LEGUME SUPPLEMENTED FLAT BREAD: NUTRITIVE VALUE, TEXTURAL AND ORGANOLEPTIC CHANGES

DURING STORAGE

SAVITA SHARMA, K.S. SEKHON and H.P.S. NAGI

Department of Food Science and Technology Punjab Agricultural University

Ludhiana I41 004, India

Accepted for Publication March 30. 1995

ABSTRACT

Flat breads were prepared from wheat flour substituting chick pea and pigeon pea flours at 10 and 20% levels and their nutritive value, textural, organoleptic properties and storability studied. Dough development time and stability of supplemented flours increased; however, their water absorption capacity decreased. Dough handling was satisfactory at I 0 % supplementation of both the legumes but extra dusting was needed for sheeting at higher levels of pigeon pea. Supplemented flat breads had lower moisture but harder texture than the unsupplemented one, the hardness increased further upon storage. Sensory evaluation revealed that superior quality flat breads could be produced by supplementation of chickpea up to 20% andpigeon pea up to 10%. Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) of supplemented breads was significantly higher than that of unsupplemented ones. Supplementation also resulted in significantly improved haemoglobin content of the blood in rats.

INTRODUCTION

A majority of the Indian subcontinent population consumes chapaties prepared from wheat as a staple food. Chapaties, an unleavened product, are prepared twice a day in homes and are eaten fresh. As they are mostly vegetarian, these people consume chapaties in combination with legumes to meet their nutritional needs. However, with the changing lifestyles due to urbaniza- tion and industrialization, the demand for ready-to-eat and easy-to-carry foodstuffs is increasing. Flat bread, a leavened product which is commonly consumed in many parts of the world (Faridi and Finney 1980; Faridi and Rubenthaler 1983) and has a close resemblance to chapaties, offers a great potential to diversify the consumption of chapaties. Production of flat breads

Journal of Food Processing and Preservation 19 (1995) 207-222. All Rights Resewed. Vopyright 1995 by Food dr Nutrition Press, Inc., Trumbull, Connecticut. 207

208 S. SHARMA, K.S. SEKHON and H.P.S. NAG1

from legume supplemented wheat flour will provide a nutritionally balanced food product which is especially rich in protein and iron (Abdel-Rahman and Yousseff 1976; Hallab ef al. 1984; Khalil and Hallab 1975; Ramadhan 1986; Shehata and Fryer 1970). This paper describes the studies carried out on the production of supplemented flat bread using commonly available legumes, chick pea and pigeon pea, and the storage changes in textural and organoleptic properties.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preparation of Samples

Wheat Flour. Bread wheat var. WL 1562 was obtained from the wheat section of Plant Breeding Department of PAU Ludhiana. The cleaned sample was conditioned to 15 % moisture by adding the requisite quantity of water and was rested for 48 h and milled on the Buhler Pneumatic Laboratory Mill (MLU-202) to get straight run flour.

Chick Pea (GL-769) and Pigeon Pea (AL-15) Flour. Samples of chick pea and pigeon pea varieties, obtained from the Pulse section of the Plant Breeding Department, were soaked in water in the ratio of 1 : 1.5 (pea:water) for 8 h at 30C for easy removal of husk. After requisite soaking the excess water was drained off and grains dried in a forced air circulation drier for 7 h at 35C. Hulls were loosened by passing the grains between two circular stones of the hand operated ch&i and aspirated to remove the hulls. The cleaned cotyledons were made into flour by grinding them in a power driven laboratory stone mill to get flour fineness in the samples.

Farinographic Properties

The constant flour method (50 g, 14 % moisture basis) of AACC (1976) was followed, and the curve was interpreted for farinographic water absorption (FWA), dough development time (DDT) and stability.

Baking Procedure

Flat breads were prepared from the following flour combinations, 100% wheat flour (WF); 90% WF+10% chick pea flour (CF); 80% WF+20% CF; 90% WF+10% pigeon pea flour (PF); 80% WF+20% PF. The baking formula and schedule are given in Table 1.

