Assessment of nutritional composition of different cultivars of kodo and kutki millets

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences
ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 8 Number 10 (2019)
Journal homepage:

Original Research Article

/>
Assessment of Nutritional Composition of Different Cultivars of
Kodo and Kutki Millets
L. P. S. Rajput1, Pratibha Parihar1, Ketki Dhumketi1*, Koji Tsuji2 and Seema Naberia3
1

2

Department of Food Science and Technology, JNKVV, Jabalpur, India
Faculty of Education, Chiba University, 1-33, Yayoi, Inage, Chiba, Chiba 263-8522, Japan
3
Department of Extension Education, JNKVV, Jabalpur, India
*Corresponding author

ABSTRACT

Keywords
Kodo millet, Kutki
millet and Quality
attributes

Article Info
Accepted:

04 September 2019
Available Online:
10 October 2019

Millet is one of the oldest foods known to humans and possibly the first cereal
grain to be used for domestic purposes. Millet grain is the basic foodstuff for
farm households in the world’s poorest countries and among the poorest
people. Millets are good sources of energy, protein, fatty acids, vitamins,
minerals, dietary fibre and polyphenol. Cultivars of kodo contained quality
attributes such as ash, fat, fibre, protein, carbohydrate, starch, amylose,
phosphorus and iron in the range from 2.00-3.67%, 1.20 -2.00%, 8.58-10.22%,
7.85-8.85% 62.00-65.00%, 57.10-58.66%, 23.00-25.93%, 176-188mg and1.21.7mg/100gm respectively whereas kutki cultivars contain above attributes in
the range from 1.01-2.70%, 3.47-4.84%, 6.32-7.88%,7.15-8.68%, 63.2365.00%,54.72-56.41%, 27.02- 30.93%, 189- 225mg, and 8.2- 9.5 mg/100gm
respectively. Kutki millet is found to be the best as compared to cultivars of
kodo millet with nutritional point of view. Quality attributes such as ash, fat,
fibre, starch and phosphorus of kodo milet significantly differed with cultivars
of kutki millet whereas protein, amylose, iron and carbohydrate content of
kodo cultivars did not differ significantly with cultivars of kutki millet.

Introduction
India is the leading producer of small millets
namely kodo millet (kodo), little millet (kutki)
finger millet (ragi), foxtail millet (kangni),
barnyard millet (sawan) and proso millet
(cheena). Millets play very specific role in
human nutrition because of their multiple
qualities. Millets are rich in vitamins,

minerals, sulphur containing amino acids and
phytochemicals, and hence are termed as

“nutri- cereals”. They are nutritionally
comparable or even superior to staple cereals
such as rice and wheat (Gopalan et al., 2004).
Millet is the major source of energy and
protein and has many nutritious and medical
functions (Obilana and Manyasa, 2002).
Millet grains are easily digested, have a longer

2724


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

shelf life and do not contain gluten, hence are
advisable for celiac patients (Chandrasekhar
and Shahidi, 2010). These are recognized
nutritionally superior for being a good source
of minerals such as magnesium, manganese
and phosphorus and also rich in
phytochemicals, including phytic acid (Shashi
et al., 2007). They are also believed to lower
cholesterol level and associated with reduced
cancer risk. Millet is gluten-free, therefore an
excellent option for people suffering from
celiac diseases often irritated by the gluten
content of wheat and other more common
cereal grains. It is also useful for people who
are suffering from atherosclerosis and diabetic
heart disease (Gélinas et al., 2008).
Report have been published in the literature

showing that kodo and little millet contain
protein 8.3gm and 7.7gm, fat 1.4gm and
4.7gm, carbohydrate 65.9gm and 67.0gm,
crude fibre 9.0gm and 7.6gm, iron 0.5mg and
9.3mg, phosphorus 188.0mg and 220.0mg per
100gm respectively(Deshpande et al., 2015).
They also contain high amounts of
polyphenols, antioxidants, tannis, and phytic
acids. Dietary fibre content of little millet is
the contributing factor for its low glycaemic
index and a recent study conducted on little
millet indicated that it exhibits hypoglycaemic
effect due to its higher proportion of dietary
fibre (Itagi et al., 2013). It has a significant
role in providing significant amounts of
antioxidants and phytochemicals in the diet
(Ushakumari et al., 2007). However, there is a
need to restore the lost interest in millets due
to its potential nutritional qualities and health
benefits. The main objective of this study is to
promote consumption of minor millets in the
daily diet of school going children.

