This study aimed at investigating the influence of varying proportions of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours on proximate composition, antinutritional, functional and pasting properties and mineral profiles of their blends as potential ingredients for snack production. Blends were optimized for protein (10-20%) and fibre (3-5%), using Design Expert Version 6.0.8. and variables wheat flour (55-65%), pigeon-pea flour (16-25%) and cassavacortex flour (11-20%). Blends generated were evaluated for protein and crude fibre contents and three blends with highest protein and fibre contents were evaluated for proximate and anti-nutrition compositions, functional and pasting properties and phytate/oxalate-mineral molar ratios and mineral profiles including mineral safety index of selected minerals. Protein and fibre contents of blends increased as proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex increased, with sample WPC-1 having highest protein content (16.30%) and sample WPC-3 having the highest fibre content (4.05%). Samples with higher proportion of pigeon pea flour (WPC-1 and WPC-3) had significantly (p<0.05) higher water and oil absorption and breakdown viscosities, significantly (p<0.05) lower swelling and water solubility and setback viscosities. There was significant difference (p<0.05) among samples for Oxa:Ca, and between Phy:Zn and [Ca]:[Phy]/[Zn] molar ratios, between which there was also strong positive correlation (r = 0.99), but no significant difference for Phy:Zn, while values for both parameters and phytate and oxalate contents for all samples were within safe thresholds. There was significant (p<0.05) differences between the mean calculated and standard MSI values for all the minerals, except Na, while sample WPC-3 had the highest calculated MSI values for all minerals measured. Varying proportions of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours had significant (p<0.05) effects on proximate composition, physico-chemical properties and mineral profiles of their blends.

•    Cassava-cortex flour
•    Flour blends
•    Mineral profiles
•    physico-chemical properties
•    Snack
•    Wheat flour

Akinjayeju O, Eke A, Akinpelu AA (2020) Optimization of Proximate Compositions, Mineral Profiles, Physico-Chemical And Anti-Nutritional Properties of Wheat, Pigeon-Pea and Cassava-Cortex Flour Blends For Snack Production. Ann Food Process Preserv 4(1): 1027

Snacks constitute a group of convenience foods, which are often smaller than a regular meal and generally eaten between meals. In addition to their convenience, snack foods also offer certain advantages including wide consumption, relatively long shelf life, good eating quality, high palatability and wide acceptability by most consumers. Conventional snack foods are produced exclusive from cereal-based flours, especially wheat, which contains mainly carbohydrate with little amounts of important nutrients like protein, fibre and minerals. This is because, white flour from milling of wheat, is deficient in useful nutrients like fibre, vitamins and minerals contained in the germ, bran and aleurone parts of the wheat grain which are normally removed during milling. Such flour is also generally low in protein. Despite this, snacking has become so popular that snacks are now taken as major meals for a large number of people, especially those who eat on the go [1]. It therefore becomes necessary to improve the nutritional value of such products by incorporating other plant materials high in protein, fibre and minerals in their formulations. High protein, high fibre diets are associated with fewer digestive disorders, reduced rate of colon cancer, better blood-sugar control, and lower blood-cholesterol levels [2]. Many efforts have been made by researchers to improve the nutritional value of bakery products including snacks by incorporating protein and fibre-rich plant sources into wheat flour [3-5].

Legumes constitute excellent addition to cereal flours in the production of bakery products due to their high dietary proteins, minerals, the B-vitamins and lysine and tryptophan, the two limiting essential amino acids in cereal grains, including wheat. Pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) is considered the fifth ranked legume grain in terms of food uses, as well its nutritional, economical and medicinal importance in different parts of the world including Nigeria [6]. It is credited with high protein and fibre contents and good source of minerals including calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, iron, and essential amino acid lysine [7, 8]. Despite its high nutritional and economic importance, pigeon pea could be considered an under-utilized legume in Nigeria, in terms of food and industrial uses. Its use as extender of cereal flours for bakery products could be explored in view of its potential benefits. Cassava cortex, commonly called the peel, is the whitish thick layer underneath the thin brown bark or periderm, and consists of about 10-12% of the root weight [9]. Cassava cortex is reported to contain 5–15% of crude fibre [10], which makes it a potential excellent source of dietary fibre for humans. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of varying proportions of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours on some physico-chemical properties, proximate and anti-nutritional compositions, as well as mineral bio-availability and profiles of their blends, as potential ingredient for snack production, using response surface methodology.

Materials and sources

The materials used for this research study were wheat flour (Triticum spp), pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) and cassava (Manihot spp) cortex. Wheat flour and pigeon pea were purchased from Oyingbo Retail Market on Lagos Mainland, while the cassava cortex was purchased from a local cassava processing market, Abule Ijesha, on the outskirt of Lagos, Nigeria.

Preparation of samples

Wheat flour was sieved using a sieve of mesh size 212μm and packaged in a high-density polyethylene bag and stored in a cool, moisture-free environment for further use.

Pigeon pea was produced using a slightly modified method of [8]. The pigeon pea seeds were hydrated in cold water (30±1.5°C) for 60mins, de-hulled manually, dried in a cabinet dryer (Carlisle CA2 5DU, Mitchel Dryers Ltd, England, 3695-010), followed by milling into flour using a grinding hammer mill (Type S/03 7.5HP, Petrel Limited, Birmingham England, 2121A). The flour was sieved in a sieve of mesh size 212μm, packaged in a highdensity polyethylene bag and stored in a cool dry environment until used.

Fresh cassava peels were sorted to remove dirt and the white cortex was seperated from the brown outer covering. The cortex was washed and soaked in cold water and allowed to ferment for 72 hours, followed by drying an oven (Macadams Deck Oven, MM02 - 01023- 07/15, MB805) at 65o C for 8 hours. The dried cortex was milled in a locally-fabricated attrition mill. The flour obtained was packaged in a high-polyethylene bag and stored in a cool, dry place for further use.

