sign in sign up
<<
Home , Semolina, Wheat germ oil

Middle East Journal of Applied Volume : 05 | Issue : 03 | July-Sept. | 2015 Sciences Pages: 670-675 ISSN 2077-4613

Estimation of Partially Substitution by Germ in Specific a KSA Local Lovely Product

Garsa Ali Al Shehry

Nutrition and Food Science, College of Designs and Home Economics- Taif Univ., Saudi Arabia

ABSTRACT

Plant materials with high and contents are of great importance in the food technology, wherein, the significances are determined not only by their nutritional value, but also by the involvement in the formation of the basic functional and technological characteristics. Such properties are consequently impact on the consumer palatability of the final products. Therefore, the wheat germ powder (0, 5, 10 or 15%) was partially substituted by the same amount of the main ingredient (semolina flour) in a KSA local product (busbousa) formula. Major chemical compositions, anti-nutritional components and water and fat absorbance capacity of the wheat germ were compared to that found in original tested semolina. Impact of the existence substitutes on such tests, in addition to sensory evaluation, in the final product was, also, extended studied. The resulted data showed that, due to the significantly higher amounts of protein, fat, fiber and ash and the significantly lower antinutritional components, the whole wheat germ was more nutritious than semolina. Such findings cleared the fact that the higher wheat germ percent addition, the higher nutrients and lower antinutrition components existence in the final product. On the other hand, the sensory evaluation of the tested products showed that most of the studied attributes were more preferable in case of the 10% whole wheat germ than all the other tested busbousa formulas.

Key words: Whole wheat germ, Semolina, busbousa, chemical, nutritional, antinutritional, sensory evaluation.

Introduction

Durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L.) is the preferred raw material for the production of worldwide and some specialty in parts of the Mediterranean region. The quality of such foods in terms of texture, color, flavor, and appearance are determined by raw material quality, processing methods and other ingredients. wheat is the hardest wheat and durum milling produces a coarse particle called semolina ideal for making pasta and , etc.,. The key features of durum wheat include its hardness, intense yellow color and nutty taste. After conversion to pasta, durum wheat produces products with good cooking quality and stability to overcooking unmatchable eating quality. The yellowish color, the characteristic taste and smell of durum result in a fine uniform crumb structure and more prolonged shelf life and all of which appeal to consumers of bakery products. Durum is the best wheat for pasta products due to its excellent amber color and superior cooking quality. Pasta is delicious and could be utilized in preparing the healthy food (Sissons 2008). The quality of durum wheat is defined in terms of its suitability for semolina and macaroni production. Semolina is the coarsely ground, purified middlings of the wheat kernel and is the principal material used in the manufacture of macaroni. The actual quality of a lot of durum wheat is influenced by the variety and growing conditions. protein influences quality factors more than any other component. As a ready source of protein and complex , it has become one of Western society's staple foods. Modern food science has revealed that pasta is rich in minerals such as iron, phosphorus and essential B (Thiamine, Niacin and Riboflavin). Durum products are a key part of stable diet in Mediterranean countries (Pasta professional, 2004). The basic quality criteria valid today, include a high yield of highly refined semolina; high protein and yellow pigment content, strong gluten and good pasta cooking quality, and are to remain valid for the foreseeable future (Dexter and Marchylo 2000). Consequently, durum is now being used in the Mediterranean regions and popularity is spreading to other countries (Sissons 2008). Plant raw materials can be used to solve the problem of reducing the calorie intake with the compensation for the reduction of fat intake by carbohydrates, including complex carbohydrates, and replacing saturated with polyunsaturated fatty acids of plant raw materials (Gurinovich and Patrakova 2013). Analysis of scientific and engineering information shows an expansion of research into various types of plant raw materials as an alternative to traditionally used soybeans oil. Byproducts of grain processing, in particular, wheat and rice , have high technological potential implementations (Kolpakova et al., 2001 and Chandi et al., 2007).