were used. Kodo and kutki millet were
procured from Dindori, Jabalpur farm and
farmers fields. The seeds were cleaned to
remove the dirt, dust and foreign matter by
winnowing and sieving then ground it for
quality analysis.
Nutritional composition& quality attributes

of kodo and kutki millets
The kodo and kutki cultivars were assessed for
their nutritional composition and quality
attributes mainly carbohydrate, protein, fat,
ash, fibre, starch, amylose, phosphorus and
iron.
The protein content in the sample was
determined by conventional Micro-Kjeldhal
digestion and distillation procedure as given in
AOAC, (1992) using Pelican’s Kel Plus
digestion and distillation assembly. The fat,
ash and crude fibre content of the sample was
determined by the procedure as described by
AOAC, (1992) using Socsplus automatic fat
analysis system, Muffle furnace and automatic
fibre analysis system (Make- Pelican)
respectively. Total carbohydrate content was
estimated by hydrolysis method as described
by AOAC, (1992) and starch content by
Ranganna, (2001). Amylose content was
estimated by the method of Juliano, (1971).
Phosphorous content was determined by
Vanadomolybdate yellow colour method by
spectrophotometer (Bhargava and Raghupathi,
1984).
Iron content was determined by atomic
absorption spectrophotometer (Singh et al.,
2005).
Statistical analysis

Materials and Methods
In order to compare nutritional properties of
kodo and kutki millets, thirty cultivars of each

A complete randomized design (CRD) was
adopted for statistical analysis described by
Panse and Sukhatme, (1963).

2725


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Results and Discussion
Quality attributes of kodo millet
An appraisal of the table 1 showed that the
contents of quality attributes such as ash, fat,
fibre, protein and carbohydrate of kodo millet
per 100gm were found to be maximum in
different
cultivars
DINKOD20180215-4
(3.67%), DINKOD20180315-10 (2.00%)
DINKOD20180315-10 (10.22%), DINKOD20
160830-3 (8.85%) and DINKOD20160830-3
(65.00%) respectively, whereas minimum
contents were found in DINKOD20160830-3
(2.0%),
DINKOD20160830-4
(1.20%),

DINKOD20180215-7 (8.58%), DINKOD2016
0830-2 (7.85%) and DINKOD20180215-6
(62.00%) respectively.
Proximate composition of constituents such as
ash, fat, fibre and carbohydrate of different
cultivars of kodo millet differed significantly
with each other whereas non- significant
differences were found in protein content of
different cultivars of kodo millet. Quality
attributes of all cultivars of kodo millet were
slightly differed to each other similar
resultshave also been reported by Mirza et al.,
(2014) and Patel et al., (2018) with regards to
finger millet genotypes and varietal difference
of kodo millet respectively.
An appraisal of the table 2 showed that the
varied contents of starch, amylose, phosphorus
and iron content in different cultivars of kodo
millet were found in DINKOD20180315-11
(58.66%), DINKOD20180215-8 (25.93%),
DINKOD20160830-2, DINKOD20160830-5,
DINKOD20160830-13 (188mg) and DINKOD20180315-11 (188mg) and DINKOD20180215-1(1.7mg) and DINKOD20180315-13
(1.7mg) respectively whereas minimum
contents were found in DINKOD20160830-4
(57.10%), DINKOD20160830-11 (23.00%),

DINKOD20160830-8 (176mg) and DINKOD20160830-3 (1.2mg), DINKOD20160830-5
(1.2mg), DINKOD20160830-10 (1.2mg),
DINKOD20180215-6 (1.2mg), DINKOD20180215-8 (1.2mg) and DINKOD20160830-10
(1.2mg) respectively. Similar results were

