Abstract
The nutrient composition, antinutritional factors and flour functionality of cowpea and horse gram flours were evaluated in comparison to chickpea flour characteristics. Protein content of these flours was in the range of 22.5−24.1%. Fat content was highest in chickpea (4.8%) and lowest in horse gram (1.4%). Resistant starch and phytic acid were significantly higher in cowpea flour. Compared to chickpea and cowpea, horse gram has more carbohydrate, dietary fibre, polyphenols and trypsin inhibitor activity and less oligosaccharides. Horse gram and chickpea flours had the highest water and oil absorption capacities with values of 148.1% and 109.3%, respectively. Although emulsion activity (58.1%) and stability (52.0%) were superior in horse gram, foaming capacity and foam stability were significantly higher in chickpea and cowpea flours, respectively. These results suggest the potential utility of cowpea and horse gram flours as substitutes for chickpea flour in some food products formulations.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
