MARATTO

article · Food and Humanity

Textural attributes and consumer acceptability of chapatti made from different composite flours

20241 citationOpen accessMakerere University

Abstract

This study assessed the effect of partial or complete replacement of wheat flour (W) with native (NCF) and modified cassava (MCF) and cowpea (CP) flours on the textural attributes and consumer acceptability of chapatti. Wheat-cassava and cowpea-cassava composite flours of varying proportions were used. Cassava and cowpea flours were used in their native and modified forms. Textural attributes and consumer acceptability were determined using standard methods. Increasing the proportion of native cassava flour in the wheat-native cassava composite chapatti decreased the resistance to extension, and area under the curve but had no effect on the extensibility and yield stress of the chapatti. Increasing the proportion of modified cassava flour in wheat to wheat-modified cassava composite chapatti decreased resistance to extension of chapatti but increased extensibility of the chapatti with no effect on yield stress. Increasing the proportion of modified cassava flour for chapatti made from modified cowpea-cassava composite chapatti decreased resistance to extension and area under the curve but increased the extensibility of the chapatti with no effect on yield stress. Chapattis made from 80%W:20%MCF and 80%W:20%NCF were not distinguishable from those made from 100% wheat flour by the sensory panel. The consumer acceptability scores for chapattis made from 80%W:20%MCF and 80%W:20%NCF ranged from liked slightly (6) to liked very much (8), while those for the chapattis made from 20%CP:80%MCF ranged from disliked slightly (4) to liked slightly (6). This work demonstrates that cassava whether modified or in its native state can replace wheat flour up to 20% to make chapatti with good textural properties. However, cassava flour modification further improves the textural and consumer acceptability of the chapatti.

Research topics

  • Seed and Plant Biochemistry
  • Agricultural and Food Sciences
  • Botanical Research and Applications

Read the original research

This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.

DOI: 10.1016/j.foohum.2024.100320

Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.

Discussion

Discuss this research

Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.

No discussion yet. Open the first thread.