## 3 Results  
### Nutritional and Energetic Value of Pasta  
The nutritional and energetic values of the pasta developed in the study are summarised in Table 3, by regulation No. 1169/2011 on the information's provision to consumers in the labelling of food products [25]. Figure 1: Experimental pasta: (**a**) control sample and AMAR; (**b**) amaranth pasta blends with buckwheat flour—AMAR+BUCKW 15%, AMAR+BUCKW 30%, and AMAR+BUCKW 50%; (**c**) amaranth pasta blends with oat flour—AMAR+OAT 15%, AMAR+OAT 30%, and AMAR+OAT 50%. Figure 2: The research design. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline
**Nutrients/** & **Control** & & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** & **AMAR+** \\
**Energetic Value** & **Sample** & **AIMAR** & **BUCKW 15\%** & **BUCKW 30\%** & **BUCKW 50\%** & **OAT 15\%** & **OAT 30\%** & **OAT 50\%** \\ \hline Moisture, g & \(11.23\pm 0.17\)* & \(6.75\pm 0.23\)* & \(5.14\pm 0.30\)* & \(5.01\pm 0.27\)* & \(6.33\pm 0.21\)* & \(5.21\pm 0.22\)* & \(5.66\pm 0.23\)* & \(6.42\pm 0.18\)* \\ Fat, g & \(1.04\pm 0.03\)* & \(5.45\pm 0.20\)* & \(4.58\pm 0.24\)* & \(4.37\pm 0.11\)* & \(3.96\pm 0.15\)* & \(4.99\pm 0.14\)* & \(4.77\pm 0.21\)* & \(4.22\pm 0.20\)* \\ including SFA, g & \(0.28\pm 0.01\)* & \(1.59\pm 0.02\)* & \(1.13\pm 0.07\)* & \(1.05\pm 0.03\)* & \(11.26\pm 0.06\)* & \(1.25\pm 0.03\)* & \(1.16\pm 0.06\)* & \(1.17\pm 0.05\)* \\ Carbohydrates, g & \(69.81\pm 0.90\)* & \(60.77\pm 1.19\)* & \(61.6\pm 1.01\)* & \(64.08\pm 1.12\)* & \(63.13\pm 1.45\)* & \(56.76\pm 0.98\)* & \(58.31\pm 1.03\)* & \(59.60\pm 1.09\)* \\ including sugars, g & \(3.95\pm 0.03\)* & \(5.12\pm 0.06\)* & \(4.96\pm 0.14\)* & \(4.88\pm 0.12\)* & \(4.80\pm 0.07\)* & \(5.09\pm 0.16\)* & \(4.30\pm 0.08\)* & \(3.50\pm 0.04\)* \\ Fibre, g & \(0.29\pm 0.01\)* & \(3.49\pm 0.09\)* & \(3.11\pm 0.07\)* & \(2.29\pm 0.09\)* & \(2.99\pm 0.06\)* & \(2.85\pm 0.06\)* & \(2.31\pm 0.07\)* & \(1.91\pm 0.04\)* \\ Protein, g & \(11.78\pm 0.39\)* & \(13.26\pm 0.40\)* & \(13.47\pm 0.34\)* & \(13.47\pm 0.41\)* & \(13.35\pm 0.41\)* & \(13.68\pm 0.35\)* & \(13.87\pm 0.27\)* & \(14.35\pm 0.45\)* \\ Salt, g & \(0.007\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.05\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.075\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.063\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.07\pm 0.01\)* & \(0.009\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.078\pm 0.00\)* & \(0.07\pm 0.00\)* \\ Energetic value, kJ & \(1428\pm 21\) & \(1488\pm 34\) & \(1471\pm 34\) & \(1498\pm 30\) & \(1471\pm 38\) & \(1405\pm 28\) & \(1422\pm 28\) & \(1429\pm 34\) \\ Iron, mg & \(1.22\pm 0.02\)* & \(6.71\pm 0.11\)* & \(6.10\pm 0.08\)* & \(5.49\pm 0.10\)* & \(4.53\pm 0.18\)* & \(5.68\pm 0.12\)* & \(5.90\pm 0.13\)* & \(5.33\pm 0.15\)* \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
* Different letters indicate significant differences (\(p<0.05\)) within each row.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Nutritional and energetic value per 100 g amaranth pasta samples developed in the study. Significant differences between the control sample and the developed amaranth pasta and its blends with buckwheat or oat flour were identified in all indicators (_p_ < 0.05); except for the energy value, there were no significant differences between the samples (_p_ > 0.05). The control sample showed a significantly higher carbohydrate content, while the other nutrients had significantly lower values. The developed pasta samples showed similar amounts of moisture and salt, while significant differences were found for carbohydrates, fat, saturated fatty acids, sugars, fiber, and iron. The AMAR pasta sample had a significantly higher amount of fat, saturated fatty acids, fiber, protein, and iron compared to the blends with buckwheat or oat flour. In the AMAR+OAT 50% pasta sample, the significantly highest protein content among the samples was found. The energetic value of all pasta samples ranged from 336 to 354 kcal 100 g\({}^{-1}\). All seven pasta samples can be evaluated as products with increased nutritional value to which several nutrition claims can be applied by regulation No.