reported by Hariprasanna et al., (2014) with
regards to starch content of kodo millets.
Nazni and Bhuvaneswari, (2015) and
Jaybhaye et al., (2014) evaluated amylose and
iron content of kodo millet but results differed
with the findings of Thilagavathi et al., (2015)
in chemical characteristics of kodo millet.
Quality attributes such as starch content of
different cultivars of kodo millet significantly
differed with each other but non- significant
differences were found in amylose,
phosphorus and iron content of different
cultivars of kodo millet. Cultivars of kodo
millet DINKOD20160830-3 and DINKOD20180315-10 were statistically superior to
other cultivars of kodo millet whereas other
cultivars of kodo millet slightly differed with
each other as nutritional point of view.
Quality attributes of kutki millet
Quality attributes of kutki millet per 100gm
presented in table 3 showed that contents of
ash, fat, fibre, protein and carbohydrate were
found maximum in DINKUT20160830-6
(2.70%), DINKUT20160830-10 (4.84%),
DINKUT20160830-7 (7.88%), DINKUT20160830-4 (8.68%) and DINKUT20180219-3
(65.00%) whereas minimum contents were
found in DINKUT20180315-8 (1.01%),
DINKUT20160830-2 (3.47%), DINKUT20160830-5 and DINKUT20180315-5 (6.32%),
DINKUT20180315-7
(7.15%)
and

DINKUT20-160830-7
(63.23%).Similar
results were also reported by Kotagi et al.,
(2012) and Jaybhaye et al., (2014) for quality
attributes of little millet.

2726


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Table.1 Proximate composition of kodo millet
S. No

Sample

Fat %

DINKOD20160830-1
DINKOD20160830-2
DINKOD20160830-3
DINKOD20160830-4
DINKOD20160830-5
DINKOD20160830-6
DINKOD20160830-7
DINKOD20160830-8
DINKOD20160830-9
DINKOD20160830-10
DINKOD20160830-11
DINKOD20160830-12

Ash
%
2.60
2.36
2.00
2.84
2.41
2.02
2.12
2.18
2.70
2.66
2.64
2.76

1.30
1.34
1.25
1.20
1.30
1.36
1.35
1.40
1.38
1.26
1.29
1.27

Fibre

%
9.31
9.36
9.40
9.88
10.11
9.90
9.78
9.84
8.98
9.77
8.74
9.64

Protein
%
8.55
7.85
8.85
7.95
8.16
7.95
8.30
8.75
8.35
7.95
8.16
8.55

Carbohydrate

%
62.68
62.95
65.00
62.79
63.03
63.22
63.48
63.16
62.84
64.08
62.96
63.21

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

DINKOD20160830-13

2.22

1.82

9.88

8.35

62.92

14

DINKOD20180215-1

2.35

1.40

9.23

8.35

63.34

15

DINKOD20180215-2

2.23

1.31

9.40

7.95

62.97

16

DINKOD20180215-3

2.29

1.25

10.12

7.87

63.29

17

DINKOD20180215-4

3.67

1.50

8.65

8.35

63.52

18

DINKOD20180215-5

2.37

1.42

9.43

8.15

62.82

19

DINKOD20180215-6

2.36

1.43

8.91

8.35

62.00

20

DINKOD20180215-7

2.85

1.20

8.58

8.15

63.28

21

DINKOD20180215-8

2.49

1.33

9.52

8.55

62.88

22

DINKOD20180315-9

2.77

1.66

9.32

8.15

63.88

23

DINKOD20180315-10

2.18

2.00

10.22

8.15

63.41

24

DINKOD20180315-11

2.37

1.46

10.00

8.55

62.97

25

DINKOD20180315-12

2.71

1.52

9.63

8.55

63.82

26

DINKOD20180315-13

2.54

1.30

9.21

8.35

63.97

27
28
29

DINKOD20180315-14
DINKOD20180315-15
DINKOD20180315-16

2.47
2.5
2.35

1.63
1.47
1.54

9.60
9.54

9.67

7.95
8.35
8.15

63.78
63.81
63.28

30
CD at 5%
SEM

JABKOD20180315-17

2.37
0.263
0.093

1.35
0.265
0.083

9.50
0.216
0.076

8.35
N/S

0.506

62.79
0.056
0.020

2727


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Table.2 Quality attributes of cultivars of kodo millet
S. No

Sample
DINKOD20160830-1
DINKOD20160830-2
DINKOD20160830-3
DINKOD20160830-4
DINKOD20160830-5
DINKOD20160830-6
DINKOD20160830-7
DINKOD20160830-8
DINKOD20160830-9
DINKOD20160830-10
DINKOD20160830-11
DINKOD20160830-12

