AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Eniola Jayeola, Department of Food Science Department Bowen University Iwo.
Citation: Jayeola Eniola and Olunlade B.A, (2024), Production of Bread from Composites of Wheat, Maize, and Soybeans Flours, J. Nutrition and Food Processing, 7(12); DOI:10.31579/2637-8914/260
Copyright: © 2024, Eniola Jayeola. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 23 August 2024 | Accepted: 05 September 2024 | Published: 23 September 2024
Keywords: bread; composite flour; wheat; maize; soybeans
Bread consumption prepared from solely wheat flour have remained popular in Nigeria. The low protein and fiber content of wheat flour and its associated high cost are the major concerns in its utilization as ingredient in bakery industries.
The use of wheat flour, maize flour and soybeans flour blends in varying proportions for the production of bread was studied. Wheat flour was substituted with maize and soybeans flour in ratios 9:5:5, 8:15:5, 8:10:10, 8:5:15, 7:25:5, 7:20:10, 7:15:15, 7:10:20 while wheat flour bread served as control. The different bread samples were produced and subsequently were analyzed for functional properties, proximate compositions, physical parameters, sensory evaluation, pasting properties and shelf-life studies. The crude protein of the composite bread samples ranged from 8.75% to 29.17%. Sensory properties of the composite bread were significantly (p< 0.05) affected by blending ratio.
(T6) had the highest value compared to other treatments, while (T5 and T8) had the least value and are not significantly different from each other. However, there was significance difference (P≤0.05) among the entire treatments. The bread with blend 70% wheat flour, 20% maize flour and 10% soybean flour was organoleptically preferred as much as that of whole wheat flour and it also has the highest protein value of 29.17%when compared with bread from other treatment. The shelf life study also indicated that all the bread samples can be stored for 5 days before the onset of mould growth.
Bread is an important staple food and the most widely consumed bakery product (Aini and Maimon, 1996). It constitutes one of the most important sources of nutrients such as carbohydrates, protein, fiber, vitamins and minerals in the diets of many people worldwide.
Bread is a fermented confectionary product produced mainly from white wheat flour, water, yeast and salt by a series of processes involving mixing, kneading, proofing, shaping and baking (Dewettinck et al., 2008).
Wheat flour for bread has starches and functional protein glutens that favor the processing of leavened aerated bread, but is limited in fat and balanced amino acids (Goesaert et al., 2005).
Maize nutritionally is superior to others cereals in many ways, except in protein value. Maize has high nutrients profile. It is rich in carbohydrates which are a good source of energy, fats, fibers, phosphorous, sodium, sulfur, riboflavin, amino acids, minerals, calcium, iron, potassium, thiamine, vitamin-C, magnesium and copper as well as ashes are present in the maize kernels (Breadley, 1992). These nutrients make the maize high profile nutrients.
Soybeans are high in protein and a decent source of both carbohydrates and fat. They are a rich source of various vitamins, minerals, and beneficial plant compounds, such as isoflavones. Soybean is rich in high quality proteins with balanced amino acids, lipids, minerals and bioactive compounds but is limited in starches (Garg, Lule, Malik, &Tomar, 2016). The protein content of soybean is about 2 times of other pulses, 4 times of wheat, 6 times of rice grain, 4 times of egg and 12 times of milk. It is also rich in calcium, phosphorous, isoflavones and Vitamins A, B, C and D, and it has been referred to as “the protein hope of the future” (Islam et al. 2007). Soybean protein is rich in valuable amino acid lysine (5%), which is deficient in most of the cereals. Hence, soybean is the richest in food value of all plant foods consumed in the world (Bolarinwa, 2016).
The use of composite flour has been identified by researchers as a possible avenue of producing high-quality nutritious food products, reduced celiac diseases and a means of reducing the huge amount of foreign exchange spent by Nigeria in the importation of wheat flour (Vaugha et al., 2014). One method to alleviate the shortage of wheat flour, increase the nutritional quality and bioactive contents of the bread is to use composite flours prepared from different crops like protein rich legumes, tubers rich in starches and/or other cereal grain flours (Nwanekezi, 2013).
Since bread comprised of a significant proportion of wheat flour products, fortification of flour used for their production presents an opportunity to improve nutrient intake among bread consumers, particularly given the increasing demand for bread, hence this study will utilize incorporation of maize and soybeans into wheat flour for the fortification of a nutrient dense, palatable, affordable and shelf stable bread from locally available raw materials. The fortified bread will be of a balanced diet for all categories of consumers.
