Ugali (Kiswahili language) is a thick porridge popular in Eastern and Southern Africa and is

prepared using flour from whole or dehulled grains. Traditional methods of ugali preparation

and consumption are described. Ugali quality characteristics of 61 sorghum cultivars,

including those of the International Sorghum Food Quality Trials, were evaluated by taste

panels. It was observed that a light colored ugali with least tack~nessw as the most des~rable.

In general, cultivars with corneous grains and high breaking strength produced ugali with the

most desirable textllre and keeping quality

Mukuru, S Z

Murty, D S

Mushonga, J N

ICRISAT Open Access Repository

Sorghum Ugali

Sorghum Ugali S. 2. Mukuru, J. N. Mushonga, and D. S. Murty* Summery Ugali (Kiswahili language) is a thick porridge popular in Eastern and Southern Africa and is prepared using flour from whole or dehulled grains. Traditional methods of ugali preparation and consumption are described. Ugali quality characteristics of 61 sorghum cultivars, including those of the International Sorghum Food Quality Trials, were evaluated by taste panels. It was observed that a light colored ugali with least tack~ness was the most des~rable. In general, cultivars with corneous grains and high breaking strength produced ugali with the most desirable textllre and keeping quality. Sorghum and millets are the traditional staple lreals in most countries of Eastern and Southern >frica and used to be the only cereals grown until the introduction of maize about 50 years ago. Maize is now extensively grown in the whole region especially in fertile and high rainfall areas. Sorghum and millets are, however, still the favored traditional cereals and are especially important in areas with relatively poor soils, and low and unreliable rainfall. All these cereals are similarly consumed in a variety of ways but the most important and widespread method of consump- tion as food is in the form of flour that is mixed with hot water and cooked into a stiff paste or thick porridge. An equally large percentage of sorghum and millets are used in the preparation of a wide range of traditional alcoholic and nonalcoholic beverages. The cooked stiff porridge that is prepared from all the cereals is commonly known as ugali (Kiswahili language) in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania; so/ or mafo in Somalia; nsima in Malawi land Zambia and sadza in Zimbabwe. It is also called by several other different names in tribal dialects throughout the entire region. For con- venience and ease of presentation, we will refer to all the cooked stiff porridges (neutral pH) pre- pared from sorghum as ugali. Today most ugali is made from maize, but sorghum ugali still enjoys considerable import- ance and popularity among the rural poor for whom it is an important dish. In this paper, we will attempt to describe some of the tradttional methods of grain processing and ugali preparation noting significant variations if any in some coun- tries of eastern and southern Afrtca. We will also present the results of taste panel evaluations carried out at ICRISAT Center on ugeli prepared from several different sorghum cultivars and dis- cuss their quality variations. Grain Types Used A wide range of sorghum grain types are used in the preparation of ugali. However, the white- seeded and highly corneous grains where available are preferred by most people in several countries. In Uganda, Rwanda, and parts of Western Tanzania, the brown-seeded high tannin sorghum grain types are most common and are used for ugali preparation as well as for brewing traditional beers. In Zimbabwe, all the brown- seeded grains with testa are used for brewing while the white or red-seeded types without testa are preferred for ugali. Mukuru is Principal Sorghum Breeder, ICRISAT; Grain Mushonga is Plant Breeder, Crop Breeding Institute, Salisbury, Zimbabwe; Murty is Sorghum Breeder, Traditional methods of sorghum grain processing ICRISAT. are similar and are largely dependent on the grain types used for ugali. Sorghum grain processing is generally carried out by women. The white or red- seeded and highly corneous grains without testa are usually dehulled to remove the pericarp before they are ground into flour. Traditional sorghum grain dehulling generally involves pounding the soaked or damp grain in a wooden mortar with a pestle and winnowing to separate the dehulled grain from bran. The highly corneous grains are preferred because they are much easier to dehull and give higher recovery ratesof dehulled grain. In Malawi, the grain is soaked in water for 1 2 hr before pounding it lightly to remove the pericarp. In Tanzania, a little water is added to the grain in the mortar and then pounded vigorously, followed by winnowing. This process is repeated until the pericarp iscompletely removed. The white-seeded grains with a floury endosperm as well as the brown-seeded high tannin types, which also have a