ISSN 0975-2366

DOI:https://doi.org/10.31838/ijpr/2020.12.03.136
Research Article

Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality

of Hot Air Oven Puffed Quinoa
S. DEEPAK1*, T. SHARMILA2, M. MAHESWARI3, M.S. SHIVASWAMY4
1*
Department of Food Technology, Kongu Engineering College, Erode, India.
2-4
Department of Food Technology, Kongu Engineering College, Erode, India.
Email ID: deepaksiragiri@gmail.com
Received: 20.01.20, Revised: 23.02.20, Accepted: 25.03.20

ABSTRACT
Quinoa is a nutritious and bioactive pseudocereal which can be transformed into a crispy and expanded ready-
to- eat snack by hot air oven puffing. Puffing study was conducted by subjecting the moisture-conditioned (0.2-
1.8 ml/10g sample) and salt-pretreated (0-1%) quinoa grains to high temperature (240-280 ºC) for short time
(20-60 s). The Puffing yield, expansion ratio, flake size and overall acceptability of puffed quinoa increased while
bulk density decreased with decrease in moisture level and salt concentration and increase in oven
temperature and residence time. Optimum condition for puffing was 0.2ml moisture/10g sample, 0% salt
concentration, 253.8ºC oven temperature and 60 seconds residence time. As fourfold volume expansion
achieved from optimized condition, manufacturers can be profited.
Keywords: Expansion, Ready-to-eat, Puffing Yield, Sensory.

INTRODUCTION level for infants, children and adults [1]. It

Quinoa is an emerging food crop originated in
Andean region of South America and has been
introduced into many tropical and temperate
countries for exploring its value [1]. It is called as
mother grain because of its unique nutritional
properties and its ability to grow under extreme
stress conditions [2]. As it is resistant to draught,
frost, pests, salinity, nutrient deficiency and other
adverse abiotic and biotic factors, its productivity
rate is increasing year by year [3], [4]. In terms of
quantitative and qualitative nutrition, quinoa is
considered as one of the best source for protein
[5]. It has protein content of 16.3g per 100g
drymatter, which is greater than in rice (8.8g),
barley (11g), corn (10.5g), wheat (14.8g), rye
(11.6g) and Sorghum (12.4g) [6]. Unlike cereals,
quinoa is a rich source of lysine and other
essential amino acids required by body [7]. The
protein efficiency ratio (2.99) and biological value
(87.73%) of quinoa protein is equivalent to that of
milk protein casein [8]. Though quinoa has
relatively higher fat content of 5.2- 9.7%, it
majorly constitutes unsaturated essential fatty
acids such as linoleic acid (48.2-56%), oleic acid
(24.5-26.7%) and linolenic acid (3.8-8.3%) [9].
The absence of gluten and prolamin residues
makes it a gluten free food suited for celiac
disease [10]. It can be preferred by people
suffering from diabetes because of its low
carbohydrate level and glycemic index [11].
Minerals such as calcium, phosphorous,
potassium, magnesium, iron, manganese,
copper, zinc and sodium in quinoa can contribute
greater percentage to recommended daily intake
remains as a good source for thiamine,
riboflavin, niacin, pyridoxine, folate, vitamin C
and vitamin E [8]. Besides providing essential
nutrients, it also delivers additional health benefits
due to bioactive peptides, squalene,
phytoecdysteroids, polypenols, flavonoids, β-
carotene, tocopherols, phytosterols, fagopyritols
and glycine betaine having antioxidant,
antihypertensive, anticarcinogenic,
hypocholesterolemic and hypoglycemic
properties [12], [9]. The nutritional and health
potential of quinoa drives demand for coming up
with diverse range of functional food products
with special emphasis on snack food segment
[13]. Puffing is a simple low cost technology used
for producing aerated, porous, crispy, light and
cellular structured expanded ready- to-eat
products having superior palatability profile [14].
Currently, puffed products such as puffed rice,
popcorn, popped wheat etc have wide popularity
and consumed by mass population for its
affordability and sensory quality [15], [16]. The
mechanism of puffing involves exposure of grains
to high temperature for short residence time so
that sufficient pressure builds up within the shell
of grain which at one point burst to release the
rapidly expanding starchy endosperm [17]. The
inherent phenotypic factors of grain influencing
puffing quality are endosperm type, amylose and
amylopectin ratio, husk interlocking, bran content
and its thickness, pore size, grain size and shape,
density etc [18], [19]. Puffing can be done using
heating mediums such as sand, hot air and oil
[20]. Sand puffing, a widely used traditional

736| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa

method consumes more energy and cause
environmental pollution [21]. Moreover, the
presence of sand residues pose health issues [22].
Oil popped product has short shelf life period
due to rancidity on storage [23]. Being
contamination free and involves no usage of oil,
hot air puffing is a preferred method for
producing puffed product [24]. Moreover, the
process can be made energy efficient by heat
extraction from spent hot air or by recirculation
system [25]. As the manufacturers buy the grains
from weight basis and sell the expanded product
in consumer market by volume basis, the degree
of expansion and yield obtained on puffing has
direct effect on profit on sales [26]. Consumer
would get satisfied if the puffed product has good
sensory quality [27]. The objective of current study
is to optimize the processing conditions of hot air
oven puffing that influence puffing quality of
nutritionally rich quinoa using response surface
methodology.
METHODOLOGY
A. Process Description
The white variety of quinoa grain was purchased
from Organic India Private Limited. Sample size
of about 10g was used in each experimental trial.
The grains were moisture conditioned and salt-
pretreated by spraying salt solution. After
tempering for 30 minutes at 27ºC, the grains
were spread evenly as a thin layer in a tray and
loaded into hot air oven cabinet maintained at
certain fixed temperature and treated for fixed
exposure time. Fully puffed grains were then
separated from the unpuffed grains by
handpicking and packed in low density
polyethylene pouches.
B. Design of Experiment and Statistical Analysis
Design Expert (StatEase) software package was
used for designing the experiment, analysis and
optimization. Box Behnken Design having 4
independent variables each having 3 levels and 5
dependant variables were chosen for study. The
trials were replicated three times and its average
value of data was used for analysis of variance.
The independent variables coded as A, B, C and
D were moisture level (0.2-1.8 ml/10g sample),
salt concentration (0-1%), oven temperature
(240-280 ºC) and residence time (20-60 s)
respectively. The dependant variables measured
from analysis were puffing yield (%), expansion
ratio, flake size (mm3), bulk density (g/ml) and
overall acceptability. The model and its
terminologies were considered significant only if it
had less than 5% level of significance (p<0.05).
Apart from that, a validation trial was conducted
at optimized condition and analyzed using
Minitab 19 statistical software.
C. Puffing Quality Measures
Puffing yield (%) was calculated by measuring the
percentage of grains fully puffed out of the total
grain mixture in terms of weight [28]. Expansion
ratio states the degree of expansion upon puffing.
It was estimated by the ratio of volume of puffed
grains to volume of raw grains [24]. Flake size or
puff size (mm3) was determined by the ratio of
volume of puffed grains to number of puffed
grains [29]. Bulk density (g/ml) was measured by
tapping method. It is the ratio of mass of puffed
grains to volume of puffed grains [30]. Sensory
analysis was conducted based on 9 point hedonic
scale. The organolepic quality of coded and
randomly arranged puffed product was evaluated
by 3 trained persons and 7 untrained persons
based on parameters like color, texture, taste,
odour, flavor and overall acceptability [23].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
D. Puffing Yield
Puffing yield of hot air oven puffed quinoa
obtained from different trials varied from 0.67%
to 61.41% (Table I). The model has F value of
19.83 and is highly significant (p<0.0001) (Table
II). Lack of fit is not significant which implies that
the model is compatible to data. The second
order polynomial equation (1) fitted for puffing
yield in coded form after eliminating non
significant terms is,

