See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348004270

EFFECT OF PACKAGING MATERIALS ON THE QUALITY OF PRECOOKED

COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata L.) FLOUR

Article · December 2020

CITATION READS

1 242

3 authors, including:

Olajide Emmanuel Adedeji

Federal University Wukari, Wukari, Nigeria
43 PUBLICATIONS   214 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pretreatment of agricultural residues for improved properties of bio-products View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Olajide Emmanuel Adedeji on 30 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Applied Tropical Agriculture
Volume 25, No.1, 89 - 96, 2020
© A publication of the School of Agriculture and Agricultural Technology,
The Federal University of Technology, P.M.B. 704, Akure, Nigeria.

EFFECT OF PACKAGING MATERIALS ON THE QUALITY OF

PRECOOKED COWPEA (Vigna unguiculata L.) FLOUR
1 1 2*
Abiodun, O. A., Adedeji, O. G. and Adedeji, O. E.
1
Department of Home Economics and Food Science, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria
2
Department of Food Science and Technology, Federal University Wukari, Wukari, Nigeria
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract
This study investigated the effect of packaging materials on the quality of precooked cowpea flour during storage.
Precooked cowpea flour was packaged with high-density polyethylene (HDPE), aluminium foil (ALF), and
polypropylene (PPE). Proximate composition, functional and microbiological properties of the flour samples were
analyzed monthly. Sensory properties of soup prepared from precooked cowpea flour were compared with soup
prepared from fresh cowpea beans. Throughout the storage, moisture, ash, protein, fat, fibre, and carbohydrate
contents were <6.50%, 3.83-4.85%, 21.32-23.61%, 3.33-3.44%, 2.31-2.40% and 60.31-62.35%, respectively. Bulk
density of samples packaged in HDPE and ALF increased significantly (p<0.05) within the first two months, and
decreased in PPE, while water and oil absorption capacity and swelling capacity reduced significantly (p<0.05) as
storage progressed. After 6 months of storage, there was no significant (p>0.05) difference in the degree of lightness
(L*), while significantly (p<0.05) higher values were recorded for redness (a*) (4.725) and yellowness (b*)
(16.050) in sample packaged with PPE. Total aerobic bacteria count was highest (8.0×103 CFU/g) in PPE, followed
by HDPE (6.4×103 CFU/g) and ALF (6.0×103 CFU/g). Mould count also followed a similar trend. Soup prepared
from precooked cowpea flour compared significantly (p<0.05) with the one prepared from raw cowpea in terms of
colour, flavour, consistency, and overall acceptability. This study showed that ALF and HDPE preserved the quality
of precooked cowpea flour better compared to PPE during storage.

Keywords: Aluminium foil; Bean soup; Polyethylene; Polypropylene; Precooking

Introduction tonnage, hence the largest producer of cowpea globally

Legumes are a good source of protein and other (IITA, 2019). Cowpea, like other legumes, is a good
essential macro and micro-nutrients (Sánchez-Arteaga source of important nutrients such as protein (22.3%),
et al., 2015; Schoenlechner, 2016). Consumption of fat (2.10%), dietary fibre (4.10%), total ash (3.77%),
legumes has been attributed to positive physiological and carbohydrate (60.07%) (Khalid et al., 2012). Also,
effects in man and animals, owing to their ability to Frota et al. (2017) reported a high content of essential
suppress a good number of diseases (Ngoma et al., amino acids in cowpea. Cowpea is a major raw material
2018), and consequently, could be regarded as in the preparation of bean cakes (moin-moin and akara),
functional foods. The utilization of legumes as a source soup (gbegiri), pastries and complementary foods
of protein in cereal, root, and vegetable-based foods (Olapade et al., 2012).
constitutes one of the major ways of combating
nutrition insecurity in sub-Saharan Africa (Patil et al, Traditional use of cowpea grains in food preparation is
2016; Ngoma et al., 2018; Kurek et al., 2019). associated with drudgery, and thus, a lot of time is
Numerous leguminous crops including cowpea (Vigna wasted in preliminary operations (Vazquez et al., 2015).
unguiculata), soybean (Glycine max), pigeon pea Therefore, the processing of cowpea into flour is highly
(Cajanus cajan), mung bean (Vigna radiata), Bambara imperative. Furthermore, the utilization of cowpea flour
nut (Vignas subterranea) and faba bean (Vicia faba) are as a raw material in food preparation is constrained by
cultivated around the globe (Guzel and Sayar, 2012; its unpleasant beany flavour, poor digestibility, and long
Khalid et al., 2012; Frota et al., 2017). Among these, cooking time (Malomo et al., 2017). Precooking of
cowpea has the highest culinary applications (Frota et cowpea before its conversion into flour has been
al., 2017). reported as a means of alleviating these problems
(Mojica et al., 2014; Ugen et al., 2015).
Cowpea is a leguminous plant, which is widely
cultivated due to its adaptability to many agro- Deterioration of food products commences
ecological conditions (Syanda, 2019). Over 5.4 million immediately after processing and continues during
tons of cowpea is cultivated around the globe annually, storage (Giannou et al., 2014; Uchechukwu-Agua et al.,
and Nigeria alone produces about 60% of the total 2015). Therefore, the packaging of these products is