The raw materials used were wheat flour, maize, soybeans, butter, yeast, sugar and salt.
Golden penny’ brand of wheat flour produced by Flour Mill of Nigeria Plc. was purchased from a licensed marketer in Iwo, Osun State Iwo,
Maize grain, soybeans, and other ingredients were obtained from a supermarket in Iwo Osun State
Flour Preparation
Wheat flour
This was bought in an open market
Wheat flour (Plate 1) is a key ingredient in baking products. Wheat flour is unique among cereals because when mixed with water, it forms a visco-elastic dough.
Maize flour (Plate 2) is gluten-free and cannot be used to make rising breads on its own
Soy flour (Plate 3) is made by milling processed soybeans
Production of maize flour
The production of maize flour as described by Houssou and Ayemor (2002).
Water was sprinkled on cleaned maize seeds so as to allow absorption of water by the grains, toughening the pericarp and germ so they do not splinter during milling. The grains were left for about 10 min before dehulling and milling. The flour was sieved using 250 μm mesh size
Production of soybeans flour
The seeds were cleaned by removing dirt and other foreign materials before being soaked in water for about 8 hours. The soaked beans were dehulled and dried in an oven at 80oC for 8 hr. The dried soybeans were allowed to cool, milled and sieved with a 250 μm mesh
Formulation of recipe
The recipe formulation for the wheat, maize and soybeans flour incorporated bread
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | T6 | T7 | T8 | |
Wheat flour | 90.0g | 80.0g | 80.0g | 80.0g | 70.0g | 70.0g | 70.0g | 70.0g |
Maize flour | 5.0g | 15.0g | 10.0g | 5.0g | 25.0g | 20.0g | 15.0g | 10.0g |
Soybea ns flour | 5.0g | 5.0g | 10.0g | 15.0g | 5.0g | 10.0g | 15.0g | 20.0g |
| Fat | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g | 4.0g |
| Sugar | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g | 5.0g |
| Yeast | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g |
| Salt | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g | 2.0g |
| Water | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml | 62.0ml |
Table 1. Recipe formulation for bread
Production of composite bread
The straight dough method was used to produce the bread. This method involves the addition of all the ingredients (flour, salt, water, sugar, yeast etc.) at mixing stage and kneading same to obtain the dough. The different dough samples were placed in baking pans smeared with vegetable oil and was covered for the dough to ferment resulting in gas production and gluten development for about 3 hour. The dough was then baked in the oven at 2200C for 30 minutes. The baked loaves were carefully removed from the pans and allowed to cool and packaged in polyethylene bags for analysis.
Plate 4: Composition of different bread blends
Determination of physical properties of bread loaves
The physical characteristics of the breads investigated included height, breadth, weight, length, and specific volume were determined according to the method described by Ceserani et al. (1995). The height, breadth and length were measured by a metal rule. The weight was determined using a weighing balance. Specific volume was determined using the formula below.
Thus, Specific volume (cm3 /g) = HxBxL W Where L = Bread length
B = bread breadth H = bread height W = bread weight.
Determination of functional properties
The bulk density of flour was determined as described by (Ojinnaka et al., 2013). Ten grams of each flour sample was measured into a clean 100 ml graduated measuring cylinder. It was taped repeatedly on a padded table until constant volume of flour was obtained. This was express as weight of flour per its constant volume.
The proximate composition of the bread samples was estimated using AOAC 2012. Moisture, pH, Protein, Fat, Ash, Crude fibre were determined using (A.O.A.C 2012)
Sensory evaluation
Bread loaves were cut into slices of uniform thickness and transferred onto white coloured plates coded with random 3-digit codes. A sensory panel consisting of 25 semi-trained students at Bowen University and familiar with sensory attributes of local bread was employed to evaluate the products. A 5-point Hedonic scale was used to rate the breads for crumb appearance, colour, taste, texture, flavour and overall acceptability. A score of 1 represented “dislike extremely” and a score of 5 represented “like extremely”. An atmosphere of complete quietness and privacy was provided for each panelist.
