IOSR-JESTFT   Volume-7 ~ Issue-3 ~ Nov–Dec 2013

Abstract: Millets have been neglected despite their nutritive value and therapeutic use. Barnyard millet is one of the underutilized nutritious minor millet. In developing countries like India with increasing urbanization, the demand for processed food is increasing popularly. Among them, bakery products particularly cookies command wide popularity in both urban and rural mass. Hence, an attempt was made to develop value added barnyard millet cookies with acceptable sensory attributes. Three types of cookies namely plain, pulse and vegetable cookies were developed. Plain cookies were developed by incorporating sago flour to barnyard millet flour at different levels. Further trials were conducted for value addition of plain cookies with pulses (soybean flour and green gram dhal flour) and dehydrated carrot gratings to barnyard millet flour at different levels to develop pulse and vegetable cookies respectively. Consumer acceptability studies were conducted for identifying the best accepted cookies. The nutritional and storage quality evaluation of the best accepted cookies were estimated by standard procedures. The findings indicated that plain cookies prepared with 100 per cent barnyard millet flour; pulse cookies with 10 per cent incorporation of soy bean flour and green gram dhal flour and vegetable cookies with 10 per cent incorporation of dehydrated carrot gratings were best accepted. Among various types of cookies, pulse cookies were most accepted by consumers (85 %). There was significant increase in the macro and micronutrient composition of cookies after incorporation of pulses and carrot gratings. The developed cookies had a shelf life of 45-60 days.

Key Words: Barnyard millet, Cookies, Consumer acceptability, Shelf life.

[1]. A.O.A.C. (1990). Official Methods of Analysis, 14th ed. Association of official analytical chemists, Washington, DC.
[2]. A.O.A.C. (2005). Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemists 18th edition. Arlington, U.S.A .
[3]. Akubor, P.I., Offonry, S.U. and Isolokwu, P.C. (2006). Effect of proportion of soy milk and pH on the quality attributes of soy warankasi - a Nigerian soft cheese. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 43:101-103.
[4]. Amerine, M.A., Pongborn, R.M. and Roessler, E.D. (1965). Principles of sensory evaluation of food. Academic Press., New York.
[5]. Anju., T. and Sarita, S. (2010). Suitability of Foxtail millet (Setaria italica) and Barnyard millet (Echinochloa frumentacea)for development of low glycaemic index biscuits. Mal. J. Nutr., 16(3):361-368.
[6]. Anon., (1983). Approved methods of American Association of cereal Chemists, 8th Ed. AACC, The Association: St. Paul, MN.

Abstract: Investigations revealed that tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) induces hepatic damage. Chitosan exhibits antioxidant properties and supplementations with antioxidants can influence hepatotoxicity. We evaluate effect of dietary low molecular weight chitosan (106-110 kilodaltons) in 3 multiplied doses (1.2, 2.4 and 3.6 g/ kg diet) against hepato toxic effects caused by a single oral dose (5 μg TCDD/ kg body weight) for 6 weeks in adult male albino rats. TCDD decreased body weight gain, food intake, feeding efficiency ratio, serum albumin and albumin / globulin ratio. While it caused an increase in liver relative weight, serum total protein, globulin, aspartate and alanine amino transferases and alkaline phosphatase. Also, TCDD caused basophilic hyper chromatic nuclei, hepatic degeneration and fibrosis. Chitosan alone showed a significant positive effect in measured items except feed intake, body weight gain and feed efficiency ratio. Also it alleviated most of biochemical and histological hepatotoxic effects of dioxin. Chitosan is safe as a dietary supplement in rat's diet and can mitigate the hepatotoxic effects of TCDD by controlling the antioxidant status and free radicals production.

Keywords: antioxidants, chitosan, hepatotoxicity, Sprague Dawley rats, TCDD.

[1] A. Abelsohn , L. Gibson, D. Sanborn and E. Weir . Identifying and managing adverse environmental health effects of Persistent organic pollutants. Can Med Assoc J. 166, 2002, 1549-54.

[2] T. Ishida, M. Ishizaki, S. Tsutsumi, Y. Ishii and H. Yamada. Piperine, a paper ingredient improves the hepatic increase in free fatty acids caused by 2, 3, 7, 8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin.J Health Sci. 54, 2008. 551- 58.

[3] S. Chang S. Recent developments in microbial biotransformation and biodegradation of dioxins. J Mol Microbiol Biotechnol. 15, 2008. 152- 71.

[4] O. Kjeller and C. Rappe. . Time trends in levels, patterns, and profiles for polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, dibenzofurans, and biphenyls in a sediment core from the Baltic Proper. Environ Sci Technol. 29, 1995. 346- 55.

[5] H. Sean and A. Lesa. Dioxin risks in perspective: past, present, and future. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 37, 2003. 202- 217.

[6] S. Kim, E. Henery, D. Kim, Y. Kim, K. Shin, M. Han, T. Lee, J. Kang, T. Gasiewicz,S. Ryu and P. Suh . . Novel compound 2-methyl-2H-pyrazole-3-carboxylic acid (2-methyl-4-o-tolylazo-phenyl)-amide (CH-223191) prevents 2, 3, 7, 8-TCDD-induced toxicity by antagonizing the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Mol Pharmacol . 69, 2006. 1871-87.

[7] D. Boverhof, L. Burgoon, T. Colleen, B. Sharratt, B. Chittim, J. Harkema , D. Mendrick and T. Zacharewski T. Comparative toxicogenomic analysis of the hepatotoxic effects of TCDD in Sprague Dawley rats and C57bl/6 mice. Toxicol Sci. 94, 2006, 398- 416.

[8] T. Ikuta, Y. Kobayash and K. Kawajiri . Phosphorylation of nuclear localization signal inhibits the ligand-dependent nuclear import of aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 317, 2004. 545-50.
[9] N. Kohda S. , Inoue T. Noda and T. Saito. Effects of a chitosan intake on the fecal excretion of dioxins and fat in rats. Biosci Biotech Biochemist. 76, 2012. 1544- 48.

[10] X. Wenshui, L. Ping, Z. Jiali and C. Jie. Biological activities of chitosan and chitooligosaccharides. Food Hydrocolloids. 25, 2011. 170- 79.

Abstract: The objective of this study was to identify the organic compounds removed from the leachates when treated with coagulation-flocculation and Fenton-Adsorption by gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in order to identify toxic compounds that could be harmful for the environment or human health. Physico-chemical characterization of the raw leachates (RL) was carried out before and after the aforementioned combined treatment process. The effluent from each stage of this process was characterized: pH, Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD5), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), turbidity and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). The organic compounds were determined by GC-MS. The removal of COD and BOD5 reached over 91% in compliance with the Tunisian Standards (NT 106.002-1989), which establishes the maximum permissible limits for contaminants present in wastewater discharges to urbanized streams. The chromatographic analysis from the Adsorption effluent proved that this treatment removed more than 99% of the organic compounds present in the initial sample. The phytotoxicity test showed that combined treatment process allowed a significant toxicity removed (92.2%). The mono (2-ethylhexyl) ester 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid persisted, although it is not considered as toxic compound by the NT 106.002-1989) Therefore, the treated effluent can be safely disposed of into the urbanized streams.

Keywords: Adsorption; Coagulation-Flocculation; Fenton; Landfill leachates; Organic compounds; phytoxicity

[1] ANPE (2001). National Agency of Protection of the Environment, supervision of the national programme of solid wastes gestion (PRONAGDES).

[2] A.L. Reitzel and A. ledin, Determination of phenols in landfill leachates contaminated groundwaters by solid phase extraction, Journal of Chromatography A, 972, 2002, 175-182.

[3] S. Marttinen, R. Kettunen and J Rintalla, Occurrence and removal of organic pollutants in sewages and landfill leachates, Sci Total Environ, 301, 2003, 1-12.

[4] H. Zhang, X. Wu and X. Li, Oxidation and coagulation removal of COD from landfill leachate by fered- Fenton process, Chemical Engeneering Journal, 2012, 188-194.

[5] R. Mejberi, G. Matejka, P. Lafrance and M Mazet, Fractionation and characterization of the organic matter in sanitary landfill leachates. Revue des sciences de l'eau, 1995, 217-236.

[6] S. Renou, S. Poulain, J.G. Givaudan and P. Moulin, Treatment process adapted to stabilized leachates: lime precipitation-prefiltration-reverse osmosis, J Hazard Mater, 313, 2008, 9-22.

[7] S. Wang, X. Wu, Y. Wang, Q. Li and M Tao, Removal of organic matter and ammonia nitrogen from landfill leachate by ultrasound, Ultrason. Sonochemical, 15, 2008 933-937.

[8] K, Okawa, K. Suzuki, T. Takeshita and K. Nakanoa, Degradation of chemical substances using wet peroxide oxidation under mild conditions, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 127, 2005, 68- 72.

[9] T. A. Kurniawan, W.H. Lo and G.Y. Chan , Physico-chemical treatments for removal of recalcitrant contaminants from landfill leachate, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 129, 2006, 80-100. [10] S. Cortez, P. Teixeira, R. Oliveira and M. Mota, Evaluation of Fenton and ozone-based advanced oxidation processes as mature landfill leachate pre-treatments, Journal of Environmental Management, 92, 2011, 749-755.

Abstract: The study was conducted to evaluate the socio-economic impact of desertification on rural livelihood in Toungo, Southeastern fringe of Adamawa State, Nigeria, situated in the Southern Guinea Savanna zone. A total of three hundred (300) respondents (farmers) interviewed were selected using purposive and random sampling techniques. The results of socio-economic characteristics of the respondents (farmers) are presented in Table 1. On the causes of desertification, the respondents (56.7%) indicated that the main causes of desertification were human activities, 30% were of the opinion that this was cause by changes in the climate, while 13.3% of the respondents are ignorant of what causes desertification. When asked about the effect of desertification on their livelihoods, 43.3% of the respondents indicated that there was reductions in the amount of rainfall receive each year, 40% pointed out that there was increased in temperature, and 16.7% maintained that they noticed drying of water bodies. There was a diverse response concerning the impact of desertification on farmer's agricultural activities. 43.3% of the respondents pointed out that they recorded poor harvest as the result of desertification in the previous years, 36.7% maintained that they notice an increase in wind erosion, 13.3% shows that the situation was tending towards a decrease in the availability of pasture for livestock, while 6.7% revealed that there was a drastic reduction in soil fertility as observed on their farmlands. The results of this study shows that majority of the farmers in the study area are aware about the causes, effects and impact of desertification as it's seriously affects their agricultural productions in diverse ways. At the same time, 56.7% of the respondents indicated that Aforestation is one of the best strategies for combating desertification, 43.3% believe that the practice of proper irrigation will be a good strategy, while 10% maintained that establishment and maintenance of shelter belts will reduce the impact of desertification in the study area. An important issue is how to support the rural poor to use the soils, the biota and other natural resources without destroying those resources, and without affecting the climate adversely.

Keywords: Livelihood, Desertification, Impact, Farmers, Forest, Socio-Economics

[1]. Adams, M.W and Mortimore, M. (1997). Agricultural Intensification and Flixibility in the Sahel. The Geographical Journal. Vol. 163, No. 2 pp. 150-160
[2]. Adekunle, V. A. (2009). Contributions of agroforestry practice in Ondo State, Nigeria, to environmental sustainability and sustainable agricultural production. Afrika Focus -Volume 22, Nr. 2, 2009 -pp. 27-40
[3]. Ashley, c. and Carney, D. (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods: Lessons from early Experience London; Department for International Development.
[4]. Bosorrup, E. (1965). The conditions of Agricultural Growth; The Economics of Agrarian Change under population pressure. London; George Allen and Unwan Ltd. Pergamon Press
[5]. Carney, D. (Ed) (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: What contribution we make? London: Department for International Development.
[6]. Chambers, R. and Conway, G.R (1992). Sustainable Rural Livelihood for the 21st Century, Discussion paper 296.Brighton, UK: Institute of Development.
[7]. DFID (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods and Poverty Elimination: Background Briefing Available of www ids. Ac. Uk/Livelihoods. Htmlretrieved on 31st March, 2009.
[8]. Ellis, F. (1998). Household Strategies and Rural Livelihood Desertification. Journal of Development Studies 351 Pp 1-38.
[9]. Hermann, S.M. and Hutchinson, C.F (2005). The Changing Contexts of the Desertification Debate. Journal of Arid Environments. 63. Pp 538 -555.
[10]. Kawu, U. (1987). "Drought and Desertification in the Sahel and Sudan- Sahel" in Sagua, V. O et al (Edited) Ecological Disasters in Nigeria: Drought and Desertification. Lagos: Federal ministry of Science and Technology pp. 105 - 113.