89
 Abiodun et al./ Applied Tropical Agriculture 25 (1),89-96, 2020

required to maintain their quality (Meena, 2015). Preparation of Soup from Raw and Precooked
According to Putranda (2017), factors such as cost, Cowpea Flour
strength, durability, and permeability among others, are Soup was prepared from raw cowpea and FPCP. In the
usually considered when selecting a packaging case of the former, cowpeawas soaked, dehulled, and
material for a given food product. Low/medium gauge cooked for 30 min. Ingredients such as pepper, palm oil,
polyethylene, aluminium foil, polypropylene, and and seasoning were added. This served as control. For
polyvinyl chloride are common packaging materials the preparation of soup from precooked cowpea flour,
for food products due to their availability, low cost, and FPCP was reconstituted with potable water (1:5, % w/v)
strength (Adebowale et al., 2017). and ingredients such as pepper, palm oil and seasonings
were added. The mixture was cooked for 5 min. The soup
The utilization of precooked cowpea flour in soup, samples were served immediately for sensory
complementary foods, and pastries production is well evaluation.
documented (Olapade et al., 2012; Malomo et al.,
2017).However, little or no attempt has been made to Analyses
evaluate the effects of packaging materials on Determination of Chemical Composition of
precooked cowpea flour, therefore, this paper Precooked Cowpea Flour
evaluated the effect of packaging materials on the The proximate composition of cowpea flour was
chemical, functional, microbial and sensory properties determined using standard methods (AOAC,
of precooked cowpea flour during ambient storage. 2005).Minerals (Ca, Mn, Cu, Fe, Na, and K) were
determined according to the procedures outlined by
Materials and Methods AOAC (2005).
Materials
The white-seeded cultivar of cowpea (Vigna Determination of Functional, Colour Attributes and
unguiculata L.) beans was procured from IITA, Ibadan, Microbial Properties of Pre-cooked Cowpea Flour
Nigeria. The beans were packaged in airtight Methods described by Narayana and Narsinga (1992)
containers (ZipLock, China), and stored at a were used for the determination of loose and packed bulk
temperature of -4 oC and 30% relative humidity until density, while water and oil absorption capacity were
required. High-density polyethylene (700 gauge), determined according to the methods described by . The
polypropylene (100 μ), and aluminium foil (75 μ) were procedure outlined by Akpata and Miachi (2001) was
obtained from PJD Supermarket, Ilorin, Nigeria. used for the determination of swelling capacity.

Methods Colour attributes, L* (a measure of lightness), a* (a

Preparation of Pre-cooked Cowpea Flour measure of redness and greenness) and b* (a measure of
Precooked cowpea flour was prepared according to the yellowness and blueness) were measured with the aid of
method described by Mojica et al. (2014). Cowpea was colour meter (Chromameter CR-400/410, Japan)
sorted to remove unwanted materials such as straws, Total aerobic bacterial and mould counts were
stones, and damaged beans. The sorted beans were determined using nutrient and potato dextrose agar,
soaked in water for 20 min, dehulled manually, and respectively (Roberts and Greenwood, 2003).
boiled at 100 oC for 30 min. Subsequently, the cooked
beans were cooled and dried at 50 °C for 18 h in a cabinet Sensory Evaluation of Soup Prepared from Cowpea
dryer (L'equip dehydrator, Eco vision). The dried beans Sensory evaluation of soups prepared from raw cowpea
were finely ground using a grinder (BLG-402, China) and freshly prepared precooked cowpea flour was
and sieved using a wire mesh size of 450 µm. carried out by a 50 panellists that comprised male (42%)
and female (58%) students and staff of Department of
Packaging and Storage of Precooked Cowpea Flour Home Economics and Food Science, University of
Precooked cowpea flour was packaged in three Ilorin, Nigeria. The panellists analyzed the samples for
packaging materials namely high-density polyethylene appearance, colour, consistency, mouth-feel, flavour,
(HDPE), aluminium foil (ALF) and polypropylene and overall acceptability (Olapade et al., 2012). The
(PPE). The packaged samples were stored in a cool dry soups were served to the panellists at 70 oC in individual
platform at ambient temperature (27±2 oC) and relative booths under fluorescent light. Potable water was
humidity (78±2%) for six months. The samples were provided in between samples for palate cleansing.
analyzed monthly for proximate composition,
functional and microbial properties, while mineral Statistical Analysis
contents and colour attributes were analyzed in the first Except otherwise stated, all analyses were conducted in
and last day of storage. Freshly prepared precooked triplicates. Two-way analysis of variance and t-test were
cowpea flour (FPCP) served as the control. used to generate means and standard deviations, while
Duncan multiple range test was used to separate the
means. This was done at p<0.05, with the aid of
Statistical Package for the Social Scientists (SPSS)
version 17.0.