soft endosperm, are not dehulled. However they are usually lightly pounded dry and winnowed before grinding into flour. The traditional dehulling is hard work and consumes much time for the housewives thus restricting the amount of grain that can be pro- cessed and utilized. As far as we know, no suitable mechanical dehullers are available in these count- ries that could be used to process sorghum to produce dehulled grains of similar quality as the traditionally dehulled grain. The dehulled or whole grain is then finely ground into flour on traditional grinding stones. The grinding stones consist of a small flat stone on a larger rectangular stone. The grain must be clean and sufficiently dry to produce flour of high quality. Grinding is always carried out by ex- perienced women who try to produce finely milled flour. Small-scale mechanical grinders have been introduced in some areas, usually for maize, and these are becoming popular for sorghum as well. For many people in rural areas where mechanical grinders are not available or who cannot afford the pricescharged for grinding, traditional grinding on stones is still the practice. In Zimbabwe, the dehulled damp grain is some- times roasted in a clay pot to dry before grinding it into flour. This is believed to improve the flavor of the ugali produced. In Tanzania, the dehulled grain is sometimes soaked in water for 1-2 days after which it is dried and ground into flour. This improves the whiteness of the flour. In the northern and eastern parts of Uganda, western Tanzania, and Kenya, the brown-seeded grains are mixed with a little dry cassava, finger millet dr maize and the mixture is ground into flour. Ugali Preparation The traditional preparation methods for ugali in most countries are basically similar. A clay pot is used to boil an estimated amount of water, de- pending on the size of the family and the amount of flour available. When the water starts boiling, a little flour is sprinkled on the surface of the water and heating is continued. As soon as the water begins boiling again, most of the flour is poured into the pot and allowed to cook for about 2 min. After this one-fourth to one-half of the hot slurry is removed and kept in a separate container. The remaining boiling water and flour in the pot are vigorously mixed with a wooden stick, which hasa cylindrical handle and a flat end. Additional slurry or flour is added as required until ugali with tb* right consistency is obtained. Then the ugali in thd pot is allowed to continue cooking on a reduced fire for an additional 4 5 min. The ugaliis removed from the pot into baskets made for this purpose, as ugali kept on plates becomes watery after some time. The whole process of ugalipreparation might take up to 20 min. In northern Uganda, tamarind water or mango or lemon juice is added to boiling water to improve the taste and flavor of ugali. In Kenya, lemon juice or milk may be added to boiling water. Ugal; is usually served with beans or peas, vegetable soup, meat or fish stew, etc. To prepare a high quality ugali, the flour used should be ground from clean grain free of mold and weevil damage. A good ugali should not contain any lumps. When eating ugali one should be able to take pieces of it with the fingers without the ugali sticking to the fingers or teeth while eating. After ugali has cooled, a thin crust forms on the surface,( but the ugali inside should be soft but not sticky and should be able to keep in a similar condition for up to 24 hr. Ugali Quality Differences At ICRISAT, sorghum ugali preparation methods were standardized with the help of trainees from Kenya familiar with sorghum ugali (Muny and House 1980). Whole grain samples of sorghum were ground to a moderately coarse flour using a carborundum stone grinder (Milcent-Size D2) powered by 0.5 hp motor. Flour samples were sieved with a U.S. standard 35 mesh sieve and the throughs were used for ugali preparation. Four hundred and fifty ml of tap water were heated on an electric hot plate. As soon as the water started boiling, flour was added in in- crements coupled with vigorous stirr~ng w ~ t h  awooden laddie. Further quanuties of flour were added as required until a thick well cooked paste was formed devoid of any lumps. The ugali was then removed from the heater and allowed to cool. The whole process took 10 12 min. The amount of flour required to produce ugali w ~ t h  the deslred consistency and texture was recorded. Twenty-nine standard sorghum cult~vars were evaluated for their ugaliqual~ty In 1978 and 1979. Ugali for each varlety was prepared following the standard preparation methods described above. The ugali was scored by trainees from Kenya for F e most important quality character~st~cs. 1.e.. olor, taste, texture, and keeping quality on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 represented good and 5 poor quality. Five trainees in 1978 and six different trainees in 1979 were used to score all the