INTRODUCTION Fig (Ficus carica) belongs to the family Moraceae has been growing since 4000 B.C. Figs are syconia, multiple druplet fruits with a distinctive “inside-out” structure (Mawa et al., 2013). Fig can be harvested twice a year and its regarded as a seasonal fruit. Depending on the cultivar, it is harvested either in the spring or in the early or late summer (Ouchemoukh et al., 2012). Fig is a commercially valuable crop (Kitajima et al., 2018). A mature fresh fig has a pulp content of 84 % and a skin content of 16 % (Hiwale, 2015). The fresh figs contain moisture (89.8%), carbohydrate (17.1%), protein (1.3%), fat (0.2%), mineral matter (0.6%), phosphorus (0.03%), calcium (0.06%), and iron (12 mg). It also has carotene (162 μg), thiamine (60 μg), riboflavin (50 μg), and niacin (600 μg) per 100 g (Cheema and Bhatt, 1954). While the dried figs contained water (15.7%), reducing sugar (62.84%), protein (3.39%), ash (2.10%), crude fiber (5.80%), acid (0.42%) (Hiwale et al., 2015). Because of the large amount of dietary fiber, vitamins, and minerals in dried figs, they have a better nutrition profile than all other dried fruits (Badgujar et al., 2014). There are many varieties (about 1,000 varieties) under cultivation which may have common characteristics. Turkey is the highest leading producer of figs (Hiwale, 2015) followed by Egypt, Moracco, Greece, Iran, and Algeria that account for 70 % of global annual fig production (FAOSTAT, 2022). Mineral amounts differed significantly amongst the sample groups grown in Italy, Greece and Turkey (Lo Turco et al., 2020). Figs are also a source of a number of bioactive compounds that are found in the peel, pulp, and leaves includes cyanidin 3-rutinoside, epicatechin, and caftaric acid, respectively (Teruel-Andreu et al., 2021). The traditional medicine field has been using fig products to treat a variety of diseases, primarily in the treatment of skin (Zhang et al., 2020). The fig plant's leaves, roots, and latex are recognized for the health benefits, including antihelminthic, antifungal, acetyl cholinesterase inhibition and anticarcinogenic effects (Arvaniti et al., 2019). It was reported that fig is used to treat a variety of ailments including gastric problems, inflammation and cancer. (Mawa et al., 2013). Fresh figs are extremely susceptible to decay and the post-harvest life is very short (Kong et al., 2013). So the fresh figs are processed, dried, stored, and consumed as a dried fruit for enhanced shelf life and safer storage. Previous studies have reported that the analysis of various physicochemical parameters of fig powder revealed that it is rich source of sugars, fiber, potassium (Khapre et al., 2014) which can be incorporated in various value added products like milk shake, ice cream, toffee and burfi (Khapre, 2011) . Value added products can be prepared using fig pulp, dried fig and also by incorporating fig powder. The products like fig jam having 0.7 %pectin and 0.3 % (Kumari et al., 2018), fruit bar with 20 % fig puree and 80 % mango puree (Pawase et al., 2018), fresh rabri, with 150g of fig pulp for every 1 liter of sweetened condensed milk (Dhemre et al., 2018) was prepared using fig pulp. The dried figs were crushed and filtered to prepare a microbial biotechnological product like wine from dried fig using Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the wine had 4 % alcohol (Kadam and Upadhye 2011), also wine was made from sliced figs (Jeong et al., 2005). The fig powder was found to be better in terms of ease of processing and yield, in contrast to fig pulp and dried figs. Fig powder was also incorporated to prepare burfi (Khapre et al., 2015), goat’s yogurt (Mahmoudi et al., 2021) and cookies Khapre et al. (2015). Chikki, also known as peanut brittle, is a famous Indian sweet snack enjoyed by a greater portion of population. Chikki is a hard crunchy product which is golden brown colored, that contains peanut pieces and has a distinct peanut flavour (Pallavi & Chetana 2014). There are various types of chikki based on the added ingredients, such as groundnut chikki, roasted bengal gram chikki, sesame chikki, and so on. The peanut chikki can be done using incorporation of various raw materials like sesame seed, ragi flour, flaxseed (Chetana & Sunkireddy, 2011), pomegranate juice (Devhare et al., 2021), even various nutraceuticals was used to enrich the chikki (Ramakrishna & Pamisetty 2014). Multigrain flour is now used in the preparation for maximum health benefits (Abhirami & Karpagapandi 2018). Based upon this research, this study aims at preparation of value of added product of Fig Chikki by incorporating fig powder and to study their effects upon storage for 30 days on various physico chemical parameters. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Preparation of Fig Powder The fresh figs of Deanna variety were purchased from orchards of Namakkal district of Tamil Nadu, India, dried and powdered. The figs were cleaned, washed and cut into round shaped slices of 0.5 ± 1.0 mm thickness. The slices were pretreated with 0.2% KMS solution. It was observed that the fresh fig slices had a mean diameter of 31.28 ± 3.66 mm and weighed 3.79 ± 0.24 g. The fresh figs were stored in a refrigerated condition of 4 ± 1°C until subjecting them to drying. The figs were subjected to drying by using a novel method of Low Temperature Low Humidity (LTLH) drying. The fresh fig slices were placed in the drying chamber and dried in the set condition of 30°C and 10 % RH until the moisture is reduced to 5 %. The dried fig samples were cooled in a desiccator and stored in polyethylene zip lock pouches in ambient temperature. The LTLH dried figs were grinded to get fig powder which was sieved using two sieves of mesh sizes 707 and 505 μm. The sieved fig powder was added with 1 % of tri-calcium phosphate as an anticaking agent as described by Khapre et al. (2015). The prepared fresh fig powder had an average particle size of 465nm. Ingredients. The ingredients needed for the chikki preparation includes peanuts and jaggery along with above items. All the ingredients were purchased from local markets of Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu and stored in ambient conditions. B. Fig Chikki Preparation Fig chikki was prepared using the method described by Ramakrishna & Pamisetty (2014) with required modifications (Fig. 1). The process (Fig. 2) involves roasting of peanuts at a temperature of 120 to 140 °C for 20 minutes. The outer peanut skin was removed and the nuts were broken into two pieces. The ratio of ingredients followed were 3:1:1 indicating the roasted peanuts, peanut fines and fig powder (Table 1). The ingredients were weighed accordingly. The jaggery was added with half ratio of water to prepare syrup and heated to 145°C for 20 minutes. Once the syrup is thickened with desired consistency, it was added with roasted peanuts, peanut fines and fig powder and mixed well. It was spread in a greased tray and the chikkis were cut into small square pieces. Similarly, the control chikkis were prepared without the fig powder. Storage of prepared products. The value added product was prepared and stored for storage studies. The chikkis was stored in polyethylene zip lock pouches at ambient room temperature conditions for 30 days. C. Physicochemical analysis of product The prepared product was analyzed for various physico chemical parameters for 0, 15 and 30 days and the changes were noted. The moisture, protein, fat, crude fiber, ash, titratable acidity, reducing sugar, and ascorbic acid content of fig products and control products were determined using the methods described by AOAC (2021) and Ranganna, (1995). Water activity and Ph. The water activity of samples was recorded using a water activity meter (Aqua lab dew point, Water activity meter 4TE). The temperature during measurement was recorded and it was kept constant at 27 ± 1°C. The pH of samples was recorded using the pH meter (Horiba- PH1100, Model: 9615S, Japan). Color and ΔE. The color of the product was assessed with a colorimeter (Hunter lab color flex EZ, Model: CFEZ0925,Hunter Associate Laboratory, Inc., Reston, Virginia, USA) by measuring opposite sides of the products. In CIE color coordinates, measurements were recorded as L* (lightness to darkness), a* (greenness to redness), and b* (blueness to yellowness). The colorimeter had a viewing area of 64 mm diameter and it was calibrated using the standard black and white tile provided (X-80.06, Y- 85.06, Z-89.63) before taking every sample reading. The change in color (ΔE) of the products was assessed using the method described by Monisha & Loganathan (2021) and Ruangchakpet a & Sajjaanantakul (2007). ΔE=√((L_c*-L)^2+(a_c*-a*)^2+〖(b_c*-b*)〗^2 ) Total phenolic Content. The phenolic content of the product were analyzed using the Folin-Ciocalteau method for total phenolic content assay as described by Singleton et al.(1999) using catechol standards. The absorbance was read in a UV spectrophotometer (Make: Shimadzu; Model: UV-1800) and it was expressed as mg Gallic acid equivalents per 100g of sample. Antioxidant Assay. The antioxidant activity of the product was quantified using the DPPH method as described by Williams et al.(1995) using methanolic extracts of the samples and the DPPH inhibition activity (%) was recorded. C. Statistical analysis The experimental assays were performed in triplicates and data of these various physicochemical parameters were statistically analyzed to find the significance of the results. The results of physicochemical data were expressed as means ± standard deviations and it was compared with control samples. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was computed using Minitab (Version 17.3.1). Turkey test was done at a 5% level of significance and when p < 0.05 the data were considered significant. Sensory Evaluation. The sensory evaluation of the prepared product was carried out with a panel of 25 semi-trained judges by using the 9-point hedonic scale. The various parameters analyzed for chikkis includes appearance, color, hardness, crunchiness, flavor, mouth feel, taste, sweetness, overall acceptability. The data obtained was analyzed by following the method of Descriptive analysis as described by Ramakrishna & Pamisetty (2014) using the Fizz WEB by Biosystems Sensory Software. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Analysis of various physicochemical parameters of product and its effect of storage Moisture. The moisture content of fig peanut chikki was in range of 0.7 (F0) to 2.1 % (F30) while in control, it was 1.7 (C0) to 2.1 % (C30) (Table 2). The control samples had a higher moisture than fig peanut chikki initially. The moisture was found to be increasing during storage. But after 15 days, the moisture was not found to be significantly different between control and fig sample. Both samples had a lesser moisture of 2.1 % at the end of storage of 30 days. The fig peanut chikki was found to have a very less moisture content ranging from 0.7 to 2.1 % (Table 2) which was comparatively less than a similar product of peanut chikki made from pomegranate peel powder (Devhare et al., 2021), pumpkin peanut chikki and also commercial chikki samples (Mala et al., 2015). Thus the storage stability may be better with a lesser moisture content. Thus it is concluded that fig powder had no influence on moisture content of the product upon 30 days of storage. Protein. It was reported that the amount of protein in the dried figs was found to increase than in fresh figs during the drying and dehydration of figs (Hiwale, 2015). The fig product had a greater storage stability in protein levels in all 4 samples as the values were not significantly different upon storage of 30 days. When fig peanut chikki is considered, it had a very high protein levels because of peanuts ranging from 17.5(F0) to 17.9 % (F15) which was comparatively higher than in control chikki samples ranging from 14.9(C30) to 15.1 %(C0) (Table 2). This protein content of fig chikkis concurred with the nutra chikki prepared by Pallavi & Chetana (2014). Both the control and fig chikkis were rich in protein which was higher than other common peanut chikki (Hirdyani & Charak 2015; Mala et al., 2015; Tidke et al., 2017). All the fig incorporated samples had a higher protein content than their respective control samples even upon storage showing the significance of value addition. Fat. The figs naturally had a lower fat content (Gopalan et al., 1989) and it was also reported that figs are fat and cholesterol-free (Solomon et al., 2006). The fig chikkis were found to have fat content of 21 % (F30) and the control had 23 percent (C30) after 30 days of storage (Table 2). Upon storage the fat content was decreasing which showed the significant difference among the samples. On comparing, the fig chikkis had lesser fat content than control chikkis for respective storage day sample. Crude Fiber. Fig is a combination of fiber and minerals naturally (Venu et al., 2005). The fresh figs had a crude fiber content of 6.5 % which was found to be increased upon drying. Even fig powder was considered to be a rich source of fiber and it had a dietary fiber of 15.4 % (Khapre, 2011). The fig peanut chikki had crude fiber of 5.7 % (F30) while control samples had 4 % (C0) at end of 30 days (Table 2). It was observed that there was slight reduction in control chikki on storage, while in fig peanut chikki did not showing significant difference during storage. All the chikki samples had a higher crude fiber content when compared with their respective control samples. The crude fiber content was higher than in other reported chikki products using pomegranate peel powder (Devhare et al., 2021), pumpkin peanut chikki and also commercial chikki samples (Hirdyani & Charak, 2015; Mala et al., 2015). These results revealed that all fig products had good crude fiber content. Ash. The ash of the chikkiswas found to be 3.3% (F30) and the control had 3.4 percent (C30) after 30 days of storage (Table 2). The ash content of both control and fig chikki samples were reducing upon storage and thus the significant difference was noted. But all the samples were having same range of values as control revealing no negative effect of fig product. Titratable Acidity. The titratable acidity is proportional to the amount of organic acids present in the fruits (Kays, 1991). The titratable acidity of fig chikki was found to be reducing upon storage and ranged from 0.04 (F30) to 0.08 % in fig sample(F0) and 0.03(C30) to 0.05 % in control (C0) (Table 2). The acidity of control chikki samples was found to be significantly different from respective fig sample of same storage day. All the control samples had a lesser acidity than their respective fig samples. Upon storage, the acidity of chikki samples was found to be decreasing. The findings indicated that acidity of fig incorporated products were reducing upon storage. Reducing Sugars. The fig fruits are recorded to be dominant in glucose and fructose (Fateh & Ferchich, 2009). Sugars and organic acid content in fresh figs were lower than in dried figs (Slatnar et al., 2011). It was ranged from 26.0 (F30) to 29.5 % in fig chikki (F0) while in control chikki, it was 26.0 (C30) to 27.0 % (C0) (Table 2). The product was found to have reducing sugars ranged from 26 to 29.5 which was found to be slightly decreasing upon