# A review of cassava semolina (gari and eba) end-user preferences and implications for varietal trait evaluation

Wasiu Awoyale, Emmanuel Oladeji Alamu, Ugo Chijioke, Thierry Tran, Hubert Noel Takam Tchuente, Robert Ndjouenkeu, Ngoualem Kegah, Busie Maziya-dixon

► To cite this version:

Wasiu Awoyale, Emmanuel Oladeji Alamu, Ugo Chijioke, Thierry Tran, Hubert Noel Takam Tchuente, et al.. A review of cassava semolina (gari and eba) end-user preferences and implications for varietal trait evaluation. International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2021, 56 (3), pp.1206-1222. 10.1111/ijfs.14867. hal-05176995

HAL Id: hal-05176995

https://hal.science/hal-05176995v1

Submitted on 22 Jul 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Review

# A review of cassava semolina (gari and eba) end-user preferences and implications for varietal trait evaluation

Wasiu Awoyale,¹,² Emmanuel Oladeji Alamu,¹,³ ID Ugo Chijioke,⁴ ID Thierry Tran,⁵,⁶ Hubert Noel Takam Tchuente,⁷,⁸ Robert Ndjouenkeu,⁷ ID Ngoualem Kegah⁷ & Busie Maziya-Dixon¹*

1 Food and Nutrition Sciences Laboratory, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PMB 5320 Oyo Road, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria

2 Department of Food Science and Technology, Kwara State University Malete, PMB 1530, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria

3 Food and Nutrition Sciences Laboratory, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Southern Africa Hub, PO Box 310142, Chelstone, Lusaka, Zambia

4 National Root Crops Research Institute, Umudike, PMB 7006, Umuahia, Abia State, Nigeria

5 Alliance of Bioversity International and the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), CGIAR Research Program on Roots Tubers and Bananas (RTB), Apartado Aéreo 6713, Cali, Colombia

6 Qualisud, CIRAD, Montpellier SupAgro, University of Avignon, University of La Réunion, University of Montpellier, 73 rue JF Breton, Montpellier 34398, France

7 Department of Rural Socio-Economics and Agricultural Extension, Faculty of Agronomy and Agricultural Sciences, University of Dschang, PO Box 222, Dschang, Cameroon

8 International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PO Box 2008, Messa, Yaoundé, Cameroon

*(Received 14 July 2020; Accepted in revised form 22 October 2020)*

**Summary** The purpose of this review is to support breeders and food scientists by examining research carried out on end-user preferences for gari and its derived dough product, eba, in Africa. The review focused on gari regarding the physical and chemical composition of raw cassava roots, methods of storage, the composition of gari with or without enrichment, and the sensory evaluation of gari and eba. The primary sensory attributes identified to describe gari are colour, taste, texture, aroma and flavour. Texture attribute of importance is crispiness for uncooked gari, and hand feel before consumption for eba. There was a significant correlation between the sensory characteristics of gari and the starch and cyanogenic potential (CNP) contents of the raw roots. Hence, the correlation of the end-user preferences with the chemical composition of the cassava roots could be helpful to breeders in refining selection criteria and developing high-throughput screening methods.

**Keywords** Cassava root composition, gari and eba composition, sensory evaluation, texture and physicochemical analysis.

Introduction

Because of their inherent high moisture content (60–70% wet basis), cassava roots are subject to rapid microbial and physiological deterioration after harvest, leading to undesirable biochemical changes (Onyewoke & Simonyan, 2014). As a result, value is added to the roots through processing to improve the palatability, increase shelf-life, facilitate transportation, as well as detoxify the roots by removing cyanogenic compounds (Westby, 2002; Nyirenda et al., 2011). In African countries in general and Nigeria, Ghana, Benin, Togo and Côte d'Ivoire, cassava roots are used in a wide range of food products such as gari, tapioca,

lafun, fufu, starch and attieke. All these products differ in their functional, pasting and sensory characteristics, which are mostly influenced by the processing methods used (Sanni et al., 2003; Onitilo et al., 2007). Processing cassava roots confers a range of specific functional properties to each of the end-products. Which are determined by various biophysical processes, for instance, starch gelatinisation (Sánchez et al., 2010), degradation of cell wall components such as pectin (Eggleston and Asiedu, 1994) and formation of semolina-like particles or thick paste depending on the type of product.

Gari is a dry, crispy, creamy-white or yellow, granular flour (semolina) obtained from cassava roots by peeling, washing, grating, pressing, fermenting (optional), sieving and roasting (Escobar et al., 2018). It is the most consumed and traded of all cassava food

<footnote>*Correspondent: Fax: +44 208 7113786;
e-mail: b.maziya-dixon@cgiar.org</footnote>
products in Nigeria (FOS, 1970; Westby & Twiddy, 1992; Okafor *et al.*, 1998), and in many other countries in West Africa (Oduro *et al.*, 2000). The extensive consumption of gari has been attributed to its relatively long shelf-life compared to other food products from cassava and its ease of preparation before consumption (Omueti *et al.*, 1993; Sanni *et al.*, 2005).

Gari is usually consumed in the uncooked form, or added with water, sugar, groundnuts and/or cashew nuts, or cooked into a dough called eba—the most widely eaten form or sprinkled on cooked cowpea beans in some Africa countries like Nigeria, Togo and Benin Republic (Adinsi *et al.*, 2019). Eba is made by sprinkling gari into a bowl or pot of boiled water and continue stirring until dough is formed. Eba is served with vegetable soup and fish or meat. Most households widely purchase gari because of its quick ability to make eba without going through any form of stress (Ogundipe *et al.*, 2013).

In many developing countries of the world, gari has become an outstanding staple food for many households. The main consumption areas of gari in Africa are Nigeria, Benin, Togo and Ghana. The other major Africa's consumption markets are Niger, Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Guinea, Chad, Gabon, Congo and Cameroon (Africabiz online, 2020). In Nigeria, gari processing firms occupy a substantial portion of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that has contributed significantly to national economic growth (Ogundipe *et al.*, 2013). Gari production in Nigeria accounts for about two-thirds of fresh (unpeeled) cassava roots (Adeoti *et al.*, 2009). An average household of eight persons consumed 25 kg of gari at the cost of N2, 500 representing 5% of monthly household income in Ohaozara, Ebonyi State, Southeast Nigeria (Onye-mauwa, 2010). Nigerian gari supplies Niger Republic, Chad and Cameroon (Coulibaly *et al.*, 2014). Though, the annual gari production in Cameroon is around 49 000 tons, representing about 43 300 million USD (AGROPME, 2010; FAO, 2018). In terms of market volume and value, gari represents 45% of the Cameroonian national market of cassava products, and up to 53% in urban areas, where the demand is significant, with almost 74% of households consuming gari (PNDRT, 2006; Tolly Lolo, 2013). Gari consumption in Cameroon is most strongly associated with people originating from the South-West and North-West Regions (Njukwe *et al.*, 2013). It may be related both to the geographical proximity of these two regions with Nigeria, which is the largest gari producer and consumer and to common colonial heritage. The extensive consumption of gari has been attributed to its relatively long shelf-life compared to other food products from cassava and its ease of preparation before consumption (Omueti *et al.*, 1993; Sanni *et al.*, 2005). The total quantity of fresh cassava roots used

<table><caption>**Table 1** Major Gari consuming countries in Africa</caption><thead><tr><td>S/no.</td><td>Countries</td><td>Local names</td><td>Consumption forms</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Nigeria</td><td>Gari/Garri</td><td>Eaten raw and cooked (eba)</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Liberia</td><td>Gari/farina</td><td>Eaten as snacks</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Republic of Benin</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten raw and cooked (eba)</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Togo</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten raw and cooked (eba)</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Burkina Faso</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten as snacks</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Ghana</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten raw and cooked (eba)</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Mozambique</td><td>Rale</td><td>Eaten as snacks</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Cameroon</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten as snacks</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Ivory Coast</td><td>Gari</td><td>Eaten raw and cooked (eba)</td></tr></tbody></table>

Sources: Abass *et al.* (2012); Coulibaly *et al.* (2014); Awoyale *et al.* (2019); Africabiz online (2020).

for the production of gari in Republic of Benin, Togo and Ghana as at 2003 is 3, 160, 2385 and 9309 metric tons respectively. The total quantity of gari consumed by these countries as at 2003 is Republic of Benin 210.73 metric tons, Togo 159.06 metric tons and Ghana 620.66 metric tons (Africabiz online, 2020). Considering the readiness of gari to be used as diet's complement for a variety of African sauces and cooking and, the long shelf-life under normal atmospheric conditions, it is possible to expand the consumption area of gari to covering Central, Eastern and Southern African countries. Table 1 showed some of the gari consuming countries.

Differences in cassava varieties have been reported to play important roles in the production of diversified food products and have significantly affected the physicochemical, functional, sensory and other quality characteristics of gari (Montagnac *et al.*, 2009). The knowledge of the suitability of different cassava varieties for gari could contribute to reducing the challenge of how to balance the requirements of farmers with those of processors and end-users, particularly where there may be a compromise in productivity for varieties with the highest expression of the processor and consumer-preferred qualities (Egesi *et al.*, 2012). Thus, this review describes gari end-user preferences in the form of uncooked or cooked gari (eba), implications for cassava trait evaluation, and research needed to meet the demands of gari consumers.