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26.0 computer was used to analyze the data. Means was used to analyze the continuous variables and standard deviations were calculated to show the statistical variability. Descriptive statistics was performed and the generated means were compared using the least significant (P<0>
| Treatment | Bulk density (g/ ml) | Dispersibility (%) | Water absorption capacity (%) |
| T1 | 0.53±0.00d | 73.33±0.57bc | 2.52±0.23bc |
| T2 | 0.56±0.03c | 75.00±0.00a | 2.80±0.00a |
| T3 | 0.57±0.01c | 72.00±1.00d | 2.61±0.12ab |
| T4 | 0.50±0.00e | 72.00±0.00d | 2.13±0.24de |
| T5 | 0.61±0.02b | 73.33±0.57bc | 2.33±0.02cd |
| T6 | 0.57±0.01c | 74.33±0.57ab | 2.29±0.03cd |
| T7 | 0.63±0.00b | 72.33±0.57cd | 2.47±0.14bc |
| T8 | 0.53±0.00d | 73.33±0.57bc | 2.03±0.11e |
Values with different superscripts within the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05) using Duncans mean separation method.
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour
Table 2: Functional properties of flour blends
Figure 2: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T2 (80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour).
Figure 3: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T3 (80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour).
Figure 4: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T4 (80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour+ 15%Soybeans flour).
Figure 5: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T5 (70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour).
Figure 6: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T6 (70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour).
Figure 7: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T7 (70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour).
Figure 8: Influence of heating time on the viscosity of sample T8 (70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour).
| Treatment | Length(cm) | Breadth(cm) | Height(cm) | Weight(g) | Specific volume(cm3/g) |
| T1 | 14.36±0.15bc | 9.66±0.57ab | 4.26±0.25b | 258.33±2.08c | 2.29±0.19ab |
| T2 | 14.00±0.20c | 9.73±0.11ab | 4.23±0.20b | 233.33±1.52e | 2.47±0.17a |
| T3 | 13.23±0.251d | 9.43±0.20b | 5.00±0.26a | 247.33±1.15d | 2.52±0.21a |
| T4 | 14.16±0.76bc | 10.06±0.25a | 5.03±0.15a | 273.66±2.51b | 2.62±0.24a |
| T5 | 14.63±0.11b | 9.56±0.30ab | 3.46±0.25c | 291.33±1.52a | 1.67±0.11c |
| T6 | 15.46±0.25a | 9.60±0.30ab | 3.43±0.15c | 292.66±2.51a | 1.74±0.12c |
| T7 | 15.53±0.15a | 9.60±0.34ab | 4.23±0.25b | 293.00±5.29a | 2.15±0.15b |
| T8 | 14.70±0.10b | 9.53±0.15ab | 4.20±0.17b | 234.66±4.16e | 2.50±0.11a |
Values with different superscripts within the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05) using Duncans mean separation method.
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour 110
(T4) has the highest level of Specific volume which was not significant different from sample (T4, T3 and T8). (T5) shows the lowest level of specific volume of 1.67cm3/g.
Table 3: Results of physical parameters of composite bread
Proximate analysis and pH value of composite bread
Table 4 below shows the moisture, crude protein, fat, ash, total dietary fiber, carbohydrate content and pH of the various bread treatments. There was a significant difference in the proximate composition and pH value of the tested samples.
The moisture content of the composite bread ranged from 32.05% to 39.53 with (T2) having the least and (T1) had the highest as shown in table 4.10 below. There was significant difference (P≤0.05) in the moisture content of the various treatments. However, (T1 and T5, T3, T4 and T8, T6 and T7) are not significantly different from each other but are significantly different from other treatments.
The crude protein of the composite bread samples ranged from 8.75% to 29.17%. (T6) had the highest value compared to other treatments, while (T5 and T8) had the least value and are not significantly different from each other. However, there was significance difference (P≤0.05) among the entire treatments.
The crude fat of the composite bread samples ranged from 1.85% to 2.30%. (T5) has the highest fat followed by (T6) while (T4) has the lowest fat. There was significant differences (P≤0.05) among the entire samples but, (T1and T7, T2, T3, andT8) are also not significantly different from each other but significantly different from other treatments.
