Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. 3 (2026)

Optimisation of ultrasound-assisted hydration for improving nutritional quality, starch functionality and reducing anti-nutritional factors in pearl millet

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.14079
Submitted
13 February 2026
Published
14-08-2026 — Updated on 29-09-2026
Versions

Abstract

The effect of ultrasound-assisted hydration (UAH) was investigated as a non-thermal processing approach to enhance the nutritional and functional properties of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R.Br.). A Box–Behnken design (BBD) was employed to study the combined effects of ultrasound amplitude (30–70 %), treatment time (10–30 min) and grain-to-water ratio (1 : 1–1 : 5) using a 20 kHz probe-type ultrasonic processor. Key response parameters included moisture content, anti-nutrients (phytate, tannin, raffinose-family oligosaccharides), starch functionality, B-vitamins and minerals (Ca, P, Fe, Zn, Na, Mg). The UAH significantly reduced anti-nutritional factors: phytate decreased from approximately 594 to 270 mg/100 g with similar reductions in tannins and raffinose family oligosaccharides (RFOs) while improving starch properties as reflected by higher degree of gelatinisation and increased content of resistant starch. B-vitamin retention remained above 80 %, indicating limited degradation. A gradual decline in total mineral content was observed with increasing ultrasonic amplitude and duration, primarily due to cavitation-induced leaching and enhanced mass transfer. Response surface models showed strong predictive accuracy (R² > 0.90), identifying amplitude and time as major influencing parameters. The process parameters were optimised in the range of 30–70 % (ultrasound amplitude), 10–30 min (treatment time) and 1 : 1 to 1 : 6 (grain-to-water ratio).  The optimised values of these process parameters were reported to be 68 %, 27.69 min and 2.60 : 1 respectively. Model validation confirmed the reliability of optimisation. The UAH offers a rapid and efficient approach to improve the nutritional and functional quality of pearl millet.

