Vol. 6, Issue 5 (2017)
Biochemical evaluation for the selection of suitable processed products in sweet potato cultivars
Author(s): Rakesh Reddy, Helen Soibam, Ayam Victor Singh, Surajit Mitra
Abstract: Fifteen cultivars of sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) were harvested from the field of (All India Coordinated Research Project on Tuber Crops) AICRPT, Horticulture Research Station, Mandouri and the analysis of biochemical composition was carried out to determine the best nutritive cultivars suitable for making the various process products. It was observed that total soluble solids (TSS) ranged from Sree Bhadra (6.20°Brix) to TSP 12-4(10.30°Brix), dry matter from 90/101(15.5 %) to X-9(33.1 %), moisture content 90/101 (84.50%) to X-9 (66.20%). Total sugars were 5.31 to 9.54 % in cultivar TSP 12-10 and TSP 12-4, respectively. The reducing sugar content ranged from TSP 12-10 (1.04 %)to ST-14 (1.98 %), followed by non-reducing sugars are from TSP 12-7 (3.65 %) to TSP 12-4 (7.95 %). The total carbohydrate content ranged from TSP 12-8 (18.86 %) to TSP 12-1 (28.63 %), protein content from 1.28 % in TSP 12-5 to 3.56 % in ST-14. β-Carotene content differed quite significantly and ranged from 1.29 mg to 13.4 mg/100g in ST-14 and TSP 12-10, respectively. The starch content of the sweet potato cultivars varied significantly from 90/101(9.20 %) to Kishan (22.40 %). This study help in selecting the best nutritive cultivars suitable for making various processed products such as chips and crisps, production of alcohol, flour, snacks, noodles, jam, candies, snacks or biscuits and maltose as a sweetener. Certain high protein cultivars like ST-14, TSP 12-10, BESP-14 etc. were also recommended for cultivation in malnourished areas. Further, a study on the bioactive components and processing can be carried out for the future commercialization.
How to cite this article:
Rakesh Reddy, Helen Soibam, Ayam Victor Singh, Surajit Mitra. Biochemical evaluation for the selection of suitable processed products in sweet potato cultivars. J Pharmacogn Phytochem 2017;6(5):1766-1769.