Você está na página 1de 137

THESIS

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RICE BRAN CONCENTRATIONS


AND BAKING TIME ON THE CONSUMER PREFERENCES
AND PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN BROWNIES

Written as partial fulfillment of the academic requirements


to obtain the degree of Sarjana Teknologi Pertanian Strata Satu

By :
NAME
NPM

: MERRYO SETYAWAN
: 03420080102

FOOD TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT


FACULTY OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
UNIVERSITAS PELITA HARAPAN
KARAWACI
2012

STATEMENT OF THESIS AUTHENTICITY

I, a student of Food Technology Department, Faculty of Industrial


Technology, Universitas Pelita Harapan,
Name

: Merryo Setyawan

Student Id. Number

: 03420080102

Department

: Food Technology

Hereby declare that my thesis, entitled EFFECT OF DIFFERENT


RICE BRAN CONCENTRATIONS AND BAKING TIME ON THE
CONSUMER

PREFERENCES

AND

PHYSICO-CHEMICAL

CHARACTERISTICS OF GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN BROWNIES is:


1) An original piece of work, written and completed on my own, based on
lecture notes, data observation, reference books, journals, and other
sources as listed on the work cited section.
2) Not a duplication of other writing that has been published or used for
obtaining the degree of Sarjana in other Universities, except for passages
that include information on respective references.
3) Not a translation of other works from books or journals, which are listed
on the work cited section.
I understand that if my statement above is proven untrue, this Thesis will be
canceled.
Karawaci, June 15th, 2012
Matera
i
Rp

(Merryo
Setyawan)

UNIVERSITAS PELITA HARAPAN


FACULTY OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY
APPROVAL BY THESIS SUPERVISORS
EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RICE BRAN CONCENTRATIONS AND
BAKING TIME ON THE CONSUMER PREFERENCES AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN
BROWNIES
Written By :
Name

Merryo Setyawan

Student Id. Number

03420080102

Department

Food Technology

has been approved to be examined for obtaining the degree of


Sarjana Teknologi Pertanian Strata Satu in the Food Technology
Department, Faculty of Industrial Technology, Universitas Pelita
Harapan Karawaci Tangerang, Banten.
Karawaci, June 15th, 2012
Approved by:
Supervisor
Supervisor

Co-

(Dr. Ir. Raffi Paramawati, M.Si)


Eng )

(Natania, M.

Acknowledged by,
Head of Food Technology Department

(Nuri Arum Anugrahati, MP)

UNIVERSITAS PELITA HARAPAN


FACULTY OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY

APPROVAL BY THESIS EXAMINATION COMMITTEE


We the undersigned, certify that a thesis defense has been held
on June 25th, 2012, as partial fulfillment of the academic
requirement to obtain the degree of Sarjana Teknologi Pertanian
Strata Satu in the Food Technology Department, Faculty of
Industrial Technology, Universitas Pelita Harapan, for the student:
Name

: Merryo Setyawan

Student Id. Number


Department

: 03420080102

: Food Technology

Faculty

: Industrial Technology

With the following title EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RICE BRAN


CONCENTRATIONS

AND

BAKING

TIME

ON

THE

CONSUMER

PREFERENCES AND PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF


GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN BROWNIES , and that the thesis has

been approved by the examination committee.

Examiners
1.

Signature
Head of Examiners

2.

Member

3.

Member

ABSTRACT

Merryo Setyawan (03420080102)


