|Year : 2019 | Volume
| Issue : 3 | Page : 228-232
Moisture, carbohydrate, protein, fat, calcium, and zinc content in finger, foxtail, pearl, and proso millets
KN Shankaramurthy, Manjunath S Somannavar
Department of Biochemistry, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belgaum, Karnataka, India
|Date of Web Publication||15-Oct-2019|
Mr. K N Shankaramurthy
Department of Biochemistry, KLE Academy of Higher Education and Research, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belgaum, Karnataka
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
BACKGROUND: Millets are a group of variable small seeded grass, widely grown around the world as cereals crop. The finger millet had more moisture and calcium content. Whereas, fat content was least when compared to three other different millets. Foxtail millets had more protein content, pearl millets had more zinc and proso millets had more carbohydrate and fat content.
AIM: To determine the proximate constituent and micronutrient content of finger millet, foxtail millet, pearl millet and proso millet.
OBJECTIVES: To analyse the moisture, carbohydrate, fat, and protein content of finger millet, foxtail millet, pearl millet, proso millet by standard methods of AOAC. To analyse the calcium and zinc content of finger millet, foxtail millet, pearl millet, proso millet by atomic absorption spectrophotometer.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Proximate analysis of samples (moisture content, carbohydrate, protein, fat, calcium and zinc) was performed by standard methods of Association of Official Analytical Chemist (AOAC).
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The mean values of finger millet for moisture content (12.86 ± 0.95) had highest and fat content (1.58 ± 0.36) was least. In foxtail millet protein content (12.94 ± 0.87) was highest and in pearl millet zinc content (3.29 ± 0.47) was highest. In proso millet fat content (12.80 ± 0.30) and carbohydrate content 75.06 ± 7.3) was highest when compared to the other millet. Calcium (344.45 ± 2.62) had highest in finger millet whereas pearl millet zinc content (3.29 ± 0.47) was highest when compared to the other millets. Hence, the study results can be useful for informing the people to select the different millets depending upon the nutritional needs.
Keywords: Atomic absorption spectrophotometer, calcium, millets, proximates, zinc
|How to cite this article:|
Shankaramurthy K N, Somannavar MS. Moisture, carbohydrate, protein, fat, calcium, and zinc content in finger, foxtail, pearl, and proso millets. Indian J Health Sci Biomed Res 2019;12:228-32
|How to cite this URL:|
Shankaramurthy K N, Somannavar MS. Moisture, carbohydrate, protein, fat, calcium, and zinc content in finger, foxtail, pearl, and proso millets. Indian J Health Sci Biomed Res [serial online] 2019 [cited 2023 Feb 4];12:228-32. Available from: https://www.ijournalhs.org/text.asp?2019/12/3/228/269202
| Introduction|| |
Millets are a group of variable small-seeded grass, widely grown around the world as cereals crop. It is the major food source and has short growing season and grows under dry, high-temperature condition with less water requirement in tropical regions. Millets have resistance to pests and disease, compared to major cereals. The fast maturation and all-season growth characteristics make millets a desirable crop for more intensive cropping system.
Millets are useful for people suffering from gluten allergy and celiac disease. They are nonacid forming and nonallergenic and hence, easy to digest. They are the principal source of energy, protein, vitamins, and minerals such as calcium, iron, magnesium, and zinc.,
In 2002, the world production of millets was 23.3 million metric tons from an area of 33.3 million hectares. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization statistics (2009), the world production of millets increased to 26.7 million metric tons from an area of 33.6 million hectares. Africa was the largest producer of millets in 2009 (20.6 million metric tons), and India produced 10.5 million metric tons.
Commonly cultivated millet species in India include proso millet, pearl millet, finger millet, kodo millet, foxtail millet, little millet, and barnyard millet., The regular use of millets can lead to significant health benefits and might help in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular diseases, constipation, and in improving the overall health of people.