Starch
%

58.44
58.41
58.10
57.10
58.27
58.02
57.90
57.64
58.26
57.41
57.61
58.24

Amylose
%
23.36
23.82
24.05
24.34
25.87
24.73
24.53
23.28
25.06
23.28
23.00
23.16

Phosphorus
(mg/100gm)

187
188
187
185
188
186
187
176
185
186
180
187

Iron
(mg/100gm)
1.5
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.5
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.5

1
2

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

DINKOD20160830-13

58.43

24.99

188

1.4

14
15

DINKOD20180215-1
DINKOD20180215-2

57.89
57.60

23.6
23.11

187
181

1.7
1.5

16

DINKOD20180215-3

58.30

24.88

185

1.4

17

DINKOD20180215-4

57.89

25.06

180

1.6

18

DINKOD20180215-5

57.81

25.77

184

1.5

19

DINKOD20180215-6

58.18

24.05

187

1.2

20

DINKOD20180215-7

58.35

23.94

184

1.6

21

DINKOD20180215-8

58.29

25.93

182

1.2

22

DINKOD20180315-9

57.43

23.31

183

1.6

23

DINKOD20180315-10

57.56

24.00

185

1.4

24

DINKOD20180315-11

58.66

23.88

188

1.5

25

DINKOD20180315-12

58.15

25.7

183

1.3

26
27
28

DINKOD20180315-13
DINKOD20180315-14
DINKOD20180315-15

58.34
57.84
58.51

23.88
25.85
24.99

180
183
187

1.7
1.5
1.2

29

DINKOD20180315-16

58.26

24.83

183

1.5

JABKOD20180315-17

57.55
0.056
0.469

23.72
N/S
1.006

181
N/S
3.536

1.3
N/S
0.130

30
CD at 5%
SE(M)

2728


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Table.3 Quality attributes of kutki millet
S. No.

Samples

Fat %

DINKUT20160830-1

Ash
%
1.94

3.52

Fibre
%

7.24

Protein
%
8.64

Carbohydrate
%
64.34

1
2

DINKUT20160830-2

1.58

3.47

6.48

7.53

63.88

3

DINKUT20160830-3

1.90

3.94

7.64

8.51

63.83

4

DINKUT20160830-4

1.62

3.81

6.60

8.68

64.21

5

DINKUT20160830-5

2.60

4.81

6.32

8.42

64.05

6

DINKUT20160830-6

2.70

4.05

7.03

7.91

64.22

7

DINKUT20160830-7

2.62

3.88

7.88

7.83

63.23

8

DINKUT20160830-8

2.68

4.40

7.55

8.47

63.45

9

DINKUT20160830-9

1.71

3.82

7.25

8.06

63.52

10

DINKUT20160830-10

1.78

4.84

7.32

7.84

63.84

11

DINKUT20160830-11

2.54

3.79

7.27

8.45

63.87

12

DINKUT20160830-12

2.67

3.88

6.81

8.67

64.20

13

DINKUT20180219-1

2.23

4.33

6.44

7.35

63.87

14

DINKUT20180219-2

2.32

4.0

7.41

7.16

64.90

15

DINKUT20180219-3

1.80

4.66

6.60

7.75

65.00

16

DINKUT20180315-4

2.20

3.56

7.15

8.35

63.81

17

DINKUT20180315-5

1.91

3.48

6.32

7.15

64.43

18

DINKUT20180315-6

1.93

4.10

6.40

7.95

64.54

19

DINKUT20180315-7

2.42

4.25

7.10

7.15

64.34

20

DINKUT20180315-8

1.01

3.64

6.54

8.15

64.30

21

DINKUT20180315-9

2.63

4.22

6.71

7.87

63.29

22

JABKUT20180315-10

2.23

4.65

7.62

7.55

63.97

CD at 5%

0.362

0.503

0.357

0.942

N/S

SE (M)

0.127

0.176

0.125

0.329

2.430

2729

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Table.4 Quality attributes of kutki millet
S. No

Samples

Starch %

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

20
21
22
CD at 5%
SE (M)