The flour blends were obtained using D-Optimal model of Mixture Design of Design Expert Version 6.0.8. The design was based on the optimization of protein from pigeon pea flour and fibre from cassava cortex flour. The variables used were; wheat flour (55-65%), pigeon pea flour (16-25%) and cassava cortex flour (11-20%), which targeted protein and fibre contents of 10- 20% and 3-5% in the final product respectively. The 14 blends were generated were evaluated for protein and fibre contents and three blends with the highest protein and fibre contents were selected and for further studies.

Determination of protein and fibre contents of blends and proximate compositions of selected samples

Protein and fibre contents of blends generated by Design Expert and proximate composition of selected blends were determined using standard AOAC (2005). Carbohydrate content was obtained by difference and results expressed on dry weight basis, except for moisture.

Determination of functional properties of samples

Loose bulk density was determined as described by [11]. Water absorption capacity, swelling power and solubility index of each flour sample were determined using the methods described by [12], while reconstitution index was determined by the method of Egounlety and Syarief (1992).

Determination of pasting properties of samples

Pasting properties of the flour samples were determined using the Rapid Visco Analyzer (RVA), and the curves obtained were used to obtain the peak viscosity, trough viscosity, final viscosity, breakdown, setback viscosity, peak time and pasting temperature (Newport Scientific, 1998).

Determination of anti-nutritional factors, selected minerals and molar ratios

Phytate and protease inhibitor were determined using the standard AOAC (2005) methods, while total phenols, oxalate and hydrogen cyanide were determined using methods of Onwuka (2005). Oxalate-calcium and Phytate-mineral molar ratios for calcium, iron and zinc for each flour sample were determined using the method of [13]. The amount of phytate and each mineral was divided by their respective atomic weight, (phytate = 660g/ mol, Oxalate = 88, Fe = 56g/mol, Zn = 65g/mol, Ca = 40g/mol) and the phytate-mineral molar ratio obtained by dividing the mole of phytate with the mole of the respective minerals, while mineralmineral, [Ca] [Phy]/[Zn] and [K:Ca + Mg)] milli-equivalent ratios were calculated according to [14].

Calculation of Mineral Safety Index

Mineral safety index (MSI) of samples for Fe, Ca, P, Mg, Zn and Na were calculated using the method described by Watts (2010), (equation 2). The standard MSI values for the elements are, Na (4.8), Mg (15), P (10), Ca (10), Fe (6.7) and Zn [15].

Statistical Analysis

Data were collected in triplicates and analyzed using the IBM SPSS version 23 (SPSS, 2015) and results expressed as mean ± s.d. Significant difference between means was determined using the one-way analysis of Variance (ANOVA), while means were separated using the New Duncan Multiple Range Test (NDMRT) at 0.05.

Protein and fibre contents of blends and proximate compositions and energy values of samples

Protein and crude fibre contents of the blends obtained through optimization by response surface methodology are presented in Table 1, while Table 2 shows the proximate compositions of the selected flour samples. These results showed increased protein and fibre contents in blends with higher proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours, due to the high protein content of pigeon pea [15, 8], and high fibre content in cassava cortex [16] respectively. Pigeon pea flour have been used to enhance the protein content of composite of unripe cooking banana, pigeon pea, and sweet potato flours [17-18].

As Table 1 shows, the three blends selected for further studies are those with the highest protein and fibre contents, which are RUNS 1(59.50:25.00:15.50), RUN 4 (58.80:23.10:18.10) and RUN 8 (55.00:25.00:20.00) wheat:pigeon pea:cassava cortex flours, and are coded WPC-1, WPC-2 and WPC-3 respectively. The high protein and fibre contents of the blends will be beneficial to the consumers. Protein is an important nutrient for the human body, where it performs many functions like tissue repairs, body building [19], while pigeon pea protein has been reported to contain all essential amino acids for adult humans [20, 8]. Regular consumption of high-fibre diets have been reported to reduce constipation, blood glucose level and certain degenerative diseases [21,22]. There were significant differences (p<0.05) in the proximate compositions of the flour samples. The moisture contents are low enough for good storage to confer microbiological stability on the flours, especially from moldiness [23]. The low fat contents of the flour blends are in agreement with low fat contents previously reported for most cereals and legumes, including wheat and pigeon pea [24, 25, 8, 26). These low fat contents will neither pre-dispose the flour samples to fat oxidation and rancid conditions during storage [3], nor contribute to the energy density of the flour samples [24]. Carbohydrate contents of the flour samples reduced slightly but significantly (p<0.05) as proportion of wheat flour reduced relative to other two components in the blends, namely pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours, but particularly pigeon pea. The slightly but significantly (p< 0.05) higher carbohydrate content of sample WPC-3 (55% wheat flour) compared to sample WPC-1 (59.5% wheat flour) is most probably due to its higher proportion of cassava cortex flour (20%) compared to that of sample WPC-1 (15.5%), due to high carbohydrate content of cassava peels of which the cortex is a high proportion of [17, 27]. The high carbohydrate contents of the flour samples enhanced their energy density, which is in agreement with the observation of Awolu et al. (2015) [3] that carbohydrate content and energy content of a food product are directly proportional.

Functional properties of selected blends

The functional properties of the flour blends are presented in Table 3, which showed significant differences (p<0.05) among the flour samples for most parameters. Functional properties are those physico-chemical characteristics which often affect how food systems function especially during processing and storage [28]. The bulk densities of the flour samples, which measures how dense a flour sample is, ranged between 0.78g.cm3 for samples PWC-1 and PWC-2 to 0.86g/cm3 for sampleWPC-3. The slightly higher bulk density of sample WPC-3 was most probably due to its slightly higher moisture content and higher composition of cassava cortex flour, which resulted in higher fibre content. The bulk densities are higher that values obtained for blends of quality protein maize, soy cake and whole millet flours reported by [5], but are within the range of bulk densities for blends of rice, cassava and kersting’s groundnut flours [3]. The high bulk densities of the flour samples may be an advantage since it may allow for ease of dispensability reduced paste thickness during reconstitution [29], but may enhance packaging, storage and transportation costs [8]. The water and oil absorption capacities showed significant difference among the flour samples, ranging from 118.45 to 128.65% for water absorption and 86.24 and 96.43% for oil absorption, with sample WPC-1 having the highest value and sample WPC-3 having the lowest value for both parameters.

