Volume 2, Issue 2, June 2018, Page: 38-43
Evaluation of Physical and Cooking Characteristics of Five Improved Lima Beans
Kyeremateng Daniel Owusu, Department of Food Science and Technology, Methodist University College Ghana, Wenchi, Ghana
Coleman Fred Newman, Department of Agriculture and Agribusiness, Methodist University College Ghana, Wenchi, Ghana
Agyare-Gyimah Gabriel, Department of Agriculture and Agribusiness, Methodist University College Ghana, Wenchi, Ghana
Received: May 10, 2018;       Accepted: Jun. 4, 2018;       Published: Jul. 6, 2018
DOI: 10.11648/j.wjfst.20180202.13      View  528      Downloads  46
Abstract
Phaseolus lunatus commonly known as lima bean is one of the important leguminous crops in the genus phaseolus noted for its nutritional and medicinal properties. However, the current improved varieties released by Crop Research Institute (CRI) have no documental records on their physical and cooking properties. This informed the study to evaluate the physical and cooking characteristics of 5 improved lima beans. The lima beans were obtained from Crop Research Institute, Fumesua-Ghana and analyses on physical and cooking properties were carried out. Seed length ranged from 19.12 to 25.50 mm, breadth from 12.41 to 15.41 mm with significant differences among the accessions. However, thickness which varied from 5.10 to 6.58 mm showed no statistical significant difference. The thousand (1000) seed weight significantly varied from 886.00 to 1311.65 g. All the five lima bean accessions belonged to the Andean gene pool or Meso-American large seeded type. Length/breadth & water uptake ratio, and bulk density were within the range of 1.49 to 1.76, 1.15 to 1.81 g, and 0.59 to 0.62 g/ml, respectively. The cooking time of all the accessions ranged from 81.00mins to 91.50mins with no significant differences. Cooked Length-Breadth and water uptake ratios had minimum and maximum values of 1.39 to 1.78 and 1.15 to 1.31, respectively. Seed hydration capacity and index had values between 18.98-23.05 g/seed & 7.14-10.45; swelling capacity ranged between 17.98-20.38ml/seed and swelling index recorded values between 3.88-5.10. The physical and cooking properties of legumes are important for the design of equipment necessary for food processing, packaging, post-harvest handling and also for determination of cooking quality. The underutilized legumes have physical and cooking characteristic which make them potentially ideal for commercial cultivation, local food uses and for industrial food processing.
Keywords
Phaseolus lunatus, Cooking Characteristics, Sensory Properties
To cite this article
Kyeremateng Daniel Owusu, Coleman Fred Newman, Agyare-Gyimah Gabriel, Evaluation of Physical and Cooking Characteristics of Five Improved Lima Beans, World Journal of Food Science and Technology. Vol. 2, No. 2, 2018, pp. 38-43. doi: 10.11648/j.wjfst.20180202.13
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reference
[1]
MacDonald L and J. Low (1984). Fruit and Vegetables. Evans Brothers, London, 137pp.
[2]
Aletor, V. A. & O. O. Aladetimi (1989). “Compositional Evaluation of Some Cowpea Varieties and Some Under Utilized Edible Legumes in Nigeria”. Die Nahrung 33 (1989) 10: 999-1007.
[3]
Kaur, S., Singh, N., Sodhi, N. S., and Rana, J. C. (2009). Diversity in properties of seed and flour of kidney bean germplasm. Food Chemistry, 117, 282-289.
[4]
Adeparusi, E. O and Ajayi, A. D. (Adeparusi 1999). Among the several methods used in assessing protein quality in feed, blood evaluation is rarely used.
[5]
Wang, N., Hatcher, D. W., Gawalko, E. J., (2008). Effect of variety and processing on nutrients and certain anti-nutrients in field peas (Pisumsativum). Food Chem. 111, 132-138.