### Processing of cassava roots into gari

The details of the processing of cassava roots into gari differ from one location to another, depending on regional preferences, resulting in a large family of different types of gari. Producers/consumers may prefer gari with a sour, sweet or bland taste; a fine or coarse particle size; with or without palm oil added; or even gari enriched/fortified with different legumes or protein sources (Abass *et al.*, 2012; Awoyale, 2018; Olaleye *et al.*, 2018).
Gari processing involves various steps that include the peeling of fresh cassava roots, washing, grating, fermenting (optional), dewatering/pressing, pulverising, sifting, roasting, sieving or grading and packaging (Abass et al., 2012). Manual peeling of freshly harvested roots with a knife is most common, but mechanical peelers are now available in countries such as Nigeria and Ghana (Abass et al., 2012). The brown peel, if not removed or partly removed, might adversely affect the gari colour and increase its fibre content. Washing of the peeled roots is done to remove all extraneous materials, which could contaminate the gari. Grating of the washed cassava roots is generally done using a motorised cassava grater. However, hand graters, made by fastening a perforated grating sheet onto a wood slab, are still used in some countries. The resulting product is a wet mash. Grating increases the surface area of the root pieces so that dewatering of the mash can be done more quickly. The grated cassava mash is bagged using a polypropylene/polyethylene woven permeable bag or basket (lined with polypropylene sack) and left for between one and five days to ferment. Fermentation time is based on location: for example, consumers in South-west Nigeria do prefer sour gari, unlike those in the South-south and South-east. Apart from the taste, fermentation helps to reduce the cyanogenic potential of the product (Abass et al., 2012). The fermented mash is dewatered by pressing with a manual screw or hydraulic press (often car jacks are used) or even wood pieces tied at both ends with rope, which is still prevalent in most rural communities. Pressing is done to reduce the moisture content of the grated mash before roasting. The cake formed after dewatering is pulverised by a pulveriser/cake breaker or by hand and sieved with a standard woven sieve or rotary sieve, to remove the fibre and lumps, and to create a grit of similar particles size. However, in some locations, after the pulverisation, generally with the grating machine, the grit is not sieved before roasting.

The sieved grit is then roasted. An earthenware stove and a roasting pan made of moulded aluminium or stainless steel are used for roasting on a wood fire (Abass et al., 2012). In some communities, the roasting pan is smeared with a small amount of palm oil before roasting, to produce butter-coloured or yellow gari. Mechanical roasters are also now available in Nigeria and Ghana. The roasting process further develops the gari flavour, gelatinises the starch, and improves digestibility. The extent of drying determines the crispiness and storability of the product. Because starch in the grit is gelatinised during roasting, gari is a pre-cooked instant food product. In some communities, the grit is partially toasted and finally dried under the sun. Sun drying, while economical, adds risk that the product might be contaminated with dust and

sand. The gari is then allowed to cool for some hours, graded (sieved) depending on the particle sizes to meet the preferences of different categories of the consumers and packaged according to the distribution outlet, from wholesale to retail. Most rural communities package in 50 kg bags for transport and distribution. The sensory and functional properties of gari always result from the combination of raw materials (fresh cassava roots) quality and processing operations. The diversity of processing technologies and the resulting diversity of gari have been documented in the scientific literature. On the other hand, the relative influence of cassava roots characteristics and processing on the quality and consumers acceptability of the end-product remains to be investigated in details.

The challenge with the consistent consumption of gari is its poor nutritional value, which is also common with all cassava products. Gari is known for its high carbohydrate (starch) content, but with low protein, fat and micronutrients contents. The regular consumption of low protein gari can predispose consumers to protein-energy malnutrition (Alozie & Ekerette, 2017). Consequently, the enrichment of gari with protein-rich plant foods (soy beans, groundnut, seasame seed and melon seed) has been reported to improve the nutritional quality and sensory acceptability (Arisa et al., 2011; Oluwamukomi & Jolayemi, 2012; Oluwamukomi, 2015a,b; Alozie & Ekerette, 2017). Gari enriched with palm oil and/or soybean was developed in Benin Republic, but the gari are not available on the Beninese markets, whereas they are readily available in Nigeria and their processes (Akinoso & Olatunde, 2014), physicochemical characteristics (Edem et al., 2001; Karim et al., 2016) and sensory properties (Sanni & Sobamiwa, 1994; Osho, 2003) are documented. In most Nigerian enriched gari, the ingredients (palm oil and/or soybean) are usually added to the fermented mash prior to roasting, whereas in Benin Republic, the palm oil/or soybean are added in the mash before fermentation (Adinsi et al., 2019). Awoyale et al. (2019) also reported that the practice of adding moringa leaf powder, groundnut paste, roasted coconut chips and milk powder to gari in Liberia caused the increase of fat and protein contents of the product compared to the unenriched white gari.

Apart from the artificial enrichment of gari, biofortified cassava varieties that contain significant levels of pro-vitamin A carotenoids have been developed by conventional plant breeding methods and released for use by the local populations for gari production among other cassava value added products. Gari produced from the biofortified varieties may help solve the issue of the additional cost of adding palm oil and the occurrence of rancidity in the use palm oil while contributing to the reduction of vitamin A deficiency
(Bechoff et al., 2018). However, understanding how the pro-vitamin A carotenoids in the biofortified varieties degrade during storage of vitamin A-containing gari is critical because it will affect its nutritional impact (Bechoff et al., 2018). Onadipe (2011) studied the degradation of total carotenoids in gari from different biofortified cassava varieties and found out that 50% on average of total carotenoids were lost after 3-month storage at 30 ± 2 °C. Eynla et al. (2019) on their own part reported that processing biofortified cassava into gari and to eba could hinder the retention of β-carotene, though some varieties have retention advantage over others irrespective of the initial concentration in the fresh roots.

## Gender implications for variety development for gari/eba quality

Women play a central role in cassava production in most African countries. In Nigeria, harvesting, processing and marketing, are contributing about 58% of the total agricultural labour in the Southwest, 67% in the Southeast and 58% in the central zones (FAO, 2004; Onyemauwa, 2012). After gari processing in Nigeria, women sell a kongo (Nigeria government-approved measurement of 1.2 kg) at the rate of N100 and a plastic bowl of gari (8–9 Kongo) at the rate of N600. The women also give out gari to relations in urban areas for free (Butterworth et al., 2008). Some processing groups also employ women, and some youth to help fetch water. The wages for the activities range from N300 to N600 per day, excluding meals (Butterworth et al., 2008). Women rely mostly on traditional techniques to produce gari in Cameroon. Cassava transformation to gari through the use of modern technology could spur rural development, and hence, raise incomes for producers, processors and traders, and consequently contribute to national food security in Cameroon (Lengha, 2017). About 84% of those involved in gari production in Bamkumbit, Northwest Cameroon are women (Lengha, 2017). In Liberia, the processing of cassava roots into gari is mainly traditional and largely dominated by women. Industrialisation of gari processing is limited and would require investments in hardware, training and promotion. Women of relatively young age direct about 60% of the gari processing enterprises in Liberia. These women have short experience in gari production. About 60% of the women involved in gari production belong to an organisation. The main advantages of belonging to this organisation are access to credit, input and information among others (Coulibaly et al., 2014). In Sierra-Leone, a significant number of farmers who are women process cassava roots into gari and other minor products such as fufu and kondogbala, using locally made gratting and the pressing machines. Processing of cassava

roots into gari is done traditionally at the farm-gate, community and processor levels in Sierra-Leone (Coulibaly et al., 2014). It is the alcohol and gari production which provide the most important economic benefit in Sierra-Leone (Coulibaly et al., 2014). Gari production, which serves to address the problem of postharvest losses and generating income, is an important source of livelihood for many women between the age of 30 and 75 years in the informal sector in Ghana (Nimoh et al., 2020). Nimoh et al. (2020) also reported that gari production in Kumasi Ghana is financially profitable, with all the profitability indicators showing positive returns on inputs employed in production. However, the constraints identified in the gari production business in Ghana are seasonality and high cost of cassava roots, which may be addressed by cost-effective management strategies and release of all year round cassava varieties (Nimoh et al., 2020). The involvements of women in the production of gari in other African countries like Benin, Togo and Côte d'Ivoire among others need proper documentation.

## Sensory analysis and consumer preference of gari

Sensory criteria constitute a significant determinant of acceptability of any cassava variety, along with agro-nomic characteristics, and have a significant impact on the subsequent adoption and use of a variety for gari production (Idowu & Akindele, 1994; Oyeyinka et al., 2019). Both varietal effects and differences in the processing of gari contribute to variants in the sensory attributes of the final product to meet local preferences and traditions (Bechoff et al., 2018). Noticeable variability is observed among traditional gari types, depending on processes used, which can confer different sensory properties (colour, particle size, dryness and sourness). This inconsistency in gari quality, documented in Nigeria and Ghana (Oduro et al., 2000; Makanjuola et al., 2012), is partly because the fermentation process is now often reduced from the traditional four days to just one day to save time and ensure quick returns. Lesser time of fermentation results typically in a less sour gari and the degree of sourness desired depends on location. Speeding up fermentation can be achieved by additives or increased temperature. However, the vast bulk of gari is processed by smallholders who rarely use such technology. We identified several studies that inventoried and described the most relevant sensory attributes to describe consumers’ perceptions of gari, eba and enriched gari.

### Sensory acceptability of dry (uncooked) gari

Gari is consumed in the uncooked form by either soaking in water with the addition of milk, sugar,
groundnuts and/or cashew nuts in Nigeria, Ghana, Benin and Togo (Udofia et al., 2011) or mixed with groundnut paste or moringa leaf powder and consumed as snacks in Liberia (Awoyale et al., 2019). The sensory attributes of the gari are affected by many factors. Processing-related factors include the level of fermentation, roasting temperature, the quantity of palm oil added, postharvest storage of cassava roots before processing, method of grating, and rate of dewatering of cassava mash during fermentation, and storage condition of gari before consumption. Agronomic-related factors include soil quality, weather conditions, age of the cassava plant at harvest, cassava variety (Collard & Levi, 1959; Okafor & Uzuegbu, 1987; Oduro et al., 2000; Udofia et al., 2011). For instance, Adinsi et al. (2019a) reported that a positive correlation exists between roasting time and the sensory texture of the raw gari during chewing (r = 0.99), as well as between sour taste and fermented odour (0.96). In Nigeria, gari quality varies along traditional/cultural lines. Yellow (addition of palm oil) and sweet (short fermentation time) gari is generally preferred in the East.

Nonetheless, Owuamanam et al. (2011) reported that those consumers generally accepted gari fermented for 48 h in the Eastern part of Nigeria who prefers a fermented gari. In the West, creamy to slightly golden coloured and sour gari, imparted by a more extended period of fermentation, is preferred (Udofia et al., 2011). This difference may be related to the better storability of white gari, which does not contain oil, and is thus less susceptible to oxidation. On the contrary, yellow gari can readily oxidise during storage.