The significantly (p<0.05) lower water and oil absorption values for sample WPC-2 was most probably due its lower protein and fibre contents, brought about by relatively lower proportion of pigeon pea flour compared to samples WPC-1 and WPC-3, and slightly lower cassava cortex flour compared to sample WPC-3. High water absorption values of flours have been associated with high protein, fibre and carbohydrate contents, due to their high hydration properties [30,31]. Increased water absorption values of legume-fortified composite flours with increasing proportion of legume flours have been previously reported [26,5]. Oil absorption of the flours also showed similar trend as water absorption with WPC-2(86%) < WPC-3(94%) < WPC-1(96%). The slightly higher oil absorption values for samples WPC-1 and WPC-3 compared to WPC-2 is most probably due to their slightly higher protein content brought about by higher proportion of pigeon pea flour. This result is similar to the observations of Kiin-Kabari et al. (2015) [32] for wheat-plantain flours enriched with bambara nut protein, as well as Awolu et al. (2015) [3] for rice-cassava-Kersting’s ground nut composite flours as the proportion of protein sources increased. High oil absorption capacity of foods has been observed to enhance flavour, mouth feel and palatability [33,28] as well as promote satiety in foods due to release of satiety hormones in the body [34]. These sensory properties are particularly important for snacks for which the flour samples were formulated.

The swelling capacity and water solubility index values ranged from 2.08 to 2.59% and 4.84 to 6.00% respectively, with sample having higher proportions of pigeon pea flour (WPC1 and WPC-3) having lower swelling capacity but higher water solubility values compared to sample with lower pigeon pea flour. The slightly lower swelling capacity of samples with higher proportion of pigeon pea is most probably due to its restricted swelling which has been observed to characterize legume flours [35]. These results are similar to the observations of Akinjayeju et al. (2019) [22] who reported lower swelling capacity values for blends of quality protein maize, soy cake flour and whole millet with higher proportions of soy cake flour. The high water solubility index for samples with higher proportions of pigeon pea flour could be due to high concentration of soluble protein in most legumes [36]. These results are in agreement with the observations of Awolu et al. (2015) [3] for blends of rice, cassava, and Kersting’s ground nut, and Ocheme et al. (2018) [26] for composite of wheat and ground nut protein concentrate. Water absorption capacity showed a strong negative correlation with swelling index (r = -0.84), but positive correlation with (r = 0.69), while swelling had very strong negative correlation with solubility (r = -0.97). Reconstitution index, a measure of dispersibility of flours in water, ranged from 6.60mls for sample WPC-2 to 7.80mls for sample WPC-1, with sample WPC2 significantly (p0.05) difference. The relatively lower reconstitution index of sample WPC-2 could be attributed to its lower proportion of pigeon pea flour compared to other two samples.

Pasting properties of selected blends

The pasting properties of the flour samples are presented in Table 4, which showed significant (p<0.05) differences among the samples for almost all parameters. The peak, trough and final viscosities (RVU) varied from 115 (WPC-2) to 124 (WPC3), 61 (WPC-1) to 69 (WPC-3) and 145 (WPC-1) to 153 (WPC2) respectively, with sample WPC-3 having highest values for peak and trough viscosities, while sample WPC-2 had significantly (p<0.05) lowest trough and final viscosities. Peak viscosity of starch granules indicates maximum swelling before undergoing disintegration [37], and high peak viscosities have been associated with weak granular forces and high degree of disintegration (Newport Scientific, 1998).

Trough, or hot paste viscosity, is the minimum viscosity attained during the constant heating phase and gives a measure of the ability of a starch paste to resist breakdown during the cooling phase (Newport Scientific, 1998), while final viscosity measures the ability of flours to form viscous pastes or gels after cooking and cooling and their resistance to shearing during stirring [38]. Peak viscosity showed strong positive correlation with trough viscosity (r = 0.63), but weak correlation with both final viscosity (r = 0.23) and water absorption (r = 0.13). Breakdown, setback and consistency viscosities (RVU) for the flour samples varied significantly (p<0.05) from 48 for sample WPC-2 to 55 for WPC3, 28 for WPC-3 to 38 for WPC-2 and 83 for WPC-3 and 86.50 for WPC-2 respectively and showed similar trends for both setback and consistency. Breakdown gives indication of susceptibility of cooked starch granules to disintegrate during continued stirring and heating, which illustrates the stability or consistency of the paste during cooking [39]. Samples WPC-1 and WPC-3 with slightly higher proportion of pigeon pea had higher breakdown viscosities compared with sample WPC-2, with lower breakdown viscosity. These results are in contrast to the results of Akinjayeju et al. (2019) [22] who reported lower breakdown viscosity for blends of quality protein maize, soy cake and whole millet flours containing higher proportions of soy cake flour.

For setback viscosity, which indicates reduced dough digestibility when high [40] and reduced tendency for retrogradation when low [41], samples with high proportion of pigeon pea (WPC-1 and WPC-3), had significantly (p0.05) among the flour samples, which agrees with the observation of Akinjayeju et al. (2019) [22] for blends of quality protein maize, soy cake, whole millet flours and cassava starch.

Anti-nutritional factors, mineral contents, phytate/ oxalate-mineral molar ratios of selected minerals

The phytate, oxalate and mineral contents of the flour samples and their molar ratios with some selected minerals are presented in Table 5, which showed that there were significant differences (p0.05) between samples WPC-1 and WPC-2 for phytate and between samples WPC-1 and WPC3 for oxalate. The relatively higher contents of phytate and oxalate in sample WPC-3 could be attributed to its relatively high proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours both of which have been reported to have high anti-nutritional contents [27]. The similar oxalate contents of samples WPC-1 and WPC-3 could be due to their equal proportion of pigeon pea flour in the blends (25%), while the differences in their cassava cortex flour (15.5 and 20%) most probably did not have too much effect on the oxalate content, most probably an indication of low oxalate content in cassava cortex.

