Physicochemical and Nutritional Potential of Fifteen Sorghum Cultivars from Burkina Faso
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plant Material
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Determination of Grain Characteristics
2.2.2. Determination of Sorghum Grain Nutritional Value
2.2.3. Determination of Phenolic Compounds Content
2.2.4. Determination of Antioxidant Activity
2.2.5. Statistical Analysis of Data
3. Results
3.1. Sorghum Grain Traits
3.2. Chemical Analysis and Nutritional Potential of Sorghum Grains
3.3. Phenolics Content and Antioxidant of Sorghum Grains
3.3.1. Phenolics Content
3.3.2. Antioxidant Activity
3.4. PCA Analyses
4. Discussions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Punia, H.; Tokas, J.; Bhadu, S.; Mohanty, A.K.; Rawat, P.; Malik, A. Satpal Proteome dynamics and transcriptome profiling in sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] under salt stress. 3 Biotech 2020, 10, 412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)/SAT Afrique, Burkina Faso Superficie récoltée Sorgho Burkina Faso Production Sorgho. Available online: www.fao.org/faostat/fr/#compare (accessed on 15 October 2019).
- Chantereau, J.; Cruz, J.-F.; Ratnadass, A.; Trouche, G. Le Sorgho. Agricultures Tropicales en Poche; Passage des Déportés, 2; Presses agronomiques de Gembloux: Gembloux, Belgique, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Gutjahr, S. Analyse Des Caractères d’intérêt Morphogénétiques et Biochimiques Pour Le Développement de Sorghos Sucrés à Double Usage “Grain-Bioalcool”. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Monpellier II, Montpellier, France, 2012; p. 138. [Google Scholar]
- Dicko, M.H. Endogenous Phenolics and Starch Modifying Enzymes as Determinants of Sorghum for Food Use in Burkina Faso. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2005; p. 179. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, A.A. Botany, Taxonomy and Breeding; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 27–45. [Google Scholar]
- Alfieri, M.; Balconi, C.; Cabassi, G.; Habyarimana, E.; Redaelli, R. Antioxidant activity in a set of sorghum landraces and breeding lines. Maydica 2017, 62, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Ministere de L’agriculture et des Amenagements; Hydro-Agricoles/ Direction Generale des Etudes et des Statistiques Sectorielles/Direction des Dtatistiques Sectorielles/Enquete Permanente Agricole (MAAH/DGESS/DSS-EPA). Annuaire des Statistiques Agricoles 2017; Institut national de la statistique et de la démographie (ISND): Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Lyumugabe, F.; Gros, J.; Nzungize, J.; Bajyana, E.; Thonart, P. Characteristics of African traditional beers brewed with sorghum malt: A review. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 2012, 16, 509–530. [Google Scholar]