LEGUME SUPPLEMENTED FLAT BREAD 209

TABLE 1. BAKING FORMULA AND CONDITIONS FOR FLAT BREAD PRODUCTION

Flour Salt Yeast Water Mixing Fermentation 45 min Sheeting 0.3 cm thick Cutting Round diameter, 15 cm Proofing 15 min Baking 300 C for 3-4 min

Proximate Composition

Basic flours, supplemented flours and flat breads prepared from such flours were analyzed for protein, fat and sugars using AACC (1976) approved methods.

Mineral Analysis

The basic flours and the breads prepared from supplemented flours were analyzed for selected minerals by atomic absorption spectrophotometer (BGC-902). The organic matter in the samples was wet digested with a diacid mixture consisting of concentrated nitric and perchloric acids (AOAC 1980). Sodium and potassium were determined on the Digital flame photometer (CL 22D, Elico Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad). For the estimation of total phosphorus, the molybodic blue micro colorimetric method of Fisher (197 1) was followed.

Storage of Flat Bread

The experimental flat breads were prepared as described earlier and packed in polyethylene bags (8 x lo", 100 gauge) and heat sealed. Samples were stored at room temperature (37C) and in refrigerator (4C) for 1, 3 and 5 days.

Textural Evaluation

The breads were evaluated for textural changes using the Instron Universal Testing Instrument (Table Model 11 11) with the following setting:

210 S. SHARMA, K.S. SEKHON and H.P.S. NAG1

Flat bread piece Fixtures Compression anvils Chart speed 200 d m i n Drive speed 100 d m i n

12 mm thick

Full scale load 10 kg

Firmness of the flat bread was measured as the slice of bread to load (g) required to compress the slice of bread to a 6 mm thickness.

Organoleptic Evaluation

Flat breads (fresh and stored) supplemented with chick pea and pigeon pea flours were evaluated by a panel of semi-trained judges (6) for color, taste, texture, flavor and overall acceptability on 9 point Hedonic scale (Larmond 1 970).

Biological Evaluation of Protein

Breads were broken at room temperature (30-35C) for two days and ground to prepare the diets. Care was taken to visually inspect for instances of microbial contamination. All diets were kept at 7% protein level along with adequate provision of vitamins (Chapman er al. 1959) and minerals (Oser 1965). The fiber and fat of all the diets were maintained at constant level of 5 and lo%, respectively. A total of the following five products was prepared:

D1 D2 Wheat flour flat bread D3 D4 D5

Skim milk powder (Reference diet)

Wheat flour + Chick pea flour flat bread (9O:lO) Wheat flour + Chick pea flour flat bread (80:20) Wheat flour + Pigeon pea flour flat bread (9O:lO)

Protein efficiency ratio (PER) of different flat breads was determined through animal experiments using weaning albino rats of 24 f 1 days. In all, 5 groups were made and each group had 4 male and 4 female rats. Animals were housed individually in aluminium cages having wire mesh bottoms and

LEGUME SUPPLEMENTED FLAT BREAD 211

provided with feeding and drinking cups. A weighed amount of diet was given to rats daily. The animals were weighed at weekly intervals for a period of 4 weeks and PER was calculated from weight gain and protein intake by the method of Chapman et al. (1959). At the conclusion of PER studies the rats were sacrificed for hematological studies. Hemoglobin (Hb) was estimated by the method of Schalam et al. (1975). Total leucocyte count (TLC), total erythrocyte count (TEC) and packed cell volume (PVC) were determined using the method of Seward and Muller (1966).