The phytate and oxalate contents of the flour samples are within safety thresholds of 2-5g/kg for oxalate and 50-60mg/100g for phytate [43], which indicates that consumers will not be subjected to any risk from the consumption of snack produced for the flour samples. Results showed significant differences (p0.05) in Fe:Zn and Oxa:Ca molar and [K : (Ca + Mg)] milli-equivalent ratios of the flour samples, which indicated that varying proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours had no effect on these parameters. Fe and Zn are often assessed together in view of the effects on the absorption of one over the other. Absorption of Zn will be adversely affected when the Fe:Zn molar ratio is more than 2 [46]. The Fe:Zn values of the flour samples ranged between 1.35 for sample WPC-3 and 1.39 for sample WPC-1, and are therefore lower than the maximum value of 2, which means that Zn absorption in the snack produced from the flour samples will not impaired by Fe.

The [K : (Ca + Mg)] ratio is considered more useful than Ca:Mg molar ratio in assessing magnesium absorption [47]. A milliequivalent value of 2.2 is considered as maximum level at which magnesium absorption will not be impaired. The milli-equivalent values of the flour samples are 0.38. 0.38 and 0.40 for samples WPC-1, WPC-2 and WPC-3 respectively which are lower than the maximum value of 2.2 allowed. This indicates that consumers of snack produced from the flour samples will not suffer from acute hypomagnesaemia, a condition of abnormal low blood magnesium level [47,48]. Results for Oxa:Ca and Phy:Zn molar ratios showed that while there is significant difference (p0.05) for Oxa:Ca. The Oxa:Ca and Phy:Zn values for the flour samples are 0.26, 0.25, 0.25 and 0.66, 0.62 and 0.61 for samples WPC-1, WPC-2 and WPC-3 respectively. These values are much lower than the maximum values of not more than 1 and < 2.5 proposed for Oxa:Ca [49], 50] and < 18 suggested for Phy:Zn (Rosalind et al., 2010). This means that the bio-availability of these minerals will not be impaired by these anti-nutritional factors. The [Ca]:[Phy]/[Zn] molar ratio is considered to be a more appropriate parameter for assessing the bioavailability of zinc than Phy:Zn molar ratio, because calcium intake has been observed to effect on critical Phy:Zn molar ratio at which zinc bioavailability will be affected [50]. The values for this parameter are 1.03, 0.94 and 0.99 for samples WPC-1, WPC-2 and WPC-3 respectively, which are a little higher than the critical value of 0.5mol/kg recommended by [50] and [50]. The slightly higher [Ca]:[Phy]/[Zn] molar ratio of sample WPC-1 compared to other two samples is most probably due to its lower zinc content of 2.22. There was strong positive correlation (r = 0.70) between the Phy:Zn and [Ca]:[Phy]/[Zn]molar ratios [51].

Mineral Safety Index

The mineral safety index (MSI) values of the flour samples for selected minerals, including Ca, Fe, Mg, Na, Ph, and Zn, are presented in Table 6. Mineral safety index of foods is important because it measures the possibility of minerals to cause their overload in the human body, by comparing the sample mean of calculated MSI values of all flour samples for each mineral (CV) with the standard or table value (SV). A mineral will cause its overload when its calculated MSI is higher than its standard value [15, 52]. For all minerals determined, sample WPC-3 had the highest MSI values compared to other two samples, due most probably to its high mineral contents, as a result of higher proportion of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours (Table 5) [8, 27]. In addition, results obtained showed that mean values for calculated MSI for Ca(5.25), Na(3.82) and Ph(6.65) were lower than the standard MSI values of 10, 4.8 and 10 respectively. This means that these minerals will not expose potential consumers to risk of overload or toxic conditions by these minerals. On the other hand, mean calculated MSI for Fe(14.28), Mg(32.52) and Zn(51.63) were higher than the standard values of 6.7, 15 and 33 for these minerals respectively, indicating MSI values which are far higher than their recommended adult intakes by 113, 117 and 56% for Fe, Mg and Zn respectively. Similar results of low MSI values for Ca, Na and Ph and high values for Fe, Mg and Zn have been reported by previous studies of fast foods commonly consumed in Nigeria [15, 53] and other plant products, including flours from peeled, unpeeled and blanched plantain [47];[53,54].

The excessively high calculated MSI values for these minerals may be detrimental to the consumers since high intakes of these mineral may results in certain deleterious effects in the human body. The daily requirements of Zn is 3-11mg for males and 3-8 for females and too much intake of this mineral can lead to its toxicity resulting in gastrointestinal disruption and imbalance of other nutrients especially Cu and Fe [55]. Symptoms of high Zn in the body include nausea, vomiting, decreased immunity and reduction in concentration of ‘good cholesterol’ or high density lipoprotein [56]. With respect to magnesium, a healthy body has a concentration of 1.7-2.3mg/dL and a value of above 2.6mg/dL is considered high and may result in hypermagnesemia, which is however normally rarely occurred since gastrointestinal and renal systems are capable of the amount of magnesium absorbed in the body and how much is excreted. Symptoms of hypermagnesemia include neurological impairment and abnormally low pressure, which may led to heart problems, difficulty in breathing and coma [57]. Symptoms of iron overload, which occur when it is at advance stage, are fatigue, weakness and high blood sugar levels, which can lead to other degenerative diseases. There was very strong positive correlation in the calculated MSI values of Fe and Zn (r = 0.99), which most probably confirms the reported similarities of these mineral elements in certain respects including sharing similar dietary sources, their absorption being enhanced or impaired by the same compounds and simultaneous occurrence of their deficiencies [46]. Statistical t-test results showed significant (p<0.05) differences between mean calculated and standard MSI values for all the minerals, except Na for which calculated t-value (|-4.04|) is less that tabulated t-value (4.303), unlike other minerals for which calculated t-values were higher than tabulated t-values.