DINKUT20160830-1
DINKUT20160830-2
DINKUT20160830-3
DINKUT20160830-4
DINKUT20160830-5
DINKUT20160830-6
DINKUT20160830-7
DINKUT20160830-8
DINKUT20160830-9
DINKUT20160830-10
DINKUT20160830-11
DINKUT20160830-12
DINKUT20180219-1
DINKUT20180219-2
DINKUT20180219-3
DINKUT20180315-4
DINKUT20180315-5
DINKUT20180315-6
DINKUT20180315-7
DINKUT20180315-8
DINKUT20180315-9
JABKUT20180315-10

56.41

55.05
54.72
54.98
54.94
56.23
56.01
55.82
55.30
54.90
55.69
55.26
54.92
55.10
55.76
56.11
55.60
55.80
54.97
55.84
55.48
54.98
N/S
2.043

This is in close agreement with a previous
study by Kamatar et al., (2013) with regards
to nutritional composition of little millet
landraces.

Amylose

%
29.57
28.37
30.71
27.20
26.31
28.08
27.92
29.06
29.46
27.37
28.97
28.43
29.63
29.06
30.36
28.97
27.20
30.93
27.02
28.34
29.91
27.93
N/S
1.828

Phosphorus
(mg/100gm)
195
210

215
190
195
205
210
215
210
189
192
210
220
218
216
210
225
200
220
205
218
210
15.291
5.347

Iron
(mg/100gm)
9.2
9.1
8.5
9.0
9.1

9.5
9.0
9.2
8.7
8.5
8.2
9.2
9.1
9.0
9.2
9.3
8.7
9.2
8.8
9.3
9.0
8.8
N/S
0.655

amylose, phosphorus and iron were found
maximum in DINKUT20160830-1 (56.41%),
DINKUT20180315-6
(30.93%),
DINKUT20180315-5
(225.0mg)
and
DINKUT20160830-6
(9.5mg)
whereas

minimum contents in DINKUT20160830-3
(54.72%), DINKUT20180315-8 (27.02%),
DINKUT20160830-10
(189.0mg)
and
DINKUT20160830-11
(8.2mg).Similar
results were also reported by Nazani and
Bhuvaneswari, (2015) and Kotagi et al.,
(2012) for amylose and minerals content of
kutki millet. Quality attributes such as starch,
amylose and iron content of different
cultivars of kutki millet did not differ
significantly with each other but differed

Likewise, quality attributes such as ash, fat,
fibre and protein of different cultivars of
kutki millet differed significantly with each
other whereas non- significant differences
were found in carbohydrate content of
different cultivars of kutki millet.
Quality attributes of kutki millet
Quality attributes of kutki millet given in
table 4 showed that the contents of starch,
2730


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

significantly in phosphorus content of

different cultivars. Nutritional constituents
such as ash, fat, fibre, protein, carbohydrate,
starch, amylose, phosphorus and iron of all
cultivars of kutki millets were found differed
slightly with each other.

(ed.). Methods of analysis of soils,
plants, waters and fertilizers. Fertilizer
Development
and
Consultation
Organization, New Delhi, 49-82.
Chandrasekhara A and Shahidi F. 2010.
Contents of insoluble bound phenolics
in millets and their contribution to
antioxidant capacity. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 58, 6706-6714.
Deshpande SS, Mohapatra D, Tripathi MK
and Sadvatha RH. 2015. Kodo millet
nutritional value and utilization in
Indian foods. Journal of Grain
Processing and Storage. 2, 16-23.
Gelinas P, McKinnon CM, Mena MC and
Mendez E. 2008. Gluten contamination
of cereal foods in Canada. In. J. Food
Sci. Technology. 43, 1245-1252.
Gopalan
C,
Ramasastri
BV

and
Balasubramaniam SC. 2004. Nutritive
value of Indian foods. National Institute
of Nutrition. Indian Council of Medical
Research, Hyderabad, India.
Hariprasanna K, Gomashe S, Ganapath KN
and Patil JV. 2014. Millets for Ensuring
Nutritional Security. Popular Kheti. 2,
170-175.
Itagi KS. 2013. Development and evaluation
of millet based composite food for
diabetes II, Ph.D thesis, University of
Agricultural Sciences Dharwad (India).
Jaybhaye RV, Pardeshi IL, Vengaiah PC and
Srivastav PP. 2014. Processing and
Technology for millet based food
products: A Review. Journal of Ready
to Eat Food. 1, 32-48.
Juliano, B.O. (1971) A simplified assey for
milled rice amylase. Cereal science
today. 16, 334-360.
Kamatar MY, Hemalatha S, Meghana DR,
Sharanappa T and Rama KN. 2013.
Evaluation of Little Millet (Panicum
sumatrense) Land Races for Cooking
and Nutritional Composition. Current
Research
in
Biological
and

Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2 (1): 07-11.

