Cited by 3Seed and Plant BiochemistryFood composition and propertiesFood and Agricultural Sciences

Optimization of Muffins Nutrient Profile Using Wheat, Beans and Quinoa Flours: A Preliminary Strategy for Enhancing Protein Quality, Dietary Fibre and Anti-Oxidative Potentials

Open access

Abstract

Commercial muffins, often rich in saturated fat and simple carbohydrates while lacking sufficient dietary fibre and protein, do not adequately meet nutritional demands, especially in regions facing malnutrition. The development of muffins was optimised to enhance nutritional quality through protein complementation with underutilised regional ingredients: white beans and quinoa. Protein quality was assessed using the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) method with FAO reference standards. White bean, quinoa, and wheat flours had DIAAS values of 77, 50, and 34%, respectively. Muffins prepared with an optimal 25/50/25 blend of bean, wheat, and quinoa flours achieved a DIAAS of 72%. Key parameters, including protein, fat, dietary fibre, and phenolic content, were analysed using AOAC methods, alongside physical attributes such as texture, colour, and height. Sensory analysis and acceptance were evaluated using a 9-point hedonic scale. Results demonstrated that muffins with partial wheat flour replacement had significantly higher protein content (+ 15% and + 25%), dietary fibre (+ 30% and + 40%), and total phenolic content (+ 300% for both) compared to the control and commercial muffins, respectively (p < 0.05). Although the enhanced muffins exhibited reduced height and increased hardness, they were well accepted, scoring 6.4 on the hedonic scale with an acceptability index of 71%. These findings suggest that incorporating beans and quinoa into muffin formulations is a promising strategy for improving nutritional profiles while maintaining consumer appeal, which could help address nutrient deficiencies and chronic disease risks in vulnerable populations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11130-025-01359-y

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bassett, M. N., Acuña, M. E., Corral, L., Moreno, E. D. C., Fernández, N. N., Rossi, A. M., Marigliano, A. C. G., & Tereschuk, M. L.
Affiliations
National University of Tucumán (AR)
Corresponding author
Bassett, María Natalia
Venue
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
Published
2025-05-19
Volume
80
Issue
3
Pages
124-124
ISSN
  • 0033-5134 (ISSN-L)
  • 0921-9668
  • 1573-9104
OpenAlex
W4410503862
Cited by
3
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Plant Foods for Human Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Conicet (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Seed and Plant Biochemistry
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
Keywords
muffins, quinoa flour, wheat flour, protein quality, dietary fiber, total phenolic content, DIAAS, sensory acceptability, underutilized legumes, functional bakery products, malnutrition
MeSH terms
Antioxidants, Bread, Dietary Fiber, Dietary Proteins, Flour, Humans, Nutritive Value, Phenols, Triticum, Chenopodium quinoa, Phaseolus

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review