International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development
April2012, Vol. 1, No. 2
ISSN: 2226-6348
Nutritional Assessments Of Musa Paradisiacal (Plantain) And Dioscorea Alata (Water Yam) Harvested Within Abia State Of Nigeria
Agwu, Akuagwu
Department of Chemistry, Abia State Polytechnic, Aba
e-mail:
Avoaja, A.G.I
Department of Chemistry, Abia State Polytechnic, Aba
Abstract
The nutritive values (proteins, carbohydrate, fat, moisture, crude fiber, ash) and the mineral (Magnesium, calcium, Iron, sodium and potassium) composition of Musaparadisiaca (Plantain) and Dioscorea alata (water yam) were assessed to determine if they were good food sources of nutrients and mineral elements needed for proper body function, and also to ascertain whether they could be used alternatively and/or as an adjunct to one another. All the parameters were determined using accepted standard methods. The result indicates that both Musa paradisiaca and Dioscorea alata contain high nutrient and mineral levels. The protein content of 2.70% for Musaparadisiaca was higher than that of Dioscorea alata of 2.45%; total and available carbohydrate values of 35.70% and 34.40% respectively for Musaparadisiaca are also higher than the values of 29.35% and 27.95% respectively recorded for Dioscorea alata. Mean fat and crude fiber values of 1.30% and 2.30% in Musaparadisiaca while their corresponding values in Dioscorea alata are 0.30% and 1.40% respectively. The calcium, magnesium, iron, sodium and potassium values are respectively 37.56, 24.14, 1.03, 225.0 and 456.5mg’s for Musaparadisiaca; and 37.67, 16.63, 1.03, 225.0 and 323.0mg’s respectively for Dioscorea alata.
These results show that both Musaparadisiaca and Dioscorea alata can make significant nutritional contribution to human diet and they can both be used as an alternative/or as an adjunct to each other considering their comparable nutritional values.
Keywords: Nutritive values, mineral composition, Musa paradisiaca,Dioscorea alata, diet
Introduction
The maintenance of man’s optimal health and development is dependent on the kinds of food consumed (Gordon, 2007). Good health is achieved by the proper selection of foods that will provide the nutrients and minerals elements required for the proper functioning of the human body.
Musa paradisiaca (Plantain) is a staple food crop in this part of Africa and also a major source of energy for millions of people in Africa (Rich, 2010). And seems it is worldly rated than other food crops because of its comparative role for health maintenance as a result of the high fiber contents, low glycemic index and complex carbohydrates which metabolizes slowly into the blood stream (Fachmann et al., 1990). Musa Paradisiaca does not significantly increase the blood glucose level and is therefore recommended for the management of diabetes and obesity.
Plantain can be prepared in different ways. It can be eaten boiled, roasted, fried, to make plantain puddy and even as plantain chips (Booth et al., 1992).
Dioscorea alata (water yam) seems unnoticed when compared to the other varieties of yam. It is seen as food for the poor and has played a minor role in international trade, unlike Musa paradisiaca, there is limited knowledge of its health benefits and also its exploitation as source of nutrients and mineral elements (Wilfred, 1999). Dioscorea alata (water yam) is a good source of Vitamin B6, and is needed by the body to break down substances called homocystein which can directly damage blood vessel walls, hence reducing the risk of heart disease. D. alata is also a good source of mineral elements such as potassium, Magnesium, and Sodium. Potassium helps to control blood pressure and low intake of Potassium rich food especially when coupled with a high intake of sodium, can lead to hypertension (Onwueme, 1978).
One of the nutritional problems confronting man especially Nigerians is the provision of food alternatives and adjuncts that will support the available ones already determined for a particular purpose. Musa paradisiaca (plantain) is a common source of carbohydrate and other nutrient normally recommended for diabetic and obese patient. The need arises for alternatives and adjunct food for this class of patients.
This study therefore seeks to investigate the proximate and mineral compositions of Musa paradisiaca and Dioscorea alata with a view to determine if Dioscorea alata can serve as an alternative/or as an adjunct to Musa Paradisiaca, especially in the management of diabetic and obese people based on their nutrient composition.