storage. The results of the storage analysis showed that the reducing sugars in chikki samples, were different for initial 15 days but both control and fig chikki had same quantity of 26 % at end of 30 days (Table 2). It was found that fig samples had not much higher difference from that of control samples even upon storage. Ascorbic Acid. Vitamin C also known as ascorbic acid is highly susceptible to oxygen and heat. It can be degraded even by oxidation even upon drying under low oxygen circumstances (Kaya et al., 2010). Upon heat treatments like drying or dehydration, loss of vitamin C has been widely reported (Piga et al., 2004; Ryley & Kajda, 1994; Lund, 1988). The amount of ascorbic acid found in the sample was expressed as mg/ 100ml of sample extract. Initially, the control chikki (C0) had a very less amount (0.9) of ascorbic acid on comparing to fig chikki (F0) which had ascorbic acid of 5.6 mg. It was observed that all chikki samples showed no significant losses of ascorbic acid upon storage (Table 2). After a storage period of 30 days, the fig samples had higher content of ascorbic acid than control samples. Hence it is reported that fig product had better retention of ascorbic acid or Vitamin C. Water activity, pH. The water activity of fig chikki,was from 0.48 (F0) to 0.50 (F30) (Table 2) and upon storage there was significant difference observed between the samples. The water activity of samples was found to be increasing upon storage. Molds were identified in dried figs, which can grow in low water activity environments and cause microbial spoilage such as undesirable flavors, discoloration, putrefaction, and toxin production(Abellana et al., 1999). Thus water activity has to be monitored for safer storage of figs. The pH of the samples can be related to acidity of the figs. The present results of pH in chikki samples revealed that there is significant decrease upon storage and ranged from 6.5(C0) to 6.4in control (C30) and 6.7 (F0) to 6.4 in fig samples (F30) (Table 2). It was found that fig sample had a slightly higher pH than the control sample for each respective storage sample. Therefore, on comparison, it is evident that the products had not much difference on the water activity and pH from that of control. Total Phenolic Content. Figs are naturally an excellent source of phenolic compounds which contained a higher concentration of total phenolic in the skin than in flesh (Vallejo et al., 2012). But, there was more phenolic content of 105 (F15) to 107 (F0 and F30) mg in fig chikki due to heat processing while control chikki had 69 (C30) to 71 (C0) mg (Table 2). Each individual control sample of specific storage day was significantly different from that of fig sample. All fig incorporated samples had a higher phenolic content than control revealing the significance of value addition. Upon storage of 30 days, both in control and treated samples there was no significant difference. Thus it is concluded that value addition using figs had increased the total phenolic content of products and storage had no negative effect. Antioxidant Activity. The antioxidant activities of figs are positively associated with their phenolic compound content (Arvaniti et al., 2019) and anthocyanin content (Solomon et al., 2006; Çalişkan & Aytekin Polat 2011). In chikki, the antioxidant property of the product has lesser due to phenolic compounds degradation upon heat processing. There was significant decreasing effect upon 30 days of storage of chikki (Table 2). On comparing the control and fig samples, the control had lowest of 35 % (C30) while the fig chikki had higher of 36 % (F30). Thus, the present results supported the addition of fig which increased the antioxidant activity of products better than the control even upon storage. Color. Color is a crucial feature because it is often the first thing a customer notices (Saenz et al., 1993). The heat treatment of food is linked to a change in hue. Food color retention following thermal processing can be used to forecast the degree to which food quality deteriorates as a result of heat exposure (Shin & Bhowrnik, 1995). The fig chikki had L* values ranged from38.9 (F30) to 50.6 (F0), a* value was from 12.6(F15) to 13.7(F0) and b* value was from 37.4(F15) to 38.2(F0) (Table 3). The chikkis had significant difference in ΔE values upon storage only after 15 days and thus its concluded that storage had changed the color of chikki. These results indicate that color change was observed in fig chikki upon storage. B. Analysis of Sensory Attributes of Prepared Products The Sensory parameters were analyzed using descriptive analysis and was compared to control of respective products (Fig. 3). The fig chikkis had an overall sensory score of 8.48, while the control chikkis had 8.09 (Table 4). The parameters like appearance, color, crunchiness, mouthfeel, taste of fig chikki were slightly lesser than control. But it was noted that the parameters like hardness, flavor, sweetness of fig chikki was found to have a higher score than the control (Table 4). Thus it is concluded that the fig chikki had better flavor and hardness than the control.