EFFECT OF DIFFERENT RICE BRAN CONCENTRATIONS AND
BAKING TIME ON THE CONSUMER PREFERENCES AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN
BROWNIES
Rice bran is by product of rice milling that categorized as a food
source which contains good source of dietary fiber and other nutritious
components. Therefore, rice bran is a good additional food source for Indonesian
people who have minimum fiber consumption on their diet. The objective of this
research is to study the utilization of rice bran in the making of gluten free rice
bran brownies. The gluten free flour which was used as wheat flour replacer was
cassava flour. This research was conducted with two factors, which was rice bran
concentration (0,10,20,30 and 40%), and baking time (35,45, and 55 minutes).
The observation includes sensory tests and physico chemical analysis. Result
noted that rice bran brownies made using 30 % rice bran and 55 minutes baking
time had the highest consumer acceptance, therefore, it was selected as the best
formulation. The dietary fiber content of the best rice bran brownies formulation
was 7.99%, and it was categorized as high fiber food because it fulfilled more
than 20% RDA of dietary fiber.
Keywords: Rice Bran, Gluten Free Brownies, Baking Time
References: 74(1991 2012)

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This thesis was written as one of requirements to obtain the degree in


Sarjana Strata Satu Teknologi Pangan. The title of this thesis is EFFECT OF
DIFFERENT RICE BRAN CONCENTRATIONS AND BAKING TIME ON
THE

CONSUMER

PREFERENCES

AND

PHYSICO-CHEMICAL

CHARACTERISTICS OF GLUTEN FREE RICE BRAN BROWNIES.


The writer should express his greatest gratitude to God, because of His
blessing this thesis could be finished on time. This thesis would not be completed
on time without the help and support from many people. The writer wants to
express his gratitude to :
1) Dr. Ir. Raffi Paramawati, M.Si as the thesis supervisor who gave her time,
efforts and patience to guide, help, and support the writer during the
completion of this thesis.
2) Mrs. Natania, M. Eng as the thesis co-supervisor who has given her greatest
help, support, and guidance for the writer for the completion of this thesis.
3) Mrs. Nuri Arum Anugrahati, MP as the Head of Food Technology
Department, Universitas Pelita Harapan who has given the chance for this
research to be done.

4) Mrs. Julia Ratna Wijaya, M.AppSc., as the vice head of Food Technology

Department for the support and advice for the writer for the past 4 years.

5) Mr. Jeremia Manuel Halim, Ms. Ratna Handayani, and Mrs. Sisi Patricia who
have given the opportunity for the writer to conduct the research in the
laboratories.
6) My father (Johnny), mother (Liliany) and sister (Merrvina) for the support
and prayer during the research and during the writing of this thesis until the
completion.
7) Mr. Rudi, Mr. Hendra and Donny who have given their best helps and
supports for the writer during the work in the laboratories.
8) My best comrades, Ericko Sutiono, Jessica Ignatia, Lauralia Bernetta, Jessica
Siswadi, Felicia Lesmanadjaja, who has given their supports and
accompaniments during the research and writing of this thesis.
9) William Kuwandy, Steven Caesario, William Suhartono, who have been great
friends for the past 4 years, gave a lot of supports and motivation for the
writer.
10) All of my friends in Food Technology Department Universitas Pelita Harapan
11) People who cannot be mentioned one by one.
The writer realizes that this thesis is far from perfect, so the writer
welcomes to every comments and suggestions that can help the writer to improve
report writing in the future. The writer hopes this paper would give useful
information to the people who read it.
Karawaci, 15 June 2012

Writer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
COVER
STATEMENT OF THESIS AUTHENTICITY
APPROVAL BY THESIS SUPERVISOR
APPROVAL BY THESIS EXAMINATION COMMITTEE

ABSTRAC
ACKNOWLEDGMENT........................................................................................i
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................iii
LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES.............................................................................................vii
LIST OF APPENDICES.....................................................................................viii

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1
1.1 Background........................................................................................................1
1.2 Research Problem..............................................................................................3
1.3 Objectives...........................................................................................................3
1.3.1 General Objectives................................................................................3
1.3.2 Specific Objectives................................................................................3

LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................................5
2.1 Rice Bran............................................................................................................5
2.1.1 Qualities of Rice Bran...........................................................................5
2.1.2 Deterioration of Rice Bran Qualities.....................................................6
2.1.3 Utilization of Rice Bran.........................................................................8
2.1.4 Rice Bran Nutritional Value...................................................................9
2.2 Dietary Fiber....................................................................................................11
2.3 Brownies..........................................................................................................12