Hence, the present study was planned to analyze the moisture, carbohydrate, fat, protein, calcium, and zinc contents of finger millet, foxtail millet, pearl millet, and proso millet by standard methods.
| Materials and Methods|| |
This study was approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee of Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College (JNMC).
The study was conducted at the Department of Biochemistry. JNMC, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.
The tests were conducted at Biochem Research and Testing Laboratory, No. 24, Laxmi Ranganath Nilaya, 2nd Main Road, Shivagiri, Near Ganapati Temple, Dharwad - 580 007, Karnataka, India.
This is a prospective case series study.
The study was conducted for 12 months (January 2018–December 2018).
Convenient sample was obtained.
Processing and preparation of samples
Raw millets were obtained from the local market. Millets were processed by grinding in a mixer using a 1-mm mesh. The proximate analysis of each flour was done by standard procedure by the Association of Official Analytical Chemist (AOAC).
Moisture content was determined by the oven dry method (AOAC, 1995). Weighed 100 g of each sample was placed into a muffle furnace maintained at 105°C. The results were obtained for each sample and reported to two decimal points according to the following formula:−
where S1 is the weight of the sample before drying and S2 is the weight of the sample after drying.
The carbohydrate content was determined according to the anthrone method. 100 mg of the sample was analyzed and hydrolyzed by keeping it in a boiling water bath for 3 h with 5 ml of 2.5 N HCL and cooled to room temperature. The volume was made to 100 ml with distilled water and centrifuged. Working standards were prepared, and the volume was to made to 1 ml in all the tubes including the sample tube by adding distilled water. Then, 4 ml of anthrone reagent was added and heated for 8 min in a boiling water bath. The rapidly cooled absorbance was measured at 630 nm.
The amount of carbohydrate present in 100 mg of the sample was calculated by the following formula:
The protein content was determined according to the Kjeldal method  using a catalyst mixture (copper sulfate–potassium sulfate). 100 mg of the sample powder was taken. Then, 3–4 g of catalyst mixture (5:1 [potassium sulfate:copper sulfate]) was added to 10 ml of concentrated H2 SO4, and the sample was loaded in the digestion unit. The temperature was gradually increased to 420°C. The sample was digested for 1–1½ h and cooled. Boric acid and KMNO4 were loaded to the PELICAN EQUIPMENTS. Ponniamman Nagar, Chennai, India. A sample tube was loaded on the sample side. It was processed for 9 min. The resulting solution was titrated with 0.1 N HCL. % nitrogen was calculated by the following equation:
where 14.01 is the molecular weight of ammonia, 0.1 N is the titration solution normality, TV is the titer value, BV is the blank value, and W is the sample weight.
Soxhlet extraction method was used to determine the fat content (AOAC). The sample (100 mg) was weighed and transferred to a thimble. Solvents (petroleum ether) were poured into the beaker. The sample was boiled for 60 min at 65°C–70°C and cooled to room temperature in a desiccator. The fat content was calculated by the following formula:
where W2 is the weight of the flask and ether extract, W1 is the weight of the empty flask, and W3 is the initial weight of the sample.
Calcium and zinc were analyzed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry (AOAC 2007). 100 ml of acid mixture (60% perchloric acid + concentrated sulfuric acid) was prepared. 10 ml of the acid mixture was taken and added to 100 mg of the sample. The solution will turn into digested solution. Now, 50 ml of the digested solution was taken and 50 ml of distilled water was added to make up the volume to 100 ml, which was used for the analysis.
| Results|| |
The distribution of mean, median, and standard deviation values for moisture, carbohydrate, fat, and protein contents of four different varieties of millets (g/100 g) and minerals (mg/100 g) is summarized in [Table 1].