References

  1. 1. Satyavathi CT, Ambawat S, Khandelwal V, Srivastava RK. Pearl millet: a climate-resilient nutricereal for mitigating hidden hunger and provide nutritional security. Front Plant Sci. 2021; 12:659938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.659938
  2. 2. Singh TB, Kaushik R. Mitigation of anti-nutrients from millet by employing traditional to cutting-edge processing's to enhance nutrition profile. J Food Compos Anal. 2025; 143:107605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2025.107605
  3. 3. Nambiar VS, Dhaduk JJ, Sareen N, Shahu T, Desai R. Potential functional implications of pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum) in health and disease. J Appl Pharm Sci. 2011;1:62–7.
  4. 4. Diouf A, Sarr F, Sene B, Ndiaye C, Fall SM, Ayessou NC. Pathways for reducing anti-nutritional factors: prospects for Vigna unguiculata. J Nutr Health Food Sci. 2019;7(2):1–10. https://doi.org/10.15226/jnhfs.2019.001157
  5. 5. Tomar M, Bhardwaj R, Kumar M, Singh SP, Krishnan V, Kansal R, et al. Nutritional composition patterns and application of multivariate analysis to evaluate indigenous pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.) germplasm. J Food Compos Anal. 2021;103:104086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2021.104086
  6. 6. Chawla S. Key anti-nutrients of millet and their reduction strategies: an overview. Acta Sci Nutr Health. 2021;5.
  7. 7. Akbar N. Nutrients anti-nutrients interaction in millets and its effect on malnutrition. Acta Sci Nutr Health. 2022;6(12). https://doi.org/10.31080/ASNH.2022.06.1152
  8. 8. Yadav S, Mishra S, Pradhan RC. Ultrasound-assisted hydration of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) and its effects on starch isolates and antinutrients. Ultrason Sonochem. 2021; 73:105542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2021.105542
  9. 9. Park DJ, Han JA. Quality controlling of brown rice by ultrasound treatment and its effect on isolated starch. Carbohydr Polym. 2016;137:30–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.10.045
  10. 10. Shafaei SM, Nourmohamadi-Moghadami A, Kamgar S. An insight into thermodynamic aspects of ultrasonication effect on hydration mechanism of wheat. J Food Process Eng. 2018;41(7). https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.12862
  11. 11. Rungchang S, Ditudompo S, Kunanopparat T, Cam TM, Pisitchaiwet M, Natpanyaporn N, et al. Optimization of ultrasound-assisted hydration of oat seeds: effects of amplitude and exposure time on water absorption, germination, and antioxidant capacity. Qual Assur Saf Crops Foods. 2025;17(3):414–28. https://doi.org/10.15586/qas.v17i3.1570
  12. 12. Patero T, Augusto PE. Ultrasound (US) enhances the hydration of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) grains. Ultrason Sonochem. 2015;23:11–5.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2014.10.021
  13. 13. Miano AC, Ibarz A, Augusto PE. Ultrasound technology enhances the hydration of corn kernels without affecting their starch properties. J Food Eng. 2017; 197:34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2016.10.024
  14. 14. Yildirim A, Öner MD, Bayram M. Effect of soaking and ultrasound treatments on texture of chickpea. J Food Sci Technol. 2013;50(3):455–65.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0362-8
  15. 15. Ulloa JA, Ibarra-Zavala SJ, Ramírez-Salas SP, Rosas-Ulloa P, Ramírez-Ramírez JC, Ulloa-Rangel BE. Chemical, physicochemical, nutritional, microbiological, sensory and rehydration characteristics of instant whole beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Food Technol Biotechnol. 2015;53(1):48–56. https://doi.org/10.17113/ftb.53.01.15.3663
  16. 16. Zhu F. Impact of ultrasound on structure, physicochemical properties, modifications, and applications of starch. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2015;43(1):1–7.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2014.12.008
  17. 17. Zhu F, Li H. Modification of quinoa flour functionality using ultrasound. Ultrason Sonochem. 2019;52:305–10.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2018.11.027
  18. 18. Kikuchi T, Uchida T. Calorimetric method for measuring high ultrasonic power using water as a heating material. J Phys Conf Ser. 2011;279(1):012012.https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/279/1/012012
  19. 19. Thiex N. Evaluation of analytical methods for the determination of moisture, crude protein, crude fat, and crude fibre in distillers dried grains with solubles. J AOAC Int. 2009;92(1):61–73.https://doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/92.1.61
  20. 20. Demir B, Bilgiçli N. Changes in chemical and anti-nutritional properties of pasta enriched with raw and germinated quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) flours. J Food Sci Technol. 2020;57(10):3884–92.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04420-7
  21. 21. Prashanth P, Joshi TJ, Singh SM, Rao PS. Hydrothermal treatment of pearl millet grains: effects on nutritional composition, antinutrients and flour properties. Grain Oil Sci Technol. 2024;7(2):87–95.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaost.2024.04.002