The primary sensory attributes of dry gari are appearance, colour, taste, acidity, sweetness, flavour/aroma and crispiness (Table 2; Owuamanam et al., 2011; Apea-Bah et al., 2011; Makanjuola et al., 2012; Udoro et al., 2014; Laya et al., 2018). Consumer acceptability of gari samples collected from different processing centres across South-west Nigeria showed that preferences were generally based on colour (r = 0.98), taste (r = 0.96) and flavour (r = 0.99; P < 0.01; Makanjuola et al., 2012; Table 3).

One study (Laya et al., 2018) found that consumer acceptability of uncooked gari after soaking in sugary water (10% sucrose) was correlated mainly with colour and odour (r = 0.83, P < 0.01) (Table 3). Additionally, the age of the roots appeared to play a role, as consumers preferred gari from cassava roots harvested at 12 months after planting to that from roots harvested at 15 months.

## Sensory acceptability of cooked gari (eba)

Gari can be rehydrated by adding boiling water and made into dough called eba. Eba is the most

consumed cassava product in Nigeria and some other West Africa countries. Eba is made by sprinkling raw gari into a bowl or pot of boiled water and continue stirring until dough is formed. It is served with a vegetable or preferred soup (Ogundipe et al., 2013). The primary sensory attributes of eba are appearance, colour, texture, taste, aroma, mouldability and stretchability as shown in Table 2 (Udoro et al., 2014; Eje et al., 2015; 2015a,b; Olaleye et al., 2018). The factors that affect the sensory acceptability of uncooked gari also affect that of eba, in addition to the quantity of boiled water used for reconstitution and the uniformity in the stirring process. For instance, Eje et al. (2015) studied the sensory acceptability of gari and eba produced from different improved varieties of fresh cassava roots, either stored in layers in moist sawdust of 80% moisture content (wb), or unstored. They observed that there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in the stretchability of the eba from any of the varieties either stored or unstored. The result was attributed to un-degraded starch in the cassava root stored in the moist sawdust. Also, gari produced from the unstored cassava varieties were most acceptable in terms of colour (r = 0.85), taste (0.71) and aroma (r = 0.87; Table 3).

## Enriching gari to improve sensory acceptability

The enrichment of gari with defatted and full-fat sesame seed flour at different ratios showed that 10% defatted sesame seed flour-enriched gari cooked into eba compared favourably with the control sample (no enrichment; Oluwamukomi, 2015a,b). The acceptability of this type of eba sample may be attributed to the colour, texture, taste and flavour. There was a significant positive correlation (r = 0.90, P < 0.05) exists between consumer acceptability and the sensory attributes (Table 3). Adinsi et al. (2019) observed that the addition of soybean and/or palm oil did not affect the appearance, odour, texture and taste of the traditional raw gari. Sanni et al. (2010) reported no significant difference (P > 0.05) in the taste, texture and odour of iron-fortified vs unfortified gari. Karim et al. (2016) reported that gari produced from the grating of 90% fresh cassava roots and 10% fresh sweet potato roots were most preferred in the overall acceptability compared to 100% fresh cassava gari. Also, the mouldability and overall acceptability of eba made from gari samples of 90% fresh cassava root and 10% sweet potato roots were higher compared to that of the 100% fresh cassava root gari (Karim et al., 2016). Roasted soy gari was reported by Ogunlakin et al. (2015) to be more preferred for both the raw (uncooked) and cooked form (eba) compared to raw gari and eba from 100% cassava roots.
<table><caption>**Table 2** Sensory attributes of different types of gari and cooked paste (eba).</caption><thead><tr><th>Samples</th><th>Appearance</th><th>Colour</th><th>Texture</th><th>Taste</th><th>Acidity</th><th>Sweetness</th><th>Flavor/ aroma</th><th>Mouldability</th><th>Stretchability</th><th>Crispiness/ mouthfeel</th><th>Acceptance</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Gari evaluated in dry form</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (0 h fermented)</td><td>5.80</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.70</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.70</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (12 h fermented)</td><td>5.70</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.70</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.60</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (24 h fermented)</td><td>6.30</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.50</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (36 h fermented)</td><td>6.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.50</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (48 h fermented)</td><td>5.60</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.60</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.70</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Nwanyi bekee local variety (72 h fermented)</td><td>5.20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.10</td><td>Owuamanam et al. (2011)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 1</td><td>-</td><td>5.43</td><td>-</td><td>4.57</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.17</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.40</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 2</td><td>-</td><td>6.50</td><td>-</td><td>5.83</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.67</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.93</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 3</td><td>-</td><td>4.90</td><td>-</td><td>5.03</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>4.83</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>4.80</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 4</td><td>-</td><td>6.45</td><td>-</td><td>6.37</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.27</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.23</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 5</td><td>-</td><td>5.37</td><td>-</td><td>5.08</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.17</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.07</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 6</td><td>-</td><td>7.13</td><td>-</td><td>7.13</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>7.18</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>7.38</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 7</td><td>-</td><td>6.00</td><td>-</td><td>5.72</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.50</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5.92</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Processing centre 8</td><td>-</td><td>8.00</td><td>-</td><td>7.93</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>7.70</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>8.10</td><td>Makanjuola et al. (2012)†</td></tr><tr><td>Bitter cassava</td><td>-</td><td>6.85</td><td>-</td><td>6.45</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.60</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6.50</td><td>6.70</td><td>Udoro et al. (2014)†</td></tr><tr><td>TMS92/0326 (12 months)</td><td>-</td><td>3.45</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.80</td><td>2.55</td><td>3.40</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.55</td><td>3.75</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>TMS96/1414 (12 months)</td><td>-</td><td>2.85</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.65</td><td>2.65</td><td>3.20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.95</td><td>3.80</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>IRAD4115 (12 months)</td><td>-</td><td>2.75</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.20</td><td>2.50</td><td>3.05</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>3.30</td><td>2.75</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>EN local variety (12 months)</td><td>-</td><td>4.50</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.60</td><td>2.60</td><td>3.50</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.75</td><td>4.30</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>AD local variety (12 months)</td><td>-</td><td>3.55</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.65</td><td>2.30</td><td>2.95</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.90</td><td>3.10</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>TMS92/0326 (15 months)</td><td>-</td><td>2.50</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.90</td><td>2.30</td><td>1.80</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>4.30</td><td>2.55</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>TMS96/1414 (15 months)</td><td>-</td><td>2.15</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2.00</td><td>2.25</td><td>2.50</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>3.25</td><td>2.75</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 2 (Continued)</caption><thead><tr><th>Samples</th><th>Appearance</th><th>Colour</th><th>Texture</th><th>Taste</th><th>Acidity</th><th>Sweetness</th><th>Flavor/ aroma</th><th>Mouldability</th><th>Stretchability</th><th>Crispiness/ mouthfeel</th><th>Acceptance</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>IRAD4115 (15 months)</td><td>—</td><td>2.40</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1.85</td><td>3.00</td><td>2.35</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3.15</td><td>2.40</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>EN local variety (15 months)</td><td>—</td><td>2.20</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1.95</td><td>3.35</td><td>2.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3.60</td><td>2.50</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>AD local variety (15 months)</td><td>—</td><td>3.40</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1.65</td><td>2.05</td><td>2.95</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1.85</td><td>3.00</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial gari dry form</td><td>—</td><td>3.90</td><td>—</td><td>2.50</td><td>2.50</td><td>2.95</td><td>3.15</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2.85</td><td>3.55</td><td>Laya et al. (2018)*</td></tr><tr><td>Gari evaluated in uncooked and cooked form (eba)</td><td>Bitter cassava</td><td>6.80</td><td>6.50</td><td>6.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.55</td><td>6.60</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.60</td><td>Udoro et al. (2014)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (0 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.09</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (0 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>5.37</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.82</td><td>—</td><td>5.09</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (0 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>—</td><td>5.73</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>4.91</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 91934 (0 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (3 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.27</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>—</td><td>4.09</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (3 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.45</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (3 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.09</td><td>—</td><td>5.64</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.36</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 91934 (3 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.27</td><td>—</td><td>4.45</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (6 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.36</td><td>—</td><td>4.27</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.27</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (6 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.09</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.09</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (6 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.82</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.64</td><td>—</td><td>4.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 91934 (6 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (9 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.36</td><td>—</td><td>4.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (9 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.36</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.45</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (9 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.27</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.82</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>4.45</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.82</td><td>—</td><td>4.36</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>**Table 2 (Continued)**</caption><thead><tr><th>Samples</th><th>Appearance</th><th>Colour</th><th>Texture</th><th>Taste</th><th>Acidity</th><th>Sweetness</th><th>Flavor/ aroma</th><th>Mouldability</th><th>Stretchability</th><th>Crispiness/ mouthfeel</th><th>Acceptance</th><th>References</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>TMS 91934 (9 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.91</td><td>—</td><td>3.86</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>5.00</td><td>—</td><td>4.70</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (12 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.64</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.55</td><td>—</td><td>5.36</td><td>—</td><td>3.96</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (12 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.80</td><td>—</td><td>3.55</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.18</td><td>—</td><td>3.27</td><td>—</td><td>3.96</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (12 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>4.70</td><td>—</td><td>3.82</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2.73</td><td>—</td><td>5.40</td><td>—</td><td>2.45</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 91934 (12 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>1.91</td><td>—</td><td>3.85</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3.18</td><td>—</td><td>4.00</td><td>—</td><td>1.18</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 30572 (15 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>3.55</td><td>—</td><td>3.80</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3.95</td><td>—</td><td>5.18</td><td>—</td><td>3.45</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 50395 (15 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>1.27</td><td>—</td><td>2.18</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2.45</td><td>—</td><td>3.27</td><td>—</td><td>2.09</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 4(2)1425 (15 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>2.18</td><td>—</td><td>2.73</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2.55</td><td>—</td><td>5.36</td><td>—</td><td>2.36</td><td>Eje et al. (2015)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>TMS 91934 (15 week storage)</td><td>—</td><td>7.23</td><td>6.56</td><td>7.13</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>7.02</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>7.43</td><td>Oluwamukomi (2015a,b)<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>100% cassava</td><td>—</td><td>4.30</td><td>3.55</td><td>3.00</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.05</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.30</td><td>Oluwamukomi (2015a,b)<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>5% Full fat sesame</td><td>—</td><td>3.00</td><td>3.80</td><td>3.50</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.40</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3.60</td><td>Oluwamukomi (2015a,b)<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>10% Full fat sesame</td><td>—</td><td>3.90</td><td>4.95</td><td>3.90</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.05</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.70</td><td>Oluwamukomi (2015a,b)<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>5% defatted sesame</td><td>—</td><td>5.30</td><td>5.10</td><td>5.35</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.80</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.35</td><td>Oluwamukomi (2015a,b)<sup>‡</sup></td></tr><tr><td>10% defatted sesame</td><td>—</td><td>6.00</td><td>6.20</td><td>5.73</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.53</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.20</td><td>Olaleye et al. (2018)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Bitter cassava</td><td>5.73</td><td>6.07</td><td>6.53</td><td>7.00</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.53</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>7.20</td><td>Olaleye et al. (2018)<sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Sweet cassava</td><td>6.47</td><td>6.07</td><td>6.53</td><td>7.00</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6.53</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>7.20</td><td>Olaleye et al. (2018)<sup>†</sup></td></tr></tbody></table>