- Barro-Kondombo, C.P. Diversités Agro-Morphologique et Génétique de Variétés Locales de Sorgho [Sorghum Bicolor (L.) Moench] Du Burkina Faso. Eléments Pour La Valorisation Des Ressources Génétiques Locales. Ph.D. Thesis, Univesité de Ouagadougou, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Dicko, M.H.; Gruppen, H.; Barro, C.; Traore, A.S.; Van Berkel, W.J.H.; Voragen, A.G.J. Impact of phenolic compounds and related enzymes in sorghum varieties for resistance and susceptibility to biotic and abiotic stresses. J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2671–2688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kondombo, C.P.; Albert, B.; Blaise, K.; Jean Marc, B. On-farm diversity of sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] and risks of varietal erosion in four regions of Burkina Faso. Int. J. Biodivers. Conserv. 2016, 8, 171–179. [Google Scholar]
- Sawadogo, N.; Ouédraogo, M.H.; Traoré, R.E.; Nanéma, K.R.; Kiébré, Z.; Bationo-Kando, P.; Nebié, B.; Sawadogo, M.; Zongo, J.D. Effect Of Agromorphological Diversity and Botanical Race on Biochemical Composition in Sweet Grains Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] of Burkina Faso. J. BioSci. Biotech. 2018, 2017, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Songre-Ouattara, L.T.; Bationo, F.; Parkouda, C.; Dao, A.; Bassole, I.H.N.; Diawara, B. Qualité des grains et aptitude à la transformation: Cas des variétés de Sorghum bicolor, Pennisetumg laucum et Zea mays en usage en Afrique de l’Ouest. Int. J. Biol. Chem. Sci. 2015, 9, 2819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Giuntini, E.B.; Lajolo, F.M.; De Menezes, E.W. Tabela Brasileira de Composição de Alimentos TBCA-USP (Versões 3 e 4) no contexto internacional. Arch. Latinoam. Nutr. 2006, 56, 366–374. [Google Scholar]
- Guinko, S. Végétation de la Haute-Volta. Ph.D. Thesis, Universite’ Bordeaux III, Bordeaux, France, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Dedi, J.; Allou, K. Etude du pouvoir germinatif de quatre variétés de riz que sont GIZA 178, WAB 56-50, LOHININI, DANANE et identification des champignons présents sur les grains en germination. Afrique Sci. Rev. Int. des Sci. Technol. 2015, 11, 161–171. [Google Scholar]
- Yetneberk, S.; Rooney, L.W.; Taylor, J.R.N. Improving the quality of sorghum injera by decortication and compositing with tef. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2005, 85, 1252–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IBPGR; ICRISAT. Descriptors for sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]; ICRISAT: Patancheru, India; Rome, Italy, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Black, C.K.; Panozzo, J.F. Accurate technique for measuring color values of grain and grain products using a visible-NIR instrument. Cereal Chem. 2004, 81, 469–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradford, M.M. A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal. Biochem. 