| Treatment | Moisture (%) | Crude protein (%) | Crude fat (%) | Crude fiber (%) | Total ash (%) | Carbohydrat e (%) | pH |
| 1 | 39.53±1.94a | 21.87±4.37 bc | 2.08±0.07d | 6.06±0.05a | 1.06±0.06b | 29.41±2.37c | 6.00±0.00e |
| 2 | 32.05±0.01c | 13.13±0.00 cd | 1.95±0.05e | 4.95±0.05b | 0.90±0.09b | 47.04±0.13b | 6.06±0.01d |
| 3 | 34.52±2.04bc | 26.25±4.37b | 2.00±0.00e | 4.40±0.00e | 1.08±0.00b | 31.73±6.41c | 6.17±0.01b |
| 4 | 34.32±0.07bc | 14.58±6.68 cd | 1.85±0.05f | 4.63±0.02c | 1.28±0.04b | 46.95±2.25b | 6.24±0.02a |
| 5 | 38.64±1.47a | 8.75±0.05d | 2.40±0.00b | 5.00±0.00b | 0.90±0.08b | 44.30±1.39b | 6.06±0.00d |
| 6 | 34.75±1.73b | 29.17±6.68 b | 2.30±0.00c | 4.50±0.00d | 1.12±0.08b | 28.89±8.21c | 6.15±0.02b c |
| 7 | 35.49±1.23b | 17.50±7.58 cd | 2.10±0.00d | 4.95±0.05b | 1.03±0.04b | 41.14±5.32b | 6.14±0.01c |
| 8 | 33.23±0.85bc | 8.75±0.00d | 2.00±0.00e | 4.60±0.00c | 2.13±0.78a | 49.22±1.63b | 6.22±0.01a |
Values with different superscripts within the same column are significantly different (p≤0.05) using Duncans mean separation method
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour
Table 4: Results of proximate analysis and pH value of composite bread
The crude fiber of the composite bread samples ranged from 4.40% to 6.06%. (T1) has the highest value compared to other treatments. There was significant difference (P≤0.05) in the crude fiber of (T1) when compared to other treatments while (T3) has the lowest fiber content and also significantly differ when compared with other treatments.
The total ash of the composite bread samples ranged from 0.90% to 2.13. (T8) has the highest value and there was a significant difference (P≤0.05) compared to other treatments while (T2 and T5) had the lowest value and are not significantly different from each other but are significantly different from other treatments.
The carbohydrate content of the composite bread samples ranged from 49.22% to 28.89%. (T8) had the highest carbohydrate value followed by
(T2) while (T6) had the lowest carbohydrate value. There was significant difference (P≤0.05) among the entire treatments but, (T1, T3 and T6, T2, T4, T5, T7 and T8) are not significantly different from each other but are significantly different from other treatments.
The pH value of the composite bread samples ranged from 6.00 to 6.24. (T4) had the highest pH value followed by (T8), while (T1) had the lowest pH value. There was significant difference (P≤0.05) among the entire treatments. However, It was observed that (T2 and T5) had similar values and there was no significant difference between the two treatments. Composite bread was produced with varying proportion of wheat flour, maize flour and soybeans flour i.e. 8 formulations incorporating different proportion of wheat flour with respect to maize flour along soybeans flour in every samples
Plate 5: Showing bread from replacement blends
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour,
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour,
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour,
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour.
4.11 Colour parameters of composite bread
The results of colour parameter is shown in Table 4.11 below
The L* values of crumb colour ranged from 63.83 to 66.98 with (T5) having the highest value and (T8) having the lowest value. There was no consistence variation in the value of the various treatments of the crust colour.
The a* values of the crumb colour ranged between 0.89 and 2.34 with (T8) having the highest value and (T1) having the lowest value. It was observed that there was no consistence variation in the value of the various treatments of the crust colour.
The b* values of the crumb colour ranged from 17.53 to 19.58 with (T1) having the highest value and (T8) having the lowest value. There was also no consistence variation in the value of the various treatments of the crust colour.
However, a* and b* values are always higher in the crust compared to the crumb and this is due to caramelization and Maillard reaction during crust formation. During baking, the two processes are important since they transform reducing sugars to other components and change the color of bread samples (Jusoh et al., 2008). Martins et al. (2000) indicated that caramelization and Maillard browning are governed by baking temperature and time.