Statistical Analysis

Results reported are an average of duplicate experiments. The extent of variation and mean differences were compared using analysis of variance (Steel and Torrie 1960) and Duncans multiple range test (Duncan 1955).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Proximate Composition of Flours

Pigeon pea and chick pea flours contained 26.6 and 23.4% protein, respectively, which were considerably higher from that of wheat flour (9.1 %). Pigeon pea flour had more ash (5.43 X) and lesser fat (1.87 %) than that of chick pea flour with values of 3.64 and 5.07%, respectively. Total sugars were somewhat similar in both the pulse flours. Phosphorus and iron in these flours were also considerably higher as compared to wheat flour; however, calcium content was marginally higher. The ash content of 10% and 20% chick pea supplemented wheat flour was 0.92 and 1.28%, respectively. The correspond- ing values with pigeon pea supplemented wheat flour were 1.12 and 1.65 %, respectively. The protein content of 20% supplemented (chick pea as well as pigeon pea) wheat flour was 1 1.75 % . The total sugars of wheat flour and those supplemented with 10 and 20% of chick pea and pigeon pea flours were similar. Thus the protein, fat, ash, phosphorus and iron contents in supplemented flours were higher than those of wheat flour (Table 2).

Rheological Properties of Flours

Farinographic characteristics of wheat and supplemented flours are given Farinographic water absorption decreased somewhat with the in Table 3.

TABL

E 2.

EF

FEC

T O

F SU

PPLE

MEN

TIN

G T

HE

WH

EAT

FLO

UR

* W

ITH

CH

ICK

PEA

FLO

UR

AN

D P

IGEO

N

PEA

FLO

UR

ON

PR

OX

IMA

TE, M

INER

AL

CO

MPO

SITI

ON

AN

D F

AR

INO

GR

APH

IC

CH

AR

AC

TER

ISTI

CS

!2 N

Type

of

Flour

Prox

imat

e Co

mpos

itio

n Mi

nera

1s

(mg/

100g

1 Fa

rino

grap

hic

Char

acte

rist

ics

Pro-

Fa

t A

sh

Tota

l Ph

osp-

Ca

lc-

Iron

Wate

r Do

ugh

Dough

tein

(%

) (%

I su

gars

h

oru

s iu

m (F

e)

ab

sor-

de

vel-

st

abi-

(%

I (

8 gl-

(PI

(ca)

pt

ion

opme

nt

lity

ucos

e)

(%I

time

(min

) (rnin)

Whea

t fl

ou

r 9.1

0.81 0.56 4.4

110.3

34.5

2.5

58.1

1.5

1.9

Chic

k pea

flour

23.4

5.07 3.64 4.6

338.2

38.5

7.9

- -

-

Pige

on pea flour

26.6

1.87 5.43 4.3

308.8

37.5

5.5

- -

- 9O

%WF

+ 1O%CF

10.5

1.31 0.92 4.5

14S.l

34.9

3.3

56.0

4.6

7.5

808W

F t.

20%

CF

11.7

1.82 1.28 4.5

176.2

35.4

4.1

55.0

4.2

7.0

908W

F t

IOBP

F 10.6

1.00 1.12 4.5

131.0

34.8

3.1

57.7

1.6

4.1

808W

F +

ZO%

PF

11.8

1.18 1.65

4.5

165.6

35.2

3.6

57.8

1.6

3.8

P, a n

X

L” a

* Ex

trac

tion

rate o

f flour 70% ,

va

lue

s a

re means of

du

pli

cate

s.

TABL

E 3.

EF

FEC

T O

F SU

PPLE

MEN

TIN

G T

HE

WH

EAT

FLO

UR

* W

ITH

CH

ICK

PEA

FLO

UR

AN

D P

IGEO

N

PEA

FLO

UR

ON

FLA

T BR

EAD

MA

KIN

G C

HA

RA

CTE

RIS

TIC

S r

m 0 c

*3

1

Flat Bread

Bake A

b-

Puff

ing

Color

Text

ure

Flavor

m

sorption

(4)

Handling

z (a

) 3

100%

WF

67.0

98

Nonst icky

Full

Creamish

Soft

Pleasing

90%WF

+ 10%CF

64.0

97

Nons t icky

Full

Light

Soft

Pleasing

8O%WF

+ 20

%C

F 63.5

95

Non st

icky

Full

Yellow

Soft

Pleasing

White

Yellow

F! 3 m

90%WF

+ 10%PF

66.0

97

Non st

icky

Fu

ll

Yellow

Soft

Pleasing

P F

BO%WF

+ 20

%PF

65

.6

94

Slightly

Full

Reddish

Less

Pleasing

u Sticky

Yellow

Soft

* Extraction rate

of

flou

r 70%. +

* Comprising t

as

te and aroma.

