## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **CP** & **FCP** & **FPC** & **CCP** & **CCP** \\ \hline Total phenolics (mg & 8.36 \(\pm\) 0.59 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.15 \(\pm\) 0.01 \({}^{\text{e}}\) & 2.23 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 0.46 \(\pm\) 0.06 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 1.10 \(\pm\) 0.03 \({}^{\text{c}}\) \\ GAE/g & & & & & \\ Total flavonoids (mg & 5.17 \(\pm\) 0.72 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & 0.09 \(\pm\) 0.04 \({}^{\text{d}}\) & 3.86 \(\pm\) 0.32 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & 1.85 \(\pm\) 0.21 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & 3.71 \(\pm\) 0.16 \({}^{\text{b}}\) \\ Total anthocyanins & & & & & \\ (mg/g) & & & & & \\ Caroenoids (mg/g) & & & & & \\ DPPH\({}^{\bullet}\) (mg TE/g) & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Results expressed in mg/g dry weight. Values are presented as mean \(\pm\) standard deviation (n = 3). Values within each line that do not share the same letter are significantly different (\(p<\) 0.05), determined by ANOVA followed by the Tukey HSD test. CP—calendula petals; FCP—uncooked pasta control; FPC—uncooked enriched pasta with 5% calendula petals; CCP—cooked pasta control; CPC—cooked enriched pasta with 5% calendula petals.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: The quantification of bioactive compounds and antioxidant activity (DPPH\({}^{\bullet}\)) of calendula petals, uncooked and cooked control pasta, and enriched pasta with 5% calendula petals. Results are expressed in mg/g dry weight (dw). As shown in Table 3, the parameters studied exhibit a strong correlation, with values exceeding 0.50. As anticipated, flavonoids display the highest correlation with phenolics, reflecting their status as a subgroup of these compounds. The addition of novel ingredients might affect the appearance, flavor, and aroma of pasta, and few studies have been conducted on the sensory analysis of enriched pasta. Currently, no research has been carried out on the inclusion of petals of calendula in fresh pasta. To examine the previous requirements, a sensory analysis was conducted using an untrained taster panel (Table 4). Since this was considered an innovative study, an assessment of the product's acceptance was included (Figure 1). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c} \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Attributes**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Age**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Rank**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Test Statistics**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **N** & **Mean Rank** & **Z-Value** & **Chi-Square** & **DF** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{Control} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Appearance} & \textless{}25 & 26 & 36.1 & 0.71 & & & \\  & 25–50 & 33 & 31.9 & \(-\)0.86 & 0.79 & 2 & 0.675 \\  & \textless{}50 & 8 & 35.7 & 0.26 & & & \\  & \textless{}25 & 26 & 36.4 & 0.81 & & & \\  & 25–50 & 33 & 33.0 & \(-\)0.40 & 0.85 & 2 & 0.654 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 30.0 & \(-\)0.60 & & & \\  & \textless{}25 & 26 & 35.3 & 0.45 & & & \\ Flavor & 25–50 & 33 & 34.0 & 0.00 & 0.55 & 2 & 0.758 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 29.6 & \(-\)0.68 & & & \\ \multicolumn{8}{c}{Purchase probability} & \textless{}25 & 26 & 30.5 & \(-\)1.16 & & & \\  & 25–50 & 33 & 34.8 & 0.34 & 3.14 & 2 & 0.208 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 41.8 & 1.21 & & & \\ \hline \multicolumn{8}{c}{Enriched pasta with 5\% calendula} \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Appearance} & \textless{}25 & 26 & 32.4 & \(-\)0.54 & & & \\  & 25–50 & 33 & 33.8 & \(-\)0.08 & 0.99 & 2 & 0.610 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 40.1 & 0.94 & & & \\  & \textless{}25 & 26 & 28.8 & \(-\)1.75 & & & \\ Aroma & 25–50 & 33 & 35.7 & 0.70 & 4.49 & 2 & 0.106 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 44.0 & 1.55 & & & \\ Flavor & 25–50 & 33 & 38.3 & 1.77 & 10.02 & 2 & 0.007 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 45.0 & 1.70 & & & \\ Purchase probability & \textless{}25 & 26 & 32.0 & \(-\)0.68 & & & \\  & 25–50 & 33 & 33.9 & \(-\)0.04 & 2.65 & 2 & 0.266 \\  & \textgreater{}50 & 8 & 41.0 & 1.08 & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Kruskal–Wallis test to check the difference between tasters in relation to an age range for each sample.