Table 1: Independent Factors of Experiment and its Corresponding Values of Dependant Variables
Trial Independent Dependant Variables
Variables
A B C D Puffing Expansion Flake Bulk Overall
Yield (%) Ratio Size Density Acceptability
(mm3) (g/ml)
1 1 1 280 40 34.61 3.03 8 0.4 7.14
2 1.8 0.5 260 20 14.87 2 4 0.5 5.42
3 1 0 240 40 16.31 2.65 6 0.41 5.57
4 1 0 280 40 54.02 3.11 9 0.35 7.29
5 0.2 0.5 280 40 61.41 3.35 12 0.32 7.57

737| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa

6 1 0.5 280 20 41.38 2.85 8 0.43 7.57

7 1.8 0.5 240 40 2.93 0.9 3 0.58 4
8 1 0.5 280 60 35.33 2.9 8 0.39 5
9 1 0.5 240 20 0.67 0.13 3 0.5 4.29
10 0.2 0.5 260 20 35.16 2.7 9 0.38 7.71
11 1 0.5 260 40 27.22 2.76 6 0.44 7.14
12 1 0.5 260 40 21.7 3.08 7 0.36 7.2
13 1.8 0.5 260 60 28.65 2.51 5 0.46 6
14 1 1 240 40 5.74 1.57 5 0.48 4.86
15 0.2 0.5 260 60 61.25 3.3 11 0.37 8.29
16 0.2 0.5 240 40 20.71 2.76 7 0.39 6.29
17 1.8 1 260 40 22.5 2.2 3 0.48 5.71
18 1 0 260 60 37.28 3.17 9 0.39 7.43
19 1 0.5 260 40 30.98 3.32 6 0.46 6.5
20 1.8 0 260 40 25 2.47 5 0.46 6.42
21 1 1 260 20 23.66 2.59 6 0.43 6.57
22 0.2 0 260 40 49.72 3.78 14 0.32 8.57
23 1 0 260 20 25 2.61 7 0.4 6.71
24 1.8 0.5 280 40 30.97 2.78 5 0.42 6.86
25 1 0.5 260 40 20.44 2.27 7 0.44 7.14
26 1 0.5 240 60 24.04 2.7 7 0.46 6
27 1 0.5 260 40 20.86 2.76 6 0.42 7.28
28 0.2 1 260 40 41.49 3.14 9 0.41 8.29
29 1 1 260 60 31.53 2.68 8 0.42 7
A-Moisture (ml/10g sample), B-Salt Concentration (%)
C-Oven Temperature (ºC), D-Residence Time (s)

Table 2: Analysis of Variance and Fit Statistics for Different Models

Source F Value
Puffing Yield Expansion Flake Size Bulk Density Overall
(%) Ratio (mm3) (g/ml) Acceptability
Model 19.83S 9.16S 41.66S 0.0181S 16.80S
A-Moisture Level 79.36S 29.62S 115.69S 0.0420S 83.69S
B-Salt 8.65S 5.18S 10.23S 0.0070S 3.23
Concentration
C-Oven 132.77S 41.57S 30.51S 0.0217S 59.97S
Temperature
D-Residence Time 22.63S 14.93S 10.23S 0.0019 1.16
AB 0.3727 0.3195 - - 0.3064
AC 1.82 3.88 - - 4.14
AD 1.72 0.0189 - - 0
BC 0.8870 2.33 - - 0.5196
BD 0.2208 0.5156 - - 0.1393
CD 9.82S 14.82S - - 30.35S
A 2
14.58 S
0.0074 - - 0.3632
B2 3.74 0.9871 - - 0.9122
C 2
0.4835 9.99S - - 42.50S
D 2
1.92 3.20 - - 3.88
Lack of Fit 1.02 0.5587 3.74 0.3559 1.74
R2 0.9520 0.9016 0.8741 0.8152 0.9438
Adj R2 0.9040 0.8032 0.8531 0.7844 0.8876
Pred R2 0.7801 0.6055 0.8106 0.7433 0.7203
Std. Dev 4.69 0.3273 0.9930 0.0262 0.3884
C.V % 16.10 12.48 14.19 6.19 5.87
S
- Significant terminologies (p<0.05)

738| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa
Puffing Yield (%)  24.24 - 12.07  A - 3.98  B  15.61 
2 lack of fit is not significant, the model can be
C  6.45  D - 7.35 - CD  7.04  A
(1)
The higher F value (132.77) of oven temperature
(C) reveals its prominence effect on puffing yield
followed by moisture level (A) and residence time
(D) (Table II). The variation in salt concentration
(B) has least effect on puffing yield. From Fig. 1,
increase in puffing yield with increase in oven
temperature and residence time may be due to
increased steam pressure development causing
puffing of more grains [31], [32]. Swarnakar et
al., 2014 stated that popping percentage
increase upon increment in residence time by
more heat exposure [22]. The added moisture
level and salt concentration decreases yield (Fig.
2) as the melting point of pericarp decreases and
starch structure collapse upon heating [33].
Moreover, salt bounds water and elevates boiling
point leading to reduction in yield [34]. Mishra et
al., 2015 found a significant reduction in puffing
yield at high level of moisture and salt
concentration [35].
Fig. 1: Effect of Oven Temperature (C) and
Residence Time (D) on Puffing Yield
Fig. 2: Effect of Moisture Level (A) and Salt
Concentration (B) on Puffing Yield
E. Expansion Ratio
Expansion ratio should be high enough for a
puffed product to derive profit. Expansion ratio of
puffed quinoa ranges between 0.13 to 3.78
739| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
(Table I). As model is significant (p<0.0001) and
used for predicting the response (Table II). The
regression equation (2) stating the effect of
independent variables on expansion ratio without
insignificant terms is,
Expansion Ratio  2.84  0.514  A  0.215  B  0.61
C  0.365  D - 0.63  CD - 0.41  C 2
( 2)
On comparing the F values (Table II), expansion
ratio of puffed quinoa is highly influenced by
oven temperature (C) followed by moisture level
(A), residence time (D) and salt concentration (B).
When oven temperature and residence time
increase (Fig. 3), expansion ratio increases due to
increase in rate of generation of steam under this
condition and by which pressure differential
between grain and surrounding is high enough to
favor sudden greater expansion [14]. The
negativity of interaction term CD and quadratic
term C2 means that at a very high temperature
(280 ºC) and too long residence time (60 s),
expansion ratio decreases due to carbonization
[36]. Similar results have been stated by
Chinnaswamy & Battacharya (1983) in which
higher expansion ratio of puffed rice was
obtained at temperature between 240 ºC to 270
ºC, while further increment in temperature
resulted in charring of rice [37]. In case of
increment in moisture level and salt concentration
(Fig. 4), negative effect was observed in
expansion ratio and it might be due to softening
of grain pericarp reducing its pressure holding
capacity [23]. Ertas et al., 2009 found the sharp
reduction in expansion volume of popcorn at very
high moisture level of 14% [38].
Fig. 3: Effect of Oven Temperature (C) and
Residence Time (D) on Expansion Ratio
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa
Fig. 4: Effect of Moisture Level (A) and Salt
Concentration (B) on Expansion Ratio
F. Flake Size
Flake size of puffed quinoa is within 3 to 14 mm3
(Table I). Linear model was suggested and it was
found to be significant (p<0.0001) as inferred
from model F value of 41.66. Lack of fit is not
significant for the model (Table II). The linear
equation expressing the effect of significant
process parameters on flake size of puffed quinoa
is given as,
Flake Size (mm3 )  7  3.08  A  0.916  B  1.58  C
 0.916  D (3)
F value of moisture level (A) is 41.66 and it is the
most effective process parameter affecting flake
size of puffed quinoa followed by oven
temperature (C) (Table II). Salt concentration (B)
and residence time (D) have least effect on flake
size. Similar to the effect of process variables on
expansion ratio, flake size of puffed quinoa too
increased with increase in oven temperature and
residence time (Fig. 5) and decrease in moisture
level and salt concentration (Fig. 6). Ertas et al,
2009 reported that flake size of popcorn cultivars
such as Ant Cin-98 and Con cin-98 are higher at
optimum moisture content of 12% than at 14%
[38]. Quinn et al., 2005 stated that flake size of
popcorn can be increased by increasing pressure
gradient between grain and atmosphere [29]. As
heating at high oven temperature and residence
time increases pressure gradient between grain
and surrounding, flake size of puffed quinoa also
increases [17], [35].
Fig. 5: Effect of Oven Temperature (C) and
Residence Time (D) on Flake Size
740| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
Fig. 6: Effect of Moisture Level (A) and Salt
Concentration (B) on Flake Size
G. Bulk Density
As the bulk density is the ratio of mass to volume,
the highly expanded structure should have lower
bulk density. Bulk density of puffed quinoa
obtained from different treatments varied from
0.32 to 0.58 g/ml (Table I). The suggested linear
model is significant (p<0.0001) and lack of fit is
not significant (Table II). The model reflecting the
effect of puffing conditions on bulk density of
puffed quinoa after neglecting the non significant
terminologies is expressed as,
Bulk Density (g/ml)  0.423  0.059  A  0.024  B  0.042
 C - 0.012  D (4)
It can be observed from Table II that moisture
level (A) having high F value of 61.27 exhibit
majority contribution to bulk density, whereas
residence time (D) is the least affecting
parameter. The greater the oven temperature and
residence time, lower is the bulk density (Fig. 7). It
is because of greater degree of expansion,
transforming hard raw grain into an aerated and
light weighed puffed quinoa [30]. Similar results
have been obtained by Nath & Chattopadhyay,
2007 in which bulk density of puffed potato snack
decreased with increase in puffing temperature
and puffing time [20]. On increase in moisture
level and salt concentration (Fig. 8), bulk density
value increased to greater extent which is not
desirable [39]. Prinyawiwatkul et al., 1995
described the positive correlation of moisture level
and bulk density of extrusion puffed snack [40].
Fig.7: Effect of Oven Temperature (C) and
Residence Time (D) on Bulk Density
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa
Fig. 8: Effect of Moisture Level (A) and Salt
Concentration (B) on Bulk Density
H. Overall Acceptability
On sensory evaluation, the mean value of overall
acceptability for different trials varied from 4 to
8.57 (Table I). The quadratic model represented
below having F value of 16.8 is significant
(p<0.0001) and lack of fit is not significant (Table
II). It can be used for navigating the design space.
The model was reduced by neglecting the non
significant terms and given below,
Overall Acceptability  7.05  1.03  A  0.868  C  1.07 
CD - 0.994  C 2
Overall acceptability of puffed quinoa is greatly
affected by linear term moisture level (A) (F value
= 83.69) followed by oven temperature (C) (F
value = 59.97). It is not significantly influenced
by salt concentration (B) and residence time (D)
(Table II). The negative relationship of moisture
with overall acceptability (Fig. 9) is because of
high hardness and incomplete expansion resulted
which is not liked by panelist [35]. Kantrong et
al., 2018 reported the increment in hardness and
decrement in crispiness of extrusion puffed snack
with increase in moisture level [41]. If oven
temperature increases (Fig. 10), overall
acceptability of puffed quinoa also increases but
too high temperature cause charring of grains
leading to darker unattractive color and burnt
flavor on consumption [42], [32]. Similar results
have been obtained by Joshi, 2011 in which
overall acceptability of puffed rice increased with
increase in oven preheating temperature but its
negative quadratic term infers the reduction in
acceptability if exposed to elevated temperature
zone for long time [43].
741| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
Fig. 9: Effect of Oven Temperature (C) and
Residence Time (D) on Overall Acceptability
(5)
Fig.10: Effect of Moisture Level (A) and Salt
Concentration (B) on Overall Acceptability
I. Optimization and Validation
Optimization was done with aim to obtain desired
responses such as lower bulk density and higher
puffing yield, flake size, expansion ratio and
overall acceptability. The Optimum solution
having maximum desirability of 0.962 was
selected. It was predicted to get puffing yield of
61.16%, expansion ratio of 4.20, flake size of
11.43 mm3, bulk density of 0.34 g/ml and
overall acceptability of 8.44 at optimum level of
0.2 ml moisture/10g sample, 0% salt
concentration, 253.8 ºC oven temperature and
60 s residence time. In order to validate the
model, a verification trial with three replications
using optimized solution was performed and
analyzed for its variance. The puffing yield of
61.76%, expansion ratio of 4.1, flake size of
10.73 mm3, bulk density of 0.37 g/ml and
overall acceptability of 8.53 obtained. The actual
and predicted response were in close range
without significant difference (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION
The nutritious and bioactive ready-to-eat puffed
quinoa produced by hot air oven puffing method
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa

can be used to alleviate nutrition deficiency in 11. E. Gordillo-Bastidas, D. A. Díaz-Rizzolo, E.

society. It was found in study that all dependant Roura, T. Massanés and R. Gomis, “Quinoa
variables except bulk density were positively (Chenopodium quinoa willd), from nutritional
related with oven temperature and residence value to potential health benefits: an integrative
time, while moisture level and salt concentration review,” J. Nutr. Food Sci., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 497,
had negative effect. The optimum condition was Apr. 2016.
0.2 ml moisture/10g sample, 0% salt 12. B. L. Graf et al., “Innovations in health value and
concentration, 253.8 ºC oven temperature and functional food development of Quinoa
60 s residence time. Though expansion ratio (Chenopodium quinoa Wild.),” Compr. Rev.
obtained from optimum solution was high Food Sci. Food Saf., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 431-445,
July. 2015.
enough, puffing yield was low. It has future scope
13. M. N. A. Razzaque, “Studies on physico-chemical
to increase yield further by adopting hybrid
and nutritional properties of Quinoa seed
puffing technologies like pressure puffing,
(Chenopodium quinoa wild) and its exploration
infrared assisted hot air oven puffing etc.
in cookies,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Food
Technology., Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi
REFERENCES Vidyapeeth., Parbhani, India, 2018.
1. L. E. A. James, “Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa
14. G. Mishra, D. C. Joshi and B. K. Panda, “Popping
Willd.): Composition, Chemistry, Nutritional,
and puffing of cereal grains: a review,” Journal of
and Functional properties,” Adv. Food Nutr.
grain processing and storage, vol. 1, no. 2, pp.
Res., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 1-31, Jan. 2009.
34-46, July. 2014.
2. G. Camaggio and V. Amicarelli, “The ancient
15. P. Kapoor, “Nutritional and Functional
crop of Quinoa for world food security,” in
properties of popped Little Millet (Panicum
Commodity Science in Research and Practice-
sumatrense),” Ph.D. Dissertation, Dept.
Future Trends and Challenges in Food Sector, M.
Bioresource. Eng., McGill University Libraries.,
Miśniakiewicz and S. Popek, Ed. Polish Society of
Québec, Canada, 2013.
Commodity Science. 2014, pp. 31-45.
16. L. M. Menacho, M. Dueñas, E. Peñas, J. Frias and
3. M. Jancurova, L. Minarovičová and A. Dandar,
C. Villaluenga, “Effect of dry heat puffing on
“Quinoa – a review,” Czech J. Food Sci., vol. 27,
nutritional composition, fatty acid, amino Acid
no. 2, pp. 71–79, Jan. 2009.
and phenolic profiles of pseudocereals
4. A. Bhargava, S. Shukla and D. Ohri,
grains” Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci, vol. 68, no. 4, pp.