Table 1: Protein and fibre contents of blends of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours.

Experimental Runs	Wheat Flour	Pigeon Pea Flour	Cassava Cortex Four	Protein Content	Crude fibre content
1	59.50	25.00	15.50	13.22	3.05
2	63.55	18.60	17.85	12.36	2.66
3	64.00	25.00	11.00	13.53	2.39
4	58.80	23.10	18.10	12.93	3.14
5	63.55	22.85	13.60	13.12	2.63
6	59.50	20.50	20.00	12.42	3.29
7	65.00	20.00	15.00	12.71	2.72
8	55.00	25.00	20.00	13.12	3.40
9	64.00	16.00	20.00	11.94	3.19
10	62.60	21.20	16.20	12.76	2.88
11	55.00	25.00	20.00	13.05	3.40
12	59.50	20.50	20.00	12.45	3.30
13	64.00	16.00	20.00	11.90	3.21
14	64.00	25.00	11.00	13.53	2.42

Table 2: Proximate composition of flour blends from wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex

Parameters/Samples	WCP-1	WPC-2	WPC-3	WHT
Moisture content (%)	9.25 ± 0.01d	9.76 ± 0.39c	11.30 ± 0.62a	10.16 ± 0.12b
Crude protein (%)	16.30 ± 0.03a	14.65 ± 0.03c	15.09± 0.02b	13.47 ± 0.02d
Crude fat (%)	1.50 ± 0.03ab	1.65 ± 0.05a	1.55 ± 0.03a	1.38 ± 0.03c
Total ash (%)	2.63± 0.05c	2.95 ± 0.03b	2.89 ± 0.02a	1.00 ± 0.02d
Crude fibre (%)	3.48± 0.03c	3.32 ± 0.05b	4.05 ± 0.07a	1.36 ± 0.07d
Carbohydrate (%)	76.09 ± 0.03c	77.43 ± 0.14b	76.42 ± 0.08d	82.79 ± 0.28a
Energy value (kJ)	1626.13 ± 0.20b	1619.31 ± 0.15c	1602.14 ± 0.24b	1687.48 ± 0.35a
Values are Means ± s.d. of triplicate determinations expressed on dry-weight basis except moisture Means of similar superscripts along rows are not significantly different (p > 0.05) WPC-1: = 59.50 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 15.50 CCF WPC-2: = 58.80 WHF, 23.10 PPF, 18.10 CCF WPC-3: = 55.00 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 20.00 CCF WHT = 100% Wheat flour WHF= Wheat flour, PPF= Pigeon pea flour, CCF= Cassava cortex flour

 Table 3: Functional Properties of flour blends from wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours.

Parameters/Samples	WCP-1	WPC-2	WPC-3
Packed bulk density (g/cm3 )	0.78 ± 0.01b	0.78 ± 0.02b	0.86 ± 0.05a
Water Absorption Capacity (%)	128.65 ± 0.02a	118.45 ± 0.02c	123.87 ± 0.01b
Oil Absorption Capacity (%)	96.43 ± 0.15a	86.24 ± 0.20c	94.10 ± 0.12b
Swelling capacity (%)	2.13 ± 0.02b	2.59 ± 0.02a	2.08 ± 0.01c
Water solubility index (%)	5.62 ± 0.03b	4.84 ± 0.06c	6.00 ± 0.04a
Reconstitution index (ml)	7.80 ± 0.02a	6.60 ± 0.01	7.74 ± 0.15a
Foaming capacity (%)	21.00 ± 0.10a	15.02 ± 0.73c	19.25 ± 0.15b
Values are Means ± s.d. of triplicate determinations Means of similar superscripts along rows are not significantly different (p > 0.05) WPC-1: = 59.50 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 15.50 CCF WPC-2: = 58.80 WHF, 23.10 PPF, 18.10 CCF WPC-3: = 55.00 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 20.00 CCF WHT = 100% Wheat flour WHF= Wheat flour, PPF= Pigeon pea flour, CCF= Cassava cortex flour.

Table 4: Pasting Characteristics of flour blends from wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex.

Parameters/Samples	WCP-1	WPC-2	WPC-3
Peak Viscosity(RVU)(a)	116.13 ± 1.13b	115.14 ± 0.47b	124.49 ± 1.07a
Trough Viscosity(RVU)(b)	61.29 ± 0.46c	67.04 ± 0.54b	69.08 ± 0.41a
Final viscosity(RVU)(c)	61.29 ± 0.46c	153.54 ± 1.37a	152.11 ± 0.94b
Breakdown (RVU)(a – b)	54.84 ± 1.17b	48.10 ± 0.98c	55.41 ± 0.10a
Setback (RVU)(c – a)	29.11 ± 0.69b	38.40 ± 0.85a	27.62 ± 0.05c
Consistency (RVU)(c – b)	83.95 ± 0.30b	86.50 ± 0.80a	83.03 ± 0.55c
Pasting temp (oC) Pasting time (mins)	89.50 ± 0.10a 5.56 ± 0.90b	89.80 ± 0.20a 5.80 ± 0.00a	87.25 ± 0.00b 5.74 ± 0.01
Values are Means ± s.d. of triplicate determinations  Means of similar superscripts along rows are not significantly different (p > 0.05) WPC-1: = 59.50 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 15.50 CCF WPC-2: = 58.80 WHF, 23.10 PPF, 18.10 CCF WPC-3: = 55.00 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 20.00 CCF WHT = 100% Wheat flour WHF= Wheat flour, PPF= Pigeon pea flour, CCF= Cassava cortex flour

Table 5: Anti-nutritional factors, mineral-mineral, and phytate/oxalate-mineral molar ratios of selected minerals of blends of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours.