The moisture content of the four types of millets in the study ranged from 7.25 ± 0.37 to 12.86 ± 0.95% [Table 1], with a mean value of 9.71%. The carbohydrate content of the four types of millets was analyzed, which ranged from 66.59 ± 2.8 to 75.06 ± 7.3 g/100 g [Table 1], with a mean value of 71.21 g/100 g. The protein content of the four types of millets ranged from 7.32 ± 0.45 to 12.94 ± 0.87 g/100 g [Table 1], with a mean value of 10.65 g/100 g. The fat content of the four types of millets was analyzed, which ranged from 1.58 ± 0.36 to 12.80 ± 0.30 g/100 g [Table 1], with a mean value of 5.66 g/100 g. The calcium content of the four types of millets was analyzed, which ranged from 14.98 ± 1.5 to 344.45 ± 2.62 mg/100 g [Table 1], with a mean value of 110.6 mg/100 g. The zinc content of the four types of millets was analyzed, which ranged from 3.29 ± 0.47 to 3.13 ± 0.47 mg/100 g [Table 1], with a mean value of 2.89 mg/100 g. Finger millets had more moisture and calcium content compared to the other three different millets; foxtail millets had more protein content; pearl millets had more zinc content; and proso millets had more fat and carbohydrate content.
| Discussion|| |
Moisture is an important parameter for the storage of millets. Low levels are more favourable and render relatively longer shelf life. Among the four types of millets, finger millet (12.86 ± 0.95) had the highest moisture content followed by foxtail millets (9.59 ± 0.61) and pearl millets (9.17 ± 0.22). Proso millet (7.25 ± 0.37) had the least moisture content among the four types of millets under study. The findings obtained in the present study agree well with the values reported by the Nutritional Values of Indian Foods  where in moisture content of finger millet (13.1g/100g) and Indian food composition table  (10.89g/100g). A study conducted in a North Indian state  showed the moisture content of finger millets (13.1 g/100 g), pearl millets (12.4 g/100g), foxtail millets (11.2 g/100g), and proso millet (11.9 g/100g). Furthermore, a study conducted in a South Indian state , reported the moisture content of finger millet to be 13.1 g/100 g. Among the four types of millets, proso millets (75.06 ± 7.3) had the highest carbohydrate content, followed by finger millets (71.63 ± 1.4) and foxtail millets (71.58 ± 2.1). Pearl millets (66.59 ± 2.8) had the lowest carbohydrate content among the four types of millets under study. A study conducted in a North Indian State showed that finger millets had highest carbohydrate content (72.6g/100g) among the four millets followed by pearl millet (67.5g/100g), proso millet (70.4g/100g) and foxtail millet (60.9g/100g) content among the four millets. Another study conducted in a North Indian state  showed the carbohydrate content of finger millet to be 72.6 g/100 g. Furthermore, a study conducted in a South Indian state , reported the carbohydrate content of finger millet to be 72 g/100 g. Among the four types of millets, foxtail millet (12.94 ± 0.87) had the highest protein content, followed by proso millets (11.94 ± 0.83), pearl millets (10.43 ± 0.42), and finger millets (7.32 ± 0.45). The values obtained in the present study were comparable with that of the study conducted in a North Indian state  which reported the protein content of pearl millets to be 14.5 g/100 g, foxtail millets to be 11.7 g/100 g, proso millets to be 11.0 g/100 g, and finger millets to be 7.3 g/100 g. A study conducted in a South Indian state  showed in similar results in finger millet. No work has been conducted on the other millets. Among the four types of millets, proso millets (12.80 ± 0.30) had the highest fat content, followed by pearl millets (4.7 ± 0.49), foxtail millets (3.56 ± 0.44), and finger millets (1.58 ± 0.36). A study conducted in a North Indian state , reported highest in pearl millet (4.8 g/100 g), foxtail millet (4.0 g/100 g), proso millet 3.5 g/100 g) and finger millet (1.5 g/100 g). However, another study conducted in a North Indian state  showed higher fat content (8.4 mg/100 g) in pearl millets.
Finger millets (344.45 ± 2.62) had the highest calcium content, followed by pearl millets (47.34 ± 2.84) and foxtail millets (35.63 ± 3.14). Proso millets (14.98 ± 1.5) had the least calcium content among all the millets under study. The finding of the present study agrees with values reported in a similar study conducted in a North Indian state  which showed highest calcium content in finger millet was (344 mg/100 g), followed by pearl millet (42 mg/100 g), foxtail millet (31 mg/100 g) and proso millet (8 mg/100 g). Furthermore, another study conducted in a North Indian state  showed higher calcium content in pearl millets (37 mg/100 g) and finger millets (357 mg/100 g). Another study done in a South Indian state  showed that foxtail millet calcium content comparable to our results. Among all the types of millets, pearl millets (3.29 ± 0.47) had the highest zinc content, followed by finger millets (3.13 ± 0.67), foxtail millets (2.92 ± 0.13), and proso millets (2.22 ± 0.21). The study conducted in South Czech Repulic state  showed that zinc content was highest in proso millet (3.7 mg/100 g) followed by finger millet (3.0 mg/100 g) and pearl millet (2.6 mg/100 g). Foxtail millet (2.4 mg/100 g) had the least content. Other studies conducted in western states of India  showed that pearl millet zinc content was comparable to our study results. However, lower zinc content (2.4 mg/100 g) in foxtail millets has been reported in South Indian states.
| Conclusion|| |
Millets are the general category of several species of small-grained cereal crops which are used as staple food in many parts of India, Africa, and China.
Finger millets had the highest moisture and calcium content, whereas its fat content was least when compared to the other three types of millets. Foxtail millets had more protein content, pearl millets had more zinc content, and proso millets had more carbohydrate and fat content.
According to the present study, finger millets were better when compared to other millets with respect to nutritional composition. Hence, the study results can be useful for informing the people to select different types of millets depending on the nutritional needs.
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Dayakar Rao B, Bhaskarachary K, Arlene Christia GD, Sudha Devi G, Tonapi VA. The Tradition of India Millet Nutrition. ICAR- Indian Institute of Millets Research (IIMR). Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India: Nutritional and Health Benefits of Millets; 2017. p. 7, 9, 11.
Kulkarni DB, Sakhale BK, Giri NA. A potential review on millet grain processing. Int J Nutr Sci 2018;3:1-8.
Saleh AS, Zhang Q, Chen J, Shen Q. Millet grains: Nutritional quality, processing, and potential health benefits. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 2012;12:281-95.
Gupta SM, Arora S, Mirza N, Pande A, Lata C, Puranik S, et al.
Finger millet: A “Certain” crop for an “Uncertain” future and a solution to food insecurity and hidden hunger under stressful environments. Front Plant Sci 2017;8:643.
Vaishnavi Devi N, Sinthiya R. Development of value added product from finger millet (Eleusine coracana
). Int J Res Granthaalayah 2018;6:109-19.
Mall TP, Tripathi SC. Millets the nutrimental potent ethno-medicinal grasses: A review. World J Pharm Res 2016;5:495-520.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official Methods of Analysis, 16th
ed. USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 1995. p. 278-81.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official Methods of Analysis. 18th
ed. USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 2003. p. 195-99.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Officials Methods of Analysis. 17th
ed. USA: Association of Official Analytical Chemists; 2007. p.325-30.
Gopalan C, Rama Sastri BV, Balasubramanian SC, Narasinga Rao BS, Deosthale YG, Pant KC. In: Nutritive Values of Indian foods (NVIF). Revised edition. National Institute of nutrition (NIN). Hyderabad, India: Indian Council of Medical Research; 1989. p. 47.
Longvah T, Ananthan R, Bhaskarachry K, Venkaiah K. Table – 1 Proximate Principles and Dietary Fiber. Indian Food Composition Table (IFCT). National Institute of Nutrition (NIN). Telangana, India: Indian Council of Medical Research; 2007. p. 3.