1976, 72, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- García-Ayuso, L.E.; Luque De Castro, M.D. A multivariate study of the performance of a microwave-assisted Soxhlet extractor for olive seeds. Anal. Chim. Acta 1999, 382, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jarvis, C.E.; Walker, J.R.L. Simultaneous, rapid, spectrophotometric determination of total starch, amylose and amylopectin. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1993, 63, 53–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singleton, V.L.; Orthofer, R.; Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of folin-ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol. 1999, 299, 152–178. [Google Scholar]
- Arvouet-Grand, A.; Vennat, B.; Pourrat, A.; Legret, P. Standardisation D’Un Extrait De Propolis Et Identification Des Principaux Constituants. J. Pharm. Belg. 1994, 49, 462–468. [Google Scholar]
- Re, R.; Pellegrini, N.; Proteggente, A.; Pannala, A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 1999, 26, 1231–1237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hinneburg, I.; Damien Dorman, H.J.; Hiltunen, R. Antioxidant activities of extracts from selected culinary herbs and spices. Food Chem. 2006, 97, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Rangel, J.C.; Benavides, J.; Heredia, J.B.; Cisneros-Zevallos, L.; Jacobo-Velázquez, D.A. The Folin-Ciocalteu assay revisited: Improvement of its specificity for total phenolic content determination. Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 5990–5999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brocke, K.V.; Trouche, G.; Zongo, S.; Abdramane, B.; Barro-Kondombo, C.P.; Weltzien, E.; Chantereau, J. Création et amélioration de populations de sorgho à base large avec les agriculteurs au Burkina Faso. Cah. Agric. 2008, 17, 146–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ba, K.; Tine, E.; Destain, J.; Cissé, N.; Thonart, P. Étude comparative des composés phénoliques, du pouvoir.PDF. Biotechnol. Agron. Soc. Environ. 2010, 14, 131–139. [Google Scholar]
- Awika, J.M.; Rooney, L.W. Sorghum phytochemicals and their potential impact on human health. Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 1199–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chanapamokkhot, H.; Thongngam, M. The chemical and physico-chemical properties of Sorghum starches and flours. Nat. Sci. 2007, 41, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Triki, T.; Boussora, F.; Ali, S.B.; Gasmi, A.; Guasmi, F.; Boussora, F.; Mbarka, B.; Ben Ali, S.; Gasmi, A.; Hédi, Y.; et al. Etude de la composition phénolique et des propriétés antioxydantes d’extraits des feuilles de cinq variétés d’orge (Hordeum vulgare L.) soumis à un stress hydrique (PEG 6000). Rev. Des Régions Arid. n 43 2017, 3, 1–721. [Google Scholar]
- Amri, O.; Elguiche, R.; Tahrouch, S.; Zekhnini, A.; Hatimi, A. Research Article Antifungal and antioxidant activities of some aromatic and medicinal plants from the southwest of Morocco. J. Chem. Pharm. Res. 2015, 7, 672–678. [Google Scholar]