Parameters/Samples	WCP-1	WPC-2	WPC-3	*RAI
Phytate (mg/100g)	14.81 ± 0.08b	14.81 ± 0.08b	15.29 ± 0.06a
Oxalate (mg/100g)	35.40 ± 0.15a	33.69 ± 0.20b	35.64 ± 0.02a
Calcium (mg/100g)	62.88 ± 0.05b	60.47 ± 0.15c	65.58 ± 0.10a	1200
Iron (mg/100g)	87.63 ± 0.13b	3.16 ± 0.04b	3.35 ± 0.02a	15
Magnesium (mg/100g)	87.63 ± 0.13b	79.03 ± 0.17c	93.46 ± 0.16a	400
Phosphorus(mg/100g)	77.51 ± 0.50c	79.77 ± 0.25b	82.18 ± 0.40a	1200
Potassium (mg/100g)	153.93 ± 1.13b	79.77 ± 0.25	176.13 ± 0.63a	400
Sodium (mg/100g)	39.93 ± 0.01b	35.44 ± 0.21c	44.10 ± 0.19a	500
Zinc (mg/100g)	2.22 ± 0.03c	2.33 ± 0.04b	2.49 ± 0.04a	15
Iron:Zinc	1.39 ± 0.02a	1.36 ± 0.03a	1.35 ± 0.01a
Oxalate:Calcium	0.66 ± 0.01a	0.25 ± 0.00a	0.25 ± 0.01a
Phytate:Zinc	0.66 ± 0.01a	0.62 ± 0.00b	0.61 ± 0.00b
[K:Ca + Mg)] (meq.)	0.38 ± 0.00a	0.38 ± 0.01a	0.40 ± 0.02a
[Ca] [Phy]/[Zn]	1.03 ± 0.02a	0.94 ± 0.01c	0.99 ± 0.03b
Values are Means ± s.d. of triplicate determinations  Means of similar superscripts along rows are not significantly different (p > 0.05) WPC-1: = 59.50 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 15.50 CCF WPC-2: = 58.80 WHF, 23.10 PPF, 18.10 CCF WPC-3: = 55.00 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 20.00 CCF WHT = 100% Wheat flour WHF= Wheat flour, PPF= Pigeon pea flour, CCF= Cassava cortex flour.

This study showed that varying proportions of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours resulted in significant (p<0.05) changes in proximate compositions, physico-chemical and mineral profiles of their blends. Protein and fibre contents of the blends increased with increasing proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours respectively. Most functional properties the flours increased significantly (p<0.05) as proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex increased, except swelling, which reduced with increasing proportions of pigeon pea. Peak, trough and final viscosities of the flours varied significantly (p<0.05) as proportions of pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours varied, while samples WPC-1 and WPC-3 with higher proportions of pigeon pea had significantly (p<0.05) higher breakdown viscosities, but significantly (p<0.05) lower setback viscosities. These samples also had similar values for oxalate (35.40 and 35.64mg/100g) respectively, but significantly (p<0.05) lower phytate contents, but both anti-oxidants were within safe thresholds for all the flour samples. There was no significant (p<0.05) difference for Fe:Zn and Oxa:Ca and [K: (Ca + Mg)] milli-equivalent ratios, while there was significant (p<0.05) difference and large positive correlation (r = 0.99) between Phy:Zn and [Ca]:[Phy]/[Zn] molar ratios. Average calculated MSI values were lower than standard table values for Ca, Na and Ph in all flour samples, which indicates that these minerals will not produce overloads in the body, unlike for Fe, Mg and Zn, for which average calculated MSI values were much higher than standard table values, which may result in their overloads. Varying proportions of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours had significant (p<0.05) effects on proximate composition, physico-chemical properties and mineral profiles of their blends. It is expected that the varying proximate compositions and physico-chemical properties will also have considerable effects on other properties of the flour blends, including sensory properties of snack produced from them. Future studies will focus on other nutritional parameters, including amino acid profiles and predicted protein quality indices, as well as the glycaemic properties and toxicity of the flour blends using rat models. Sensory attributes of the snacks produced from the flour samples will also be evaluated.

Table 6: Mineral safety index of selected minerals of blends of wheat, pigeon pea and cassava cortex flours

Minerals/ Samples	Ca		Fe		Mg		Na		Ph		Zn
	SV	CV	SV	CV	SV	CV	SV	CV	SV	CV	SV	CV
WPC-1	10	5.24	6.7	13.76	15	32.86	4.8	3.83	10	6.46	33	48.84
WPC-2	10	5.04	6.7	14.11	15	29.64	4.8	3.4	10	6.65	33	51.26
WPC-3	10	5.47	6.7	14.96	15	35.05	4.8	4.23	10	6.65	33	54.78
Sample mean	10	5.25	6.7	14.28	15	32.52	4.8	3.82	10	6.65	33	51.63
Sample STD		0.22		0.62		2.72		0.42		0.2		2.99
*t-test t-calculated		-37.40		21.18		11.16		-4.04		-29.01		10.79
Table value for t-test (ttabulated) at p = 0.05 = 4.303 WPC-1: = 59.50 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 15.50 CCF WPC-2: = 58.80 WHF, 23.10 PPF, 18.10 CCF WPC-3: = 55.00 WHF, 25.00 PPF, 20.00 CCF WHT = 100% Wheat flour WHF= Wheat flour, PPF= Pigeon pea flour, CCF= Cassava cortex flour. SV = Standard (Table) value; CV = Calculated value Ca = Calcium, Fe = Iron, Mg = Magnesium, Na = Sodium, Ph = Phosphorus, Zn = Zinc STD = Sample standard deviation

 

1. Olagunju AC. Production and nutritioal evaluation of snack produced from blends of unripe plantain, soy cake and rice bran flours. MSc Thesis. 2017; Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria.

2. Lairon D, Arnault N, Bertrais S, Planells R, Clero E, Hercberg S, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk factors for cardiovascular disease in French adults. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2005; 82: 1185– 1194.

3. Awolu OO, Oluwaferanmi PMO, Fafowora, I, Oseyemi GF. Optimization of the extrusion process for the production of ready-to-eat snack from rice, cassava and kersting’s groundnut composite flours. LWT Food Science and Technology. 2015; 64: 18-24.