214 S. SHARMA, K. S. SEKHON and H.P.S. NAG1

addition of up to 20% chick pea and pigeon pea flour from that of the control sample. The dough development time and stability of the blend greatly increased with the addition of 10 and 20% chick pea flour, but only a marginal increase in the dough development time was noted with similar supplementations of pigeon pea flour. Dough stability noted at the 10% supplementation level decreased at the 20% level. Supplementation beyond 12% of wheat flour with winged bean full fat flour resulted in decreased stability, as has been reported by Kailasapathy and Macneil (1985).

Baking Properties

The bake absorption of wheat flour was 67%, which decreased with the 10% supplementation of chick pea and pigeon pea flour to 64 and 66%, respectively (Table 4). Increased levels of supplementation further reduced bake absorptions. A reduction in flat bread loaf weight was observed with increased levels of supplementation, which could be due to lower bake absorption of supplemented flours. Dough handling properties, texfure and flavor of flat breads produced from supplemented flours were as good as those from wheat flour alone. However, the doughs produced from a 20% supplemented flour with pigeon pea were slightly sticky, which required extra dusting for sheeting and produced tougher breads. While the color of the flat breads produced from wheat flour was creamish white with brown spots over the crust, supplemented flat breads had a yellowish tinge. Faridi and Rubenthaler (1983) also reported that flat breads were functionally more tolerant to blending with legumes and other cereals than pan breads because flat bread volume was not the sole criterion in evaluating them.

Textural and Organoleptic Evaluation

Freshly prepared wheat flour flat breads had higher moisture than supplemented flat breads and an increase in the supplementation levels resulted in decreased moisture of flat breads. The moisture content of flat breads was 32% which decreased to 31.1, 25.8 and 22.2% at 4C after 1, 3 and 5 days storage. Flat breads stored at 37C showed visible growth of fungus on the third day (Table 5) .

Supplementation and storage had significant effect on the force required to compress flat breads. Wheat flour flat breads were softer than supplemented breads and increase in the supplementation level caused an increase in hardness. Pigeon pea supplemented flat breads required more force for compression than chick pea supplemented breads. Significantly increased force was required to

TA

BL

E 4

. E

FFE

CT

OF

SUPP

LE

ME

NT

ING

TH

E W

HEA

T FL

OU

R WITH

CHIC

K P

EA F

LOU

R A

ND

PIG

EON

PE

A F

LOU

R A

T 1

0% A

ND

20%

LEV

EL O

N T

EX

TU

RA

L A

ND

OR

GA

NO

LEPT

IC P

RO

PER

TIES

OF

r

STO

RED

FLA

T BR

EAD

m Q

C 5 113

Flat

Bread

Mois

ture

In

stro

n Co

lor

Text

ure

Flavor

Tast

e Ov

eral

l (%

) Lo

ad (g 1

Ac

cept

abil

ity

1OO%

WF

29.2'

5795'

8.0'

7.3'

7.4'

7.6'

7.6'

m 90

%WF

+ 10%CF

28.7'

6025

b 7.9b

7.Ob

7.Ob

7.2b

7.9

80%WF

+ 2O%CF

27. Eb

6285'

8.1

' 7.2'

7.2'

7.Ob

7.4b

90%W

F +

lO%PF

27. 7b

6184'

7.9b

7.2'

7.1b

7.1

7.3b

U

8O%W

F +

20%PF

27.2'

6424

e 7.8b

6. eb

7.0'

7.Ob

7.1'

The

mean

s ha

ving th

e sa

me s

uper

scri

pt d

o no

t di

ffer

sig

nifi

cant

ly from ea

ch o

ther

.