Corresponding Author: Garsa Ali Al Shehry, Nutrition and Food Science, College of Designs and Home Economics- Taif Univ., Saudi Arabia 670

Middle East J. Appl. Sci.., 5(3): 670-675, 2015 ISSN 2077-4613

Wheat germ, a highly nutritive part of wheat kernels, is separated during milling as a byproduct and has the potential to be used for food supplementation (Ragaee et al., 2006). It constitutes about 2-3% of the wheat grain and can be separated in a fairly pure form from the grain during the milling process (Megahed 2011). Wheat germ is of obvious interest in terms of nutritional value and the possibility of using it in them eat product technology. Despite small sizes of the germ (2.0-3.0% with respect to the mass of the grain), it is the most important part of the grain because it contains the primary organs of development of the plant, and this is responsible for its unique chemical composition. Wheat germ contains a large number of biologically active components; its protein is close to the physiologically active proteins of animal tissues and more fully-featured and balanced with respect to amino acid composition than the grain protein in general. This is attributed to the fact that gluten proteins, which are classified as reserve proteins, are mostly contained in whole grains, while biologically active proteins are dominant in the germ (Vishnyakov et al., 2000, Safronova et al., 1990 and Lasztity 1984). Wheat germ protein is reported to have a high nutritive value, comparable to that of animal proteins. In the wheat grain, most nutrients, with the exception of , are concentrated in germ but most of this is generally used in animal feed formulations, due to which the precious wheat germ source has not been amply, rationally, and efficiently utilized. It was reported that by the replacement of 15% defatted germ, cookies with high ernutritional quality and improved sensory attributes were obtained (Arshad et al., 2007). is an excellent source of polyunsaturated fatty acids and E. It is one of the richest natural sources of α-tocopherol, the type of tocopherol with the greatest vitamin E activity. Wheat germ oil has been attributed to reduced plasma and liver cholesterol in animals, improved physical endurance, and delayed aging (Tong and Lawrence 2001). With the aim of reducing the sugar content of the sponge cake, Baeva et al. (2000) produced a diabetic cake using wheat germ. Of great importance from the standpoint of safety and nutritional value of food products is the stability of their lipid component. According to the best available data, wheat germ contains phenolic components exhibiting antioxidant activity, including ubiquinone coenzymes and vitamins E (Oufnac 2007); at the same time, it contains prooxidant factors against the background of a high content of polyunsaturated fatty acids (Zherebtov et al.,2000 and Sudha et al., 2006). Unfortunately, little information is found in the literature to show the effects of wheat germ on final products (Majzoobi et al., 2012). Therefore, the object of the current study is to estimate the impact of wheat germ powder partially substituted (0, 5, 10 or 15%) by the same amount of the main ingredient (semolina flour) in a KSA local product (busbousa) formula.

Materials and Methods

Wheat germ and semolina flour were obtained from Grain Soils and Flour Mills Organization at KSA. Other ingredients for busbousa making were purchased from the local market at Mecca, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Chemicals for analytical tests were obtained from Merck, . The germ (with specified particle size as determined by sieving according to the factory) was milled using a laboratory mill and manually sieved to obtain the suitable flour for prepare the tested busbousa formulas. The prepared formula were packed and sealed in polyethylene bags and stored at -18ºC till used (Majzoobi et al., 2012). The ingredients of the tested busbousa formulas are listed in Table (1).

Table 1 : Ingredients (in g)of the tested busbousa formulas Busbousa prepared from whole wheat germ amounts (%) of Contents 0 (Control) 5 10 15 Semolina Flour 300 285 270 255 Sugar 200 200 200 200 Powder skimmed milk 50 50 50 50 Ghee 150 150 150 150 Whole wheat germ 0 15 30 45 Water 50 50 50 50

The control sample of busbousa was prepared by mixing sugars, water, ghee and powder skimmed milk together and the mixture was stirring well. The semolina flour was then added to the mixture and put in a suitable pan previously varnished well with small amount of ghee and pressing by the hand on the mixture surface. The pan was put in an oven at 220° c for 20 min until a golden brown surface was formed. Then the fire was turned off and the suitable sheera (its preparation well explained latterly) amount was added to the hot busbousa and left to cool to the room temperature and checked. The other busbousa samples were prepared the control with replacing 5, 10, 15 and 20% of the semolina amounts by the same amounts of wheat germ flour as previously mentioned in Table (1).

