Evaluation of sorghum varieties for the production of snack bars


Published on

Presented by Y.B. Byaruhanga, P. Ndahilo, A. Kisambira, B. Sentongo at the First Bio-Innovate regional scientific conference, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-27 February 2013

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Evaluation of sorghum varieties for the production of snack bars

  1. 1. Evaluation of sorghum varieties for theproduction of snack barsFirst Bio-Innovate regional scientificconference, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-27February 2013 YB Byaruhanga, P Ndahilo, A Kisambira, B Sentongo
  2. 2. Introduction Sorghum is a major food crop in Africa Due to its robust and hardy nature, sorghum will remain one of Africa’s major food crops In Ethiopia, Tanzania and Uganda per capita consumption of sorghum is up to 25 kg/capita/year
  3. 3. Introduction However, one of the major challenges with sorghum  Utilization which is limited to  Soft/stiff porridges – with or without malting &/or fermentation  Beers opaque indigenous and now clear lagers  Animal feed Thus there is limited processing to  Add value (convenience, nutrition and shelf life)  Increase variety of sorghum products We obtain less economic value from sorghum
  4. 4. Objective This study sought to present sorghum in a different form that embodies convenience and nutrition - sorghum snack bar Specifically  Develop a method for production of the sorghum snack bar easily adaptable to MSMEs  Assess the suitability of different sorghum varieties for snack bar production  Determine the nutritional sensory properties of the snack bar
  5. 5. MethodologyMaterials Four common sorghum varieties namely Epurpur, Seso 1, Seso 2 & Eyera were evaluated Grains were obtained from NARO –Serere and cleaned to remove  Foreign matter, chuff, moulded shrivelled and broken grain
  6. 6. MethodologyBar formulation The formulation aimed at modifying the  Nutritional (protein and energy) composition  Sensory properties (taste and flavour)  Physical properties of the snack bar Thus additional ingredients used were  Roasted sesame and ground nuts  Sucrose/common sugar
  7. 7. Table 1: Formulation for sorghum snackbar Target was to obtain a 40g bar providing at least:  25% of daily recommended protein intake for 4-8 yr child  15% of daily recommended energy intake for 4-8 yr child
  8. 8. MethodologySnack bar making process The conventional method of making snack bars from cereal grains was used  Pre-treatment  Steaming  Steaming with rolling  Steaming with rolling & toasting  Popping with conditioning
  9. 9. Methodology  Bar formation  Mixingingredients  Moulding and pressing  Packaging
  10. 10. Findings
  11. 11. How not to make a sorghumbar Steaming alone, steaming with rolling, and steaming with rolling and toasting produced  Hard and brittle grains – not appealing to consumer  Hard and brittle grain needed moistening to make the bar pliable – but this compromised product safety and shelf stability The hardness & brittleness were attributed to  Sorghum grain size and structure  Starch and protein type and structural conformation
  12. 12. How to make a sorghum barTable 2: Popping of four sorghum varieties conditioned to differentmoisture contentMoisture % popping grains for different varietiescontent (%) Epurpur Seseo 1 Seso 3 Eyera12 control 13 (1.9) 13 (3.8) 34 (2.4) 9 (1.4)14-16 85 (2.5) 73 (2.5) 67 (9.8) 13 (2.3)
  13. 13. How to make a sorghum barFrom Table 2: Sorghum varieties popped to different extents with Epurpur popping most and Eyera popping least Conditioning the grain to different moisture content affected popping rates Also, popping of sorghum grain produced a snack bar that was appealing to consumers – appearance, texture, & flavour
  14. 14. Nutritional composition of sorghum snack barTable 3: Nutritional composition of sorghum snack bars on drybasisParameter Seso 1 Seso 3 Epurpur Energy kcal/g 4.96 5.53 5.28Carbohydrates 51.8 52.9 52.6(%)Protein (%) 14.3 14.8 12.6Fiber (%) 10.9( 9.8 8.2K mg/100g 655.0 530.0 690.0Na mg/100g 85.0 80.0 95.0Ca mg/100g 335.0 335.0 395.0Fe mg/100g 7.4 5.5 12.9 Zn mg/100g 2.3 1.3 1.68•This formulation attained 27% and 15% of thedaily recommended protein and energy intake,respectively
  15. 15. Sensory acceptability of snack barfrom 3 sorghum varieties The snack bars from all the three sorghum varieties were acceptable (scoring 7 on a scale of 9) Snack bars from Seso 1 were the most liked followed by Epurpur and Seso 3
  16. 16. Conclusion With modification, sorghum varieties can be used to produce an acceptable snack bar With respect to suitability, varieties were ranked as Seso 1, Epurpur and Seso 3 in descending order Simple technology adaptable to micro, small, medium and large enterprise
  17. 17. Product market potential The sorghum snack bar can be positioned as a healthy snack bar With a few modifications, the snack bar can be positioned as a vehicle to deliver nutrients to consumer groups with different nutritional needs such as  diabetics, school children, relief food and army rations
  18. 18. The enterprise side Production costs  In development a 40g bar cost about US$ 0.2  This can be brought down to less than US$ 0.1 in a commercial operation producing 50-100kg of product/day  At a micro-enterprise level one can start with about US$ 1000 Are you a potential investor? If yes lets talk!
  19. 19. Acknowledgement Consortium partners Research team Bio-Innovate SIDA