Texture: the texture of the dried gari is the crispiness, while that of the eba is the hand feel before consumption.

Taste: This is the combination of sweetness or sourness of the gari.

*5-point hedonic scale.

†7-point hedonic scale.

*9-point hedonic scale.
<table><caption>**Table 3 Pearson correlation of sensory attributes and consumers acceptability**</caption><thead><tr><th>Sensory evaluations</th><th>Colour</th><th>Taste</th><th>Acidity</th><th>Sweetness</th><th>Flavour/odour</th><th>Texture</th><th>Appearance</th><th>Crispiness/mouthfeel</th><th>Stretchability</th><th>Acceptability</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="11">Effect of length of fermentation on sensory acceptability of gari (Olaoye et al., 2015)</td></tr><tr><td>Appearance</td><td>-</td><td>0.98**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.47</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.98**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.57</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>-</td><td>0.57</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.47</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Effect of varieties and period of harvest on sensory acceptability of soaked gari (Laya et al., 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-0.19</td><td>-0.31</td><td>0.74*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-0.63*</td><td>-</td><td>0.84**</td></tr><tr><td>Acidity</td><td>-0.9</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.15</td><td>0.30</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.14</td><td>-</td><td>0.27</td></tr><tr><td>Sweetness</td><td>-0.31</td><td>-</td><td>0.15</td><td>1.00</td><td>-0.06</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.38</td><td>-</td><td>-0.21</td></tr><tr><td>Odour</td><td>0.74*</td><td>-</td><td>0.30</td><td>-0.07</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-0.66*</td><td>-</td><td>0.84**</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.81**</td><td>-</td><td>0.27</td><td>-0.16</td><td>0.83**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-0.44</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Effect of different processing centres on the sensory acceptability of gari (Makanjuola et al., 2012)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.96**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.97**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.98**</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>0.96**</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.97**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.96**</td></tr><tr><td>Flavor</td><td>0.97**</td><td>0.97**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.99**</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.98**</td><td>0.96**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.99**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Effect of cassava varieties and storage on sensory acceptability of eba (Eje et al., 2015)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.75**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.77**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.85**</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>0.75**</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.82**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.71**</td></tr><tr><td>Aroma</td><td>0.77**</td><td>0.82**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.07</td><td>0.87**</td></tr><tr><td>Stretchability</td><td>0.27</td><td>0.25</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.07</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.19</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.85**</td><td>0.71**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.87**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.19</td><td>1.00</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11">Effect of sesame enrichment on the sensory acceptability of eba (Oluwamukomi, 2015a,b)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.92*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.90*</td><td>0.87</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.98**</td></tr><tr><td>Texture</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.95*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.98**</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.94*</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>0.92*</td><td>1.00</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.99**</td><td>0.95*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.95*</td></tr><tr><td>Flavor</td><td>0.90*</td><td>0.99**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td><td>0.98**</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.95*</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.98**</td><td>0.95*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.95*</td><td>0.94*</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1.00</td></tr></tbody></table>

-, not evaluated.

The sample size used for the Pearson correlation is the mean of each parameters presented by the authors.

## Processing methods, product characterisation and relationship with sensory evaluation

### Root composition and processing methods related to product quality

While the characteristics of the raw material (cassava roots) are essential, processing also plays a crucial role in determining the quality of gari and its sensorial perception by consumers. In particular, the grating and roasting operations determine particle size and hence the structure and texture of the final product. In contrast, the fermentation operation changes the pH and composition in organic acids and therefore the taste of the final product. The scientific literature reports the following key findings on how processing influences gari quality.

Gari processing leads to high nutrient losses due to leaching out with water, and roasting due to thermal degradation. Favier *et al.* (1969) estimated these losses at around 22% for carbohydrates and above 50% for

several other nutrients and micronutrients. Nutrient losses may vary depending on the type of technology used, from completely traditional and manual to semi-mechanised. Aloys & Zhou (2005) indicated that longer fermentation of raw cassava is associated with several traits of the processed gari: higher yield, higher density, higher dispersibility, higher crude fibre, and higher pasting temperature, but lower pH, starch, cyanide content, peak viscosity, paste viscosity and water retention of the gari. About 80% of the dry matter in cassava root consists of carbohydrates, including starch in the majority, fibre and sugars (Kim *et al.*, 1995; Huang *et al.*, 2007; Goddard *et al.*, 2015). The starch itself consists of amylose (a linear-chain polymer of glucose units) and amylopectin (branched-chain of glucose units).

In native starch, amylose and amylopectin are arranged in semi-crystalline granules. The role of starch in determining the texture of cassava-based products is debated in the scientific literature and appears to depend on the product considered. For

<footnote>*P* < 0.05.</footnote>

<footnote>**P* < 0.01.</footnote>
starch suspensions in excess water, the increase in viscosity during cooking and subsequent cooling is correlated with the shape and size of starch granules, swelling power and the amylose-to-amylopectin ratio (Sánchez *et al.*, 2010). For semi-solid systems composed of pure starch, that is starch gels, the texture and rheological properties were influenced by the branched structure of amylopectin (Charles *et al.*, 2005). On the contrary, in more complex systems such as boiled roots, the molecular structure of starch was not related to textural properties (Charoenkul *et al.*, 2006), which suggested that other components (fibres, cell wall materials, etc.) may play a more critical role (Favaro *et al.*, 2008).

In the case of gari, starch appears to play a significant role in determining the texture of the end-product (gari as well as eba). During the roasting operation, starch gelatinisation results in swelling and eventual break down of starch granules upon absorption of water to form an amorphous matrix. Starch properties such as water absorption capacity after gelatinisation and the amylose: amylopectin ratio underpin the rheological and textural behaviour of the starch matrix, and hence contribute to explain the textural characteristics of gari, as well as the pasting properties of eba (Akingbala *et al.*, 2005; Goddard *et al.*, 2015). Besides, Maieves *et al.* (2012) reported that cassava varieties whose starch granules are more bound with parenchyma tissues, pectin and cellulose tend to be harder in texture, both in raw and in cooked cassava roots, which may also affect the quality of the gari and eba. Thus quantification of starch and fibre could help to predict the suitability of cassava roots for production of gari, especially when considering that the age of the plants can influence the starch and fibre contents of the product. Thus, cassava of not more than 12 months should be used for the production of gari because of the high starch content and low fibre content varies between cassava varieties and with the age of the plants. The viscosity of cassava-based products has been correlated with starch granule shape and sizes, swelling power and the amylose and amylopectin ratios (Sánchez *et al.*, 2010).

On the contrary, Charoenkul *et al.* (2006) stated that textural properties were not related to the molecular structure of starch. This was also supported by the observation of Charles *et al.* (2005), based on a visual assessment of texture rather than on instrumental methods. Also, a positive correlation between particle size and moisture content of gari was reported by Makanjuola *et al.* (2012). This implied that gari with large particle sizes would be associated with higher moisture content and thus, with a problem of storage stability. Aryee *et al.* (2006) stated that cassava varieties of poor cooking quality and high cyanogenic potential could be used for the production of starch,

glucose, adhesives, fuel, alcohol and other industrial materials, but not primary cassava product like gari. Gouado *et al.* (2008) showed that increasing frying time above 10 min, reduces the acceptability of gari. Frying temperature, the quantity of palm oil added, storage conditions of cassava roots, grating method and dewatering conditions of cassava mash are other technological factors influencing the acceptability of gari (Oduro *et al.*, 2000; Udofia *et al.*, 2011).