671 Middle East J. Appl. Sci.., 5(3): 670-675, 2015 ISSN 2077-4613

The invert syrup (the sweetness syrup, which is known as in a local name, called Sheera) was prepared as follows: 250 g sugar was added to 100ml water and 2ml lemon juices as well as a fine amount of vanillin were added. The previous mixture was boiled up to 30 min to produce 37.5 g invert syrup with 70 Brix as recommended by Majzoobi et al., (2012). It was left to cool to the room temperature up to used. The formula samples were estimated with respect to chemical composition (moisture, protein, ether extract, ash and crude fiber) as a good mirror for the nutritional status of the tested formula. Total carbohydrates were calculated by difference as follows: %Carbohydrates = 100 - the sum of % moisture , % crude protein , % fat , % ash and % crude fiber according to the procedures of the AOAC (2000). Water and Oil Absorption Capacity of the tested formulas were determined by the centrifugal method of Beuchat (1977) as follows: About one gram of sample was mixed with 10 ml distilled water/oil by using high speed mixer. The samples were then allowed to stand at 21 oC for 30 min, centrifuged at 5000 x g for 30min, and the volume of the supernatant noted in a 10 ml graduated cylinder. Density of distilled water was assumed to be 1g/ml and that of oil was found to be 0.89 g/ml. Results were expressed on a dry weight basis. Antinutritional factor (tannin and phytic acid) contents were determined by the methods of Price et al., (1978) and Wheeler and Ferrel (1971), respectively. The in vitro protein digestibility of the tested busbousa formula were estimated according the method of Sultana et al., (2010). To evaluate the sensory properties of the final products, all the tested busbousa samples were served to 20 in-house well trained panelists of the Nutrition and Food Science, College of Designs and Home Economics- Taif Univ., Saudi Arabia staff. The tested samples were evaluated for general appearance, taste ,color, odor, texture and palatability using a ranking test. The panelists were asked to score the samples from 0 (for the worst) to 10 (for the best) sample (Majzoobi et al., 2012) to determine the best level of the germ in the busbousa which were made from different levels of the germ. All the sensory tests were performed in isolated standard booths under standard condition (Watts et al., 1989). The experiments were performed in a completely randomized design and conducted in triplicates, except the sensory evaluation, and the mean values and standard deviations were calculated. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed and the results were separated using the Multiple Range Duncan's test (<0.05) using the SAS (1990) statistical software.

Results and Discussion

The chemical compositions of the wheat germ flour in relative the semolina flour, based on dry weight, are recorded in Table (2). It showed that the germ contained a significantly superior amount, in agreement with Majzoobi et al., (2012), of protein, fat, fiber and ash. On contrary, the semolina flour contained a significantly higher amount of carbohydrates and moisture. Such results were concurrent with that found by Gurinovich and Patrakova (2013) and Boyacioğlu and D'appolonia (1994).

Table 2: Chemical composition (%) of the tested semolina flour and whole wheat germ Constituents Semolina Flour Whole wheat germ Moisture 11.81a±1.42 8.52b ±1.48 Protein* 16.11b±0.82 29.18a ±0.62 Fat* 1.08b ±0.062 24.22a ±1.46 Fiber* 0.77b ±0.032 5.47a ±0.03 Ash* 0.72b ±0.04 3.71a ±0.22 Carbohydrates* 81.32a ±1.46 37.42b ±1.32 *On dry weight basis - Each mean value, within the same raw, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. - Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation.