4. Ogunmodimu OO, Ijarotimi OS, Fagbemi TN. Evaluation of nutritional properties of high protein-fiber based snacks formulated from wheat, soybean concentrate and cassava fibre. Sky Journal of Food Science. 2015; 4(3): 030-041.

5. Akinjayeju O, Adekoya MT. Ingredient optimization by response surface methodology and nutritional evaluation of bread from wheat, millet and soya meal flour blends. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. 2018; 3(6): 176-184.

6. Rachie KO, Wurster R. The potential of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) as a horticultural crop in East Africa. 1 SHS Acts Hortictive. 2007; 21: 1-5.

7. Amarteifio JO, Muntali DC, Karikar SK, Morake TK. The composition of pigeon pea(Cajanus cajan) grow in Botswana. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 2002; 57: 75-177.

8. Akubor PI. Effect of processing methods on the chemical composition and functional properties of pigeon pea seed. Asian Journal of Advances in Agricultural Research. 2017; 2(2): 1-8.

9. Alves AAC. Cassava Botany and Physiology. In: Hillock RJ, Thresh JM, Belloti AC, editors. Cassava: Biology, Production and Utilization. Oxfordshire, CAB International. 2002; p. 68.

10. Wheatley CC, Chizel GL. Cassava: The nature of the tuber and use as raw material. In: Macrae R. et al. editors). Encyclopaedia of Food Science, Food Technology and Nutrition. California: Academic Press. 1993; 734-743.

11. Arisa NN, Adelakan AO, Alamu AE, Ogunfowora, EJ. The effects of pretreatment of plantain (Musa parasidiaca) flour on the pasting and sensory characteristics of Biscuits. International Journal of Food and Nutrition Science. 2013; 2(1): 10-23.

12. Falade KO, Okafor CA. Physical, functional, and pasting properties of flours from corms of two Cocoyam (Colocasia esculenta and Xanthosoma sagittifolium) cultivars, Journal of Food Science Technology. 2015; 52(6): 3440-3448.

13. Egounlety M and Syarief R. Studies on the supplementation of ogi with tempeh. Nigerian Food Journal. 1992; 10: 92-94.

14. Norhaizan ME, Nor Faizadatul Ain AW. Determination of phytate, iron, zinc, calcium contents and their molar ratios in commonly consumed raw and prepared food in Malaysia. Malaysia Journal of Nutrition. 2009; 15(2): 213-222.

15. Adeyeye EI, Orisakeye OT, Oyarekua MA. Composition, mineral safety index, calcium, zinc and phytate interrelationships in four fast-foods consumed in Nigeria. Bulletin of Chemical Society of Ethiopia. 2012; 26(1): 43-54.

16. Okparah LC, Mammah EN. Functional properties of raw and processed pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan) flour. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. 2001; 52: 343-346.

17. Odediran OF, Ashimolowo OR, Sodiya CI, Sanni LO, Adebayo K, Ojebiy, WG, Adeoye AS. Awareness of cassava peel utilization forms among cassava processors in rural communities of Southwest Nigeria. International Journal of Applied Agricultural and Apicultural Research. 2015; (1&2): 93-102.

18. Ohizua ER, Adeola AA, Idowu MA, Sobukola OP, Afolabi AT, Raphael OI, et al. Nutrient composition, functional, and pasting properties of unripe cooking banana, pigeon pea, and sweet potato flour blends. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. 2017; 5(3): 750-762.

19. Akinjayeju O. Human and Applied Nutrition 2nd Ed. Lagos: Concept Publication. 2015; pp. 28, 91, 135.

20. Anuonye JC, Jigam AA, Ndaceko GM. Effects of extrusion- cooking on the nutrients and anti-nutrient composition of Pigeon pea and unripe plantain blends. Journal of Applied Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2012; 2(5): 158 -162.

21. Anderson JW, Baird P, Davis Jr RH, Ferreri S, Knudtson M, Koraym A, Waters V, Williams CI. Health benefits of dietary fiber. Nutrition Reviews. 2009; 67(4): 188-205.

22. Akinjayeju O, Fagbemi TN, Ijarotimi OS, Awolu OO. Optimization and evaluation of some physico-chemical and nutritional properties of cereal-based soya-fortified flours for dough meal. Journal of Advances in Food Science and Technology. 2019; 6(1): 40-59.

23. Elleuch M, Bedigian D, Roiseux O, Besbes S, Blecker C, Attia H. Dietary fibre and fibre-rich by-products of food processing: Characterization, technological functionality and commercial applications. Revista Food Chemistry. 2011; 124: 411-421.

24. Kavitha S, Parimalavalli R. Effect of processing methods on proximate composition of cereal and legume flours. Journal of Human Nutrition and Food Science. 2014; 2(4): 1051-1058.

25. Talari A, Devindra S. Role of pigeon pea (Cajanus cajan L.) in human nutrition and health: A review. Journal of Dairying, Foods and Home Sciences. 2018.

26. Ocheme OB, Adedeji OE, Chinma CE, Yakubu CM, Ajibo UH. Proximate composition, functional, and pasting properties of wheat and groundnut protein concentrate flour blends. Food Science and Nutrition. 2018; 6(5): 1173-1178.

27. Otache MA, Ubwa ST, Godwin AK. Proximate analysis and mineral composition of peels of three sweet cassava cultivars. Asian Journal of Physical and Chemical Sciences. 2017; 3(4): 1-10.

28. Akubor PI, Isolokwu PC, Ugane O, Onimawo IA. Proximate composition and functional properties of African bread fruit kernel and wheat flour blends. Food Research International. 2000; 33: 707-712.

29. Amadinkwa C. Proximate and functional properties of open air, solar and oven dried cocoyam flour. International Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development. 2012; 15(2): 988 -994.

30. Oluwalana IB, Oluwamukomi MO, Fagbemi TN, Oluwafemi G. Effects of temperature and period of blanching on the pasting and functional properties of plantain (Musa parasidiaca) flour. Journal of Stored Product and Postharvest Research. 2011; 2(8): 164 – 169.