Another set of publications on gari processing in the scientific literature deal with the nutritional enrichment (fortification) of gari, and how to minimise losses in nutritional value during processing. National and international research centres such as the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and the National Root Crop Research Institute (NRCRI) in Nigeria have developed biofortification programmes (e.g. HarvestPlus) to increase vitamin A, iron and zinc in basic food crops such as cassava, maize, beans and potatoes to reduce micronutrient deficiency in Sub-Saharan Africa (IITA, 2011). The consumer acceptability of some traditional food products from biofortified crops as affected by different processing methods, especially cassava (e.g. gari and fufu) have been assessed (Omodamiro *et al.*, 2012; IITA, 2011; Aniedu & Omodamiro, 2012). Increasing the carotenoids content of cassava through conventional breeding has resulted in yellow-fleshed varieties with up to 10 µg g⁻¹ (wb) total carotenoids, that is two to five times higher than traditional varieties. During postharvest processing, part of the carotenoids is lost due to leaching and molecular degradation. In the case of gari processing, the retention rate was relatively high when evaluated on a wet basis. According to Omodamiro *et al.* (2012), grating yellow-fleshed cassava root retained 97.7–98.5% of the original total carotenoid content of between 6.3 and 7.8 µg g⁻¹. Subsequent fermentation of this mash leads to 94.7–96.7% retention of carotenoids. In another study of improved varieties TMS 01/1371, TMS 01/1235 and TMS 94/0006 into gari, fermentation significantly increased the average carotenoid content from 4.9 to 8.6 µg g⁻¹ (wb; Maziya-Dixon *et al.*, 2015). The increase in the proportion of carotenoids content was explained by a reduction in moisture as well as hydrolysis of carbohydrates and fibre by hydrolysis during fermentation. However, Ortiz *et al.* (2011) indicated that dry basis measurements of the carotenoid content would give a more accurate trend of what transpired during fermentation of the cassava mash. Regarding other micronutrients, Maziya-Dixon *et al.* (2015) also noted that fermentation significantly reduced the iron content from 7.47 to 7.13 mg kg⁻¹, and the zinc content from 8.95 to 5.58 mg kg⁻¹ (wb). This can be interpreted as the leaching of minerals due to the acidic nature of the fermentate, and oxidative activities of microbes that use the micronutrients for
development and growth (Ayetigbo *et al.*, 2018). Production of gari from yellow-fleshed cassava varieties has been reported to retain the least β-carotene viz: oven-dried chips (71.9% retention) > shade-dried chips (59.2%) > boiled roots (55.7%) > sun dried chips (37.9%) > gari production (34.1%; Chavez *et al.*, 2007).

## Texture assessment and relationship with sensory evaluation

Understanding the textural properties of foods allows for better control of food operations such as cooking, heating, roasting and drying, attaining the desired quality attributes of the product (Chen & Opara, 2013). For gari and eba, several parameters such as particle size, water absorption capacity and starch properties contribute to texture, resulting in wide variations between gari-producing regions. The scientific literature provides some information on texture evaluations of gari; however, further work may be useful in order to elucidate the underlying molecular mechanisms. The texture is an essential quality parameter when it comes to the reconstitution of the gari to eba. The most crucial factor influencing cassava product texture is the quantity and quality of starch (Charles *et al.*, 2005; Charoenkul *et al.*, 2006). Texture assessment of food can be done using either human senses (sensory texture profile analysis--STPA) or instruments (instrumental texture profile analysis--ITPA). For the STPA, consumers are asked to rate the textural attributes resulting from different varieties and of different planting periods, allowing the researcher to identify consumer-preferred textural attributes and to select varieties with consumer-preferred characteristics (Tomlins *et al.*, 2013), while the ITPA uses equipment designed to imitate the chewing process, providing standardised data through which a wide range of food texture properties can be analysed, including hardness, springiness, adhesiveness, resiliency, fracturability, wateriness, gumminess, sliminess and chewiness (Chen & Opara, 2013; Goddard *et al.*, 2015). This implies that the ITPA can significantly expedite the testing process and allow for repeat testing of the same sample over time, and this seems to be the best method for rapid and repeatable assessment of texture. Maieves *et al.* (2012) observed that the use of a textrometer to determine the hardness of cooked cassava roots could significantly facilitate the decision on which varieties are softer for industrial processes involving heat treatment of raw materials. There is a paucity of research on the ITPA of gari produced from different cassava varieties reconstituted to eba, though work has been done on the texture analysis of different cassava products (Asaoka *et al.*, 1992; Defloor *et al.*, 1998; Tomlins *et al.*, 2007; Aryee *et al.*, 2006; Anggraini *et al.*, 2009; Sánchez *et al.*, 2010; Oyewole & Afolami, 2001; Franck *et al.*, 2011; Makanjuola *et al.*, 2012; Perez *et al.*, 1998).

## Relationship between composition and sensory evaluation

The functional properties indicate how the food materials under examination interact with other food components directly or indirectly affecting the processing applications, food quality, and ultimate acceptance by the consumers (Adeleke & Odedeji, 2010). From the work of Awoyale *et al.* (2020), it was observed that a significant positive correlation (*P* < 0.01; *r* = 0.56) exist between the water absorption capacity (WAC) of polypropylene woven sack stored gari samples and the overall acceptability of the eba. Also, the mouldability (*P* < 0.05; *r* = 0.51) and mouthfeel (*P* < 0.01; *r* = 0.46) of the eba were positively correlated with the WAC. The solubility index of gari packaged in polypropylene woven sack had a significant positive correlation (*P* < 0.05, *r* = 0.61) with the overall acceptability of the eba, and a negative (*P* < 0.05) correlation with the peak time (*r* = −0.62) and pasting temperature (*r* = −0.63; Awoyale *et al.*, 2020). The bulk density of the gari packaged in polypropylene woven sack was positively correlated (*P* < 0.05, *r* = 0.58) with the mouldability of the eba. The setback viscosity of the gari packaged in polyvinyl chloride container was negatively correlated (*P* < 0.05, *r* = −0.58) with the texture of the eba (Awoyale *et al.*, 2020). Furthermore, a study on the effect of varieties and period of harvesting (Laya *et al.*, 2018) on the functional properties and sensory attributes of gari revealed that a significant positive correlation (*P* < 0.01) exist between overall acceptability and the bulk density (*r* = 0.86), water absorption capacity (*r* = 0.83), and swelling power (*r* = 0.77; Table 4). Also, the correlation between the bulk density (*r* = 0.82), water absorption capacity (*r* = 0.67) and the colour of the gari was positive and significant (*P* < 0.05). But, the least gelation concentration of the gari had a negative and significant (*P* < 0.05) correlation with the colour (*r* = −0.66) and the odour (*r* = −0.64; Table 4).

In addition to the functional properties, biochemical composition contributes to the sensory perception and acceptability of gari and eba. Key biochemical factors include the production of lactic acid and other organic acids during fermentation that gives the end-product its sour taste and the presence of sugars and proteins that contribute to browning during roasting. The acceptability of gari by consumers varies with regional preferences; nevertheless, some correlations can be observed between chemical composition and the acceptability of sensory attributes of gari (Table 5). Laya *et al.* (2018) studied the effect of varieties and
<table><caption>**Table 4 Pearson correlation of functional properties and sensory evaluation of gari from Laya et al. (2018) data**</caption><thead><tr><th>Parameters</th><th>BD</th><th>WAC</th><th>SWP</th><th>LGC</th><th>Colour</th><th>Odour</th><th>Mouthfeel</th><th>Acidity</th><th>Sweetness</th><th>Acceptance</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>BD</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>WAC</td><td>0.73*</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>SWP</td><td>0.68*</td><td>0.95**</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>LGC</td><td>-0.74*</td><td>-0.54</td><td>-0.64*</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>0.82**</td><td>0.67*</td><td>0.62</td><td>-0.66*</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Odour</td><td>0.85**</td><td>0.59</td><td>0.59</td><td>-0.64*</td><td>0.74*</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mouthfeel</td><td>-0.51</td><td>-0.25</td><td>-0.14</td><td>0.34</td><td>-0.63*</td><td>-0.66*</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Acidity</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.31</td><td>0.05</td><td>-0.19</td><td>0.30</td><td>0.14</td><td>1.00</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sweetness</td><td>0.05</td><td>-0.18</td><td>-0.13</td><td>0.22</td><td>-0.31</td><td>-0.06</td><td>0.38</td><td>0.15</td><td>1.00</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.86**</td><td>0.83**</td><td>0.77**</td><td>-0.54</td><td>0.81**</td><td>0.83**</td><td>-0.44</td><td>0.27</td><td>-0.16</td><td>1.00</td></tr></tbody></table>

BD, bulk density; LGC, least gelation concentration; SWP, swelling power; WAC, water absorption capacity.

<table><caption>**Table 5 Pearson correlation of chemical composition and sensory evaluation of gari**</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Moisture</th><th>Ash</th><th>Protein</th><th>Lipid</th><th>Crude fibre</th><th>CHO</th><th>Sugar</th><th>CNP</th><th>pH</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="10">Effect of varieties and period of harvest on sensory acceptability of gari (Laya et al., 2018)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>-0.26</td><td>-</td><td>0.58</td><td>0.10</td><td>0.06</td><td>0.56</td><td>0.24</td><td>-0.07</td><td>-0.56</td></tr><tr><td>Odour</td><td>-0.47</td><td>-</td><td>0.65*</td><td>0.44</td><td>-0.34</td><td>0.69*</td><td>0.40</td><td>-0.37</td><td>-0.76*</td></tr><tr><td>Acidity</td><td>-0.38</td><td>-</td><td>-0.04</td><td>0.60</td><td>-0.26</td><td>0.34</td><td>0.71*</td><td>-0.82**</td><td>-0.54</td></tr><tr><td>Sweetness</td><td>0.13</td><td>-</td><td>0.21</td><td>-0.24</td><td>-0.08</td><td>0.22</td><td>-0.11</td><td>-0.37</td><td>0.16</td></tr><tr><td>Mouthfeel</td><td>-0.01</td><td>-</td><td>-0.43</td><td>-0.22</td><td>0.28</td><td>-0.05</td><td>-0.29</td><td>-0.06</td><td>0.50</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>-0.47</td><td>-</td><td>0.54</td><td>0.40</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.67*</td><td>0.38</td><td>-0.50</td><td>-0.67*</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">Effect of different processing centres on the sensory acceptability of gari (Makanjuola et al., 2012)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>0.28</td><td>-0.13</td><td>NA</td><td>-0.67</td><td>-0.37</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>0.06</td><td>-0.24</td><td>NA</td><td>-0.51</td><td>-0.19</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Aroma</td><td>0.12</td><td>-0.05</td><td>NA</td><td>-0.54</td><td>-0.40</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.19</td><td>-0.04</td><td>NA</td><td>-0.61</td><td>-0.40</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">Effect of Sesame enrichment on the sensory acceptability of eba (Oluwamukomi, 2015a,b)</td></tr><tr><td>Colour</td><td>0.57</td><td>-0.31</td><td>-0.47</td><td>-0.86</td><td>0.80</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.78</td><td>0.78</td><td>-0.52</td></tr><tr><td>Texture</td><td>0.47</td><td>0.00</td><td>-0.34</td><td>-0.89*</td><td>0.81</td><td>0.67</td><td>0.98**</td><td>0.98**</td><td>-0.73</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>0.40</td><td>-0.18</td><td>-0.35</td><td>-0.79</td><td>0.92*</td><td>0.69</td><td>0.92*</td><td>0.92*</td><td>-0.54</td></tr><tr><td>Aroma</td><td>0.40</td><td>-0.08</td><td>-0.31</td><td>-0.83</td><td>0.88*</td><td>0.66</td><td>0.96**</td><td>0.96**</td><td>-0.60</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>0.61</td><td>-0.23</td><td>-0.50</td><td>-0.91*</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.83</td><td>0.87</td><td>0.87</td><td>-0.66</td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">Effect of varieties and length of fermentation on sensory acceptability of gari (Olaoye et al., 2015)</td></tr><tr><td>Appearance</td><td>-0.93**</td><td>0.91**</td><td>0.60*</td><td>-0.76**</td><td>0.83**</td><td>0.91**</td><td>-0.54</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Texture</td><td>-0.93**</td><td>0.93**</td><td>0.58</td><td>-0.77**</td><td>0.79**</td><td>0.93**</td><td>-0.55</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Taste</td><td>-0.94**</td><td>0.93**</td><td>0.55</td><td>-0.77**</td><td>0.79**</td><td>0.95**</td><td>-0.56</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Aroma</td><td>-0.91**</td><td>0.95**</td><td>0.45</td><td>-0.69*</td><td>0.78**</td><td>0.95**</td><td>-0.71**</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Acceptance</td><td>-0.67*</td><td>0.59*</td><td>0.33</td><td>-0.46</td><td>0.59*</td><td>0.69*</td><td>-0.58</td><td>NA</td><td>NA</td></tr></tbody></table>

