CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF PROCESSED TENDER LEAVES AND HUSKS OF COWPEA AND ORGANOLEPTIC ATTRIBUTES OF THEIR SOUPS
ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW,
PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL
PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE
COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953,
08168759420
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF PROCESSED
TENDER LEAVES AND HUSKS OF COWPEA AND ORGANOLEPTIC ATTRIBUTES OF THEIR SOUPS
ABSTRACT
The study
examined the chemical composition of fresh, sundried tender leaves and husks of
cowpea ‘Adengee’ (Vigna unguiculata) and organoleptic attributes of their
traditional soups. Information on
processing,
preparation and utilization of soup meals based on cowpea leaves and husks were
obtained during the focus group discussion. The tender leaves and husks were
parboiled and sundried. Proximate, micronutrients, phytochemicals and
antinutrient levels were determined using standard procedures. The soups based
on fresh and sundried leaves and husks were analysed prior to sensory
evaluation. The data collected were statistically analysed using means,
standard deviation and standard error. All values were based on residual
moisture. Protein for dried leaves was higher (p<0.05) (39.24 vs. 21.98 and
13.95%) than those of fresh leaves and dried husks. Dried leaves and husks had
lower fat than the control (1.31 and 0.75 vs. 9.10%) (p<0.05). Sun drying
increased ash in both dried leaves and husks (14.74 and 10.86 vs. 4.82%). The
lower value for fibre in the dry samples was rather surprising (14.20 and 20.42
vs.25.13%) (p<0.05). Carbohydrate significantly increased more in dried
husks than in dried leaves. (53.76 Vs. 30.22%) (p<0.05).The micronutrients
in both dried leaves and husks were reduced due to their volatile nature.
Tannins, saponins, flavonoids and polyphenols decreased significantly (p<0.05)
in processed samples due to drying. Soups based on dried leaves (DS) had higher
protein (p<0.05) relative to the soup based on dried husks (HS) and fresh
leaves (FS) (34.40 vs.34.10 and 33.30%).
Similarly,
husks based soups had higher fat (34.10 vs.34.05 and 31.44%)(p<0.05) Ash was
higher in dried leaves based soup(7.83%) and fresh leaves soup (7.20%).
Fibre for
the husks based soup was higher (p<0.05) relative to fresh and dried leaves
based soups
(6.13
vs.5.58 and 6.11%, respectively). The carbohydrate levels were generally
appreciable. All soups
had
appreciable levels of calcium, phosphorus and iron. These minerals varied
significantly amongst
the soups
(p<0.05). Zinc and iodine also differed (p<0.05).β-carotene content of
soup based on fresh
leaves was
higher (p<0.05) relative to those based on dried leaves and husks (6.08
vs.5.07 and
5.46RE).Vitamin
C varied significantly (0.90 to 1.10mg) in soups based on fresh leaves and
dried
husks.
Tannins, saponins, polyphenols and flavonoids in soups based on fresh leaves
and dried husks were comparable. Anti nutrients levels in all soups were
generally low. Scores for all organoleptic attributes of the three soups were
more than half (6.17 to 7.70) of the 9-point scale. The soups were generally
acceptable. As judged by the results, cowpea leaves, husks and their soups have
high nutrient potentials to justify its cultivation, consumption promotion and
diversification. Consumption related information such as nutritional properties
should be packaged and extensively promoted to broaden the knowledge of health
and nutritional benefits of consuming cowpea leaves and husks. The results
demonstrate that, there is a potential in developing multi-purpose varieties
with good performance, which are well-yielding in both leaves and seeds.
Therefore, production related information, such as variety, yields and
cultivation practices as well as processing should be packaged and made
available to extension personnel and governmental agricultural research
institutes that often have a good outreach to farmers.
TABLE OF CONTENT:
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
1.2 Statement of the
Research Problem
1.3 Objectives of the
Study
1.4 Significance of
the Study
1.5 Research Questions
1.6 Research
Hypothesis
1.7 Conceptual and
Operational Definition
1.8 Assumptions
1.9 Limitations of the
Study
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Sources of
Literature
2.2 The Review
2.3 Summary of
Literature Review
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Method
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Research Sample
3.4 Measuring
Instrument
3.5 Data Collection
3.6 Data Analysis
3.7 Expected Result
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
4.1 Data Analysis
4.2 Results
4.3 Discussion
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary
5.2 Recommendations
for Further Study
References
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT WORK
PLEASE, print the following instructions and information if you
will like to order/buy our complete written material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount (#5,000) into our bank Account
below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project topics
(2) Email Address
(3)
Payment Name (If you made a transfer)
(4)
Teller Number (If you made a direct deposit)
We will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
Our
other research websites:
Comments
Post a Comment