31. Adegunwa MO, Adelekan EO, Adebowale AA, Bakare HA, Alamu EO. Evaluation of nutritional and functional properties of plantain (Musa paradisiaca L.) and tigernut (Cyperus esculentus L.) flour blends for food formulations. Cogent Chemistry. 2017; 3: 1383707.

32. Kiin-Kabari DB, Eke-Ejiofor J, Giami SY. Functional and pasting properties of wheat- plantain flours enriched with bambara groundnut protein concentrate. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Engineering. 2015; 5(2): 75-81.

33. Blundell JE, MacDiarmid JI. Fat as a risk factor for overconsumption: Satiation, satiety, and patterns of eating. Journal of American Dietary Association. 1997; 97: S63-S69.

34. Feinle-Bisset C, Patterson M, Ghatei MA, Bloom SR, Horowitz M. Fat digestion is required for suppression of ghrelin and stimulation of peptide YY and pancreatic polypeptide secretion by intraduodenal lipid. American Journal of Physiology and Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2005; 289: E948-E953.

35. Akinjayeju O, Ajayi OF. Effect of dehulling on functional and sensory properties of flours from black beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Food and Nutrition Sciences. 2011; 2(4): 344-349.

.36. Garba U, Kaur S. Review: protein isolates: Production, functional properties and application. International Research Journal of Chemistry. 2014; 4: 22-36.

37. Liu Q, Donner E, Yin Y, Huang RL, Fan MZ The physicochemical properties and in vitro digestibility of selected cereals, tubers and legumes grown in China. Food Chemistry. 2006; 99: 470-477.

38. Adebowale KO, Olu-Owolabi BI, Olawumi EK, Lawal OS. Functional properties of native, physically and chemically modified breadfruit (Artocarpus artillis) starch. Industrial Crops Production. 2005; 21: 343-351.

39. Koh BK, Singh V. Cooking behaviour of rice and black gram in the preparation of “Idli”, a traditional fermented product of Indian origin by Viscography. Journal of Texture Studies. 2009; 40: 36-50.

40. hittu TA, Lasekan OO, Sanni LO, Oladosu MO. The effect of drying methods on the functional and sensory characteristics of pupuru-a fermented cassava product. ASSET International Journal. 2001; 1: 9-16.

41. Sandhu KS, Singh N and Malhi NS. Some properties of corn grains and their flours I: Physicochemical, functional and “Chapatti” making properties of flours. Food Chemistry. 2007; 101: 938-946.

42. Falade KO, Okafor CA. Physico-chemical properties of five cocoyam (Colocasia esculenta and Xanthosoma sagittifolium) starches. Food Hydrocolloids. 2013; 30: 173–181.

43. Nwosu JN. The effects of processing on the anti-nutritional properties of Oze Bosqueia angolensis seed. Journal of American Science. 2011; 7: 1-6.

44. Nwanekezi EC, Ubbaonu CN, Arukwe DC. Effect of combined processing methods on the proximate and mineral composition of Pigeon Pea (Cajanus Cajan) flour. International Journal of Food Science and Biotechnology. 2017; 2(3): 73-79.

45. Anon AH, Fagbohun JB, Ekissi ESG, Yapi JC, Kouame LP. Chemical composition and nutritional value of composite wheat flours (Triticum aestivum) and two varieties of Taro Corms (Colocasia esculenta) cultivar Fouê and Cultivar Yatan IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology. 2018; 12(8): 24-28.

46. Lim KHC, Riddell LJ, Nowson CA, Booth AO, Szymlek-Gay EA. Iron and zinc nutrition in the economically-developed world: A review. Nutrients. 2013; 5: 3184-3211.

47. Ademola OA, Abioye OR. Proximate composition, mineral content and mineral safety index of Lablab purpureus seed flour. International Journal of Science Healthcare Research. 2017; 2(4): 44-50.

48. Adetuyi FO. Effect of natural fermentation on antinuritional factor, Bvitamins and mineral profiles of Okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) seeds. Nigerian Food Journal. 2019; 37 (1): 81- 91.

49. Frontela C, Ros G, Martinez C. Effect of dephytinization on bioavailability of iron, calcium and from infant cereals assessed in the Caco-2 cell model. World Journal Gastroenterology. 2009; 15(16): 1977-1984.

50. ailu A and Addis G. The content and bioavailability of mineral nutrients of selected wild and traditional edible plants as affected by household preparation methods practiced by local community in Benishangul Gumuz Regional State, Ethiopia. International Journal of Food Science. 2016; Open Access: Article ID 7615853, 7 pages.

51. .Rosalind S, Gibson KB, Bailey MG, Ferguson EL. A review of phytate, iron, zinc, and calcium concentrations in plant-based complementary foods used in low-income countries and implications for bioavailability. Food and Nutrition Bulletin. 2010; 31 (Supp 2).

52. iyi OH, Jonathan AA, Ibukun AO. Comparative assessment of the proximate, mineral composition and mineral safety index of peel, pulp and seeds of Cucumber (Cucumis sativus). Open Journal Applied Science. 2019; 9: 691-701.

53. Adeyeye EI, Adubiaro H. Proximate, mineral, vitamin compositions, mineral safety index and mineral ratios of the flesh of heterosexual pairs of Neopetrolisthes maculates. Sustainable Food Production. 2018; 3: 46-62.

54. Akinjayeju O, Badrudeen AO, Soretire MQ. Effect of peeling and blanching on proximate compositions, mineral profile, physicochemical and anti-nutritional properties of plantain (Musa AAB) flours. Journal of Research in Food Science and Nutrition. 2020; 1(2): 013-023.

55. Galan, N. What happens when a person takes too much zinc? Medical News Today. 2019.

56. Meixner, M. 7 signs and symptoms of zinc overdose. Health Line. 2018. 57.Barrell A. What is Hypermagnesemia? Medical New Today. 2017