CHO, carbohydrate; CNP, cyanogenic potential; NA, not available.

The Pearson correlation was done using the primary data from the authors by means of SPSS version 21.

the period of the harvest of cassava roots on the sensory evaluation of gari. They found that the acceptability of gari produced from different varieties had a negative but not significant relationship with moisture content (r = -0.47), and positive relationship with the lipid (r = 0.40, P > 0.05) and the carbohydrate

(r = 0.67, P < 0.05) contents (Table 5). In addition, the moisture content of the gari had a negative correlation with the colour (r = -0.26, P > 0.05), odour (r = -0.47, P > 0.01), and mouthfeel (r = -0.01, P > 0.01), but a positive correlation with sweetness (r = 0.13, P > 0.01). The protein content was

<footnote>*P < 0.05.</footnote>

<footnote>**P < 0.01.</footnote>

<footnote>*P < 0.05.</footnote>

<footnote>**P < 0.01.</footnote>
significant and positive only with the odour ($r = 0.65, P < 0.05$; Table 5).

The carbohydrate content of gari has significant positive correlations with the odour ($r = 0.69, P < 0.05$) and the overall acceptability ($r = 0.69, P < 0.05$). The cyanogenic potential was negatively correlated with the acidity ($= -0.82, P < 0.01$). However, all the sensory attributes have negative but not significant ($P > 0.05$) correlation with the CNP. The odour ($r = -0.76, P < 0.05$) and the overall acceptability ($r = -0.67, P < 0.05$) of the gari have a significant negative correlation with the pH (Table 5). Also, the correlation of the sugar content of the gari was positive and significant with the acidity ($r = 0.71, P < 0.05$; Table 5). The effect of different processing centres on the sensory evaluation of gari as reported by Makanjuola et al. (2012) showed that the ash, lipid and fibre contents of gari have a negative correlation with all the sensory attributes evaluated (Table 5). The correlation of the data generated by Olaoye et al. (2015), on the effect of varieties and length of fermentation on the sensory evaluation of gari showed that the acceptability of the gari had a significant ($P < 0.05$) positive correlation with ash and fibre ($r = 0.59$), and the carbohydrate ($r = 0.69$) contents, but a negative correlation with moisture ($r = -0.67, P < 0.05$; Table 5). Also, the ash, fibre and carbohydrate contents of the gari have significant positive correlations with all the sensory attributes, and that of moisture content was negative for all the attributes. The protein content had a significant positive correlation with the gari appearance ($r = 0.60, P < 0.05$), and the cyanogenic potential content had a significant negative correlation with the aroma ($r = -0.71, P < 0.05$; Table 5). Oluwole et al. (2004) on their own part reported that the breakdown of starch in fresh cassava root by *Corynebacterium manihot* into simple sugars and the subsequent fermentation to produce lactic and formic acids resulting in pH drop could be linked to the production of the characteristics taste of gari. This correlation implies that breeders may use the relationship between the chemical composition of the cassava roots and the sensory acceptability of gari during the breeding process to improve on the varieties.

Apart from the relationship between the composition of the gari and its sensory attributes, the chemical composition of the cassava roots may affect the consumer preference of the gari/eba. This is because Akely et al. (2020) reported that the sweet taste of gari could be attributed to the relative high reducing sugar and low hydrogen cyanide contents of the cassava roots. Sanoussi et al. (2015) on their part observed that the dirty white colour of gari may be due to the high soluble sugars of the cassava root, which tends to caramelise during roasting. The texture of gari was also reported by Sanoussi et al. (2015) to be associated with the low fibres content of the cassava roots.

By and large, the primary sensory attributes that describe good gari are colour, taste, texture and aroma/flavour. Texture attributes of importance is crispiness in the case of dried gari, and hand feel before consumption in the case of eba. Taste attributes of importance are sweetness and sourness, and the combination thereof of the gari and eba. As a result of the relationship between the sensory attributes of gari and the carbohydrate (starch) and cyanogenic potential (CNP) contents of the raw roots, breeders should work more on increasing the starch and decreasing the CNP contents of the roots. Also, the gab in the texture of the gari/eba could be attributed to the differences in the production of gari from one location to another (Laya et al., 2018), thus, there is a need for further study to establish the different textural attributes of gari/eba based on locations.

## Conclusions

Substantial work has been published on the biochemical composition of fresh cassava roots and gari, on the postharvest processing to produce gari, including enrichment with additional ingredients (palm oil, soy flour, etc.) and on their effect on the sensory properties and perception by consumers of gari itself and gari reconstituted into eba. It is possible to correlate some biochemical or functional properties with specific sensory attributes, such as particle size with the perception of texture, or lactic acid content with the perception of sourness. These correlations make possible the evaluation of gari by instrumental means, to identify and select improved cassava varieties most suitable for transformation into gari, or inclusion as progenitors in breeding programmes. For further research on the interactions between consumer preferences assessments and the development of improved cassava varieties, the following areas currently have little or no information published and would benefit from more investigations: (i) comparison of the physical, functional and biochemical properties of gari produced from traditional and mechanised methods, with consideration of unit operation in order to identify critical control points and clarify the effect of the process on gari quality; (ii) the sensory attributes and consumer acceptability of gari produced from traditional and mechanised methods, and the sensory and instrumental texture profile analyses of eba from the same two methods; (iii) effect of postharvest preservation techniques of cassava roots such as ratooning and pruning on the processing ability, quality and sensory properties of gari and eba; (iv) effect of carotenoids biofortification on the quality and acceptability of eba, by comparing the properties and sensory attributes of eba made from white and yellow-fleshed varieties.
## Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the RTBfoods project https://rtbfoods.cirad.fr through a grant OPP1178942: Breeding RTB products for end-user preferences (RTBfoods), to the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), Montpellier, France, by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF). Special thanks to Béla Teeken, Tessy Madu, Benjamin Okoye, Bello Abolore, Olamide Olaosebikan, Durodola Owoade, Michael Adesokan, Maria Justin, Catherine Ebah, N'Nan Diby, Christelle Kouakou, Ernest Depieu and Alban Kanon, for their contributions to this work. Thanks to Clair Hershey for reviewing and editing the manuscript.

## Author contributions

**Wasiu Awoyale:** Conceptualization (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Software (equal); Writing-original draft (equal). **Emmanuel Oladeji Alamu:** Conceptualization (equal); Methodology (equal); Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Ugo Chijioke:** Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Thierry Tran:** Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Noel Hubert Takam-Tchuente:** Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Robert Ndjouenkeu:** Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Franklin Ngoualem Kegah:** Validation (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal). **Bussie Maziya-Dixon:** Conceptualization (equal); Funding acquisition (equal); Resources (equal); Writing-review & editing (equal).

## Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest in this work.

## Ethical approval

Ethics approval was not required for this research.

## Peer Review

The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1111/ijfs.14867.

## Data availability statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

## References

Abass, A.B., Dziedzoave, N.T., Alenkhe, B.E. & James, B.D. (2012). *Quality Management Manual for the Production of Gari*. Pp. 48. Ibadan, Nigeria: IITA.

Adeleke, R. O. & Odedeji, J. O. (2010) Functional properties of wheat and sweet potato flour blends. *Pakistan Journal of Nutrition*, **9** (6), 535-538.

Adeoti, O., Ayelegun, T.A. & Oyewole, B.A. (2009). A review on the impact of gari consumption on the water resource of Nigeria. *African Journal of Biotechnology*, **8**, 7283-7289.

Adinsi, L., Akissoé, N., Escobar, A. et al. (2019). Sensory and physicochemical profiling of traditional and enriched gari in Benin. *Food Science and Nutrition*, **7**, 3338-3348.

Africabiz online (2020). Tropical Roots and Tubers: (VII)-B-Gari market. Accessed from http://businessafrica.net/africabiz/arcvoll1/is61front.php on Friday 25/09/2020 at 12.50 pm.

AGROPME (2010). Étude de marché de gari et de fufu dans les villes de Douala & Yaoundé. PNDRT et IRTCM - Cameroun.

Akely, P.M.T., Gnagne, E.H., To Lou, G.M.L.T. & Amani, G.N.G. (2021). Varietal influence of cassava on chemical composition and consumer acceptability of gari. *International Journal of Food Science and Technology*, **56**, 1239-1246.