90
 Effect of Packaging Materials on the Quality of Precooked Cowpea

Table 1 Effect of Packaging Materials on The Proximate Composition of Cooked Cowpea Flour During Storage

Storage Packaging Moisture (%) Ash (%) Protein (%) Fat (%) Fibre (%) Carbohydrate (%)
Time (month) materials
0 FPCP 6.46±0.00a 4.27±0.00c 21.42±0.00 fg 3.34±0.00 cd 2.31±0.00g 62.30±0.00cd
1 HDPE 6.46±0.01a 4.11±0.01 d 21.41±0.01fg 3.38±0.01e 2.35±0.01cde 61.34±0.02g
ALF 6.43±0.01bcd 4.26±0.01c 21.40±0.01fg 3.37±0.01abcd 2.33±0.01efg 62.20±0.01cd
PPE 6.39±0.01fg 4.26±0.07c 21.36±0.01fg 3.36±0.01abcd 2.34±0.01def 62.23±0.01ef
2 HDPE 6.45±0.00ab 4.85±0.07a 21.42±0.02fg 3.36±0.01abcd 2.36±0.01bc 60.88±0.02h
ALF 6.42±0.01cd 4.26±0.01c 21.41±0.01fg 3.36±0.01abcd 2.32±0.01fg 62.21±0.04f
PPE 6.37±0.00gh 4.28±0.01c 21.40±0.54fg 3.36±0.00abcd 2.33±0.00defg 62.22±0.01ef
3 HDPE 6.44±0.01bcd 4.40±0.14b 21.55±0.21fg 3.40±0.01abcd 2.39±0.01ab 60.56±0.04i
ALF 6.42±0.01de 4.26±0.00c 21.38±0.01fg 3.34±0.01cd 2.32±0.00g 62.29±0.01c
PPE 6.35±0.01hi 4.30±0.01c 21.33±0.0fg 3.36±0.00abcd 2.33±0.00defg 62.26±0.01de
4 HDPE 6.42±0.01de 3.99±0.16e 23.38±0.11 b 3.41±0.02abcd 2.39±0.01a 60.35±0.01j
ALF 6.39±0.01fg 4.27±0.01c 21.36±0.01fg 3.34±0.01cd 2.31±0.01fg 62.31±0.02bc
PPE 6.35±0.01hi 4.31±0.01c 21.32±0.02fg 3.36±0.00abcd 2.35±0.01cde 62.30±0.02cd
5 HDPE 6.44±0.01abc 3.83±0.01f 23.61±0.01a 3.43±0.00ab 2.39±0.01a 60.31±0.01j
ALF 6.39±0.01fg 4.28±0.02c 21.35±0.01fg 3.33±0.02d 2.31±0.01g 62.35±0.01a
PPE 6.37±0.01gh 4.31±0.01c 21.32±0.00fg 3.36±0.01abcd 2.35±0.01cde 62.31±0.01bc
6 HDPE 6.41±0.01ef 3.84±0.02f 23.59±0.01a 3.42±0.01abc 2.40±0.01a 60.35±0.02j
ALF 6.38±0.00g 4.28±0.01c 21.34±0.01fg 3.44±0.16a 2.32±0.02fg 62.35±0.03a
PPE 6.35±0.01hi 4.33±0.01c 21.29±0.01g 3.35±0.01bcd 2.35±0.01cd 62.35±0.02ab
Values are means±standard deviations of triplicate scores. Column values with different superscripts were
significantly (p˂0.05) different. FPCP freshly prepared precooked cowpea flour, HDPE high-density polyethylene,
ALF aluminum foil, PPE polypropylene.