- Trouche, G.; Fliedel, G.; Chantereau, J.; Barro, C. Productivité et qualité des grains de sorgho pour le tô en afrique de l’ouest: Les nouvelles voies d’amélioration. Agric. Dev. 1999, 23, 94–107. [Google Scholar]
Variety Code | Local Name of Variety | Type of Variety * | Region/Origin | Village or Structure of Provenance | Botanical Race ** | Cycle Sowing to 50% Heading (Day) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
V1 | Wal vêguin lobé | OLV | Centre-East | Dirlakou | G-C | 64 |
V2 | Yaga 2 | OLV | Centre-East | Zabatourla | G-g | 68 |
V3 | Ibiari moani | LVP | East | Konli 2 | G-g | 93 |
V4 | Ikparbinuani | LVP | East | Konli 2 | G-g | 93 |
V5 | Icuari 2 | OLV | East | Konli 2 | G-g | 89 |
V6 | Icourbobi moani | LVP | East | Koulga | G-M | 109 |
V7 | Icuari moani | OLV | East | Koulga | G-g | 93 |
V8 | Kiodi ou Balinga | LVP | East | Diora | G-g | 82 |
V9 | Woubri glume rouge | OLV | East | Kossougou-dou | G-g | 71 |
V10 | Woubri | OLV | East | Dassari | G-g | 75 |
V11 | Kourbouli glume rouge | OLV | East | Kossougou-dou | G-g | 71 |
V12 | G1296 | IV | Gene bank | INERA/Saria | G-C | 74 |
V13 | Nafo-natogué (775) | ILV | Gene bank | INERA/Saria | G-g | 64 |
V14 | Sorgho sucré Baoghin | OLV | Centre-West | Nadiala | G-g | 66 |
V15 | Sorgho sucré Villy | OLV | Centre-West | Villy | G-g | 66 |
Variety Code | Vitreous Index (a) | Testa (b) | Rate of Germination (%) | 1000-Grain Weight (g) | Grain Color | Grain Images | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
L* | a* | b* | ΔE | ||||||
V1 | 4.5 | P | 73.0 ± 0.57 c | 26.86 ± 1.50 bc | 42.81 ± 0.31 a | 15.05 ± 0.39 de | 15.83 ± 0.53 bc | 48.07 ± 0.26 a | |
V2 | 4.5 | P | 90.0 ± 0.40 efg | 28.37 ± 0.10 bcd | 43.26 ± 0.31 a | 12.70 ± 0.02 cd | 14.66 ± 0.11 b | 47.42 ± 0.32 a | |
V3 | 3.5 | A | 88.0 ± 0.54 e | 33.61 ± 1.88 e | 43.90 ± 3.35 a | 24.86 ± 1.54 g | 26.55 ± 0.76 e | 57.06 ± 2.31 bc | |
V4 | 3 | A | 98.0 ± 0.48 jk | 34.7 ± 1.50 e | 60.19 ± 0.30 bc | 7.81 ± 0.05 ab | 16.34 ± 0.19 bc | 62.86 ± 0.33 cd | |
V5 | 3 | A | 84.0 ± 0.60 d | 27.91 ± 0.05 bc | 70.59 ± 0.56 de | 5.17 ± 0.26 a | 19.44 ± 0.36 cd | 73.40 ± 0.43 e | |
V6 | 3 | A | 92.0 ± 0.51 fgh | 33.39 ± 1.27 de | 37.83 ± 5.60 a | 23.26 ± 0.28 g | 16.38 ± 4.46 bc | 47.44 ± 5.98 a | |
V7 | 1.5 | A | 99.0 ± 0.30 k | 28.43 ± 0.07 bc | 73.80 ± 0.75 e | 6.16 ± 0.06 a | 19.56 ± 0.18 cd | 76.60 ± 0.69 e | |
V8 | 3 | A | 95.0 ± 0.57 hij | 16.63 ± 1.50 a | 64.29 ± 1.05 bcd | 7.31 ± 0.34 ab | 21.88 ± 0.51 d | 68.30 ± 1.12 de | |
V9 | 3 | A | 89.0 ± 0.42 ef | 25.21 ± 0.10 b | 68.52 ± 0.35 cde | 6.94 ± 0.76 a | 15.10 ± 1.09 b | 70.51 ± 0.65 de | |
V10 | 3.5 | P | 68.0 ± 0.56 b | 28.71 ± 0.15 bcd | 71.38 ± 0.09 de | 5.35 ± 0.01 a | 18.37 ± 0.06 bcd | 73.90 ± 0.08 e | |
V11 | 3 | A | 92.0 ± 0.49 fgh | 26.09 ± 0.76 b | 57.60 ± 0.02 b | 10.57 ± 0.03 bc | 21.64 ± 0.01 d | 62.43 ± 0.02 cd | |
V12 | 5 | P | 96.0 ± 0.58 ijk | 31.03 ± 1.04 cde | 39.92 ± 1.08 a | 19.27 ± 0.13 f | 21.05 ± 1.40 d | 49.07 ± 1.53 ab | |
V13 | 5 | P | 93.0 ± 0.45 ghi | 27.51 ± 0.05 bc | 40.67 ± 0.10 a | 16.81 ± 0.21 ef | 18.58 ± 0.32 bcd | 47.77 ± 0.28 a | |