2.3.1 Eggs.....................................................................................................13
2.3.2 Wheat Flour.........................................................................................13
2.3.3 Sugar....................................................................................................14
2.3.4 Fat........................................................................................................15
2.4 Brownies Processing........................................................................................15
2.5 Potato Flour......................................................................................................16
2.6 Rice Flour.........................................................................................................16
2.7 Cassava Flour...................................................................................................17

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.......................................................................18
3.1 Materials and Equipments................................................................................18
3.1.1 Materials..............................................................................................18
3.1.2 Equipments..........................................................................................18
3.2 Research Procedure..........................................................................................19
3.2.1 Preliminary Research...........................................................................19
3.2.2 Main Research.....................................................................................19
3.3 Experimental Design........................................................................................21
3.3.1 Preliminary Research...........................................................................21
3.3.2 Main Research.....................................................................................22
3.4 Analysis Procedure...........................................................................................24
3.4.1 Sensory Qualities.................................................................................25
3.4.2 Physical Characteristic........................................................................25
3.4.3 Chemical Characteristic.......................................................................25
3.4.4 Proximate Analyses for the best gluten free - high dietary fiber
brownies formulation....................................................................................25

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS.........................................................................27


4.1 Determination of Wheat Flour Replacer..........................................................27
4.1.1 Sensory Acceptance.............................................................................27
4.1.1.1 Aroma......................................................................................28
4.1.1.2 Taste........................................................................................29
4.1.1.3 Texture.....................................................................................31

4.1.1.4 Overall Acceptance.................................................................32


4.1.2 Physico Chemical Characteristics....................................................34
4.1.2.1 Texture.....................................................................................34
4.1.2.2 Moisture Content.....................................................................36
4.1.2.3 Water Activity.........................................................................38
4.2 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time on Gluten Free Rice
Bran Brownies Qualities........................................................................................39
4.2.1 Sensory Acceptance.............................................................................40
4.2.1.1 Aroma......................................................................................40
4.2.1.2 Taste........................................................................................42
4.2.1.3 Texture.....................................................................................44
4.2.1.4 Overall.....................................................................................45
4.2.2 Physico Chemical Characteristics....................................................47
4.2.2.1 Texture.....................................................................................47
4.2.2.2 Moisture Content.....................................................................49
4.2.2.3 Water Activity.........................................................................51
4.3 Nutritional Composition..................................................................................53

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS...........................................................55


5.1 Conclusions......................................................................................................55
5.2 Suggestions......................................................................................................56

BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................................................................57
APPENDICES......................................................................................................63

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Chemical Composition of Rice Bran.....................................................10


Table 2.2 Rice Bran Fatty Acid composition........................................................10
Table 3.1 Rice bran brownies formula...................................................................20
Table 3.2 Treatments (Composition of Flour)........................................................21
Table 3.3 Combination of Factors..........................................................................24
Table 4.1 Effect of Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time
towards Aroma Parameter......................................................................................41
Table 4.2 Effect of Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time
towards Texture Parameter.....................................................................................45
Table 4.3 Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time towards
Texture Parameter..................................................................................................47
Table 4.4 Proximate Composition of Rice Bran Flour and The Best Gluten Free
Rice Bran Brownies Formula.................................................................................54

LIST OF FIGURES

Figures 3.1 Flowchart of main research.................................................................21