TA

BL

E 5

. E

FFE

CT

OF

STO

RA

GE

AN

D T

EMPE

RA

TUR

E O

N T

EX

TU

RA

L A

ND

OR

GA

NO

LEF'

TIC

PR

OPE

RTI

ES O

F SU

PPL

EM

EN

TE

D F

LA

T B

RE

AD

~ ~~

Stor

age

Mois

ture

In

stro

n Co

lor

Text

ure

Flav

or

Tast

e Ov

eral

l (%

) Lo

ad (9)

Ac

cep t

a -

Days

Te

mp.

( C)

bi

lity

Fres

h 3

2.0

' 3

06

0'

8.4

' 8

.2'

8.6

a

8.6

' 8

.5'

1 3

7

29

. gb

5

52

7b

8

.2b

7

.6b

7

.6b

7.

7b

7.8b

4 31.1'

5624

' 8

.0b

7

.2'

7.4b

7.4f

7.5c

3 3

7

----

Fun

gal

Grow

th

----

4

25

-86

7185'

7.6

' 6

.6'

6.4

' 6

.4'

6.E

d

5 37

--

-- F

unga

l Gr

owth

--

--

4 2

2.2

e

931q

e 7

.5'

5.8C

5

.7'

5.7e

6.a

e

?e m

The

mean

s ha

ving

th

e sa

me s

uper

scri

pts

do n

ot di

ffer

si

gnif

ican

tly

from

ea

ch ot

her.

TABL

E 6.

EF

FEC

T O

F SU

PPLE

MEN

TIN

G T

HE

WH

EAT

FLO

UR

WIT

H C

HIC

K P

EA F

LOU

R A

ND

PIG

EON

PE

A F

LOU

R O

N P

RO

XIM

ATE

CO

MPO

SITI

ON

OF

FLA

T B

RE

AD

Flat

Bread

Prot

ein

Fat

Ash

Tota

l Su

gar

Redu

cing

No

nred

ucin

g (%

I (%

I (%

) (%

gl

ucos

e)

Suga

r su

gar

(% glu

cose

) (%

su

cros

e)

~ ~

~ -

~ ~~

~

100% W

F 8.6'

0.29'

0.35'

5.6'

5.2'

0.4'

90%W

F +

10%C

F 10

.5b

0.33b

0.9

gb

6.2b

5.ab

0.9b

80%W

F +

20%C

F 11.6'

0.77'

1.4A'

6.7'

5.9'

0.8'

90bW

F T

f0

kPF

10.1'

0.2

gd

1.7

gd

7

.gd

6.4'

1.4d

80%

WF

+ 20

%PF

10.Be

0.41'

1.92e

11.6'

10. 2c

1.Y

The me

ans

havi

ng t

he sam

e su

pers

crip

t do

not

diff

er si

gnif

ican

tly

from each

othe

r.

TABLE 7.

EFFECT OF

SUPP

LEM

ENTI

NG

THE

WH

EAT FLOUR

WIT

H CHICK P

EA FLOUR A

ND

PIG

EON

PEA

FLO

UR

ON

MINERAL C

OM

POSI

TIO

N OF

FLA

T BR

EAD

Flat

Bread

Minerals (m

g/10

0g)

Magnesium Ph

osph

orus

Cal

cium

Copper Iron Z

inc

Sodi

um Potassium Man

gane

se

(Mg)

(PI

(Ca 1

(C

u) (F

e) (Zn)

(Na)

(K

) (M

n)

100%WF

56'

110.3'

34

.5'

0.38'

2.6'

0

.48

' 0

.54

' 3.

3a

0.22'

9O%WF

+ lO%CF

62b

1

47

.0b

3

5.0

b

0.4!

ib

5.3b

0.66b

0.8

0b

3.6b

0. 3

0b

8O%W

F +

20%CF

67'

183.3'

38.0'

0.55'

6.3'

0.81'

1-08'

4.9'

0.36'

904WF

+ 104PF

71'

132. 3'

34.7'

0.43

b 4.2'

0.66b

O.5

!id

3.6'

0.23b

80%WF

+ 204PF

74=

169.1'

37.0'

0.55'

4.7'

0.7gd

0.56'

5.6'

0.34'

The

means ha

ving

same su

pers

crip

t do not

differ

sign

ificantly

from each

other.