On the basis of these findings it was
concluded that kodo and kutki millet cultivars
could be considered the best nutri-cereal.
Millets play very specific role in human
nutrition because of their multiple qualities
and good source of carbohydrate, fibre,
protein, phosphorus and iron by making them
useful components of dietary and nutritional
balance in foods. Millets can be considered as
therapeutic food for health conscious people.
Regular uses of millets are beneficial in
cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure,
cholesterol level, diabetes and overcome
malnutrition among majority of population.
Kutki millet is found to be the best as
compared to kodo millet with nutritional
point of view. Future trends should focus on
the millet consumption in the developed
countries that could help its industrial
revolution. There is a need to explore the
opportunities towards development of
diversified foods for household consumption
to achieve nutritional security on sustainable
basis.
Acknowledgement
This work is supported by JSPS KAKENHI
Grant Number JP16K00907.
References

AOAC. 1992. Official methods of analysis 16
edition.
Association
of
official
Analytical Chemistry Inc. Arlington
VA. Chemists, Washington, DC.
Bhargava BS and Raghupathi HB. 1984.
Analysis of plant materials for macro
and micronutrient, In: HLS Tandon
2731


Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(10): 2724-2732

Kotagi K, Chimmad B and Kamatar MY.
2012. Nutrient enrichment of little
millet (Panicum miliare) flakes with
garden cress seeds. International
Journal of Food and Nutritional
Sciences. 2, 36-39.
Mirza N, Taj G, Arora S and Kumar A. 2014.
Variation in popping quality related to
physical biochemical and nutritional
properties of finger millets genotypes.
Proceeding of the National Academy of
Sciences, Indian Section B: Biological
Science. 1-9.
Nazni P and Bhuvaneswari J. 2015. Analysis
of physico chemical and functional

characteristics
of
finger
millet
(Eleusinecoracana l) and little millet
(P. sumantranse). International Journal
of Food and Nutritional Sciences. 4,
109-114.
Obilana A and Manyasa E. 2002. Millets, in:
P.S. Belton, J.R.N. Taylor (Eds.),
Pseudocereals and Less Common
Cereals. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. 177214.
Panse and Sukhamte PV. 1963. Statistical
methods for agricultural workers,
Indian Council for Agricultural
Research, New Delhi, India.
Patel A, Parihar P and Dhumketi K. 2018.
Nutritional evaluation of Kodo millet
How to cite this article:

and puffed Kodo. International Journal
of Chemical Studies. 6, 1639-1642.
Ranganna S. 2001. Handbook of Analysis
and Quality Control for Fruit and
Vegetable Products Second Edition.
Shashi BK, Saran S, Hittalamani S, Shankar
AG and Nagarathna K. 2007.
Micronutrient
composition,
antimicronutrients

factors
and
bio
accessibility of iron in different finger
millet genotype. Karnataka Journal of
Agricultural Science. 20, 583-585.
Singh P, Singh G, Srivastava S and Agarwal
P.
2005.
Physico-chemical
characteristics of wheat flour and millet
flour blends. Journal of Food Science
and Technology. 42, 340-343.
Thilagavathi T, Kanchana S, Banumathi P
and Ilamaran M. 2015. Physicochemical and functional characteristics
of selected millet and pulses. Indian
Journal of Science and Technology. 8,
147–155.
Ushakumari SR, Rastogi NK and Malleshi
NG. 2007. Optimization of process
variables for the preparation of
expanded finger millet using response
surface methodology. Journal Food
Engineering. 82: 35-42.

Rajput L. P. S., Pratibha Parihar, Ketki Dhumketi, Koji Tsuji and Seema Naberia. 2019.
Assessment of Nutritional Composition of Different Cultivars of Kodo and Kutki Millets.
Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 8(10): 2724-2732. doi: />
2732