The water and fat absorbance capacity of the tested semolina flour and whole wheat germ are shown in Table (3). It revealed that the germ flour could absorb more detectable and significant amounts of both water and fat. Agreed with that found by Majzoobi et al., (2012). Wherein, the higher amounts of proteins and fibers in the germ can absorb water. It may also interact with proteins, starch and other hydrocolloids of the flour and form network which can trap some water (Gómez et al., 2007). Such criteria seemed to be regarded to the variation in variation in amino acid compositions and several parameters such as hydrophobicity, degree of denaturation and the size and flexibility of the protein (Onsaard et al., 2010).Al-Kahtani and Abou-Arab (1993), also, reported that FAC is attributed to the physical entrapment of oil and to the number of nonpolar side chains on proteins that bind hydrocarbon chains on the fatty acids. The digestibility of protein is usually determined by measuring the intake by mouth and the output in the faces. Sultana et al., (2010) reported that digestibility refers to the quantitative aspect of the digestive process. It's a measure of the nutritional sources on contrary of tannin and phytate compounds which represented the

672 Middle East J. Appl. Sci.., 5(3): 670-675, 2015 ISSN 2077-4613

antinutritional factors. Therefore, both of them were put under investigation in the current study with respect to semolina and germ and the results were shown in Table (4). It was detected that the germ flour are more nutritious than the semolina flour because the germ contained low amounts of antinutritional compounds (tannin and phytate) and its protein are more able to digestion. The reason may be the enzymes of the germ that take part in protein digestion are more detectable than semolina, due to that, as reported by Sultana et al., (2010), the enzymes are more responsible for digestion of feed ingredients. Wherein, enzyme acts as catalyst, transforming feed ingredients into absorbable form (from protein to amino acids).

Table 3: Water and fat absorbance capacity ( ml/100g) of the tested semolina flour and whole wheat germ Character* Semolina Flour Whole wheat germ Water absorbance capacity 102.4b±8.22 173.53a ±6.82 Fat absorbance capacity 60.46b±4.62 78.50a ±6.92 -Each mean value, within the same raw, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. -Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation.

Table 4: Tannin and phytate compounds as well as protein digestibility factor (On dry weight basis) of the tested semolina flour and whole wheat germ Item Tannin Phytate(mg/100g) Protein digestible factor (g/100g) (mg/100g) Semolina Flour 1.13a±0.04 2.04a±0.03 79.24a ±2.66 Whole wheat germ 0.77b±0.03 1.22b±0.06 81.59a ±2.88 - Each mean value, within the same column, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. - Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation.

The chemical compositions, antinutritional compounds and protein digestibility (Tables 5 and 6) showed that, the higher amounts of the germ flour in the tested busbousa formulas, the higher amounts of protein, fat, fiber, ash and protein digestibility in the final products. On contrary, the higher amounts of the semolina flour in the tested busbousa formulas, the higher amounts of moisture, carbohydrates, tannin and phytate contents in the final products. Such results were due to the higher contents of protein, fat, fiber, ash and protein digestibility in the germ than the semolina on contrary of is ture, carbohydrates, tannin and phytate.

Table 5: Chemical composition (% as is basis) of the tested busbousa Constituents Busbousa prepared of whole wheat germ amounts (%) of 0 (Control) 5 10 15 Moisture 12.81a±1.12 11.60b±1.24 11.35bc±1.18 11.10c±1.26 Protein* 16.13c±0.42 16.61bc±0.36 18.56a±028 19.74a±0.34 Fat* 21.11d±0.04 22.32c±0.11 23.55b±0.06 24.74a±0.09 Fiber* 0.97c±0.22 1.99b±0.36 2.13b±0.24 2.58a±0.28 Ash* 0.69c±0.02 0.98b±0.04 1.08b±0.01 1.50a±0.06 Carbohydrates* 48.29a±1.26 46.50b±1.12 43.33c±1.11 40.34d±1.03 - Each mean value, within the same raw, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. - Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation.