Results and Discussion during the first three months of storage. This suggested
Effect of Packaging Materials on the Chemical reduced proteolytic activity in the samples during the
Composition of Precooked Cowpea Flour during early period of storage. Significantly (p<0.05) higher
Storage protein content was recorded for sample packaged with
The proximate composition of packaged precooked HDPE compared to those packaged with ALF and PPE
cowpea flour during storage was presented in Table 1. after the 4th month of storage. This could be due to the
Throughout the storage, moisture, total ash, protein, ability of HDPE to prevent the proteolysis of cowpea
fat, fibre and carbohydrate contents were <6.50%, proteins because of its strength and good sealing
3.83-4.85%, 21.32-23.61%, 3.33-3.44%, 2.31-2.40% property. Agrahar-Murugkar and Jha (2011) also
and 60.31-62.35%, respectively. Khalid et al. (2012) reported higher protein content of full-fat soy flour
also reported protein (22.3%), fat (2.10%), dietary fibre packaged with polyethylene during storage. There was a
(4.10%), total ash (3.77%) and carbohydrate (60.07%) significant (p<0.05) increase in the fat content of
contents for whole cowpea beans. This implied that samples packaged with HDPE, ALF, and PPE at the end
precooking had no effect on the proximate composition of four months of storage. Fat content remained stable
of cowpea flour. Throughout the storage, PPE showed during the latter period of storage. This implied that the
most resistance to moisture absorption by precooked packaging materials considered in this study were good
cowpea flour compared to HDPE and ALF. This in preventing lipolytic activity throughout the storage.
implied that the proliferation of spoilage organisms Agrahar-Murugkar and Jha (2011) had reported good
will be minimum in precooked cowpea flour packaged barrier properties of aluminium foil and polyethylene
with PPE (Sánchez-Arteaga et al., 2015). This could be against lipolysis. There was a significant (p<0.05)
due to the high moisture barrier efficiency of PPE. This increase in fibre content in all the samples after the first
result contradicted the findings of Daramola et al. month of storage and became stable during the latter part
(2010), who reported that HDPE prevented cassava of storage. This validated the reduction in carbohydrate
flour from moisture absorption better than polyvinyl after the first month of storage. An Increase in fibre
chloride. There was no significant (p>0.05) difference content could be attributed to the bioavailability of
in ash content between FPCP and sample packaged cellulose and hemicellulose consequent to carbohydrate
with ALF and PPE throughout the storage. In the sixth reduction (Agrahar-Murugkar and Jha, 2011).
month of storage, there was a significant (p<0.05) Throughout the storage, significantly (p<0.05) higher
reduction in ash content of the sample packaged with fibre and lower carbohydrate were recorded for sample
HDPE. This implied stability of essential minerals of packaged with HDPE compared to ALF and PPE. This
precooked cowpea flour packaged with ALF and PPE contradicted the report of Yar et al. (2017) who reported
during storage. There was no significant (p>0.05) the least protection of wheat flour packaged with
difference in the protein content of all the samples polyethylene compared to polypropylene and polyvinyl
chloride.

91
 Abiodun et al./ Applied Tropical Agriculture 25 (1),93-100, 2020

Table 2 Effect of Packaging Materials on the Mineral Composition of Precooked Cowpea Flour During Storage

Storage Packaging K Na Ca Cu Mg Mn Fe Zn
Time material (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g) (mg/g)
(month)
0 FPCP 0.163±0.00a 0.153±0.00a 0.406±0.00a 0.058±0.00a 0.549±0.00a 0.090±0.00a 0.241±0.00a
0.034±0.00a
6 HDPE 0.010±0.00b 0.010±0.00b 0.379±0.09b 0.021±0.00b 0.353±0.01b 0.035±0.00a 0.180±0.01b
0.023±0.00c
ALF 0.010±0.00b 0.010±0.00b 0.255±0.00c 0.020±0.00b 0.350±0.01b 0.060±0.00b 0.195±0.01b
0.028±0.00b
PPE 0.009±0.01c 0.009±0.00c 0.169±0.00d 0.019±0.00c 0.318±0.10c 0.450±0.01c 0.165±0.01c
0.019±0.00c
Values are means±standard deviations of duplicate scores. Column values with different superscripts were
significantly (p˂0.05) different. FPCP freshly prepared precooked cowpea flour, HDPE high-density polyethylene,
ALF aluminum foil, PPE polypropylene.

The mineral content of pre-cooked flour as influenced and Fe were recorded for samples packaged with ALF
by packaging materials during storage was presented and HDPE compared to PPE. Higher Ca and Mn were
in Table 2. There was a significant (p<0.05) reduction recorded for sample packaged with HDPE compared
in all the elements considered after six months of with ALF and PPE, however, significantly (p<0.05)
storage. This reduction may be linked with a reduction higher Zn was recorded for the sample packaged with
in ash content during storage. After the 6th month of ALF. Variation in mineral contents of precooked cowpea
storage, significantly (p<0.05) higher K, Na, Cu, Mg, flour could be due to differences in barrier protection
properties of the packaging materials (Galicet al., 2009).