“Chenopodium quinoa—an Indian
289-297, Dec. 2018.
perspective,” Ind. Crops Prod., vol. 23, no. 1, pp.
17. E. Virot and A. Ponomarenko, “Popcorn: critical
73-87, Jan. 2006.
temperature, jump and sound,” J. R. Soc.,
5. S. Bhathal, K. Grover and N. Gill, “Quinoa-A
Interface, vol. 12, no. 104, pp. 1-6, Mar. 2015.
treasure trove of nutrients,” Journal of Nutrition
18. G. Swapna, “Popcorn—a healthy nutritional
Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 45-49, Jun. 2015.
speciality corn value added product,”
6. A. M. Maradini-Filho, “Quinoa: Nutritional
International Journal of Food and Nutritional
aspects,” J Nutraceuticals Food Sci, vol. 2, no. 1,
Science, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1, Apr. 2017.
pp. 1-5, Apr. 2017.
19. C. Solanki, D. Saha, S. A. Kudos and R. K. Gupta,
7. A. M. M. Filho et al., “Quinoa: Nutritional,
“Effect of popping methods on popping
Functional and Antinutritional Aspects,” Crit.
characteristics of Amaranth grain,” Int. J. Chem.
Rev. Food Sci. Nutr., vol. 57, no. 8, pp. 1618-
Stud, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 2779-2782, Feb. 2018.
1630, May. 2017.
20. A. Nath and P. K. Chattopadhyay, “Quality
8. A. S. A. Abdellatif, “Chemical and technological
attributes of high temperature short time air
evaluation of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa
puffed ready-to-eat potato snacks,” Int. J. Food
willd) cultivated in Egypt,” Acta Scientific
Prop, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 113-125, Jan. 2007.
Nutritional Health, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 42-53, Jun.
21. M. V. Ashwini, P. Robinson, G. Madhu and S.
2018.
Syed, “Design and fabrication of domestic puffed
9. B. Valcárcel-Yamani and S.C. Lannes,
rice making machine,” Int. J. Eng. Res. Sci.
“Applications of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa
Technol, vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 428-432, Jan. 2016.
willd.) and Amaranth (Amaranthus Spp.) and
22. A. K. Swarnakar, M. K. Devi and S. K. Das,
their influence in the nutritional value of cereal
“Popping characteristics of paddy using
based foods,” Food and Public Health, vol. 2, no.
microwave energy and optimization of process
6, pp. 265-275, Feb. 2012.
parameters,” International Journal of Food
10. M. I. G. Martin, G. W. Moncada, S. Fischerb and
Studies, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 45-59, Apr. 2014.
O. Escuredoc, “Chemical characteristics and
23. N. D. Joshi, D. Mohapatra, D. C. Joshi and R. F.
Mineral composition of Quinoa by Near-Infrared
Sutar, “Puffing characteristics of parboiled milled
Spectroscopy,” J. Sci. Food Agric., vol. 94, no. 5,
rice in a domestic convective–microwave oven
pp. 876-881, Mar. 2014.

742| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
 S. Deepak et al / Optimization of Variables that Influence Puffing Quality of Hot Air Oven Puffed
Quinoa
and process optimization,” Food Bioprocess
Technol, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 1678-1688, Sep. 2014.
24. M. Dahiwale, P. S. Champawat and S. K. Jain,
“Performance of hot air puffing system for corn,”
Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. Appl. Sci, vol. 7, no. 10,
pp. 2540-2550, Oct. 2018.
25. J. B. Paton, “Energy utilisation in commercial
bread baking,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. Mech.
Eng., University of Leeds., Yorkshire, England,
2013.
26. Chauhan SP, Sheth NR, Jivani NP, Rathod IS,
Shah PI. "Biological Actions of Opuntia
Species." Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy 1.2
(2010), 146-151. Print. doi:10.4103/0975-
8453.75064
27. F. Baltork, M. Torbati, S. Damirchi and G. P.
Savage, “Quality properties of puffed corn snacks
incorporated with sesame seed powder,” Food
Sci. Nutr., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 85-93, Jan. 2018.
28. H. L. Rahman, M. H. M. L. Salleh and N. S. Salim,
“Effect of moisture content and microwave
power on puffed yield and expansion volume of
malaysian paddy variety Mr297,” Malays. Appl.
Biol, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 139–143, Apr. 2019.
29. P. V. Quinn, D. C. Hong and J. A. Both,
“Increasing the size of a piece of popcorn,” Phys.
A (Amsterdam, Neth.), vol. 353, pp. 637-648,
Aug. 2005.
30. L. KUMAR, N. Mishra, S. Patel, D. Khokhar, A.
Lakra, “Rice puffing characteristics of some
selected varieties,” Trends in Biosciences, vol.
10, no. 30, pp. 6263-6267, Aug. 2017.
31. C. I. Moraru and J. L. Kokini, “Nucleation and
expansion during extrusion and microwave
heating of cereal foods,” Compr. Rev. Food Sci.
Food Saf, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 147-165, Oct. 2003.
32. J. Vorwald and J. Nienhuis, “Effects of seed
moisture content, cooking time and chamber
temperature on Nuña Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris
L.) popping,” HortScience, vol. 44, no. 1, pp.
135-137, Feb. 2009.
33. A. Farahnaky, M. Alipour and M. Majzoobi,
“Popping properties of corn grains of two
different varieties at different moistures,” J.
Agric. Sci. Technol, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 771-780,
July. 2013.
34. D. Meranda and W. F. Furter, “Elevation of the
boiling point of water by salts at saturation: data
and correlation,” J. Chem. Eng. Data, vol. 22, no.
3, pp. 315-317, July. 1977.
35. G. Mishra, D. C. Joshi and D. Mohapatra,
“Optimization of pretreatments and process
parameters for Sorghum popping in microwave
oven using Response Surface Methodology,” J.
Food Sci. Technol., vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 7839-
7849, Dec. 2015.
36. S. A. Mir, S. J. D. Bosco, M. A. Shah, M. M. Mira
and K. V. Sunooj, “Process optimization and
characterization of popped brown rice,” Int. J.
743| International Journal of Pharmaceutical Research | Apr - Jun 2020 | Vol 12 | Issue 3
Food Prop, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 2102-2112, Sep.
2016.
37. R. Chinnaswamy and K. R. Bhattacharya, “Studies
on expanded rice: optimal processing condition,”
J. Food Sci, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 1604–1608, Nov.
1983.
38. N. Ertas, S. Soylu and N. Bilgiçli, “Effects of
kernel properties and popping methods on
popcorn quality of different corn cultivars,” J.
Food Process Eng, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 478–496,
Aug. 2009.
39. K. Nalladurai, P. Gayathri and K. Alagusundaram,
“Effect of variety and moisture content on the
engineering properties of paddy and rice,” AMA,
Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa and
Latin America, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 47-52. Mar.
2003.
40. W. Prinyawiwatkul, L. R. Beuchat, R. D. Phillips
and A. V. Resurreccion, “Modelling the effects
of peanut flour, feed moisture content, and
extrusion temperature on physical properties of
an extruded snack product,” Int. J. Food Sci.
Technol., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 37-44. Feb. 1995.
41. H. Kantrong, C. Charunuch, N. Limsangouan and
W. Pengpinit, “Influence of process parameters
on physical properties and specific mechanical
energy of healthy mushroom-rice snacks and
optimization of extrusion process parameters
using Response Surface Methodology,” J. Food
Sci. Technol., vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 3462-3472. Jun.
2018
42. Gupta, G., Sharma, P., Kumar, P., Sharma, R. Is
cardiovascular risk associated with subclinical
hypothyroidism: Role of C reactive protein and
interleukin-6 (2018) Journal of Cardiovascular
Disease Research, 9 (1), pp. 20-23. DOI:
10.5530/jcdr.2018.1.5
43. J. Sharma, “The structure and properties of
puffed rice cakes,” Ph.D. dissertation, RMIT
University., Melbourne, Australia, 2012.
44. N. D. Joshi, “Technology development for
production of ready-to-eat puffed rice using
microwave energy,” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept.
Food. Process Tech. Bioenergy., Anand
Agricultural University, Anand, India, 2011.