Table 6: Tannin and phytate compounds as well as protein digestibility factor (On dry weight basis) of the tested busbousa % Wheat germ in busbousa Tannin Phytate (mg/100g) Protein digestible factor (g/100g) (mg/100g) 0 (Control) 1.93a±011 3.74a±0.06 78.6c±2.44 5 1.41b±0.08 2.60b±0.04 80.4b±2.26 10 0.85c±0.02 1.83c±0.03 82.8a±1.82 15 0.51c±0.01 1.47c±0.01 84.1a±1.76 - Each mean value, within the same column, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. - Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation. To determine the best level of the germ in the tested busbousa made with different levels of the germs were estimated with respect to the sensory evaluation. The results (Table 7) showed that increasing the germ level in the tested busbousa could not distinguish any changes in the odor scores. On the other hand, up to 10% germ, it led to increase the general appearance, taste, color, texture and palatability with an insignificant degree with control sample. While, utilization of 15% germ instead of the same amounts of semolina, significantly decreased all the tested attributes, except odor. Such results are confirmed by Majzoobi et al., (2012) and Arshad et al. (2007).

673 Middle East J. Appl. Sci.., 5(3): 670-675, 2015 ISSN 2077-4613

Table 7: Sensory evaluation of the tested busbousa attributes % Wheat germ in General appearance Taste Color Odor Texture Palatability busbousa 0 (Control) 9.7a 9.5a 9.6a 9.7a 9.3a 9.3a ±0.11 ±0.20 ±0.14 ±0.16 ±0.09 ±018 5 9.7a 9.6a 9.28a 9.17a 9.7a 9.5a ±0.22 ±0.11 ±0.18 ±0.14 ±0.12 ±0.17 10 9.8a 9.5a 9.25a 9.8a 9.7a 9.4a ±0.16 ±0.14 ±0.21 ±0.12 ±0.11 ±0.14 15 8.7b 9.0b 9.2b 9.16a 9.0b 8.9b ±0.14 ±0.16 ±0.23 ±0.11 ±0.20 ±0.20 - Each mean value, within the same column, followed by the same letter is not significant different at 0.05 level. - Each mean value is followed by ± standard deviation.

Conclusion

Wheat germ can be used in product recipes. However, it can have some effects on physicochemical properties of the resultant products. The chemical composition and level of the germ used in the recipe are determining factors affecting the quality to attain an acceptable product. Based on the results, nutritional, physical and sensory properties increased with increasing germ level up to 10%.