Figure 4.1 Panelists preference on the aroma of rice bran brownies with different
flour........................................................................................................................29
Figure 4.2 Panelists preference on the taste of rice bran brownies with different
flour........................................................................................................................31
Figure 4.3 Panelists preference on the texture of rice bran brownies with different
flour........................................................................................................................32
Figure 4.4 Panelists preference on the overall parameter of rice bran brownies
with different flour.................................................................................................34
Figure 4.5 Hardness Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour..............35
Figure 4.6 Moisture Content Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour. 37
Figure 4.7 Water Activity Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour......39
Figure 4.8 Effect of Rice Bran Concentrations Towards Taste Parameter.............43
Figure 4.9 Effect of Baking Time Towards Taste Parameter.................................44
Figure 4.10 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Hardness Value.............48
Figure 4.11 Effect of Baking Time Towards Hardness Value................................49
Figure 4.12 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Moisture Content..........50
Figure 4.13 Effect of Baking Time Towards Moisture Content.............................51
Figure 4.14 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Water Activity...............52
Figure 4.15 Effect of Baking Time Towards Water Activity.................................53
Figure 4.16 The Best Gluten Free Rice Bran Brownies Formulation.................54

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix 1. Hedonic Test Questionnaire..............................................................65


Appendix 2. Sensory Analysis Procedure..............................................................66
Appendix 3. Physical Analysis Procedure.............................................................67
Appendix 4. Chemical Analysis Procedure............................................................68
Appendix 5. Hedonic Test for Aroma Parameter Result of The Preliminary
Research.................................................................................................................74
Appendix 6. Hedonic Test for Taste Parameter Result of The Preliminary Research
................................................................................................................................77
Appendix 7. Hedonic Test for Texture Parameter Result of The Preliminary
Research.................................................................................................................80
Appendix 8. Hedonic Test for Overall Parameter Result of The Preliminary
Research.................................................................................................................83
Appendix 9. Texture Analysis of The Preliminary Research.................................86
Appendix 10. Moisture Content of The Preliminary Research..............................88
Appendix 11. Water Activity of The Preliminary Research...................................91
Appendix 12. Hedonic Test for Aroma Parameter Result of The Main Research. 93
Appendix 12. Hedonic Test for Taste Parameter Result of The Main Research....97
Appendix 13. Hedonic Test for Texture Parameter Result of The Main Research
..............................................................................................................................100
Appendix 14. Hedonic Test for Overall Parameter Result of The Main Research
..............................................................................................................................104
Appendix 15. Texture Analysis of The Main Research.......................................108
Appendix 16. Moisture Content Data of The Main Research..............................110
Appendix 17. Water Activity Data of The Main Research...................................114
Appendix 18. Proximate Analysis Result of Best Formulation...........................116
Appendix 19. Proximate Analysis Result of Rice Bran.......................................119
Appendix 20. Dietary Fiber Analysis Result of Best Formulation......................121
Appendix 21. Dietary Fiber Analysis Result of Rice Bran..................................122

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
Agriculture is one of the important industrial sector in Indonesia,
especially on the rice commodity which is staple food for Indonesian people. In
2011 the production of rice in Indonesia reaching the amount of 65,74 millions
tons (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2012).
Increasing the volume of rice production will consequently increase the
volume of rice bran since rice bran is by product from the milling process of
paddy. In the rice production, about 8 12 % of rice bran is produced from the
paddy milling process (Widowati,2001). However, rice bran usually only used as
a feed for poultry or cow, although actually rice bran has a potential value to be
processed in food for human and has many benefits towards human health (Alvita
et al,2007).
Rice bran contains very rich nutritions. Rice bran contains of B
complex vitamins which includes B1,B2,B3,B5,B6 and B12 vitamins. It also rich
in vitamin E, essential fatty acid, dietary fibers and proteins. In the stabilized rice
bran product about 20 - 27 % of dietary fibers can be found (Yu et al, 2012). In
Indonesia, there is fact that we still lack in dietary fiber consumption. The other
benefits from rice bran is that it is free from gluten, easy to digest and abundant in
complex carbohydrate.