V14 | 5 | P | 53.0 ± 0.56 a | 33.42 ± 1.50 de | 41.01 ± 4.21 a | 6.46 ± 1.30 a | 2.79 ± 0.82 a | 41.64 ± 3.91 a | |
V15 | 5 | P | 56.0 ± 0.53 a | 33.97 ± 1.24 e | 41.19 ± 9.02 a | 7.99 ± 3.58 ab | 4.74 ± 1.81 a | 42.48 ± 8.09 a | |
F | 619.583 | 27.241 | 58.42 | 110.25 | 60.30 | 54.72 | |||
Proba. F | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | |||
Significant | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Variety Code | Moisture Content (% FM) | Dry Matter Content (% FM) | Crude Ash Content (% DM) | Carbohydrate Content (% DM) | Fat Content (% DM) | Protein Content (% DM) | Energetic Value (kcal/100 g DM) | Starch Content (% DM) | Amylose Content (% DM) | Amylopectin Content (% DM) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
V1 | 12.40 ± 0.31bc | 87.60 ± 0.31 ab | 1.58 ± 0.10 cde | 77.13 ± 1.03 def | 2.74 ± 0.15 ab | 6.14 ± 0.76 abc | 357.78 ± 1.24 ab | 67.70 ± 0.01 ef | 21.52 ± 0.01 bcd | 46.17 ± 0.01 c |
V2 | 11.83 ± 0.36 abc | 88.17 ± 0.36 bc | 1.42 ± 0.10 bc | 77.66 ± 0.78 ef | 3.20 ± 0.15 cd | 5.87 ± 0.54 ab | 362.99 ± 1.44 bcde | 64.69 ± 0.01 cde | 19.76 ± 0.01 abcd | 44.93 ± 0.00 c |
V3 | 11.39 ± 0.96 ab | 88.60 ± 0.96 bc | 1.73 ± 0.10 ab | 75.25 ± 1.01 bcde | 2.48 ± 0.15 a | 9.14 ± 0.10 fg | 359.92 ± 3.86 abcd | 66.41 ± 0.05 de | 21.60 ± 0.04 cd | 44.81 ± 0.05 c |
V4 | 11.81 ± 0.17 abc | 88.19 ± 0.17 bc | 1.85 ± 0.10 ef | 74.64 ± 0.52 abc | 2.62 ± 0.15 ab | 9.06 ± 0.42 fg | 358.44 ± 0.68 abc | 64.81 ± 0.00 cde | 19.26 ± 0.00 abcd | 45.55 ± 0.00 c |
V5 | 12.97 ± 0.29 c | 85.87 ± 1.43 a | 1.40 ± 0.10 bc | 73.25 ± 1.45 a | 3.54 ± 0.15 de | 7.67 ± 0.03 cde | 355.63 ± 5.74 a | 54.19 ± 0.02 a | 15.38 ± 0.02 a | 38.81 ± 0.01 a |
V6 | 10.43 ± 1.16 a | 89.57 ± 1.16 c | 1.64 ± 0.10 de | 77.20 ± 1.21 ef | 3.06 ± 0.15 bc | 7.66 ± 0.10 cdef | 367.0 ± 4.64 def | 65.63 ± 0.03 cde | 19.69 ± 0.01 abcd | 45.95 ± 0.02 c |
V7 | 11.85 ± 0.02 bc | 88.14 ± 0.02 ac | 1.38 ± 0.10 bc | 74.67 ± 0.47 abcd | 3.26 ± 0.15 cd | 8.83 ± 0.44 fg | 363.39 ± 0.10 bcdef | 60.84 ± 0.03 bcd | 17.77 ± 0.02 abc | 43.06 ± 0.01 bc |
V8 | 11.51 ± 0.10 ab | 88.49 ± 0.10 bc | 2.22 ± 0.10 g | 73.61 ± 0.08 ab | 3.44 ± 0.15 cde | 9.21 ± 0.06 g | 362.30 ± 0.40 abcde | 62.11 ± 0.02 bcde | 18.43 ± 0.01 abc | 43.69 ± 0.01 bc |
V9 | 11.87 ± 0.02 bc | 88.13 ± 0.02 bc | 1.06 ± 0.10 a | 75.45 ± 0.58 abcde | 3.78 ± 0.15 e | 7.83 ± 0.82 defg | 367.20 ± 0.08 ef | 56.74 ± 0.02 ab | 16.56 ± 0.01 a | 40.18 ± 0.01 ab |
V10 | 11.25 ± 0.55 ab | 88.74 ± 0.55 bc | 1.36 ± 0.10 bc | 76.83 ± 1.04 cde | 3.46 ± 0.15 cde | 7.08 ± 0.83 bcde | 366.86 ± 2.22 def | 73.86 ± 0.01 f | 23.42 ± 0.01 d | 50.44 ± 0.01 d |
V11 | 11.42 ± 0.43 ab | 88.58 ± 0.43 bc | 1.52 ± 0.10 bcd | 74.20 ± 0.65 ab | 4.40 ± 0.15 f | 8.45 ± 0.02 efg | 370.26 ± 1.72 f | 62.17 ± 0.05 bcde | 16.88 ± 0.03 abc | 45.29 ± 0.02 c |
V12 | 11.42 ± 0.17 ab | 88.57 ± 0.17 bc | 1.62 ± 0.10 cde | 79.36 ± 0.16 f | 2.48 ± 0.15 a | 5.09 ± 0.61 a | 360.20 ± 0.70 abcde | 61.22 ± 0.02 bcd | 18.32 ± 0.02 abc | 42.90 ± 0.01 bc |