Materials And Methods
The samples of Musa Paradisiaca fruit and Dioscorea alata tuber were harvested from a farmland in Umueke village in Osisioma Ngwa Local Government Area of Abia State in Nigeria.
The samples were washed, peeled and sliced transversely into thin pieces. The sliced pieces where dried in an oven at 105 0C for about 48hours. After drying, they were cooled and milled into powdery form with a stainless kenwood warring blender and then stored in air tight plastic containers prior to the analysis. The proximate analysis was carried out according to methods described by AOAC (1990) and they were determined in duplicate. The protein contents were determined by the kjeldahi nitrogen method; fat by soxhlet extraction method; the moisture and crude fiber by the oven dry method; carbohydrate by the arithmetic difference method. The iron contents were analyzed by spectrophotometric method using a uv-visible spectrophotometer; Sodium and potassium were determined by flame photometric methods while calcium and magnesium were determined by complexometric titration using EDTA.
The data obtained was subjected to student t-test at 95% confidence level to compare the mean values of the composition of Musa Paradisiaca and Dioscorea alata.
Results And Discussions
The mean and standard deviations of the nutritive values of Musa Paradisiaca and Dioscorea alata per 100g portion is shown in Tables 1. Both samples contained all the major nutrients expected in food. The carbohydrate contents are lower than that in other staple tubers like cassava, white yam and potatoes (Eka, 1978).
Table 1: PROXIMATE COMPOSITION OF Musa paradisiaca And Dioscorea alata Per 100g edible portion
Nutrients (%) / Musa paradisiaca / Dioscorea alataProtein / 2.70 ± 0.71 a / 2.45 ± 0.10 a
Total carbohydrate / 35.70 ± 0.14 a / 29.35 ±0.13 b
Available carbohydrate / 34.40 ± 0.07 a / 27.95 ± 0.06 b
Fat / 1.30 ± 0.57 a / 0.30 ±0.42 a
Crude fiber / 2.30 ±0.42 a / 1.40 ± 0.57 a
Moisture / 58.70 ± 0.14 a / 67.20 ± 0.14 b
Ash / 0.60 ± 0 a / 0.70 ± 0 a
- Results in the same horizontal row with the same superscript are not significantly different (p=0.05).
And it has been reported that they have low glycemic indices (Fachmann et al., 1999). The carbohydrate and moisture contents in the samples are comparable to values reported in literature (FAO, 1972; Bradbury and Holloway, 1988). The values obtained for all the parameters are all within the range reported in similar analysis by Engelberg et al. (2003);FAO (1972); Olaoye et al. ( 2006) and Bariye et al. (2011).
The fat levels of 1.38% and 0.30% for Musa paradisiaca and D. alata respectively are similar to that reported by Engelberg (2003) and FAO(1990). The values for D. alata is comparable to that obtained for other root crops such as potatoes (0.40%) and cassava (0.30%) (Richard and Coursey, 1981). Musaparadisiaca indicated higher values of fat than that of D. alata.
The protein contents of D. alata and M. Paradisiaca (2.45% and 2.70% respectively) are comparable to that reported for sweet potato (5.60-6.80%) and higher than that reported for cassava tuber of 1.70% (Gomez and Valdivieso, 1983) hence Musa paradisiaca and Dioscorea alata should not be considered protein poor.
Table 2 shows the mineral compositions of both samples and the result indicates that they are high sources of mineral elements with potassium having the highest value. The potassium levels in Dioscorea alata (323.5%) being significantly lower than that of Musa paradisiaca (456.5%). These values are comparable to result reported by Udensi et al. (2008).The levels of Sodium, Calcium and magnesium are also relatively high.
Table 2: MINERAL COMPOSITIONS OF Musa paradisiaca And Dioscorea alata. Per 100g edible portion
Elements ( mg/100g ) / Musa paradisiaca / Dioscorea alataCalcium / 37.56 ± 0.11 a / 37.67 ± 0.10 a
Magnesium / 24.140 ± 0.10 a / 16.63 ±0.06 b
Iron / 1.03 ± 0.10 a / 1.03 ± 0.10 a
Sodium / 225.0 ± 0.14 a / 225.0 ±0.13 a
Potassium / 456.5 ±0.06 a / 323.0 ± 0.07 b
- Results in the same horizontal row with the same superscript are not significantly different (p=0.05).