| Treatment | L* | a* | b* |
| 1 | 58.80±0.20ef | 2.90±0.10f | 18.70±0.18d |
| 2 | 58.29±0.17f | 8.60±0.11b | 23.83±0.11a |
| 3 | 65.40±0.12a | 5.07±0.02d | 23.04±0.06b |
| 4 | 59.01±0.19e | 6.29±0.28c | 22.16±0.23c |
| 5 | 64.22±0.63b | 3.45±0.28ef | 18.97±0.83d |
| 6 | 60.69±0.34d | 3.62±0.01e | 18.92±0.24d |
| 7 | 61.63±0.29c | 5.36±0.82d | 22.32±0.74bc |
| 8 | 50.86±0.63g | 10.20±0.05a | 22.54±0.34bc |
Crumb colour
| Treatment | L* | a* | b* |
| 1 | 65.39±0.44b | 0.89±0.01f | 17.53±0.00f |
| 2 | 65.28±0.22bc | 0.95±0.02ef | 17.91±0.08e |
| 3 | 64.29±0.21d | 1.53±0.05d | 18.12±0.08e |
| 4 | 65.16±0.20bc | 2.01±0.02b | 19.13±0.14c |
| 5 | 66.98±0.58a | 1.04±0.15e | 17.78±0.07ef |
| 6 | 66.89±0.55a | 1.69±0.03c | 18.84±0.26cd |
| 7 | 64.51±0.28cd | 1.51±0.03d | 18.53±0.23d |
| 8 | 63.83±0.79d | 2.34±0.09a | 19.58±0.38b |
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour+ 5%Soybeans flour,
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour,
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour,
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour,
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour,
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour
Table 5: Results of colour parameters of composite bread Crust colour
Shelf life study of composite bread
After baking, bread quality deteriorates, resulting in large monetary losses for the bakery sector and the consumer. (Axel, C. et.al, 2017). Bread spoilage is a complex process that involves chemical (nutritional value changes, rancidity), physical (moisture redistribution, staling), and microbiological (yeast, bacterial spoilage, and mold) changes and contributes to the "staling process" of bread. (Melini, V. et. al, 2018). Staling reduces bread's shelf life, which is defined as the amount of time that food remains "acceptable" for consumption under specific storage conditions. Acceptable indicates that it retains the required sensory, chemical, physical, and biological properties while also being safe. (Nicoli, M.C et al. 2012). Microbial deterioration, which eventually results in detectable mold growth and the development of mycotoxins that are not recognized, is another key factor for the lowering of the shelf life of bakery items through post- baking storage. High moisture levels (aw = 0.94-0.99) promote the growth of nearly all bacteria, yeasts, and molds. (Sun, L. et al., 2020).
The shelf life study of the composite bread was observed as shown in Table 6 below
At day 1 to 4, there was no visible growth among the various treatments of the composite bread, but at day 5, it was observed that (T1, T2, T5, T6, T7, and T8) had superficial growth of mold, while (T3 and T4) had no superficial growth of mold. However, at day 6, it was observed that (T3 and T4) had superficial growth of mold as shown in Table 6 below.
| Treatments1 | Days 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
| 1 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
| 2 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
| 3 | − | − | − | − | − | + | + |
| 4 | − | − | − | − | − | + | + |
| 5 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
| 6 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
| 7 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
| 8 | − | − | − | − | + | + | + |
Results are expressed as follows: (−) means no superficial growth detected; (+) means superficial growth detected.
Table 6: Shelf life study of composite bread
Plate 6: Bread baked from blends affected by microbial spoilage
T1: 90% Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T2: 80% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T3: 80% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour,
T4: 80%Wheat flour + 5% Maize flour + 15%Soybeans flour,
T5: 70% Wheat flour + 25% Maize flour + 5%Soybeans flour,
T6: 70% Wheat flour + 20% Maize flour + 10%Soybeans flour
T7: 70% Wheat flour + 15% Maize flour + 15% Soybeans flour,
T8: 70% Wheat flour + 10% Maize flour + 20%Soybeans flour.
This study was carried out to evaluate the effect of adding maize flour and soybeans flour on the quality of wheat bread. Maize and soybeans were processed into flour and added in different percentages to wheat flour for bread production. Bread with high nutrients and soybean bioactive compounds can be processed. Utilization of the maize and soybean flours in bread formulation has a significant implication in improving nutrition and reducing the rising price of bread processed from 100% wheat flours. The information could be useful for job creation for cooperatives such as women associations who can provide breads for different sectors in countries that could not afford 100% wheat bread. Composite bread from wheat, maize and soy beans flour can be prepared successfully. The statistical analysis showed that treatment with 70% wheat, 20% maize and 10% soya bean flour was significantly acceptable in terms of crumb appearance, taste, flavor, and overall acceptability among other treatments and thus can compete favorably with 100% wheat bread. However, sensory evaluation results also indicated a decrease in acceptance of bread with higher soybeans flour substitution
The findings of this project indicated that bread production from composite flours of wheat, maize and soybeans is possible. Therefore, this recipe should be made available for bakers so as to reduce high cost of bread produced mainly from wheat.
Further research activities are necessary to utilize other classes of cereal and legumes to produce protein dense and high fiber bread that is nutritious and health
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