  22. 22. Rybicka I, Gliszczynska-Swiglo A. Gluten-free flours from different raw materials as the source of vitamin B1, B2, B3 and B6. J Nutr Sci Vitaminol. 2017;63(2):125–32.https://doi.org/10.3177/jnsv.63.125
  23. 23. Amit SK, Uddin MM, Rahman R, Islam SR, Khan MS. A review on mechanisms and commercial aspects of food preservation and processing. Agric Food Secur. 2017;6(1):51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-017-0130-8
  24. 24. Qiu L, Zhang M, Chitrakar B, Bhandari B. Application of power ultrasound in freezing and thawing processes: effect on process efficiency and product quality. Ultrason Sonochem. 2020;68:105230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105230
  25. 25. Sireesha T, Nanje Gowda NA, Kambhampati V. Ultrasonication in seafood processing and preservation: a comprehensive review. Appl Food Res. 2022;2(2):100208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afres.2022.100208
  26. 26. Gupta RK, Gangoliya SS, Singh NK. Reduction of phytic acid and enhancement of bioavailable micronutrients in food grains. J Food Sci Technol. 2015;52(2):676–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-013-0978-y
  27. 27. Udeh HO, Duodu KG, Jideani AI. Effect of malting period on physicochemical properties, minerals, and phytic acid of finger millet (Eleusine coracana) flour varieties. Food Sci Nutr. 2018;6(7):1858–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.696
  28. 28. Samtiya M, Aluko RE, Dhewa T, Moreno-Rojas JM. Potential health benefits of plant food-derived bioactive components: an overview. Foods. 2021;10(4):839. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10040839
  29. 29. Bhangu SK, Singla R, Colombo E, Ashokkumar M, Cavalieri F. Sono-transformation of tannic acid into biofunctional ellagic acid micro/nanocrystals with distinct morphologies. Green Chem. 2018;20(4):816–21. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7GC03163G
  30. 30. Han IH, Baik BK. Oligosaccharide content and composition of legumes and their reduction by soaking, cooking, ultrasound, and high hydrostatic pressure. Cereal Chem. 2006;83(4):428–33. https://doi.org/10.1094/CC-83-0428
  31. 31. Xu F, Zhang L, Liu W, Liu Q, Wang F, Zhang H, et al. Physicochemical and structural characterization of potato starch with different degrees of gelatinization. Foods. 2021;10(5):1104. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10051104
  32. 32. Kang N, Zuo YJ, Hilliou L, Ashokkumar M, Hemar Y. Viscosity and hydrodynamic radius relationship of high-power ultrasound depolymerised starch pastes with different amylose content. Food Hydrocoll. 2016;52:183–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.06.017
  33. 33. Cornejo-Ramírez YI, Martínez-Cruz O, Del Toro-Sánchez CL, Wong-Corral FJ, Borboa-Flores J, Cinco-Moroyoqui FJ. The structural characteristics of starches and their functional properties. CyTA J Food. 2018;16(1):1003–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/19476337.2018.1518343
  34. 34. Luo Z, Fu X, He X, Luo F, Gao Q, Yu S. Effect of ultrasonic treatment on the physicochemical properties of maize starches differing in amylose content. Starch Stärke. 2008;60(11):646–53.https://doi.org/10.1002/star.200800014
  35. 35. Singh J, Dartois A, Kaur L. Starch digestibility in food matrix: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2010;21(4):168–80.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2009.12.001
  36. 36. Lehmann U, Robin F. Slowly digestible starch-its structure and health implications: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2007;18(7):346–55.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2007.02.009
  37. 37. Pingret D, Fabiano-Tixier AS, Chemat F. Degradation during application of ultrasound in food processing: a review. Food Control. 2013;31(2):593–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.11.039
  38. 38. Liu F, Delchier N, Bao Y, Xie C, Li Y, Liu X, et al. Chemical oxidation of B vitamins in food systems: mechanisms, matrix effects, and preservation strategies. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2025;24.https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70200
  39. 39. Rodríguez Ó, Gomes W, Rodrigues S, Fernandes FA. Effect of acoustically assisted treatments on vitamins, antioxidant activity, organic acids and drying kinetics of pineapple. Ultrason Sonochem. 2017;35:92–102.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2016.09.006
  40. 40. Nibhoria A, Kumar M, Arya RK, Siroha AK. Pearl millet for good health and nutrition-an overview. CABI Rev. 2024;19(1).https://doi.org/10.1079/cabireviews.2024.0041
  41. 41. Krishnan R, Meera MS. Pearl millet minerals: effect of processing on bioaccessibility. J Food Sci Technol. 2018;55(9):3362–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-018-3305-9
  42. 42. Mudgal S, Singh N. Impact of ultrasonication on the physicochemical, pasting, amino acid, mineral, phenolic, and sugar profile of germinated brown rice from various varieties. J Food Sci Technol. 2025;62(3):492–507.https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-024-06039-4
  43. 43. Lestienne I, Icard-Vernière C, Mouquet C, Picq C, Trèche S. Effects of soaking whole cereal and legume seeds on iron, zinc and phytate contents. Food Chem. 2005;89(3):421–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.03.040

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.