Table 3 Effect of Packaging Materials on The Functional Properties of Cooked Cowpea Flour During Storage
Storage Packaging Loose Packed Oil absorption Water absorption Swelling
time material density (g/cm3) density (g/cm3) capacity (mL/g) capacity (mL/g) capacity (g/g)
(month)
0 FPCP 0.71±0.06c 0.76±0.06c 2.17±0.03ab 4.90±0.04a 5.71±0.10a
c bc bc d
1 HDPE 0.72±0.03 0.84±0.28 2.13±0.00 4.06±0.01 5.23±0.06defg
c c d c
ALF 0.69±0.03 0.76±0.00 1.83±0.06 4.17±0.00 5.51±0.00b
c ab a b
PPE 0.71±0.00 0.89±0.06 2.22±0.03 4.47±0.03 5.38±0.03bc
bc abc de h
2 HDPE 0.75±0.03 0.87±0.06 1.80±0.00 3.46±0.06 5.20±0.00defg
c c d e
ALF 0.69±0.06 0.77±0.85 1.85±0.03 3.61±0.00 5.34±0.08cd
c c c ef
PPE 0.71±0.00 0.76±0.01 2.07±0.06 3.58±0.03 5.49±0.01b
ab abc de gh
3 HDPE 0.83±0.06 0.87±0.06 1.80±0.00 3.47±0.00 5.18±0.00efg
c c d ef
ALF 0.71±0.00 0.77±0.85 1.83±0.10 3.59±0.01 5.31±0.06cdef
bc abc c ih
PPE 0.77±0.06 0.87±0.03 2.07±0.03 3.53±0.01 5.32±0.03cde
4 HDPE 0.83±0.57ab 0.95±0.06ab 1.78±0.03de 3.36±0.06j 5.19±0.01defg
c abc de gh
ALF 0.71±0.00 0.87±0.85 1.80±0.00 3.44±0.01 5.19±0.00defg
abc abc bc l
PPE 0.77±0.00 0.87±0.85 2.10±0.01 3.21±0.00 5.21±0.01defg
ab ab i k
5 HDPE 0.83±0.03 0.95±0.01 1.21±0.00 3.29±0.04 5.16±0.11 fg
ab abc f ij
ALF 0.83±0.06 0.87±0.03 1.66±0.03 3.39±0.00 5.20±0.14defg
c c ef m
PPE 0.83±0.03 0.77±0.03 1.72±0.07 3.12±0.03 5.22±0.00defg
a ab j m
6 HDPE 0.87±0.06 0.95±0.00 1.07±0.01 3.06±0.06 5.15±0.00g
ab a h j
ALF 0.83±0.03 0.97±0.00 1.36±0.00 3.37±0.00 5.21±0.03defg
ab abc g n
PPE 0.83±0.03 0.87±0.03 1.44±0.03 2.82±0.01 5.22±0.06defg
Values are means±standard deviations of duplicate scores. Column values with different superscripts were
significantly (p˂0.05) different. FPCP freshly prepared precooked cowpea flour, HDPE high-density polyethylene,
ALF aluminum foil, PPE polypropylene

92
 Effect of Packaging Materials on the Quality of Precooked Cowpea

Effect of Packaging Materials on the Functional reduction could be attributed to a loose association of
Properties of Precooked Cowpea Flour during amylose and amylopectin fractions of starch, which
Storage probably resulted as its granular structure weakened due
The effect of packaging materials on the functional to storage (Adebowale et al., 2017). Rate of reduction of
properties of precooked cowpea flour during storage water absorption and swelling capacity was most
was presented in Table 3. Results obtained showed that pronounced in sample packaged with HDPE, and oil
loose and packed bulk density of samples packaged in absorption capacity in ALF. This corroborated the
HDPE and ALF increased significantly (p<0.05) after findings of Adebowale et al. (2017) who reported a
two months of storage, and decreased in sample pronounced reduction in water absorption capacity of
packaged in PPE. Loose and packed bulk density of the water yam (Discorea alata) flour packaged with
samples reduced during the latter part of the storage polyethylene compared to the one packaged with plastic
period. Abiodun et al. (2014) also reported a reduction materials. Variation in functional properties of pre-
in the bulk density of trifoliate yam during storage. cooked cowpea flour packaged in HDPE, ALF and PPE
Water and oil absorption capacity, and swelling during storage could be attributed to differences in their
capacity of precooked cowpea flour reduced strength and water vapour transmission rate. Ojokoh
significantly (p<0.05) as storage progressed. This and Gabriel (2010) had reported that properties of flour
change based on its immediate micro environment.

