fat 22%, Ash and protein 2% respectively) nutrient level with carbohydrate, fat and moisture forming its major component. Crude fiber in TB was higher than that in OTB. A direct relationship existed between the microbial content of OTB and the rate of substitution. Microbial content ranged from no growth to 102 cfu/ml, which was not critical to the wholesomeness of the products. The TD samples showed no microbial growth thereby confirming the wholesomeness of the samples.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ukwuru et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: