LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

LWT - Food Science and Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lwt

Optimization of antioxidant activity, textural and sensory characteristics of T

gluten-free cookies made from whole indian quinoa flour
Khan Nadiya Jan, P.S. Panesar, Sukhcharn Singh∗
Department of Food Engineering and Technology, Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering & Technology, (SLIET), Longowal, Punjab, India

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The present study deals with optimization of the process parameters for formulation of gluten-free cookies from
Quinoa quinoa flour. The levels of major ingredients and process conditions were varied to determine their effect on
Cookies responses (color, spread factor, hardness, antioxidant activity and overall acceptability) defining consumer ac-
Optimization ceptance of cookies. Response surface methodology was used to optimize levels of ingredients and process
Antioxidant activity
conditions and the selected variables had a dominant effect on responses. Increase in fat and sugar content
Overall acceptability
increased spread factor and decreased the hardness of cookies, while an increase in baking temperature and time
decreased spread factor and increased hardness. The optimized values obtained for independent variables i.e. fat
content, sugar content, baking temperature and baking time were 41.83%, 33.95%, 181 °C and 18 min, re-
spectively. Experimentally determined values for responses were color 53.05 spread factor 7.16, hardness 47.05,
antioxidant activity 20.67 (% DPPH inhibition) and overall acceptability 7.61. Results obtained from this study
validate the production of functional and acceptable gluten-free cookies made from quinoa.

1. Introduction 2006). There is dearth in availability of gluten-free products in the

Quinoa, a pseudocereal is one of the oldest crops of Andean region
with almost 7000 years of cultivation. Recently, Europe Asia and Africa
have also participated in the cultivation of quinoa and consider it as a
‘super food’ because of its high nutritional profile. Quinoa consists of
higher protein content with balanced amino acid composition in com-
parison to cereals. The protein, carbohydrate, fat and fiber content of
quinoa ranges from 11.7 to 16.4%, 55.3–75.82%, 4.69–12.4% and
1.92–3.38%, respectively. The storage proteins of quinoa include al-
bumin and globulin, with little or no prolamine which is the major
storage protein in many cereals. It is also a rich source of minerals,
vitamins and antioxidants (Arneja, Tanwar, & Chauhan, 2015). Quinoa
has the potential of being the bioactive and functional ingredient in
food products due to its high natural antioxidants and dietary fiber. The
seed may be conical or ellipsoidal with saponins concentrated in peri-
carp (Bhargava, Shukla, & Ohri, 2006). The saponins make the seed
unpalatable and hence need to be removed before consumption. This
can be done by washing and/or abrasive dehulling (Risi & Galwey,
1984). In addition to this, quinoa is naturally gluten-free (low prola-
mine and glutamine) and can be recommended for people with celiac
disease. Products labelled as “gluten-free” must meet standards of less
than 20 mg gluten/Kg (i.e. 20 ppm) of final product according to the
revised standards of Codex Alimentarius commission (Gibert et al.,
market. Further, already available products are of low quality and poor
nutritional value (Alvarez-Jubete, Arendt, & Gallagher, 2009). Quinoa
in India is at nascent stage of its growth and FAO data for its cultivation
is also not available (Jan, Panesar, Rana, & Singh, 2017a; Jan, Panesar,
& Singh, 2017 b). This limited production of quinoa seeds in India has
created a shortage, resulting in the increased price of these seeds.
Cookies represent the largest category of snacks in bakery industry
and can serve as effective vehicle of nutrient supply to consumer. They
refer to the baked product containing three major ingredients: flour, fat
and sugar. Cookies shall have low water content (1–5%) and can also
contain minor ingredients like leavening agents, salt, emulsifiers and
yeast (Pareyt & Delcour, 2008). Development of cookies can be a better
choice than any other product because of the relatively longer shelf life,
wide consumption, ready to eat form and better palatability (Tsen,
Peters, Schaffer, & Hoover, 1973). Various studies (Harra, Lemm,
Smith, & Gee, 2011; Wang & Zhu, 2016; Wang, Opassathavorn, & Zhu,
2015) have evaluated the potential of quinoa for development of
cookies. However, in these cases quinoa was used in combination with
wheat flour or some other flour which decreases the nutritional value of
quinoa and also in some cases invalidates the concept of the prepared
cookies being gluten-free. Available gluten-free cookies are of low
quality with poor flavour and mouthfeel (Gallagher, Gormley, &
Arendt, 2004; Pestorić et al., 2017). Also simultaneous optimization of

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: Sukhcharns@yahoo.com (S. Singh).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2018.04.013
Received 21 December 2017; Received in revised form 4 April 2018; Accepted 6 April 2018
Available online 07 April 2018
0023-6438/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

major ingredients and baking parameters of cookies has not been ex- sample consisted of methanol and DPPH solution.
plored. The combination of independent variables selected for this
study has not been studied earlier as available studies show the effect of DPPH radical scavenging activity(%)
baking temperature and baking time only (Farris & Piergiovanni, 2008, Abs of extract at t = 30 min ⎤
= ⎧1 − ⎡ × 100 ⎫
2009). Considering the above, the objective of present study was to ⎨
⎩ ⎣ Abs of control at t = 0 min ⎦ ⎬
⎭
optimize the process parameters for preparation of cookies from quinoa
flour and to determine the effect of these parameters on color, spread
factor, hardness, antioxidant activity and overall acceptance of cookies. 2.7. Sensory analysis

2. Materials and methods Sensory analysis of freshly prepared cookies was carried out by
twenty seven semi-trained panellists who were familiar with the quality
2.1. Raw materials aspects of baked products. The panellists were drawn within University
community. The attributes used to evaluate cookie quality were color &
Quinoa germplasm was obtained from National Bureau of Plant appearance, mouth feel, texture, taste & overall acceptability. The pa-
Genetic Resources (NBPGR) Shimla and was then cultivated at the ex- nelists scored their liking of characteristics using nine-point hedonic
perimental farm of Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering & scale (9-like extremely to 1-dislike extremely).
Technology. Harvesting was done manually and the seeds thus obtained
were cleaned of all foreign materials, soaked and washed by rubbing till 2.8. Experimental design
there was no foam formation. The seeds were then dried and ground to
flour using cyclotec mill. The flour was then passed through 60 BSS For the optimization of quality of pseudocereal cookies, experiments
sieve to get uniform particle size. The flour was then packed and stored were conducted according to central composite rotatable design con-
under refrigerated conditions till further use. taining four independent variables which dictated 30 experimental
runs. The experiments at central point were six in order to calculate the
2.2. Cookie preparation repeatability of the method. Independent variables used to determine
optimum baking conditions were fat content, sugar content, baking
The process adopted for preparation of cookies included slight temperature and baking time. The low and high levels of parameters
modification in AACC (2000) standard method (10–50 D). The in- were 35–45 g for fat, 25–35 g for sugar, 170–190 °C for baking tem-
gredients used for modified method included; flour 100 g, sodium bi- perature and 15–20 min for baking time. The level of different variables
carbonate 1.2 g, salt 1.0 g, skim milk powder 5 g and water 16 ml. Sugar is shown in Table 1. Factors such as color, spread factor, texture, an-
and shortening were mixed initially to cream followed by addition of tioxidant activity and overall acceptance were selected as quality at-
flour and other minor ingredients to form dough. The dough was then tributes of cookies.
kneaded and sheeted manually on a dough sheeter to a uniform
thickness of 0.5 cm and cut into round shapes of 5 cm in diameter. 2.9. Data analysis
Baking was carried out at different time-temperature combinations
designed by response surface methodology. The cookies were then al- Statistical analysis was conducted using a Design-Expert version 11
lowed to cool at room temperature and subjected to further analysis. (Stat-Ease Inc., Minneapolis, USA). All the responses were analysed as a
function of independent variables using a second order polynomial
2.3. Color of cookies equation as follows:
n n n−1 n
Hunter colorimeter (Model i5 Green Macbeth, USA) was used for Yk = βk 0 + ∑ βki Xi + ∑ βkii Xi2 + ∑ ∑ βkij Xi Xj
determination of color value of cookies. The color property was re- i=1 i=1 i=1 j=i+1 (1)
corded in terms of L-value and varies from 0 to 100 (L = lightness to
Where Yk is the response variable, Xi and Xj represent the coded in-
darkness).
dependent variables. βko is the value of the fitted response at the centre
point of the design, βki, βkii, βkj represent the linear, quadratic and cross-
2.4. Spread factor of cookies
product regression coefficients, respectively of the model. Analysis of
variance (ANOVA) was used to observe the effect of variables on re-
For determination of spread factor diameter (D) and thickness of
sponses.
cookies were measured with the help of vernier calliper at two places
and the average was calculated. Spread factor was then calculated by
dividing the diameter of cookies with their height (Sharma, Saxena, & 3. Results and discussion
Riar, 2016).
The experimental variables in actual form along with values of re-
2.5. Hardness sponses are given in Table 2. ANOVA data for response variables along
with correlation coefficient is shown in Table 3. Lack-of-fit, model
Texture analyzer (TA-XT2, Stable micro systems, Surrey, UK) at-
Table 1
tached with a 3-point bending rig was used for determining the hard-
Level of different variables in coded form for cookies preparation.
ness of cookies. The distance between lower beams was set at 4 mm.
The beam at top was brought down at a pre-test, test and post-test speed Independent Units Symbols Levels
of 1.5, 2 and 10 mm/s. The downward movement was continued till the variables
−α −1 0 1 α
breakage of cookie. First peak force was recorded as hardness and all
measurements were repeated five times. Fat g 100g −1
X1 30 35 40 45 50
Flour
2.6. Antioxidant activity (% DPPH inhibition) Sugar g 100g−1 X2 20 25 30 35 40
Flour
Baking Temperature °C X3 160 170 180 190 200
Antioxidant activity (AOA) was measured as percent discoloration Baking Time Min X4 12.5 15 17.5 20 22.5
by the method of Brand-Williams, Cuvelier, and Berset (1995). Control

574
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Table 2 study were > 0.70 representing a good fit between the model and ex-
The central composite rotatable design with process variables and experimental perimental data. The difference between the experimental and pre-
results of responses. dicted values was less indicating the suitability of the model used.
Runs Variables Responses
3.1. Effect of variables on responses
X1 X2 X3 X4 Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5

1 35 25 170 15 56.90 6.66 39.33 18.83 6.30 3.1.1. Color

2 45 25 170 15 56.73 6.94 35.45 18.90 6.46 Surface color has been considered as an important indicator of the
3 35 35 170 15 54.48 6.82 39.36 19.14 6.57
degree of baking of cookies and contributes to consumer preference
4 45 35 170 15 54.37 7.19 35.54 19.16 6.91
5 35 25 190 15 52.97 6.47 48.00 20.23 6.40
hence needs to be controlled strictly. The lightness value of the cookies
6 45 25 190 15 52.90 6.69 43.15 20.26 6.53 ranged from 46.08 to 56.90 (Table 2). The p value (Table 3) indicates
7 35 35 190 15 49.99 6.51 48.10 20.42 6.65 that linear (except fat) and quadratic of all the variables had a sig-
8 45 35 190 15 49.81 6.84 43.20 20.45 6.96 nificant effect. In contrast among interactions only “sugar and time”
9 35 25 170 20 53.48 6.60 41.98 19.25 6.45
and “temperature and time” showed a significant effect on color of
10 45 25 170 20 53.36 6.89 36.60 19.27 6.62
11 35 35 170 20 51.57 6.68 42.00 19.98 6.75 cookies.
12 45 35 170 20 51.48 7.07 36.63 20.00 7.04 The magnitude of regression coefficients (Table 3) showed that the
13 35 25 190 20 50.58 6.38 56.94 20.50 6.10 linear term of temperature had a maximum negative effect
14 45 25 190 20 50.49 6.64 49.00 20.52 6.15 (B = −1.81) followed by time (B = −1.15) and sugar content
15 35 35 190 20 48.92 6.44 56.87 20.78 6.20
16 45 35 190 20 48.71 6.74 49.05 20.81 6.44
(B = −1.04). Fig. 1(a and b) shows the decrease in color value with
17 30 30 180 17.5 53.29 6.63 47.61 19.80 6.68 increase in baking temperature, time and sugar content. It can be ob-
18 50 30 180 17.5 52.87 7.22 34.05 19.85 7.33 served that the major effect was of baking temperature as with rise in
19 40 20 180 17.5 53.90 6.99 44.80 19.75 6.76 temperature lightness decreases remarkably. The decrease in lightness
20 40 40 180 17.5 50.40 7.26 46.14 20.48 7.47
value with increase in temperature, time and sugar content may be due
21 40 30 160 17.5 53.75 6.52 34.90 18.12 5.88
22 40 30 200 17.5 46.08 5.89 58.09 20.97 5.54 to caramelization of sugar and Maillard browning reactions causing
23 40 30 180 12.5 55.62 6.78 36.22 19.97 6.57 malanoidin formation during heating and thus, resulting in the dar-
24 40 30 180 22.5 51.56 6.52 47.15 20.91 6.48 kening of product (Manzocco, Calligaris, Mastrocola, Nicoli, & Lerici,
25 40 30 180 17.5 54.10 7.22 46.01 20.25 7.73 2000). The results are in conformity with the Farris and Piergiovanni
26 40 30 180 17.5 54.26 7.20 46.11 20.37 7.84
27 40 30 180 17.5 54.87 7.21 46.03 20.20 7.70
(2008) who reported the decrease in color (L-value) of cookies with
28 40 30 180 17.5 54.47 7.19 47.08 20.36 7.67 increase in temperature and sugar content. Gan et al. (2007) also re-
29 40 30 180 17.5 54.15 7.24 46.95 20.40 7.82 ported the similar decreasing trend of color value for cake.
30 40 30 180 17.5 54.71 7.23 47.00 20.34 7.79 The model F-value of 126 implies that the model is significant. The
pred R-Squared of 0.963 is in reasonable agreement with the Adj R-
Where Y1 = color (L-value); Y2 = spread factor; Y3 = hardness (N);
Squared of 0.983.
Y4 = antioxidant activity (% DPPH inhibition); Y5 = overall acceptability.

analysis and R2 were used to determine the adequacy of models. The
lack-of-fit measures the ability of a model to represent the data in ex-
perimental domain and cannot be accounted for random error. Model is
considered as adequate in describing the responses if lack-of-fit is in-
significant. The aptness of the model to signify real relationship among
selected parameters is given by R2. The R2 values of models for this
3.1.2. Spread factor
Spread factor has been considered as an important quality para-
meter for cookies. Higher spread factor means the higher product yield.
The spread factor of cookies varied from 5.89 to 7.26. The effect of
process variables on the spread factor of cookies is shown in Table 2.
The magnitude of p value indicates that linear and quadratic effect
of all variables was significant. However, among interactions “fat and

Table 3
Estimated regression coefficients of the fitted second order polynomial and their significance.
Parameters DF Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5

Model 14 53.42 7.22 46.53 20.32 7.76

X1 1 −0.078 0.151*** −2.96*** 0.014 0.125***
X2 1 −1.04*** 0.065*** 0.124 0.185*** 0.163***
X3 1 −1.81*** −0.142*** 5.57*** 0.630*** −0.098***
X4 1 −1.15*** −0.050*** 2.45*** 0.233*** 0.050**
X12 1 −0.318** −0.073*** −1.34*** −0.136*** −0.198***
X22 1 −0.554** −0.023** −0.223*** −0.064** −0.170***
X32 1 −1.10*** −0.253*** 1.34 −0.206*** −0.521***
X42 1 −0.198** −0.142*** −1.17*** 0.018 −0.317***
X1 X2 1 −0.008 0.021** 0.009 −0.003 0.042*
X1 X3 1 −0.004 −0.014* −0.441* −0.001 −0.014
X1 X4 1 0.001 0.003 −0.566* −0.004 −0.012
X2 X3 1 −0.059 −0.020* −0.003 −0.068* −0.023
X2 X4 1 0.226* −0.011 −0.015 −0.068* −0.018
X3 X4 1 0.351** 0.004 1.37*** −0.076*** −0.142***
R2 0.991 0.997 0.994 0.987 0.993
Lack of fit 10 NS NS NS NS NS

*Significant at p ≤ 0.05.
**Significant at p ≤ 0.01.
***Significant at p ≤ 0.001.
NS- Not-significant; DF- Degree of freedom.
Where Y1 = color (L-value); Y2 = spread factor; Y3 = hardness (N); Y4 = antioxidant activity (% DPPH inhibition); Y5 = overall acceptability.

575
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Fig. 1. Response plots showing the effect of a) Time, sugar and their mutual effect on color (L-value). Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and time
17.50 min. b) Temperature, time and their mutual effect on color (L-value). Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and sugar 30 g/100 g Flour. (For
interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

sugar”, “fat and temperature” and “sugar and temperature” showed a
significant effect on spread factor of cookies. The analysis of regression
coefficients (Table 3) showed that the linear term of temperature and
time had a negative effect with temperature showing higher effect
(B = −0.14) than time (B = −0.050). While as fat and sugar had a
positive effect on spread factor with magnitude being higher for fat
content (B = +0.15) followed by sugar content (B = +0.065). The
response plots for effect of temperature, fat content and time on spread
factor are shown in Fig. 2. Increase in sugar content increased the
spread factor of cookies. Similar increased mobility of dough and higher
spread of cookies by increase in sugar content was observed by
Doescher, Hoseney, Milliken, and Rubenthaler (1987). Kulthe, Pawar,
Kotecha, Chavan, and Bansode (2014) also observed that the spread
factor is decreased by decrease in sugar content. Spread factor increased

576
K.N. Jan et al.
Fig. 2. Response plots showing the effect of a) Temperature, fat and their mutual effect on spread factor. Other variables are constant: sugar 30 g/100 g Flour and
time 17.50 min. b) Temperature, time and their mutual effect on spread factor. Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and sugar 30 g/100 g Flour.
gradually with increase in fat content. Singh, Gupta, Singh Sodhi, and
Singh (2002) also observed the increase in spread factor by increase in
sugar level and attributed it to the increase in fluidity of dough allowing
two dimensional extensible film formation rather than three-dimen-
sional elastic network formation. The spread factor increased from 6.66
to 7.26 with increase in temperature from 170 to 180 °C. However,
further increase in temperature decreased the spread factor to 5.89.
Cookie spread rate is controlled by the viscosity of dough. Sugar con-
tributes to dough viscosity and is related to the dough expansion during
baking (Abboud & Hoseney, 1984). During low temperature and time
combinations sugar gets dissolved in available water content of the
dough which lowers the initial viscosity of dough and the cookie
spreads at a faster rate and vice-versa occurs during high temperature
and time combinations due to lower availability of water content. An-
other reason for decrease in spread factor of cookies at higher tem-
perature may be that the cookies set up before getting a chance to
577
LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582
spread.
The model F-value of 378 implies that the model is significant. The
predicted R-Squared of 0.986 is in reasonable agreement with the
Adjusted R-Squared of 0.994.
3.1.3. Hardness
Hardness has been considered as an important characteristic of
cookie quality as it affects consumer acceptance and repeat sales
(Gaines, Kassuba, Finney, & Donelson, 1992). Hardness refers to the
ease with which the product will break. Hardness of the cookies varied
from 34.05 N to 58.09 N. Table 2 depicts the effect of process variables
on the hardness of cookies.
The magnitude of p value indicates that linear as well as quadratic
terms of all variables had a significant effect on hardness of cookies
(Table 3). Among interactions “fat and temperature”, fat and time and
“time and temperature” showed significant effect on hardness of
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Fig. 3. Response plots showing the effect of a) Temperature, fat and their mutual effect on hardness. Other variables are constant: sugar, 30 g/100 g Flour and time
17.50 min. b) Temperature, time and their mutual effect on hardness. Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and sugar 30 g/100 g Flour.

cookies. The regression coefficients revealed that linear term of fat
showed negative effect on the hardness of cookies (B = −2.96). The
response plots for effect of temperature, fat and time on hardness of
cookies are shown in Fig. 3 (a and b). The decrease in hardness with
increase in fat content may be due to the tenderizing effect exerted by
fat. The decreased hardness may also be due to the encapsulation of
flour particles by fat, thereby isolating the flour particles from each
other and making them more easily detachable. The linear terms of
temperature, sugar and time showed positive effect (Table 3) on the
hardness of cookies with the higher magnitude observed for tempera-
ture (B = +5.57) than time (B = +2.45). Increased hardness with
increase in baking temperature and time may be due to the higher
water loss from the dough which may lead to a more rigid fiber frame
after baking. Further formation of fiber-protein complexes during high
temperature time combinations can also promote the hardening of
product (Farris & Piergiovanni, 2009). Sugar content showed the non-
significant positive effect of lower magnitude (B = +0.12) on hard-
ness. Increase in hardness with increase in sugar content may be due to
its conversion from solution to harder glass-like state after cooling.
Singh et al. (2002) also observed the increase in hardness of cookies by
sugar and attributed it to its conversion to hard glassy state.
The model F-value of 202 implies that the model is significant. The
pred R-Squared of 0.975 is in reasonable agreement with the Adj R-
Squared of 0.989.

578
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Fig. 4. Response plots showing the effect of a) Temperature, sugar and their mutual effect on antioxidant activity. Other variables are constant: fat, 40 g/100 g Flour
and time 17.50 min. b) Temperature, time and their mutual effect on antioxidant activity. Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and sugar 30 g/100 g
Flour.

3.1.4. Antioxidant activity (% DPPH inhibition)
Antioxidants have gained increased interest among consumers be-
cause the epidemiological studies have revealed the lower risk of cancer
and cardiovascular diseases with frequent consumption of antioxidants
(Temple, 2000). Antioxidant activity of optimized cookies varied from
18.12% to 20.97% (Table 2). The p value indicates that linear and
quadratic effect of all variables (except fat content) was significant
(Table 3). However, in case of interactions “sugar-time”, “sugar-tem-
perature” and “temperature-time” showed the significant effect.
The analysis of regression coefficients showed that the variables
sugar, temperature and time had a positive effect on antioxidant ac-
tivity with magnitude being higher for temperature (B = +0.630)
followed by time (B = +0.233) and sugar content (B = +0.185). The
response plots for effect of temperature, sugar content and time on
antioxidant activity are shown in Fig. 4. It can be observed that the
major effect was that of temperature as with increase in temperature
antioxidant activity of cookies increased remarkably. Increase in anti-
oxidant activity with increase in sugar, temperature and time may be
due to the formation of melanoidins during baking process. These
compounds have been reported to show antioxidant activity (Manzocco
et al., 2000). The antioxidant activity of cookies remained almost
constant after 180 °C suggesting the stability of molecules bearing ra-
dical scavenging ability. Increase in antioxidant activity can also be
attributed to the possible breakdown of phenolics or their degradation

579
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Fig. 5. Response plots showing the effect of a) Sugar, fat and their mutual effect on overall acceptability. Other variables are constant: temp, 180 °C and time
17.50 min. b) Temperature, time and their mutual effect on overall acceptability. Other variables are constant: Fat, 40 g/100 g Flour and sugar 30 g/100 g Flour.

products which could react with the reagent (Sun, Mu, Xi, & Song,
2014). Lindenmeier and Hofmann (2004) determined the influence of
baking conditions on antioxidant activity of bread and the antioxidant
activity was found to be higher in crust in comparison to the crumb and
untreated flour. They found a 3–5 fold increase in antioxidant activity
with increase in baking temperature and time and attributed it to the
formation of antioxidant compound pronyl-L-lysine. The increase in
antioxidant activity due to baking was also observed by Sharma and
Gujral (2014).
The model F-value of 84 implies that the model is significant. The
pred R-Squared of 0.937 is in reasonable agreement with the Adj R-
Squared of 0.975.
3.1.5. Overall acceptability
Overall acceptances of cookies as the sum of various quality char-
acteristics (surface color, texture, mouth feel and taste) can be used to
assess the quality of the cookies prepared. The overall acceptance score
of cookies varied from 5.54 to 7.84 (Table 2).
The magnitude of p value indicates that linear as well as quadratic
terms of all variables had a significant effect on overall acceptability of
cookies (Table 3). Among interactions “fat and sugar” and “time and
temperature” showed a significant effect on overall acceptability of
cookies. The regression coefficients revealed that linear terms of fat and
sugar showed positive effect on the overall acceptability of cookies with
the sugar content (B = +0.16) showing effect of slightly higher

580
K.N. Jan et al. LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582

Table 4 and fat and baking temperature and time markedly affected the re-
Criteria and outputs of the numerical optimization of the responses for cookies. sponses like color, spread factor, hardness, antioxidant activity and
Variables Goal Experimental range Importance Optimum values overall acceptability of quinoa cookies. Quinoa cookies can be used as
substitute for cereal in Indian subcontinent during fasting days. The
Min Max linear terms of temperature, fat content, sugar content and time was
found to have significant effect on all responses (color, texture, spread
X1 In range 35 45 3 41.83
X2 In range 25 35 3 33.95 factor, antioxidant activity and overall acceptability).
X3 In range 170 190 3 181
X4 In range 15 20 3 18 Conflicts of interest

Responses Predicted
values
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Y1 In range 46.08 56.90 3 52.72 Ethical review

Y2 Maximum 5.89 7.26 3 7.26
Y3 In range 34.05 58.09 3 46.40
Y4 Maximum 18.12 20.97 3 20.54
Y5 Maximum 5.54 7.84 3 7.76
Where Y1 = color (L-value); Y2 = spread factor; Y3 = hardness (N);
Y4 = antioxidant activity (% DPPH inhibition); Y5 = overall acceptability.
magnitude than fat content (B = +0.13). While as linear terms of
temperature and time showed negative effect on the overall accept-
ability of cookies with the temperature showing effect of higher mag-
nitude (B = −0.10) than time (B = −0.05).
Fig. 5 shows the effect of temperature, fat, sugar content and time
on over all acceptability of cookies. The cookies with higher fat and
sugar content seemed to be more acceptable by the panellists. Positive
effect of fat and sugar can be due to the reason that sugar acts as flavour
enhancer and fat provides the better mouth feel. The negative effect of
temperature on overall acceptability of cookies may be due to higher
temperature resulting in decreased color (L-value) and increased
hardness of cookies.
The model F-value of 153 implies that the model is significant. The
pred R-Squared of 0.969 is in reasonable agreement with the Adj R-
Squared of 0.986.
3.2. Optimization
The simultaneous optimization of the responses was done numeri-
cally using statistical software Design-expert 11. The criterion for op-
timization of cookies was to obtain maximum values for spread factor,
antioxidant activity and overall acceptability However, color and
hardness were kept in range (Table 4). Numerical analysis report
showed that fat content, sugar content, baking temperature and baking
time of 41.83%, 33.95%, 181 °C and 18 min, respectively gave an op-
timized product of desirability 0.93. High desirability value indicated
the suitability of process conditions for achieving favourable results in
terms of responses. Predicted and experimentally determined values for
responses were color 52.72 and 53.05 spread factor 7.26 and 7.16,
hardness 46.40 and 47.05, antioxidant activity 20.54 and 20.67 (%
DPPH inhibition) and overall acceptability 7.76 and 7.61, respectively.
Optimized solution provided the optimum range of variables for pro-
duction of best quality cookies in terms of color, spread factor, hard-
ness, antioxidant activity and overall acceptability. The optimum con-
ditions obtained may be recommended for preparation of quinoa
cookies.
4. Conclusion
Response surface methodology was effective in optimization of
different formulations and processing parameters for development of
quinoa cookies. Model analysis revealed that all models were adequate.
Validity of the models was evaluated using the relevant statistical aids
like coefficient of determination (R2), F-value and coefficient of varia-
tion. These statistical tools revealed that the models were statistically
adequate. The selected independent variables, like contents of sugar
This study does not involve any human or animal testing.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge UGC for providing Maulana
azad national fellowship (MANF).
References
AACC (2000). Approved methods of analysis (10-50D). The american association of cereal
chemists (10th ed.). St. Paul, MN, U.S.A: AACC International.
Abboud, A. M., & Hoseney, R. C. (1984). Differential scanning calorimetry of sugar
cookies and cookie doughs. Cereal Chemistry (USA), 61(1), 34–37.
Alvarez-Jubete, L., Arendt, E. K., & Gallagher, E. (2009). Nutritive value and chemical
composition of pseudocereals as gluten-free ingredients. International Journal of Food
Sciences & Nutrition, 60(sup4), 240–257.
Arneja, I., Tanwar, B., & Chauhan, A. (2015). Nutritional composition and health benefits
of golden grain of 21 st century, quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa willd.): A review.
Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 14(12), 1034.
Bhargava, A., Shukla, S., & Ohri, D. (2006). Chenopodium quinoa—an Indian perspective.
Industrial Crops and Products, 23(1), 73–87.
Brand-Williams, W., Cuvelier, M. E., & Berset, C. L. W. T. (1995). Use of a free radical
method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT-Food science and Technology, 28(1),
25–30.
Doescher, L. C., Hoseney, R. C., Milliken, G. A., & Rubenthaler, G. L. (1987). Effect of
sugars and flours on cookie spread evaluated by time-lapse photography. Cereal
Chemistry, 64(3), 163–167.
Farris, S., & Piergiovanni, L. (2008). Effects of ingredients and process conditions on
‘Amaretti’cookies characteristics. International Journal of Food Science and Technology,
43(8), 1395–1403.
Farris, S., & Piergiovanni, L. (2009). Optimization of manufacture of almond paste
cookies using response surface methodology. Journal of Food Process Engineering,
32(1), 64–87.
Gaines, C. S., Kassuba, A. N. I. T. A., Finney, P. L., & Donelson, J. R. (1992). Instrumental
measurement of cookie hardness. II. Application to product quality variables. Cereal
Chemistry, 69(2), 120–125.
Gallagher, E., Gormley, T. R., & Arendt, E. K. (2004). Recent advances in the formulation
of gluten-free cereal-based products. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 15(3-4),
143–152.
Gan, H. E., Karim, R., Muhammad, S. K. S., Bakar, J. A., Hashim, D. M., & Rahman, R. A.
(2007). Optimization of the basic formulation of a traditional baked cassava cake
using response surface methodology. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 40(4),
611–618.
Gibert, A., Espadaler, M., Canela, M. A., Sanchez, A., Vaque, C., & Rafecas, M. (2006).
Consumption of gluten-free products: Should the threshold value for trace amounts of
gluten be at 20, 100 or 200 ppm? European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology,
18(11), 1187–1195.
Harra, N. M., Lemm, T., Smith, C., & Gee, D. (2011). Quinoa flour is an acceptable re-
placement for all purpose flour in a peanut butter cookie. Journal of the American
Dietetic Association, 111(9), A45.
Jan, K. N., Panesar, P. S., Rana, J. C., & Singh, S. (2017a). Structural, thermal and
rheological properties of starches isolated from Indian quinoa varieties. International
Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 102, 315–322.
Jan, K. N., Panesar, P. S., & Singh, S. (2017b). Process standardization for isolation of
quinoa starch and its characterization in comparison with other starches. Journal of
Food Measurement and Characterization, 1–9.
Kulthe, A. A., Pawar, V. D., Kotecha, P. M., Chavan, U. D., & Bansode, V. V. (2014).
Development of high protein and low calorie cookies. Journal of Food Science and
Technology, 51(1), 153–157.
Lindenmeier, M., & Hofmann, T. (2004). Influence of baking conditions and precursor
supplementation on the amounts of the antioxidant pronyl-L-lysine in bakery pro-
ducts. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 52(2), 350–354.
Manzocco, L., Calligaris, S., Mastrocola, D., Nicoli, M. C., & Lerici, C. R. (2000). Review of
non-enzymatic browning and antioxidant capacity in processed foods. Trends in Food
Science & Technology, 11(9), 340–346.

581
K.N. Jan et al.
Pareyt, B., & Delcour, J. A. (2008). The role of wheat flour constituents, sugar, and fat in
low moisture cereal based products: A review on sugar-snap cookies. Critical Reviews
in Food Science and Nutrition, 48(9), 824–839.
Pestorić, M., Sakač, M., Pezo, L., Škrobot, D., Nedeljković, N., Jovanov, P., et al. (2017).
Physicochemical characteristics as the markers in predicting the self-life of gluten-
free cookies. Journal of Cereal Science, 77, 172–179.
Risi, J. C., & Galwey, N. W. (1984). Chenopodium grains of the Andes: Inca crops for
modern agriculture. Advances in applied biology, 145–217.
Sharma, P., & Gujral, H. S. (2014). Cookie making behavior of wheat–barley flour blends
and effects on antioxidant properties. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 55(1),
301–307.
Sharma, S., Saxena, D. C., & Riar, C. S. (2016). Nutritional, sensory and in-vitro anti-
oxidant characteristics of gluten free cookies prepared from flour blends of minor
millets. Journal of Cereal Science, 72, 153–161.
Singh, N., Gupta, S., Singh Sodhi, N., & Singh, R. P. (2002). Effect of additives on dough
582
LWT - Food Science and Technology 93 (2018) 573–582
and cookie making properties of flour. International Journal of Food Properties, 5(3),
547–562.
Sun, H., Mu, T., Xi, L., & Song, Z. (2014). Effects of domestic cooking methods on
polyphenols and antioxidant activity of sweet potato leaves. Journal of Agricultural
and Food Chemistry, 62(36), 8982–8989.
Temple, N. J. (2000). Antioxidants and disease: More questions than answers. Nutrition
Research, 20(3), 449–459.
Tsen, C. C., Peters, E. M., Schaffer, T., & Hoover, W. J. (1973). High protein cookies.
Effect of soy fortification and surfactants. Baker’s Digest, 47(4), 34–39.
Wang, S., Opassathavorn, A., & Zhu, F. (2015). Influence of quinoa flour on quality
characteristics of cookie, bread and Chinese steamed bread. Journal of Texture Studies,
46(4), 281–292.
Wang, S., & Zhu, F. (2016). Formulation and quality attributes of quinoa food products.
Food and Bioprocess Technology, 9(1), 49–68.