Table 4 Effect of packaging materials on the colour properties of cooked cowpea flour during storage
Storage time Packaging L* a* b*
(month) material
0 FPCP 90.290±0.00 a 0.150±0.00c 15.300±0.00 b
6 HDPE 79.680±0.00 b 4.190±0.18b 15.110±0.24 b
ALF 78.085±2.03 b 4.310±0.03b 15.115±0.46 b
PPE 80.705±3.71 b 4.725±0.29a 16.050±0.11 a
Values are means±standard deviations of triplicate scores. Column values with different superscripts were
significantly (p˂0.05) different. FPCP freshly prepared precooked cowpea flour, HDPE high-density polyethylene,
ALF aluminum foil, PPE polypropylene.

Effect of Packaging Materials on the Colour Sloan et al. (2016) who reported that the colour
Attributes of Precooked Cowpea during Storage attributes of dehydrated taro (Colocasia esculenta)
Table 4 showed the colour attributes of precooked were not significantly affected by different packaging
cowpea flour during six months of storage. There was a materials. Significantly (p<0.05) higher a* and b* in
significant (p<0.05) reduction in L* while a* increased sample packaged with PPE could be due to higher rate of
during the storage. After 6 months of storage, there was ascorbic acid oxidation, pigment degradation, and
no significant (p>0.05) difference in L* of all the browning reactions, probably due to its low water
samples, and significantly (p<0.05) higher a* (4.725) vapour barrier efficiency (Guzel and Sayar, 2012; Sloan
and b* (16.050) were recorded in samples packaged et al., 2016).
with PPE. These results contradicted the findings of

Figure 1. Total aerobic bacterial count of pre-cooked cowpea flour during

93
 Abiodun et al./ Applied Tropical Agriculture 25 (1),89-96, 2020

Figure 2. Total mould count of pre-cooked cowpea flour during storage. HDPE high-density polyethylene, ALF
aluminum foil, PPE polypropylene.

Effect of Packaging Material on the Microbial microbial proliferation during the latter part of storage
Load of Precooked Cowpea Flour during Storage could be due to the absorption of atmospheric moisture
Figures 1 and 2 showed the effect of packaging by precooked cowpea flour as the packaging materials
materials on total aerobic bacterial and mould weakened. At the end of 6 months of storage, total
population respectively during storage. There was no aerobic bacteria count was highest (8.0×103 CFU/g) in
visible growth of bacteria and mould during the first sample packaged in PPE, followed by HDPE (6.4×103
three and one months of storage, respectively. This CFU/g) and lowest in sample packaged with ALF
could be due to the efficiency of the packaging (6.0×103 CFU/g). There was also variation in mould
materials and hygienic preparation of precooked count of samples, and was of the order
cowpea flour. During the latter part of storage, total PPE>HDPE>ALF. Babajide et al. (2010) also reported
aerobic bacteria and fungal counts of precooked higher microbial counts in yam and cassava flours
cowpea flour increased. Visible bacteria growth was packaged with polypropylene compared to those
observed during the fourth month of storage and the packaged with HDPE. Variation in microbial counts of
second month of storage for mould. Fasoyiro et al. precooked cowpea flour packaged in HDPE, ALF, and
(2016) also reported an increase in the microbial load PPE could be due to differences in their rate of moisture
of maize-pigeon flour during storage. Increased permeability (Putranda, 2017).

Table 5 Sensory properties of fresh cowpea and precooked cowpea flours

Cowpea Colour Flavour Consistency Appearance Mouthfeel Overall
Acceptability
Raw 7.55±0.89 7.60±0.75 7.60±0.99 7.20±0.83 7.80±0.70 7.90±0.64
Precooked 7.45±0.95 7.75±0.72 7.10±1.02 7.50±0.72 6.85±1.04 7.50±1.10
tobserved 0.345 0.645 1.569 -2.238 3.395 1.405
Significance Not Not Not Significant Significant Not
significant significant significant significant
Values are means±standard deviations of twenty scores. tobserved˂tcritical(2.024)= No significant difference (p˂0.05)