LEGUME SUPPLEMENTED FLAT BREAD 219

TABLE 8. EFFECT O F SUPPLEMENTING THE WHEAT FLOUR WITH CHICK PEA FLOUR AND PIGEON PEA FLOUR ON PROTEIN EFFICIENCY RATIO (PER) O F DIFFERENT DIETS

F l a t Bread G a i n i n Diet P r o t e i n PER Body W t . I n t a k e I n t a k e

(9 ) (g) ( 9 )

R e f e r e n c e d i e t (SMP) 30.5' 175.3' 1 2 . 4 ' 2 . 46a

1008WF 10.8b 137.'lb 9.Zb 1.09b

9O%WF + 109CF 1 4 . abC 148 .0b 1 0 . 5 b 1 . 38bc

8O%WF + 209CF 16.0' 140.2b 9.9b 1.61'

9O%WF + 10WF 13 .0bc 134.2b 9.4b 1 .40 '

The means h a v i n g same s u p e r s c r i p t d o n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from e a c h o t h e r .

compress the flat bread upon storage, which indicated hardening of the product, Reduced moisture content and probable staling were the causes of hardness in the bread. It was observed that moisture of the flat bread had direct bearing on instron force required for compression.

Supplementation had a significant effect on the texture, taste and overall acceptability score, whereas consumers found no difference in the score due to color and flavor of both wheat flour and supplemented breads. Flat breads from all blends had a good acceptability. The flat bread supplemented with chick pea at the 10 and 20% levels was superior to control and pigeon pea supplemented breads. Pigeon pea supplemented flat bread at 10% level also had equal acceptability, but at the 20% level the score decreased due to hard texture and the extra yellowness imparted to bread by the pigments like carotenoids in the pulse.

Storage affected the bread quality significantly (Table 5) . Fresh breads had a higher mean score of 8.5, which decreased to 6.8 at 4C after 5 days of storage. The interaction between supplementation and storage was significant with regard to the acceptability score. The supplementation at 10% level proved to be best from the sensory point of view.

N

N 0

TA

BL

E 9

.

FLO

UR

ON

HEM

ATO

LOG

ICA

L PA

RA

MET

ERS

OF

RA

TS F

ED

ON

FL

AT

BR

EA

D D

IETS

EF

FEC

T O

F SU

PPL

EM

EN

TIN

G W

HE

AT

FLO

UR

WIT

H C

HIC

KEN

PEA

FLO

UR

AN

D P

IGE

ON

PEA

~

Fla

t B

read

H

emog

lob

in

To

tal

Leu

cocy

tes

To

tal

Ery

thro

cyte

s P

ack

ed C

ell

(g

/l O

Om

g)

Cou

nt

(TL

C)

Cou

nt

(TE

C)

Vol

ume

(PcV

)

Ref

eren

ce d

iet

10

.aa

3767’

100%

WF

9.2

b

3100’

9O%

WF

t 10%CF

9.6‘

4300’

4.5’

4.4‘

4.4’

80%

WF

+ 20

3CF

1

0. o

d 4267’

4.7b

90%WF

+ 1O

%PF

9.2b

44

90b

4.

Eb

27.3’

26.0’

30.0‘

25. 7b

32.3‘

V a n

X

-d

m

The

mea

ns .

hav

ing

the

sam

e su

per

scri

pts

do

no

t d

iffe

r s

ign

ific

an

tly

fro

m e

ach

oth

er.

LEGUME SUPPLEMENTED FLAT BREAD 22 1

Nutritional Evaluation

Significant differences were found in proximate composition of flat breads produced from wheat flour and those from supplemented flours. An increase of 35% and 26% protein was observed in the diets when the substitution of chick pea and pigeon pea, respectively, was 20%. Fat content in chick pea supplemented flat bread was higher than the corresponding pigeon pea supplemented flat breads; however, ash and sugars were higher in pigeon pea blended breads (Table 6).