Akingbala, J.O., Oyewole, O.B., Uzo-Peters, P.I., Karim, R.O. & Bacuss-Taylor, G.S.H. (2005). Evaluating stored cassava quality in gari production. *Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment*, **3**, 75-80.

Akinoso, R. & Olatunde, S.J. (2014) Effect of mash quantity and roasting duration on some physical and pasting properties of gari. *International Food Research Journal*, **21**, 77-82.

Aloys, N. & Zhou, H.M. (2005). Functional and chemical properties of Ikivunde Burundian cassava flours. *Journal of Food Biochemistry*, **30**, 429-443.

Alozie, Y.E. & Ekerette, N.N. (2017). Proximate compositions, physicochemical and sensory properties of gari fortified with soybean, melon seed and moringa seed flours. *International Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences*, **6**, 105-110.

Anggraini, V., Sudarmonowati, E., Hartati, N.S., Suurs, L. & Visser, R.G. (2009). Characterization of cassava starch attributes of different genotypes. *Starch-Stärke*, **61**, 472-481.

Aniedu, C. & Omodamiro, R.M. (2012). Use of newly bred β-carotene cassava in the production of value-added products. The implication for food security in Nigeria. *Global Journal of Science Frontier Research*, **12**, 11-16.

Apea-Bah, F.B., Oduro, I., Ellis, W.O. & Safo-Kantanka, O. (2011). Multivariate analysis and age at harvest effect on sensory preference of Gari from four cassava varieties. *American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences*, **11**, 326-333.

Arisa, N.U., Omosaiye, O.B., Adelekan, A.O. & Alabi-Mac Foy, A. (2011). Chemical and Sensory qualities of gari fortified with groundnut flour. *African Journal of Food Science and Technology*, **2**, 116-119.

Aryee, F.N.A., Oduro, I., Ellis, W.O. & Afuakwa, J.J. (2006). The physicochemical properties of flour samples from the roots of 31 varieties of cassava. *Food Control*, **17**, 916-922.

Asaoka, M., Blanshard, M.V. & Rickard, J.E. (1992). Effects of cultivar and growth season on the gelatinization properties of cassava (*Manihot esculenta*) starch. *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture*, **59**, 53-58.

Awoyale, W. (2018). *Training Manual for the Production of Cassava Products in Liberia*, Pp. 44. Ibadan, Nigeria: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA).

Awoyale, W., Kawalawu, W.K.C., Asiedu, R., Maziya-Dixon, B., Abass, A. & Edet, M. (2019). Evaluation of the chemical composition and functional properties of gari from Liberia. *Croatian Journal of Food Science and Technology*, **11**, 157-167.

**Awoyale, W., Oyedele, H. & Maziya-Dixon, B. (2020). Functional and pasting properties of gari produced from white-fleshed
cassava roots as affected by packaging materials and storage periods, and sensory attributes of the cooked gari dough (eba). *International Journal of Food Studies*. (Accepted for publication with manuscript number-875-5858-1-CE.docx). Available https://www.iseki-food-ejournal.com/ojs/index.php/e-journal/author/submission Editing/875. https://10.7455/ijfs/10.1.2021.a9.

Ayetigbo, O., Latif, S., Abass, A. & Müller, J. (2018). Comparing characteristics of root, flour and starch of biofortified yellow-flesh and white-flesh cassava variants, and sustainability considerations: a review. *Sustainability, 10*, 3089.

Bechoff, A., Tomlins, K.I., Chijioke, U., Ilona, P., Westby, A. & Boy, E. (2018). Physical losses could partially explain modest carotenoid retention in dried food products from biofortified cassava. *PLoS One, 13*, e0194402.

Butterworth, R., Abdulsalam-Saghir, P. & Martin, A. (2008). *Gender and Diversity Report -Nigeria*, Pp. 42. Cassava: Adding Value for Africa Project.

Charles, A.L., Chang, Y.H., Ko, W.C., Sriroth, K. & Huang, T.C. (2005). Influence of amylopectin structure and amylose content on the gelling properties of five cultivars of cassava starches. *Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 53*, 2717-2725.

Charoenkul, N., Uttapap, D., Pathipanawat, W. & Takeda, Y. (2006). Molecular structure of starches from cassava varieties having different cooked root textures. *Starch-Stärke, 58*, 443-452.

Chavez, A.L., Sanchez, T., Ceballos, H. et al. (2007). Retention of carotenoids in cassava roots submitted to different processing methods. *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 87*, 388-393.

Chen, L. & Opara, U.L. (2013). Approaches to analysis and modelling texture in fresh and processed foods – a review. *Journal of Food Engineering, 119*, 497-507.

Collard, P.V. & Levi, S. (1959). A two-stage fermentation of cassava. *Nature, 183*, 620-621.

Coulibaly, O., Arinloye, A.D., Faye, M. & Abdoulaye, T. (2014). Regional cassava value chains analysis in West Africa. Technical report, pp 49.

Defloor, I., Dehing, I. & Delcour, J.A. (1998). Physico-chemical properties of cassava starch. *Starch-Stärke, 50*, 58-64.

Edem, D. O., Ayatse, J. O. I. & Itam, E. H. (2001) Effect of soy protein supplementation on the nutritive value of 'gari' (farina) from Manihot esculenta. *Food Chemistry, 75*, 57-62.

Egesi, C.N., Olasanmi, B., Ekwe, K.C. et al. (2012). Participatory breeding for-vitamin A enriched cassava in Nigeria. In R.U. Okechukwu & P. Ntawuruhunga (Eds), *Tropical Roots and Tuber Crops and the Challenges of Globalization and Climate Changes*. Proceedings of 11 ISTRC-AB symposiums, Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo, 4-8 October 2010. Nigeria: 236-240.

Eggleston, G. & Asiedu, R. (1994) Effects of boiling on the texture of cassava clones: A comparison of compressive strength, intercellular adhesion and physico-chemical composition of the tuberous roots. *Tropical Science, 34*, 259-273.

Eje, B.E., Ugwu, K.C. & Okafor, E.C. (2015). Physiochemical and organoleptic properties of gari from cassava roots stored in moist medium for fifteen weeks. *International Journal of Engineering Science and Innovative Technology, 4*, 1-6.

Escobar, A., Dahdouh, L., Rondet, E. et al. (2018). Development of a novel integrated approach to monitor the processing of cassava roots into gari: macroscopic and microscopic scales. *Food Bioprocess Technology, 11*, 1370-1380.

Eyunla, T.E., Maziya-Dixon, B., Alamu, O.E. & Sanusi, R.A. (2019). Retention of pro-vitamin a content in products from new biofortified cassava varieties. *Foods, 8*, 177.

FAO (2004). Cassava industrial revolution in Nigeria. www.fao.org/docrep007/y5548e/y5548e07.htm.

FAO (2018). *Étude diagnostique de la réduction des pertes après récolte de trois cultures: manioc-tomate-pomme de terre*. Rapport de synthèse: Cameroun. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organisation of United Nations.

Favaro, S. P., Beleia, A., da Silva Fonseca Junior, N. & Waldron, K. W. (2008) The roles of cell wall polymers and intracellular components in the thermal softening of cassava roots. *Food Chemistry, 108* (1), 220-227.

Favier, J.-C., Chevassus-Agnès, S. & Gallon, G. (1969). *Les amyласés du Cameroun*. Centre ORSTOM de Yaoundé.

FOS. (1970). *Nigeria Federal Office of Statistics (FOS)*. Lagos: National Consumer Survey.

Franck, H., Christian, M., Noel, A. et al. (2011). Effects of cultivar and harvesting conditions (age, season) on the texture and taste of boiled cassava roots. *Food Chemistry, 126*, 127-133.

Goddard, J., Harris, K.P., Kelly, A. et al. (2015). Root, tuber, and banana textural traits: a review of the available food science and consumer preferences literature. *Evans School Policy Analysis and Research (EPAR)*, 295, 1-52.

Gouado, I., Mawamba, D.A., Ouambo, M.R.S., Some, T.I. & Tchouanguep, M.F. (2008). Provitamin A carotenoid content of dried fermented cassava flour: the effect of palm oil addition during processing. *International Journal of Food Engineering, 4*, 1556-13758.

Huang, C.C., Chiang, P.Y., Chen, Y.Y. & Wang, C.R. (2007). Chemical compositions and enzyme activity changes occurring in yam (*Dioscorea alata* L.) tubers during growth. *Food Science and Technology, 40*, 1498-1506.

Idowu, M.A. & Akindele, S.A. (1994). Effect of storage of cassava roots on the chemical composition and sensory qualities of 'gari' and 'fufu'. *Food Chemistry, 51*, 421-424.

IITA (2011). New vitamin A-fortified cassava released in Nigeria, set to improve the health of millions. Bulletin issue No. 2098, 5-9 December. Pp. 1-2.

Karim, O.R., Balogun, M.A., Akintayo, O.A. & Awoyale, W. (2016). Physical, chemical and sensory properties of cassava (*Manihot esculenta*) - sweet potato (*Ipomoea batatas*) gari. *Ukrainian Journal of Food Science, 4*, 276-289.

Kim, Y.S., Wiesenborn, D.P., Orr, P.H. & Grant, L.A. (1995). Screening potato starch for novel properties. *Journal of Food Science, 60*, 1060-1065.

** Laya, A., Koubala, B.B., Kouninki, H. & Nukenine, E.N. (2018). Effect of harvest period on the proximate composition and functional and sensory properties of gari produced from local and improved Cassava (*Manihot esculenta*) varieties. *International Journal of Food Science, 6241035*, 1-15.

Lengha, T.N. (2017). The use of technology by women gari producers in Bamkumbit village, Northwest Region of Cameroon. *IJRDO-Journal of Agriculture and Research, 3*, 37-52.

Maieves, H.A., De Oliveira, D.C., Bernardo, C., Müller, C.M.D.O. & Amante, E.R. (2012). Microscopy and texture of raw and cooked cassava (Manihot Esculenta Crantz) roots. *Journal of Texture Studies, 43*, 164-173.

** Makanjuola, O.M., Ogunmodede, A.S., Makanjuola, J.O. & Awonorin, S.O. (2012). Comparative study on quality attributes of gari obtained from some processing centres in South-west, Nigeria. *Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology, 4*, 135-140.