Sensory Properties of Soup Prepared from Cowpea soup prepared from raw beans was more preferred in
Sensory properties of soup prepared from raw cowpea terms of mouth feel. This result implied that bean soup
beans and precooked cowpea flour were presented in prepared from precooked cowpea flour will be
Table 5. Results showed that soup prepared from acceptable by the populace. This is advantageous
precooked cowpea flour compared significantly because preparation of soup from precooked cowpea
(p<0.05) with the one prepared from raw cowpea beans flour will save time and energy. Malomo et al. (2017)
in terms of colour, flavour, consistency, and overall also reported high acceptability of moinmoin (steamed
acceptability. Soup prepared from precooked flour was cowpea paste) prepared from precooked cowpea flour.
rated significantly (p<0.05) higher in appearance while

94
 Effect of Packaging Materials on the Quality of Precooked Cowpea

Conclusions packaged bakery goods- A Review. Critical

This study showed variation in chemical composition, Review in Food Science and Nutrition, 49(5):
functional, and colour attributes of pre-cooked cowpea 405-426.
flour packaged in different packaging materials. Giannou, V., Lebesi, D. and Tzia, C. (2014). Packaging
Samples packaged with HDPE and ALF retained the and shelf-;ife prediction of bakery products.
chemical, functional, and microbiological properties In: W. Zhou, Y.H. Hui, I. De Leyn, M.A.
of precooked cowpea flour better than sample Pagani, C.M. Rosell, J.D. Selman and
packaged with PPE. Soup prepared using precooked N. Therdthai. (Eds.). Bakery Products
cowpea flour compared significantly (p<0.05) with the Science and Technology, Second Edition,
one prepared using raw cowpea beans in terms of John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, UK.
colour, flavour, consistency, and overall acceptability. Güzel, D. and Sayar, S. (2012). Effect of cooking
methods on selected physicochemical and
nutritional properties of barlotto bean,
References chickpea, faba bean, and white kidney bean .
Abiodun, O.A., Akinoso, R. and Oluoti, O.J. (2014). Journal of Food Science and Technology,
Changes in functional and pasting 49(1): 89–95.
properties of trifoliate yam flour during Khalid, I.I., Elhardallou, S.B. and Elkhalifa, E.A.
storage. Journal of Applied Science and (2012). Composition and functional
Environmental Management, 18(2): 337-340. properties of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L.
Adebowale, A.A., Owo, H.O., Sobukola, O.P., Walp) flour and protein isolates. American
Obadina, O.A., Kajihausa, O.E., Adegunwa, Journal of Food Technology, 7(3): 113-122.
M.O., Sanni, L.O. and Tomlins, K. (2017). Kurek, M., Karp, J.W. and Wierzbicka, A. (2019).
Influence of storage conditions and Effect of modified atmosphere packaging on
packaging materials on some quality the quality of wheat bread fortified with soy
attributes flour and oat fibre. Journal of Food
Measurement and Characterization, 13:1864-
of water yam flours. Cogent Food and
` 1872.International Institute of Tropical
Agriculture, 2017(3): 1385130.
Agriculture (IITA) (2019). Cowpea
Agrahar-Murugkar, D. and Jha, K. (2011). Influence of
production in Nigeria. Retrieved on August
storage and packaging conditions on the
20, 2019 from https://www.iita.org/cropsnew
quality of soy flour from sprouted soybean.
/cowpea.
Journal of Food Science and Technology,
Malomo, O., Apo, R. and Alamu, E.A. (2017).
48(3): 325–328.
Development of spiced instant 'moinmoin'
Akpata, M.I. and Miachi, O.E. (2001). Proximate
produced from precooked cowpea flour using
composition and selected functional
maize starch as binder. International Journal
properties of Detariummicrocarpum. Plant of Food Science, Nutrition and Engineering,
Foods for Human Nutrition, 56: 297-302. 7(4): 75-90.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists Meena, P. (2015). Investigating Product behavior
International (AOAC) 2005. Official during storage in packaging materials: a study
Methods on freshly baked croissants. (Master thesis),
of Analysis. Gathersburg, MD: U.S.A. Lund University, Sweeden.
Babajide, J.M., Oyebanjo, A.A. and Oyewole, O.B. Mojica, L., Chen, K. and Mejia, E.G. (2014). Impact
(2010). Effect of storage on microbial and of CommercialPrecooking of Common Bean
sensory qualities of packaged yam-cassava (Phaseolus vulgaris) on the Generation of
“poundo” flour. Journal of Natural Science Peptides, After Pepsin–Pancreatin Hydrolysis,
and Engineering Technology, 9(1): 69-78. Capable to Inhibit Dipeptidyl Peptidase-IV.
Daramola, O.A., Idowu, M.A., Atanda, O.O. and Journal of Food Science, 2014: 1750-3841.
Oguntona, C.R.B. (2010). Effects of Narayana, K. and Narsinga, M.S. (1992). Functional
packaging material on the quality of properties of raw and heat processed winged
“pupuru” flour during storage. African J bean (psophocarpus tertragonolobus) flour.
Journal Journal of Food Science, 47: 534-
Food Science 4(5): 258 - 263 538.Ngoma, T.N., Chimimba, U.K.,
Fasoyiro, S., Hovingh, R., Gouramac, H. and Cutter, C. Mwangwela, A.M., Thakwalakwa, C., Maleta, K.M.,
(2016). Change in water activity and Manary, M.J. and Trehan, I. (2018). Effect of
fungal counts of maize-pigeon pea flour cowpea flour processing on the chemical
during storage utilizing various packaging properties and acceptability of a novel
materials. Procedia Engineering, 159: 72–76. cowpea blended maize porridge. Plos One,
Frota, K.M.G., Lopes, L.A.R., Silva, I.C.V. and Areas, 13(7): e0200418.
J.A.G. (2017). Nutritional quality of the Ojokoh, A.O. and Gabriel, R.A.O. (2010).
protein of Vignaun guiculata L. Walp and its A comparative study on the storage of yam
protein isolate. Ciencia Agronomica, 48(5): chips (gbodo) and yam flour (elubo).
792-798. African Journal of Biotechnology, 9(21):
Galić, K., Ćurić, D. and Gabrić, D. (2009). Shelf life of 3175-3177.

