PENGOPTIMUMAN TIGA FORMULASI SATA PADA BANGSA INDONESIA, MELAYU DAN CINA MELALUI PENILAIAN SENSORI

Rita Hayati

Abstract


Optimization of Three Sata Formulation on Indonesian, Malayan, and Chinese through Sensory Evaluation

 

Rita Hayati

 

Fakultas Pertanian Unsyiah, Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam

 

 

ABSTRACT

 

Result of the study showed that optimum region for sata production using boiled tuna fish, katsoubushi and surimi were 36-40%, 39-85% and 0-12%, respectively.  Three formulations were selected for validation study.  Two formulation were from acceptance region (F1=0.37 of boiled fish, 0.46 katsoubushi, 0.17 surimi, F2 =0.37 of boiled fish, 0.40 katsoubushi, 0.22 surimi), and one formulation from rejection region (F3 =12.5 of boiled fish, 75 katsoubushi, and 12.5 surimi). The validation of the three optimum points using sensory evaluation showed that formulation F1 was most acceptable followed by F2 and F3. There was significant difference (P≤0.05) between F1 and F2 when compared to F3, thus model equation was able to predict the optimum points.

 

 


Keywords


optimum; sata; sensory evaluation

Full Text:

PDF

References


DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Aminah, A. 1989. Penilaian deria dalam kawalan kualiti makanan. Dlm. Zakri, A.H. & Latif, A. (penyt). Penyelidikan semasa sains hayat, hlm. 73-85. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Aminah, A. 2000. Prinsip penilaian sensori. Kuala Lumpur. Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Arteaga, G.E., Li Chan, Vasques-artg, M. C. & Nakai, S. 1994. Systematic experimental design for products formula optimization. Trend in food science & technology.

Bovell-Benjamin, A.C., Allen, L. H., & Guinard, J.X. 1999. Toddlers acceptance of whole maize meal porridge fortified with ferrous bisglycinate. Food Quality and Preference 10:123-128.

Cockerham, W. C.,Kunz, G. & Lueschen, G. 1988. On concern with appearance, health belief, and eating habits: a reappraisal comparing Americans and West Germans. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 29:265-270.

Ho, A. Y. 1995. At the South-East asian table. New York: Oxford University Press.

IFT. 1981. Sensory evaluation guide for testing food and beverage products. Food Technology November: 50-58.

Lawless, H.T & Heymann, H. 1999. Sensory evaluation of food. Gaithersburg: An Aspen Publication.

Lindeman, M. & Vaananen, M. 2000. Measurement of ethical food choice motives. Appetite 34:55-59.

Stefani, G., Romano, D. & Cavicchi, A. 2006. Consumer expectations, liking and willingness to pay for speciality foods: Do sensory characteristics tell the whole story?. Food Quality and Preference 17: 53-62.

Stone, H & Sidel, J. L. 2004. Sensory evaluation practices. San Diego: Elsevier Academic Press.

Van der Lans, I. A., Van Ittersum, K., De Cicco, A. & Loseby, M. 2001. The role of the region of origin and EU certificates of origin in consumer evaluation of food products. European Review of Agricultural Economics 28(4): 451-477.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN / E-ISSN1907-2686 / 2597-9108
Copyright © 2018 Program Studi Agroteknologi
Fakultas Pertanian, Universitas Syiah Kuala.