Maziya-Dixon, B., Awoyale, W. & Dixon, A. (2015). Effect of processing on the retention of total carotenoid, iron and zinc contents of yellow-fleshed cassava roots. *Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 3*, 483-488.

Montagnac, J.A., Davis, C.R. & Tanumihardjo, S.A. (2009). Nutritional value of cassava for use as a staple food and recent advances for improvement. *Comprehensive Review in Food Science and Food Safety, 8*, 181-188.

Nimoh, F., Richmond, A.R., Asiamah, M.T. et al. (2020). Financial performance and constraints in gari production in Kumasi, Ghana. *African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 20*, 16085-16098.
Njukwe, E., Hanna, R., Kirscht, H. & Araki, S. (2013). Farmers perception and criteria for cassava variety preference in Cameroon. *African Study Monographs*, **34**, 221–234.

Nyirenda, D.B., Chiwona-Karltun, L., Chitundu, M., Haggblade, S. & Brimer, L. (2011). Chemical safety of cassava products in regions adopting cassava production and processing – experience from Southern Africa. *Food and Chemical Toxicology*, **49**, 607–612.

Oduro, I., Ellis, W.O., Aryeetey, S.K., Ahenkora, K. & Otoo, J.A. (2000). Pasting characteristics of starch from new sweet-potato. *Tropical Science*, **40**, 25–28.

Ogundipe, O.S., Oyelade, O.A. & Farounbi, A.J. (2013). Cassava processing in Nigeria: a case study of gari processing. *Continental Journal of Agricultural Sciences*, **7**, 10–16.

Ogunlakin, G.O., Olanipekun, B.F., Okpor, J.M. & Ajayeoba, T.A. (2015). Effect of soybeans treatment on some quality parameters of soy-gari. *Donnish Journal of Food Science and Technology*, **1**, 0001–0005.

Okafor, N., Umeh, C. & Ibenegbu, C. (1998). Amelioration of gari, a cassava-based fermented food by the inoculation of microorganisms secreting amylase, lysine and linamarase into cassava mash. *World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology*, **14**, 835–838.

Okafor, N. & Uzuegbu, J.O. (1987). Studies on the contribution of micro-organism to the organoleptic properties of gari, a fermented food derived from cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz). *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture*, **2**, 99–105.

Olaleye, O.O., Afolayan, S.S., Aondo, T.O. & Adeniyi, A.B. (2018). Effect of storage methods on the physicochemical and sensory attributes of gari processed from stored cassava roots varieties. *Journal of Agriculture and Ecology Research International*, **14**, 1–10.

** Olaleye, O.A., Lawrence, I.G., Cornelius, G.N. & Ihenetu, M.E. (2015). Evaluation of quality attributes of cassava product (gari) produced at varying length of fermentation. *American Journal of Agricultural Science*, **2**, 1–7.

Oluwamukomi, M.O. (2015a). Chemical and sensory properties of gari enriched with sesame seed flour (Sesamum indicum L.). *FUTA Journal of Research in Sciences*, **1**, 123–131.

Oluwamukomi, M.O. (2015b). Chemical and sensory properties of gari fortified with sesame seed flour (Sesamum Indicum L.). *FUTA Journal of Research in Sciences*, **1**, 123–131.

Oluwamukomi, M.O. & Jolayemi, O.S. (2012). Physicothermal and pasting properties of soy-melon-enriched "gari" semolina from cassava. *Agricultural Engineering International: CIGR Journal*, **14**, 105–116.

Oluwole, O.B., Olatunji, O.O. & Odunfa, S.A. (2004). A process technology for conversation of dried cassava chips into gari. *Nigerian Food Journal*, **22**, 65–73.

Omodamiro, R., Oti, E., Etudaiye, H., Egesi, C., Olasanmi, B. & Ukpabi, U. (2012). Production of fufu from yellow cassava roots using the odourless flour technique and the traditional method: evaluation of carotenoids retention in the fufu. *Advances in Applied Science and Research*, **3**, 2566–2572.

Omueti, O., Amusan, J.A., Fayemi, T. & Ashaye, K. (1993). Evaluation of gari from markets and processing centres for cyanide and moisture content in some states in Nigeria. *Nigerian Food Journal*, **11**, 135–136.

Onadipe, O. (2011). Total carotenoid content, retention, bioavailability and consumer acceptability of gari from biofortified cassava roots (PhD thesis). Abeokuta, Nigeria: University of Agriculture.

Onitilo, M.O., Sanii, L.O., Daniel, I., Maziya-dixon, B. & Dixon, A. (2007). Physicochemical and functional properties of native starches from cassava verities in southwest Nigeria. *Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment*, **5**, 108–114.

Onyemauwa, C.S. (2010). Analysis of Household Consumption of Cassava Products in Ohaozara, Ebonyi State, Southeast Nigeria. *Researcher*, **2**, 1–6.

Onyemauwa, C.S. (2012). Analysis of women participation in cassava production and processing in Imo State,

South-east Nigeria. *Journal of Economics of and Economics and Sustainable*, **3**, 81–90.

Onyenwoke, C.A. & Simonyan, K.J. (2014). Cassava postharvest processing and storage in Nigeria: a review. *African Journal of Agricultural Research*, **9**, 3853–3863.

Ortiz, D., Sánchez, T., Morante, N., Ceballos, H., Pachón, H. & Duque, M.C. (2011). Sampling strategies for proper quantification of carotenoids content in cassava breeding. *Journal of Plant Breeding and Crop Science*, **3**, 14–23.

Osho, S.M. (2003) Methods for the dissemination of food processing technologies: the soybean example in Nigeria. *International Society for Horticultural Science*, **21**, 1–2.

Owuamanam, C.I., Oguke, C.C., Achinewhu, S.C. & Barimala, I.S. (2011). Quality characteristics of gari as affected by permanent liquor, temperature, and duration of fermentation. *American Journal of Food Technology*, **6**, 374–384.

Oyewole, O. & Afolami, O.A. (2001). Quality and preference of different cassava varieties for lafun production. *Journal of Food Technology in Africa*, **6**, 27–29.

Oyeyinka, S.A., Ajayi, O.I., Gbadebo, C.T., Kayode, R.M.O., Karim, O.R. & Adeloye, A. (2019). Physiochemical properties of gari prepared from frozen cassava roots. *LWT-Food Science and Technology*, **99**, 594–599.

Perez, E.E., Breene, W.M. & Bahnassey, Y.A. (1998). Variations in the gelatinization profiles of cassava, sagu and arrowroot native starches as measured with different thermal and mechanical methods. *Starch-Stärke*, **50**, 70–72.

PNDRT. (2006). Etude sur l'observatoire des racines et tubercules: rapport de première phase.

Quaye, W., Gayin, J., Yawson, I. & Plahar, W.A. (2009). Characteristics of various cassava processing methods and the adoption requirements in Ghana. *Journal of Root Crops*, **35**, 59–68.

Sánchez, H., Ceballos, F., Calle, J.C. et al. (2010). Tolerance to postharvest physiological deterioration in cassava roots. *Crop Science*, **50**, 1333–1338.

Sanni, L.O., Maziya-Dixo, B., Akanya, C.I. et al. (2005). *Standards for Cassava Products and Guidelines for Export*. Pp. 11–39 Ibadan, Nigeria: International Institute of Tropical Agriculture.

Sanni, S.A., Oguntona, C.R.B., Oguntona, E.B. & Maziya-Dixon, B. (2010). Chemical composition, pasting and sensory properties of iron-fortified cassava gari. *Food*, **4**, 55–60.

Sanni, L.O., Oyewole, O.B., Adebowale, A.A. & Adebayo, K. (2003). Current trends in the utilization of roots and tubers for sustainable development. Brouwer, I.D., Traore, A.S. & Trèche, S., Eds: In: *Food Based Approaches for Healthy Nutrition*. Ouagadougou: Presse Universitaire, Proceedings of the 2nd International workshop. Pp. 123–138.

Sanni, M.O. & Sobamiwa, A.O. (1994) Processing and characteristics of soybean-fortified gari. *World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology*, **10**, 206–270.

Sanoussi, A.F., Loko, L.Y., Ahissou, H. et al. (2015). Diversity, physicochemical and technological characterization of elite Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz) Cultivars of Bantè, a District of Central Benin. *The Scientific World Journal*, **8**, 1–8.

Tolly Lolo, E. (2013). Amélioration de la commercialisation et de transformation du manioc au Cameroun: contraintes et perspectives de la chaîne de valeur. Elbehri, A,(eds.), In: *Reconstruire le potentiel alimentaire de l'Afrique de l'Ouest*. Pp. 551–584. Rome: FAO/FIDA.

Tomlins, K., Rwiza, E., Nyango, A. et al. (2004). The use of sensory evaluation and consumer preference for the selection of sweet-potato cultivars in East Africa. *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture*, **84**, 791–799.

Tomlins, K., Sanni, L., Oyewole, O. et al. (2007). Consumer acceptability and sensory evaluation of a fermented cassava product (Nigerian fufu). *Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture*, **87**, 1949–1956.
Udofia, P.G., Uduodo, P.J., Eyen, N.O. & Udoekong, N.S. (2011). Optimizing gari quality attributes for different groups of consumers with response surface methodology. *Journal of Agricultural Biotechnology and Sustainable Development, 3*, 28–34.

Udoro, E.O., Kehinde, A.T., Olasunkanmi, S.G. & Charles, T.A. (2014). Studies on the physicochemical, functional and sensory properties of gari processed from dried cassava chips. *Journal of Food Processing and Technology, 5*, 293.

Westby, A. (2002). Cassava utilization, storage and small-scale processing. In: *Cassava Biology, Production and Utilization* (edited by R.J. Hillocks, J.M. Thresh & A.C. Bellotti). Pp. 480. Oxfordshire, UK: CABI Publishing.

Westby, A. & Twiddy, D. (1992). Characterization of garland fufu preparation procedures in Nigeria. *World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 8*, 175–182.