V13 | 11.22 ± 0.35 ab | 88.77 ± 0.35 bc | 1.42 ± 0.10 bc | 76.72 ± 0.92 cde | 3.54 ± 0.15 de | 7.09 ± 0.18 bcde | 367.14 ± 1.42 ef | 59.41 ± 0.02 abc | 16.68 ± 0.01 ab | 42.73 ± 0.02 abc |
V14 | 11.68 ± 0.07 abc | 88.31 ± 0.07 bc | 1.24 ± 0.10 ab | 76.77 ± 0.24 cde | 3.44 ± 0.15 cde | 6.86 ± 0.71 bcd | 365.52 ± 0.30 cdef | 57.83 ± 0.04 ab | 17.44 ± 0.02 abc | 40.39 ± 0.02 ab |
V15 | 12.44 ± 0.07 bc | 87.56 ± 0.07 ab | 1.98 ± 0.10 fg | 75.82 ± 0.78 bcde | 3.20 ± 0.15 cd | 6.55 ± 0.57 abcd | 358.34 ± 0.28 ab | 60.23 ± 0.02 bcd | 17.30 ± 0.00 abc | 42.93 ± 0.02 bc |
F | 4.962 | 5.635 | 26.304 | 12.386 | 35.991 | 18.785 | 10.186 | 15.658 | 5.528 | 14.332 |
Proba. F | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
Significant | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Cultivar Code | FRAP (mg AAE/100 mg DM) | ABTS (mg AAE/100 mg DM) | DPPH (mg AAE/100 mg DM) |
---|---|---|---|
V1 | 0.009 ± 0.003 a | 0.026 ± 0.001 i | 0.091±0.007 i |
V2 | 0.036 ± 0.003 e | 0.002 ± 0.001 f | 0.092±0.004 bc |
V3 | 0.016 ± 0.004 abc | 0.011 ± 0.000 bcde | 0.102 ± 0.008 cd |
V4 | 0.010 ± 0.002 a | 0.011 ± 0.001 bc | 0.117 ± 0.005 def |
V5 | 0.018 ± 0.009 abc | 0.007 ± 0.001 a | 0.118±0.002 def |
V6 | 0.027 ± 0.003 bcde | 0.012 ± 0.001 cde | 0.107±0.006 cde |
V7 | 0.026 ± 0.004 bcde | 0.011 ± 0.000 bcd | 0.126 ± 0.003 f |
V8 | 0.019 ± 0.002 abcd | 0.013 ± 0.001 de | 0.118 ± 0.003 def |
V9 | 0.020 ± 0.001 abcd | 0.009 ± 0.001 b | 0.121 ± 0.004 ef |
V10 | 0.028 ± 0.004 cde | 0.010 ± 0.000 bc | 0.119 ± 0.003 def |
V11 | 0.032 ± 0.004 de | 0.013 ± 0.002 e | 0.113 ± 0.007 def |
V12 | 0.019 ± 0.005 abcde | 0.020 ± 0.001 fg | 0.113 ± 0.003 def |
V13 | 0.015±0.002 abc | 0.028 ± 0.000 i | 0.083 ± 0.004 b |
V14 | 0.014 ± 0.007 ab | 0.021 ± 0.000 gh | 0.058 ± 0.010 a |
V15 | 0.012 ± 0.002 a | 0.022 ± 0.000 h | 0.066 ± 0.009 a |
F | 9.684 | 251.494 | 40,897 |
Proba. F | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
Significant | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bazié, D.; Dibala, C.I.; Kondombo, C.P.; Diao, M.; Konaté, K.; Sama, H.; Kayodé, A.P.P.; Dicko, M.H. Physicochemical and Nutritional Potential of Fifteen Sorghum Cultivars from Burkina Faso. Agriculture 2023, 13, 675. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13030675
Bazié D, Dibala CI, Kondombo CP, Diao M, Konaté K, Sama H, Kayodé APP, Dicko MH. Physicochemical and Nutritional Potential of Fifteen Sorghum Cultivars from Burkina Faso. Agriculture. 2023; 13(3):675. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13030675
Chicago/Turabian StyleBazié, David, Crépin Ibingou Dibala, Clarisse Pulcherie Kondombo, Mamounata Diao, Kiessoun Konaté, Hemayoro Sama, Adéchola Pierre Polycarpe Kayodé, and Mamoudou H. Dicko. 2023. "Physicochemical and Nutritional Potential of Fifteen Sorghum Cultivars from Burkina Faso" Agriculture 13, no. 3: 675. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture13030675