This result indicates that they can both be eaten individually and /or as an alternative source of nutrient and minerals for proper body function and maintenance.
Conclusion
The result of this assessment has shown that M. paradisiaca and D. alata have comparable nutritional and mineral composition and hence can serve as a good source of nutrients and minerals. Hence, D. alata can be consumed as an alternative or an adjunct to M. paradisiaca considering its proximate composition and high levels of mineral elements.
References
AOAC, (1990). Official methods of analysis of the Association of OfficialAnalytical Chemists, 5th ed., AOAC Press, Arlington, Virginia, USA
Baiyeri, K. P., Aba, S. C., Otitoju, G. T and Mbah, O. B (2011). The effects of ripening and cooking method on mineral and proximate composition of plantain (Musa sp. AAB cv. ‘Agbagba’) fruit pulp, African Journal of Biotechnology,10(36): 6979-6984
Booth, S., Bressanic R, and John,T (1992). Nutrient content of selected Indigenous crop consumed by Dessert people of Vietnam, J. Food crop, 5:25-34
Bradbury, J.H and Holloway, W.D. (1985). Chemistry of tropical rootcrops: Significance for nutrition and Agricultural research, In: Pacific Austrialian Centre for International Agricultural research (ACIAR), Canberra Australia monograph, 6:68-76.
Engeberger, I.I, Darnton-Hill, M.H, Coyne, T.F and Mark, G.C (2003).Caroteniods-rich bananas: A potential food source for alleviating vitamin deficiency, J. food and Nutrition bulletin, 24 (4): 303-318.
Fachmann, W., Soud, S.W and krant, H (1990). Food composition andNutrition table; J. Science Nutrition 13: 41-58.
FAO (1972). Food composition table for use in East Asia. In: Godson Osuji(Ed.), Advances in yam research of Biochemical society of Nigerian in collaboration with Anambra state University of Technology, Enugu, p.56.
Eka, O.U (1978). Proximate composition of yam tubers, In: Godson Osuji (Ed.), Advances in yam research of Biochemical society of Nigeria in collaboration with Anambra state University of Technology, Enugu, pp 55- 56.
Faustina Dafic B. (2009). Characterization of water yam (Dioscoreaalata) for existing and potential food products, http// Retrieved 12-07-2010.
Gordon, M.W and Jeffrey, S.H (2007). Perspective in nutrition, 7thedition. Macmillian Graw-Hill, New York. Pp 106-108.
Gomez, G and Valdivieso, M (1982). The effect of Variety andplant age on cyanide content, chemical composition and quality of cassava roots, nutri. Rep. Int, 27: 857-865.
Kure, O.A., Bahago, E.J and Daniel, E.A (1998). Studies on the proximateComposition and effect of flour particle size of acceptability of biscuitsproduced from blends of soyabeans and plantain flours. Namoda Tech. Scope J. 3(2): 17-22
Onwueme, I.C (1978). The tropical tuber crop: yam, cassava, sweetpotato and cocoyam, John wiley and sons Ltd, Singapore P. 234.
Pearson, D (1976). The Chemical Analysis of Food. Churchill Livingston,London, p. 525
Richard, J.E and coursey, D.G (1981). Cassava storage, Tropicalscience 23:1-32.
Pearson, D (1976). The Chemical Analysis of Food. Churchill Livingston,London, p. 525
Udensi, E.A., Oselebe, H.O and Iweala, 0.0 (2008). The investigationof chemical composition and functional properties of water yam (Dioscorea alata)-effect of varietal differences, Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 7 (2) : 342- 344.
Viteri, F (1991). Iron Deficiency, Proceedings of Ending HiddenHunger-A policy conference on micro-nutrient malnutrition, Canada: pp 145-184.
Wilfred, L. (1999). Taro (Colocaia esculenta), J. food science andNutrition, 80: 333-345.
1