## 3 Results and Discussion
### Lafun Gruel Rheological Properties
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**LAB Strain(s)** & **Cassava Variety** & **Storage Modulus** & **Loss Modulus** & **\$ Value** \\ \hline K1 & Bitter & 1378.73 \({}^{\text{fgh}}\) \(\pm\) 21.19 & 287.89 \({}^{\text{cdef}}\) \(\pm\) 4.29 & 0.21 \\  & Fortified & 2864.80 \({}^{\text{1}}\) \(\pm\) 105.32 & 480.90 \({}^{\text{1}}\) \(\pm\) 11.34 & 0.17 \\  & Sweet & 1467.57 \({}^{\text{gh}}\) \(\pm\) 170.91 & 356.27 \({}^{\text{fgh}}\) \(\pm\) 41.47 & 0.24 \\ \hline L & Bitter & 1215.97 \({}^{\text{def}}\) \(\pm\) 84.35 & 284.56 \({}^{\text{cdef}}\) \(\pm\) 12.29 & 0.23 \\  & Fortified & 2775.27 \({}^{\text{kl}}\) \(\pm\) 234.98 & 489.91 \({}^{\text{1}}\) \(\pm\) 39.32 & 0.18 \\  & Sweet & 1283.63 \({}^{\text{efg}}\) \(\pm\) 77.14 & 300.27 \({}^{\text{def}}\) \(\pm\) 17.78 & 0.23 \\ \hline K2 & Bitter & 869.46 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 61.49 & 205.25 \({}^{\text{a}}\) \(\pm\) 10.73 & 0.24 \\  & Fortified & 4589.87 \({}^{\text{n}}\) \(\pm\) 466.45 & 804.57 \({}^{\text{1}}\) \(\pm\) 66.35 & 0.18 \\  & Sweet & 999.64 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) \(\pm\) 62.95 & 241.09 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) \(\pm\) 9.92 & 0.24 \\ \hline M & Bitter & 1260.83 \({}^{\text{efg}}\) \(\pm\) 58.77 & 274.69 \({}^{\text{abcdc}}\) \(\pm\) 12.09 & 0.22 \\  & Fortified & 2324.40 \({}^{\text{1}}\) \(\pm\) 334.78 & 382.09 \({}^{\text{fhi}}\) \(\pm\) 58.3 & 0.16 \\  & Sweet & 926.81 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) \(\pm\) 86.34 & 228.18 \({}^{\text{abcd}}\) \(\pm\) 15.34 & 0.25 \\ \hline L + M & Bitter & 1197.10 \({}^{\text{cdef}}\) \(\pm\) 19.77 & 268.96 \({}^{\text{abcdc}}\) \(\pm\) 1.28 & 0.22 \\  & Fortified & 2340.33 \({}^{\text{ij}}\) \(\pm\) 82.14 & 390.51 \({}^{\text{fhi}}\) \(\pm\) 9.79 & 0.17 \\  & Sweet & 1329.67 \({}^{\text{efgh}}\) \(\pm\) 29.93 & 288.32 \({}^{\text{cdef}}\) \(\pm\) 3.79 & 0.22 \\ \hline K + K & Bitter & 908.65 \({}^{\text{ab}}\) \(\pm\) 41.81 & 226.29 \({}^{\text{abc}}\) \(\pm\) 9.49 & 0.25 \\  & Fortified & 2561.83 \({}^{\text{jk}}\) \(\pm\) 76.51 & 439.02 \({}^{\text{ij}}\) \(\pm\) 13.45 & 0.17 \\  & Sweet & 1275.67 \({}^{\text{efg}}\) \(\pm\) 61.29 & 282.60 \({}^{\text{cde}}\) \(\pm\) 9.74 & 0.22 \\ \hline K1 + L & Bitter & 1093.03 \({}^{\text{abcdc}}\) \(\pm\) 22.05 & 239.95 \({}^{\text{abcdc}}\) \(\pm\) 3.24 & 0.22 \\  & Fortified & 3480.77 \({}^{\text{m}}\) \(\pm\) 159.46 & 621.58 \({}^{\text{k}}\) \(\pm\) 16.47 & 0.18 \\  & Sweet & 1543.57 \({}^{\text{h}}\) \(\pm\) 61.08 & 322.29 \({}^{\text{efg}}\) \(\pm\) 10.36 & 0.21 \\ \hline K2 + M & Bitter & 1303.20 \({}^{\text{efg}}\) \(\pm\) 28.9 & 281.44 \({}^{\text{bcde}}\) \(\pm\) 8.3 & 0.22 \\  & Fortified & 2292.30 \({}^{\text{i}}\) \(\pm\) 57.57 & 397.48 \({}^{\text{hi}}\) \(\pm\) 7.69 & 0.17 \\  & Sweet & 1470.27 \({}^{\text{gh}}\) \(\pm\) 29.28 & 335.22 \({}^{\text{efgh}}\) \(\pm\) 2.87 & 0.23 \\ \hline MKT1 & Market sample & 1130.13 \({}^{\text{bcde}}\)\(\pm\) 8.2 & 208.07 \({}^{\text{ab}}\)\(\pm\) 0.99 & 0.18 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Rheological properties of lafun gruel produced from hydrated lafun of control fermentation of LAB, three cassava varieties (raw) (bitter: IBA30527; fortified: IBA011371; and sweet: TMEB117), and the Bodija market sample. Additionally, rheological measurement revealed different trends in the behaviour of gruel latfun made with different cassava varieties. Thus, the rheology of latfun was primarily affected by the type of cassava used. This behaviour agrees with the findings of [PERSON] et al. (2016), who reported that different flour characteristics influence rheological properties. The products of fortified cassava are more elastic than the products of the other two varieties. This solid-like behaviour of fortified cassava products could be an indication of a better water-holding capacity and, therefore, better product quality.