Due to its nutritional value, nowadays rice bran has been applied in the
food processing for some food products. Rice bran can be used as the substitute
of wheat flour in the processing of food product such as bread as studied by Hu et
al (2009) or cookies as studied by Fauziyah (2011). The substitution of rice bran
can also increase the dietary fiber content in frozen pizza (Delahaye, 2005). Based
on study done by Huang et al (2005), rice bran can be added to pork meatballs
with concentration up to 10% that will produce meatballs which is still accepted
by the panelist.
Coeliac diseases is a life long inability to digest gluten proteins. A
decade ago, coeliac disease has a rate of 1 in 1000 person or lower population and
only considered as an uncommon disorders. However nowadays the rates of
coeliac disease increase and study shown that it may affect 1 in 100 population,
To avoid the symptomps of coeliac disease, the only effective method is strict
adherence to the diet free of the allergence, which is gluten based product that are
toxic to the small intestine (Korus, 2008).
Therefore in this research, the use of wheat flour in brownies will be
replaced in order to accommodate gluten sensitive people. Several replacer for
wheat flour used in this research are cassava flour, potato starch, and rice flour.
The best formulation will later be enriched with rice bran flour. Substitution of
rice bran flour is expected to increase the amount of dietary fibers in the brownies.

1.2 Research Problem


Rice bran that contains good source of dietary fiber and other nutritious
components has very limited usage in Indonesia, hence, rice bran has potency to
be utilized in many bakery product. People like to produce bakery product that
made from wheat flour, although wheat contain gluten that prohibited in the diet
of coeliac diseases patient. On the other hand, Indonesian people lack of dietary
fiber in their daily diets.
Hence, replacing the use of wheat flour in brownies making with other
sources such as cassava flour, rice flour and potato flour with rice bran
substitution is expected to overcome the problem above. However, rice bran has
distinct aroma and flavor which is not acceptable for most people. Therefore,
study need to be done to evaluate the proper amount of rice bran which could be
incorporated to bakery product and minimize the unacceptable flavor and aroma
using different baking method.
1.3 Objectives
1.3.1 General Objectives
The general objectives of this research is to study the utilization of rice
bran in the making of gluten free - rice bran brownies.
1.3.2 Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of this research is to :
1. Determine the best wheat flour substitute in the making of gluten free - rice
bran brownies based on the consumer acceptance using the sensory evaluation
test.
3

2. Evaluate the effect of rice bran concentration and different baking time on the
physical and chemical characteristics of gluten free - rice bran brownies.
3. Evaluate the consumer preferences of gluten free rice bran brownies by
utilizing sensory evaluation method.
4. Determine the dietary fiber and nutritional composition in the best gluten free rice bran brownies formula.

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Rice Bran


The source of rice bran is from the rice milling process, which are the
conversion of brown rice to white rice. After paddy is harvested, then the paddy
undergo drying process. After the paddy has been dried, then the hull of the paddy
need to be removed by the milling process. After the hull is being removed by the
milling process, the resulted product is called brown rice. The brown rice has the
outer layer that need to be removed. The removal process is done by the process
called abrasive milling. The resulted product is called white rice which most
people commonly know as rice. The rice bran, is the side product which produced
from the separation of the brown layer in the brown rice. (Choo et al, 1999).
According to Hu et al (2009), Rice bran is a by product which is
produced from the outer layer of rice. Rice bran is considered as a good source of
nutrients such as protein, mineral and fatty acids. Rica bran is also rich in dietary
fiber content. Although rich in nutrients, the utilization of rice bran is very
minimal. Nowadays rice bran is mostly burnt off at the rice milling facilities and
also used as animal feeds.
2.1.1 Qualities of Rice Bran
During the application of rice bran in the food products, rice bran may
produce a mild sweet and bitter taste. Rice bran may produce the bitter taste
because rice bran contain saponin compound which can produce the bitter taste.
The sweet taste in rice bran is produces by the sugar content in the rice bran
5