ugali prepared from the same seed lots of the 29 cultivars. The sorghum grain of 25 cultivars was white, pale yellow, or cream color while the grains of the remaining four cultivars had a red pericarp without a testa. The amount of flour added to 450 ml of water to make ugali varied from 200 to 300 g among the sorghum cultivars. The endosperm texture score and breaking strength (kg) of grain samples from the 29 cultivars together with their ugali quality characteristics are presented in Table 1. The ugali quality scores of the sorghum cultivars varied considerably from variety to variety even though 80% of them were white. The average scores obtained in 1978 generally agreed with those obtained in 1979. The results indicated that light colored ugali without tackiness was the most desirable. Light yellow colored and slightly sweet ugali was often compared to maize ugali. The cultivars E35-1, M35-1, IS-5341, 18-6928, and CSH-5 obtained the best scores. It is interesting to note that IS-1 475 obtained desirable scores de- spite having a red pericarp. In general, cultivars with corneous grains and high breaking strength produced ugaliwith the most desirable texture and keeping quality. Grain samples of an additional 11 cultivars of the International Sorghum Food Quality Trials (ISFQT) 1979, and 21 cult~vars obta~ned from Mr P~nto, sorghum breeder. Kenya were evaluated for thew ugali quallt~es In 1979 and 1980 (Tables 2 and 3) Cult~vars E35- 1, Swarna, and M35- 1 from the ISFQT and four cult~vars from Kenya, 2219A k Lulu-D. 2KX17 B 1. Serena-1-2W. and 2KX17 6 produced the best uga11 products Cult~vars w ~ t h  a red perlcarp and testa obta~ned poor scores for ugall color Cult~vars 2KX17 B 1 and Lu1u.D needed the least amount of flour (163 and 169g, respectively) for the slandard prep- aratlon References MURIV. D S . and H ~ I ~ I S I .  L R 1980 Sorghum food qual~ty Its assessment and Improvelnent Paper pre. sented at the 5th Jolnt Meetlng of the U N D P -  CIMMYT-ICRISAT Pollcy Adv~sory Coriim~ttee. 14 18 Oct 1980. ICRISAT. Patancheru. lnd~a VOGEI, S. .  and GRAHAM. M 1979 Sorghum and Millet Food product~on and use Report of a workshop held In Nairob~. Kenya. 4 7 July 1978 Ottawa. Ontarlo. Canada. IDRC. 64 pp P N Table 1. Variation for ugali quality as assessed by two different groups of taste panels in the years 1978 and 1979.: GrainC Color appealb Tasteb ~ e x t u r e ~  Keeping qua18tyb Endo- Breaking 1978 1979 Mean 1978 1979 Mean 1978 1979 Mean 1978 1979 ~ e a n  sperm strength Genotype texture (kg) CSH-5 €35-1 Swarna 18-2550 18-1 475 IS-5341 IS-1457 IS-1070 IS-1 1025 M35- 1 SC-423 22198 8272-1 SC-108-3 UChV, Vidisha-60-1 Improved Saoner IS-1 122 18-9530 18-6928 El  87 BG-137 SC-110-14 18-4582 18-4242 €6954 SPV- 101 TAM-428 BP-53 a. The panelists were Kenyans and each panel consisted of 5 to 6 members. Values represent averages of the Independent scores of the paneltsts. 6. Color appeal. taste. texture and keeping quality of the ugali product were xored by each panelist independently on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 = the best and 5 = very poor. c. Endosperm texture was scored by examining 10  grains and noting the approximate amount of corneous endosperm. 1 = 80 100% corneousness, 2 - 60.80% corneousness. and 3 = 4 0 6 0 %  corneousness. Breaking strength of 10 grams was Independently noted on a Ktya Gra~n Hardws  Tester. . Table 2. Ugeli quality characters of sorghum cultivars from the ISFQT.. - -  Colorb Genotype Color of gram appeal Tasteb Textureb Keeplng qual1tyb E35-1 WS-1297 Swarna IS-7035 CS-3541 Segaolane White , White White White Red White Red with testa White Red with testa White White - a The panelists were Kenyans and each panel cons~sted of 5 to 6 members Values represent averages of the Independent scores of the panel~sts b Color appeal. taste, texture keeping qual~ty of the uga11 product were scored by each panellst independently on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 = the best ' Table 3. Drain and Ugdi  quality properties o f  sorghum varieties f rom Kenya. Grain Ugali 100 Breakinga Flour Endosperma grain strength quantity Color Cooking Keeping Genotype Color texture wt (gm) (kg) (9) appeala qualityb Tastea Texturea qualitya CK 60AxSB65 8M51AxLulu-1 IS10406xLulu-D 221 9AxLulu-D 5 0  x 135i13i1!3;1 Katimum AxSB65 KAFAxSB65 KX17/3!1 2KX7113 2KX76: 752 2KX76,325 Tx430 10~5~41 ; l  SERENA-12-W Makueni Local 2KX17:5 2KX17 2KX17i6 Muvenba Local Lu~u-D SERENA E525H R Strong brown White White Pale yellow Reddish yellow Reddish brown Palt. yellow Pale yellow Very pale brown White Brown yellow White White Pink White White Pale yellow Light brownish White Reddish yellow Reddish yellow a. See footnote in Table 1 for methods. b. Cooking quality was subjectively evaluated by skilled women on a scale of 1 to 3, where 1 = good. 

Sorghum Ugali

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ICRISAT Open Access Repository

ICRISAT Open Access Repository