Presentation Outline

1. Nutritional and Functional Evaluation of Chickpeas (Cicerarietinum L.): Postharvest Practice, Household Food Processing and Formulation of Flat Bread; Southern Ethiopia Faculty Researches Hawassa UniversityCollege of AgricultureSchool of Nutrition Food Science and Technology

2. Presentation Outline • Introduction • Presentation Objectives: • Studies included in this presentation • Post harvest Practices • Household food processing • Nutrition intervention • Conclusions and recommendations

3. Presentation objectives • Approaches and key results from studies addressing • Post harvest practices • Household food processing and preparation practices • Nutrition interventions – (education + product development) • Purpose • Several studies were undertaken, 3- will be highlighted

4. Study 1: Post-Harvest Practices • Objective: The effect of post-harvest practices (sorting, dehulling, drying) on Nutritional properties of chickpea & faba bean flour and snack foods • Material & Method • Chick peas (Kabuli & Desi type), Faba bean (Local variety) • Samples are pre-cleaned, Sorted and dehulledin laboratory • Milled samples: Nutritional properties determined (AOAC, 2000) • Key Results

5. Results: Postharvest Table 1: Proximate composition of Chickpeas and Faba bean flours Table 2: Effect of Sorting on Proximate Composition of Chickpeas and Faba bean flours

6. Results: Postharvest Table 3: Effect of Dehullingon Proximate Composition of Chickpeas and Faba bean flours CHO = Carbohydrates; Values are Meanstandard deviation; Values with different letter superscripts in the same column are significantly different • The samples were different in composition • Sorting influenced ash (desi type chickpea &faba bean), fiber (kabuli type • chickpea) • Dehulling affected ash (desi type chickpea &faba bean), protein (desi • type chickpea), fiber, CHO, energy (desi type chickpea & faba bean)

7. Study 2: Household Food Processing Methods • Objectives: Household Food Processing methods to Enhance Nutritional (Iron and Zinc) Bioavailalbility in Formulated Haricot bean and Maize Complementary Food • Methods • FGD on the preparation and household food processing • Soaking and Germination of Haricot bean (72 hrs and 48 hrs) • Flour is then prepared (roasting, milling) = Haricot bean + Maize • Blend of Treated Haricot bean and Maize (30:70) prepared • Porridge was prepared from (unprocessed, 48 hr, 72 hr treatments) • Nutritional and anti-nutritional properties determined (AOAC, 2000) • Key Results

8. Results: Household Food processing Table 1. mean (+SD) mineral, phytate and proximate composition of ungerminated and germinated haricot bean flour(per 100 g)

9. Results: Household Food processing • Table 2. mean (+SD) mineral, phytate and proximate composition of unprocessed and processed maize (per 100 g)

10. Study 3: Quality Evaluation of Chickpea & Formulation of flat bread • Objective: Quality Evaluation of Chickpea (Cicerarietinum L.), and Formulation of Flat Bread Blended with Maize (Zea mays L) for Preschool Children • Method • Chickpea and maize blends • Flat bread prepared • Sensory acceptability • Consumer acceptability test by 50 panelists • (5 point hedonic scale) • Key Results

11. 4. Results: Flat Bread Formulation Table 2. Sensory evaluation result of flat bread at community level (5- Hedonic point)

12. 4. Results: Flat Bread Formulation Table 3. Proximate and mineral analysis result of flat bread Table 4. Anti-nutritional and molar ration result of flat bread Table 5. Functional properties of chickpea flour

13. Concluding thoughts

14. Thank You! Canadian International Food Security Research Fund (CIFSRF): Call 1 (2010-2013); Call3 (2012-2014); Pre Scaling Up (2013-2014)