References

Al-Kahtani, H.A. and A.A. Abou-Arab, 1993.Comparison of physical, chemical and functional properties of Moringa peregrina (Al-Yassar or Al-Ban) and soybean proteins. Chemistry, 70 (6), 619-626. AOAC, 2000.Association of Official Analytical Chemists International, 17th Ed. Inc, USA. Arshad, M. U., F. M. Anjum, and T. Zahoor, 2007. Nutritional Assessment of Cookies Supplemented with Defatted Wheat Germ. Food Chem., 102:123-128. Baeva, M. R., I. N. Panchev, and V. V. Terzieva, 2000. Comparative Study of Texture of Normal and Energy Reduced Sponge Cakes. Nahrung Food, 44: 242-246. Beuchat, L.R., 1977. Functional and electrophoretic characteristics of succinylated peanut flour protein. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 25: 258-261. Boyacioğlu, M. H. and B. L. D'appolonia, 1994.Characterization and utilization of durum wheat for bread making. I. Comparison of chemical, rheological and baking properties between bread wheat flours and durum wheat flours. Cereal Chem., 71(1):21-28. Chandi, G.K. and D.S. Sogi, 2007.Functional properties of rice bran protein concentrates. Journal of FoodEngineering,79: 592-597. Dexter, J. E. and B. A. Marchylo, 2000. Recent trends in durum wheat and pasta processing. Impact on Durum Wheat Quality Requirements. In: Durum wheat, semolina and pasta quality. Recent Achievements and Now Trends. Proceeding of the International workshop, Montpellier 27 November 2000, Institute National of Research Agronomy, Montpellier, pp. 77-101. Gómez, M., F. Ronda, P. A. Cabellero, C. A. Blanco and C. M. Rosell, 2007.Functionality of Different Hydrocolloids on the Quality and Shelf-life of Yellow Layer Cakes. Food Hydrocol., 21: 167-173. Gurinovich, G. V. and I. S. Patrakova, 2013.Effect of wheat germ on the functional properties and oxidation stability of ground meat systems. Foods and Raw materials, Vol.1 (No1) :3-10. Kolpakova, V.V., I.V. Martynova, S.M. Severinenko, A.P. Nechaev and K. Berman, Yu., 2001.Wheat bran protein: Formulation of a balanced composition of protein-fatty food composites.Storage and Processing of Agricultural Raw Materials, 11: 42-47. Lasztity, R., 1984. The Chemistry of Cereal Proteins.Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Majzoobi, M., N. Darabzadeh and A. Farahnaky, 2012.Effects of Percentage and Particle Size of Wheat Germ on Some Properties of Batter and Cake. J. Agr. Sci. Tech. Vol. 14: 827-836. Megahed, M. G., 2011. Study on stability of wheat germ oil and lipase activity of wheat germ during periodical storage. Agric. Biol. J. N. Am., 2011, 2(1): 163-168. Onsaard, E., P. Pomsamud, and P. Audtum, 2010. Functional properties of sesame protein concentrates from sesame meal. As. J. Food Ag-Ind., 3(04), 420-431. Oufnac, D. S., 2007. Determination of antioxidant capacity in corn germ, wheat germ and wheat bran using solvent and microwave-assisted solvent extraction, B.S. Culinary Arts Thesis, Thibodaux: Nicholls State University. Pasta professional, 2004.Durum wheat and semolina. http://www.professionalpasta.it/durum.htm. Price, M., S. Van scoyoc and Butlen G. Larry,1978. A critical evaluation of vanillin reaction as an assay for tannin in sorghum grain. J. Agric Food Chem., 26(5): 1214-1218.

674 Middle East J. Appl. Sci.., 5(3): 670-675, 2015 ISSN 2077-4613

Ragaee, S., E. S. M. Abdel-Aal and M. Noaman, 2006.Antioxidant Activity and Nutrient Composition of Selected Cereals for Food Use. Food Chem., 98: 32-38. Safronova, A.M., B.G. Vysotskii, R.V. Narodetskaya, and E.N. Trushina, 1990.Nutritional value of wheat germ flakes. Nutritional Issues, no. 3: 54-58. SAS, 1987.Statistical analysis system. Release 6.03.SAS Institute. Inc. Carry, Nc, USA. Sissons, M., 2008. Role of durum wheat composition on the quality of pasta and bread.Food, 2 (2):75-90. Sudha, M. L., A.K. Srivastava and K. Leelavathi, 2007.Studies on pasting and structural characteristics of thermally treated wheat germ. European Food Research and Technology, 225:351-357. Sultana, Z., S. Ahmed, S. Iqball, and A. H. Chisty, 2010. Determination of in vitro protein digestibility of different feed ingredients for Nilotica (Oreochromis nilotica). Research Publication Journal, 4,(1):87-94. Tong Wang and Lawrence A. Johnson, 2001. Refining high-free wheat germ oil. J. Am Oil Chem. Soc., 78:71-76. Vishnyakov, A.B., V.N. Vlasov, O.A. Novitskii and I.P. Babenko, 2000.Integrated processing of wheat to produce biologically active products. Grain Storage and Processing, no. 12: 52-58. Watts, B. M., G. L. Ylimaki, L. E. Jeffery, and L. G. Elias, 1989.Basic Sensory Methods for Food Evaluation. The International Development Research Center. Ottawa, Canada. Wheeler, E. L. and R. E. Ferrel, 1971.A method of phytic acid determination in the wheat and wheat fractions. Cereal Chemistry, 48: 312-320. Zherebtov, N. A., T. V. Zyablova, and I. Cheremushkina, 2000.Effect of pH and temperature on the activity and stability of wheat germ lipoxygenase). Storage and Processing of Agricultural Raw Materials, 1: 53-55.

675