95
 Abiodun et al./ Applied Tropical Agriculture 25 (1),89-96, 2020

Olapade A.A., Oluwole, O.B. and Aworh, O.C. material on the quality of dehydrated taro
(2012). Physico-chemical properties and (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) slices
consumer acceptance of instant cowpea during
(Vigna unguiculata) powder for accelerated storage. International Journal
complementary food. African Journal of of Food Science, 2016: 9860139.
Food Science and Technology, 3(4): 102-106 Syanda, J.S. (2019). The effects of physical properties
Patil, S.S., Brennan, M.A., Mason, S.L. and of common bean (Phaseolus vulgarisL.)
Brennan,C .S. (2016). The effects of varieties on soaking and cooking time.
fortification of legumes and extrusion on the (Master thesis) South Eastern Kenya
protein digestibility of wheat based snack. University, Kenya.
Foods, 5: 26-33. Ugen, M.A., Karanja, D. Birachi, E., Katabalwa, C.,
Putranda, Y. (2017). Impact of biobased packaging Ouma, J. and Mutuku, R. (2015). Pre-cooked
materials on quality of fully-baked frozen. beans for improving food and nutrition
(A Master thesis), Lund University, security and income generation in Kenya
Sweeden.Roberts, D. and Greenwood, M. and Uganda. International Research
(2003). Practical Food Microbiology. Development Centre, Uganda.
Blackwell Publishing: Massachusetts 02148- Uchechukwu- Agua, U.D., Caleb, O.J., Manley, M.
5018, USA. and Opara, U.L. (2015). Effects of storage
Sosulki, F.W., Garrant, M.D. and Slinkard, A.E. conditions and duration on physicochemical
(1996). Functional properties of fern legume and microbial quality of the flour of two
flour. Food Science and Technology cassava cultivars (TME 419 and UMUCASS
Journal,9: 66 – 69. 36). CyTA – Journal of Food, 13(4): 635-
Sánchez-Arteaga, H.M., Urías-Silvas, J.E., Espinosa- 645. Vazquez, J.A.R., Ulloa, J.A., Ulloa, P.R. and
Andrews, H. and García-Márquez, Ramírez, J.C.R. (2015). Effect of
E.(2015).Effect of chemical composition dehydration conditions on the chemical,
and thermal properties on the cooking physical, and rehydration properties of
quality of common beans (Phaseolus instant whole bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.
vulgaris). CyTA – Journal of Food, 13(3): var. Azufrado). Journal of Chemistry, 2015:
385-391. 131357.
Schoenlechner, R. (2016). Properties of Yar, M.A., Hassan, M. W., Ahmad, M., Ali, F. and
pseudocereals, selected specialty cereals and Jamil, M. (2017). Effect of packaging
legumes for food processing with special materials and time period for damage in
attention to gluten-free products. Journal of packaging and weight loss in packed wheat
Land Management, Food and Environment, flour (Triticumaestivum L.) by red flour
67(4): 239–248. beetles Tribolium castaneum Herbst
.Sloan, A.R., Dunn, M.L., Jefferies, L.K., Pike, O.A., (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Journal of
Barrows, S.E.N. and Steele, F.M. (2016). Agricultural Science, 9(4): 242-247
Effect of water activity and packaging

96

View publication stats