[6]
Bourne, M. C. (1982). Food texture and viscosity. Concept and measurement. Academic Press Inc, New York. Chandrashaker, U., Lalitha, B., Rajamal-Devadas, P., 1981. Evaluation of protein quality of raw, roasted and autoclaved legumes supplemented with sulphur-containing amino acids. Indian J. Nutr. Diet. 18, 283-288.
[7]
Stanley, D. W., Wu, X., Plhak, L. C., 1989. Seed coat effects in cooked reconstituted bean texture. J. Texture Stud. 20, 419-429.
[8]
Hamid, S., Muzaffar, S., Wani, I. A., Masoodi, F. A., Bhat, M. M. (2014). Physical and cooking characteristics of two cowpea cultivars grown in temperate Indian climate. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences. doi: 10.1016/j.jssas.2014.08.002.
[9]
Yalcin, I. and Orzarslan, C. (2004). Physical properties of vetah seed. Journal of Biosystem Engineering, 88 (4), pp 507-512.
[10]
AACC (2000). Approved methods of the AACC international. Methods 44-15A, 56-35, 76 13, and 08-16 (tenth ed.). St. Paul, MN: The Association.
[11]
Wani, I. A., Sogi, D. S., Gill, B. S., (2013a). Physicochemical and functional properties of flours from three Black gram (Phaseolus mungo L.) cultivars. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48, 771-777.
[12]
Wani, I. A., Sogi, D. S., Gill, B. S., (2013b). Physical and cooking characteristics of black gram (Phaseolus mungoo L.) cultivars grown in India. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 48, 2557-2563.
[13]
Adebowale, Y. A., Adeyemi, A. and Oshodi, A. A. (2005). Variability in physicochemical and antinutritional attributes of six Mucuna species. Food Chem. 89: 37-48.
[14]
Appiah, F., Asibuo, J. Y. and Kumah, P. (2011). Physicochemical and functional properties of bean flours of three cowpea (VignaunguiculataL. Walp) varieties in Ghana. Afr. J. Food Sci. 5: 100-104.
[15]
Sobukola, O. P., Abayomi, H. T., 2011. Physical properties and rehydration characteristics of different varieties of maize (Zea mays L.) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp) Seed. J. Food Process. Preserv. 35 (3), 299-307.
[16]
Lioi, L. (1994). Morphotype relationships in lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.) deduced from variation of the evolutionary marker phaseolin. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 41: 81-85.
[17]
Esquivel, M., Castineiras, L. and Hammer, K. (1990). Origin, classification, variation and distribution of Limalima bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.) in the light of Cuban material. Euphytica 49: 89-97. Esquivel, M., Castiñeiras, L., Lioi, L.
[18]
Berry, M., Wiesinger, J., Nchimbi -Msolla, S., Miklas, P., Porch, T., Fourie, D., and Cichy, K. (2016). Breeding for a fast cooking bean: A study of geno-types across environments to determine stability of the cooking time trait in Phaseolus vulgaris Bean Improvement Cooperative, Annual Report, 33-34.
[19]
Tresina, P. S., Mohan, V. R., (2012). Physico-chemical and anti-nutritional attributes of gamma irradiated Vignaunguiculata L. subsp. unguiculata seeds. Int. Food Res. J. 19 (2), 639-646.
[20]
Miano, A. C and Augusto, P. E. D (2018). The Hydration of Grains: A Critical Review from Description of Phenomena to Process Improvements. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12328
[21]
Nwokocha, L. M. and Peter, A. W. (2011). Carbohydrate Polymers. 84: 395-401.
[22]
Fracasso A. F, Frizon C. N. T, de Matos Jorge L. M, Jorge R. M. M. (2015). Hydration kinetics of transgenic soybeans. Acta Sci-Technol 37: 141-7.
[23]
Sreerama, Y. N., Sashikala, V. B., Pratape, V. M., and Singh, V. (2012). Nutrients and antinutrients in cowpea and horse gram flours in comparison to chickpea flour: evaluation of their flour functionality. Food Chemistry, 131, 462-468.
Browse journals by subject