The influence of variety (Cavendish and Dream), stage of ripeness (green and ripe) and parts (pulp and peel) on antioxidative compounds and antioxidant activity of banana fruit was investigated. The TPC and TFC ranged widely from 75.01 to 685.57 mg GAE/100 g and 39.01 to 389.33 mg CEQ/100 g of dry matter respectively. Cavendish banana flour contained higher TPC and TFC compared to Dream variety. TPC and TFC values of banana peel were higher than those of banana pulp. Also, green banana showed higher TPC and TFC values than those of ripe fruit. Radical scavenging activities (inhibition of DPPH) of the extracts ranged from 26.55 to 52.66%. Although Dream banana peel extracts appeared to have low TPC and TFC, its antioxidant activities were ranked moderate to high. This implies that antioxidative compounds other than phenolics and flavonoids were probably responsible for inhibition of DPPH.
Proximate composition, pH and amylose content of ripe Cavendish banana flour (RBF) prepared in this study were compared with all-purpose wheat flour (WF). RBF was found to be significantly (P < 0.05) higher in total carbohydrates and minerals content, while significantly (P < 0.05) lower in protein and fat contents compared with those of WF. Wheat-ripe banana composite flours (W-RBF) prepared by partial substitution of WF with RBF were assessed for swelling power, solubility, pasting properties and gel textural properties. Granular swelling of RBF occurred at a higher temperature compared to that of WF, suggesting that more energy and water were required to cook WF-RBF as the presence of soluble carbohydrates would compete for water and this would eventually delay starch hydration and granular expansion during cooking. Higher substitution with RBF led to higher soluble carbohydrates content, and increase in solubility index of WF-RBF. Partial substitution with RBF also resulted in significant (P < 0.05) decrease in pasting properties. A higher substitution of WF with RBF could reduce starch gelatinisation during cooking and retrogradation owing to the reduction of available starch in WF-RBF. All WF-RBF gels were significantly (P < 0.05) firmer and less sticky compared to WF gels.