Kumar A, Metwal M, Kaur S, Gupta AK, Puranik S, Singh S, et al.
Nutraceutical value of finger millet [Eleusine coracana
(L.) gaertn.], and their improvement using omics approaches. Front Plant Sci 2016;7:934.
Begum JM, Begums S, Vidya K, Sahoo M, Vijayakumari J. In nutritional evaluation of decorticated finger millet (finger millet-rice) and its diversified nutri-rich products. Int J Complement Altern Med 2017;7:1-6.
Nazni P, Bhuvaneswari J. Analysis of physico chemical and functional characteristics of finger millet (Eleustine Coracana
L) and little millet (P. Sumantranse). Int J Food Nutr Sci 2015;4:109-14.
Vinita T, Sing K. Finger millet: Potential millet for food security and power house of nutrients. Int J Res Agric For 2015;2:23-3.
Chandra D, Chandra S, Pallavi, Sharma AK. Review of finger millet (Eleusine coracana
(L) Gaertn): A power house of health benefiting nutrients. Food Sci Hum Well 2016;5:149-55.
Deepak S, Sathyanarayana NR, Lavanya NS, Mithofer A, Shetty SH. Nutrional bio-fortification in pearl millet. Eur J Plant Sci Biotechnol 2011;6:87-90.
Singh E, Sarita. Potential functional implication of finger millet (Eleusine coracana
) in nutritional benefits, processing, health and diseases: A review. Int J Home Sci 2015;2:151-5.
Shukla A, Lalit A, Sharma V, Vats S, Alam A. Pearl and finger millets: The hope of food security. Appl Res J 2015;1:59-66.
Malik S. Pearl millet nutritional value and medicinal uses. Int J Adv Res Innov Ideas Educ 2015;1:414-18.
Laxmi G, Chaturvedi N, Richa S. The impact of malting on nutritional composition of foxtail millet, wheat and chickpea. J Nutr Food Sci 2015;5:1-3.
Hariprasanna K. Nutritional importance and cultivation aspects. Indian Farming. 2016;65(12):25-9.
Kalinova J. Nutritionally Important Components of Proso Millet (Panicum miliaceum
L.) Food ©2007. Global Science Books. Faculty of Agriculture, University of South Bohemia. Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic 2007;1:91-100.
Nabiar VS, Dhaduk JJ, Sareen N, Shahu T, Desai R. Potential functional implication of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum
) in health and disease. J Appl Pharm Sci 2011;1:62-7.
|This article has been cited by|
||Influences of four processing methods on main nutritional components of foxtail millet: A review
| ||Tongshuai Yang, Sen Ma, Jingke Liu, Binghua Sun, Xiaoxi Wang |
| ||Grain & Oil Science and Technology. 2022; |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Nutritional Components of Millet Porridge Cooked by Different Electric Cookers Based on Principal Component and Cluster Analyses
| ||Jiali Zhang, Pengliang Li, Junli Liu, Yunting Wang, Aixia Zhang, Wei Zhao, Shaohui Li, Yingying Liu, Jingke Liu |
| ||Foods. 2022; 11(18): 2823 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Total Protein Content, Amino Acid Composition and Eating-Quality Evaluation of Foxtail Millet (Setaria italica (L.) P. Beauv)
| ||Siyu Hou, Yihan Men, Min Wei, Yijuan Zhang, Hongying Li, Zhaoxia Sun, Yuanhuai Han |
| ||Foods. 2022; 12(1): 31 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|
||Nutritional Significance and Antioxidant-Mediated Antiaging Effects of Finger Millet: Molecular Insights and Prospects
| ||Anil Kumar,Madhu Rani,Shalini Mani,Pallavi Shah,Dev Bukhsh Singh,Himabindu Kudapa,Rajeev K. Varshney |
| ||Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 2021; 5 |
|[Pubmed] | [DOI]|