IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0222903.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Consumption of rice, acceptability and sensory qualities of fortified rice amongst consumers of social safety net rice in Nepal

Author

Listed:
  • Anjana Rai
  • Macha Raja Maharjan
  • Helen A Harris Fry
  • Parbati K Chhetri
  • Purna Chandra Wasti
  • Naomi M Saville

Abstract

Introduction: Micronutrient deficiencies are prevalent in Nepal where starchy foods constitute a large proportion of diets and consumption of micronutrient-rich foods is inadequate. We conducted a study to determine whether rice would be an appropriate vehicle for micronutrient fortification in Nepal. Materials and methods: In Bajura in remote rural Nepal, we conducted a household survey to characterize rice intakes in 195 households, and a double-blinded acceptability test with 177 social safety net rice consumers ≥18 years of age. Of these, 168 tasted fortified and unfortified rice to assess whether respondents could differentiate between fortified and non-fortified rice and their sensory properties. Rice was fortified by blending hot extruded kernels containing 6 micronutrients together with non-fortified rice at a 1:99 ratio. We used binomial tests to assess whether participants could correctly differentiate fortified rice, from non-fortified rice and paired t-tests to compare scores for sensory qualities of cooked fortified and non-fortified rice. We used multiple regression to test associations between per capita consumption and age, gender, wealth and food security. Results: Per capita consumption of rice (median 216g/day, IQR 144.0, 288.0) did not vary by wealth but was +52.08g, (95% CI 10.43, 93.72) higher amongst moderately to severely food insecure households compared with food secure / mildly food insecure. Most respondents could not differentiate fortified rice from non-fortified rice: 37.5% identified uncooked fortified rice and 39.3% cooked rice, which was not different from the 33% expected by chance (p = 0.22 and p = 0.09 respectively). The sensory qualities of fortified rice were acceptable (scoring 3.9 out of 5) and did not differ from non-fortified rice (p>0.05). Conclusion: A rice fortification programme implemented through the Nepal Food Corporation’s social safety nets has potential because purchase and consumption of rice is high and fortified rice is acceptable among consumers in remote food insecure areas of Nepal.

Suggested Citation

  • Anjana Rai & Macha Raja Maharjan & Helen A Harris Fry & Parbati K Chhetri & Purna Chandra Wasti & Naomi M Saville, 2019. "Consumption of rice, acceptability and sensory qualities of fortified rice amongst consumers of social safety net rice in Nepal," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-17, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222903
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222903
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222903
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0222903&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0222903?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0222903. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.