The minerals content of flat bread was enhanced greatly at higher levels of chick pea and pigeon pea supplementation (Table 7). Higher concentration of P, Zn, Fe, Mn and Ca was found in chick pea supplemented flat breads having 20% supplementation. The percent mean increase up to 20% supplementation (chick pedpigeon pea) was of the order of 26% Mg, 60% P, 9% Ca, 112% Fe and 159% K in the baked flat bread.

The protein quality of flat breads prepared from different blends was evaluated in terms of the protein efficiency ratio (PER) (Table 8). Feed intake and the gain in body weight of rats fed on a skim milk diet were significantly higher than those for other diets. With supplementation of chick pea and pigeon pea flour at different levels the percent gain in body weight of rats remained similar; however, the gain was significantly higher than with unsupplemented flat bread. Significant differences were observed between the PER values of wheat flour flat bread and those of supplemented ones, the values being higher for the latter; however, the PER of the reference diet (2.46) was the highest. These results are in agreement with those of Shehata and Fryer (1970) and Kailasapathy and Macneil et al. (1985).

Supplementation of flour with the legumes improved the hemoglobin (Hb) content of rats (Table 9). The significant increase in Hb in rats fed supplement- ed flat breads probably was due to the increased iron concentration in the supplemented diets. The effects were similar with respect to TLC, TEC and PCV.

REFERENCES

AACC. 1976. AACC Approved Methods, Am. Assoc. of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN.

ABDEL-RAHMAN, A.H.Y. and YOUSSEFF, S.A.M. 1976. Fortification of some Egyptian Foods with Soybean. J. Am. Oil Chem. SOC. 55, 338A.

AOAC. 1980. Oflcial Methods of Analysis, 13th Ed., Assoc. of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, D. C .

222 S. SHARMA. K.S. SEKHON and H.P.S. NAG1

CHAPMAN, D.G., CASTILLO, R. and COMPWELL, J.A. 1959. Evaluation of protein in foods. A method for the determination of protein efficiency ratio. Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 37, 679.

DUNCAN, D.B. 1955. New Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics 11, 1.

FARIDI, H.A. and FINNEY, P.L. 1980. Technical and nutritional aspects of Iranian breads. Baker’s Dig. 54. 14.

FARIDI, H.A. and RUBENTHALER, G.L. 1983. Ancient breads and a new science: Understanding flat breads. Cereal Foods World 28, 627.

FISHER. 1971. Modern FoodAnalysis, pp. 22, Freeman and Co., Washington D.C.

HALLAB, A.H., KHATCHADOURIAN, H.A. and JABR, I. 1984. The nutritive value and organoleptic properties of white Arabic bread supple- mented with soyabean and chickpea. Cereal Chem. 51, 106.

KAILASAPATHY, K. and MACNEIL, J.H. 1985. Baking studies with winged bean flour-wheat flour blends. J. Food Sci. 50, 1672.

KHALIL, J.K. and HALLAB, H.A. 1975. Nutritive value and chemical composition of Arabic bread supplemented with cheese whey. Pak. J. Biochem. 8, 57.

LARMOND, E. 1970. Methods for sensory evaluation of food. Can. Dept. of Agr. Pub. 1284.

OSER, B.L. 1965. Hawk’s Practical Physiological Chemistry, 14th Ed., McGraw Hill, New York.

RAMADHAN, A.A.S. 1986. Some characteristics of Egyptian balady bread as affected by partial substitution of maize flour. Nahrung 30, 663.

SCHALAM, O.W., JAIN, N.C. and CARROU, R.J. 1975. Veten’nary Hematology, 3rd Ed., Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia.

SEWARD, P.B. and MULLER, B.L. 1966. A Text Book ofClinical Pathology, 6th Ed., Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, MD.

SHEHATA, N.A. and FRYER, B.A. 1970. Effect of protein quality of supplementing wheat flour with chick pea flour. Cereal Chem. 47, 663.

STEEL, R.G.D. and TORRIE, J.H. 1960. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, McGraw Hill Book Co., New York.