including glucose, sucrose and fructose. Besides flavor, color is one of the most
important consideration when applying rice bran to the food products. Rice bran
has important functional properties in terms of color which are the change in color
during the processing. The rice bran color can be changed during the processing
because of the heat treatment and increase of the moisture content in the food
product. This will affect the end result of the food product. Rice bran also has the
ability to absorp water and oil, and can be used as emulsifier. Rice bran also has
low foaming ability (Luh, 1991).
2.1.2 Deterioration of Rice Bran Qualities
According to Choo et al (1999), the bran containing lipid and lipase,
which make rice bran is prone to rapid degradation of lipid because of the lipase
activity toward the lipid. The contact between the lipid and lipase in the bran is
occur during the milling process of the brown rice. This lipid degradation will
cause the rice bran become unpalatable and so the rice bran cannot be utilized for
human and only utilized for animal feed.
According to the Shahidi (2005), Most lipids in rice bran consists as
lysophospholipids, triacylglycerols and free fatty acids. The nonstarch lipids in the
aleurone, sub aleurone, and germ layers were 86 91 % neutral lipids, 2 5 %
glycolipids, and 7 9 % phospholipids. These percentage amounts of lipids are
different and affected by the milling degrees. The instability of rice bran is
affected by the lipase enzymatic activity. When the kernel of the rice bran is
intact, lipase is physically isolated from the lipids. However, when dehulling
process is done, it will disturb the surface structure and the lipase and oil will be
mixed together. As the result, the oil in rice bran will be hydrolyzed by lipase
6

enzyme into glycerol and free fatty acid which eventually causing the unpleasant
aroma of rice bran.
Rice bran stabilization is essentially needed to inactivate lipase and
lipoxygenase activity, sterilize the bran and reduce color development.
Lipoxygenase activity will increases with the presence of FFA resulting in
oxidative rancidity which is responsible for the flavor and odor rancid of the rice
bran. There are many methods of rice bran stabilization. These methods include
dry heating method, wet heating method, and extrusion methods (Shahadi, 2005).
According to Choo et al. (1999) the activity of lipase in the rice bran
can be destroyed by applying short term high temperature treatment to the rice
bran, and the thermal process will produce stabilized rice bran. The application of
heat will destruct peroxidases as well, as stated by Silva (2006). In dry heating
methods, the rice bran is dried using hot air and this drying process will reduce the
moisture content of the rice bran to 3 4 %. The rice bran must be kept in dry
condition, moisture proof containers could be used to maintain the dryness of the
rice bran, because rehydration of the rice bran bran will cause it regains its lipase
activity (Shahidi, 2005). Silva (2006) also mentioned several other methods for
rice bran stabilization such as chemical stabilization and stabilization by
microwave.

2.1.3 Utilization of Rice Bran

As an agricultural crop by products, rice bran utilization are now


widely increase, various research has been done to utilize their pharmaceutical or
nutraceutical potencial. Rice bran contains good source of antioxidants including
vitamin and oryzanol, high quality oil and protein, and anti tumor compounds like
rice bran saccharide. Rice bran saccharides was found to suppress carcinogenesis
and to prolong survival rate (Schramm et al, 2007). Rice bran addition to the
prudent diets of moderately hyperlipidemic individuals, will produces significant
reduction in trygliceride levels and improvement in the HDL ratio. Rice bran has
some insoluble fiber including cellulose and hemicellulose which can bind to bile
acids (Takakori et al, 2005). Rice bran also utilzed to produce food which is rich
in dietary fiber, because rice bran has large amount of dietary fiber content
(Chotimarkorn and Silalai, 2008).
Rice bran has been processed into several products such as rice bran
beverage which is produced by using rice bran extract and added strawberry and
cocoa flavor (Faccin et al,2009). There are also pizza which is enriched by using
rice bran (Delahaye et al ,2005), biscuit using rice bran powder (Bunde et al,
2010), rice bran frankfurter (Choi et al, 2010), rice bran sponge cake (Aftasari,
2003) and red bean paste with utilization of rice bran oil (Metta, 2003).
Chortimarkorm et al (2007) also study the utilization of rice bran powder to
prevent the oxidative reaction of fried dough from riced flour during storage.

2.1.4 Rice Bran Nutritional Value


8

Rice bran is rich in nutritional value, it contains 12 25 % fat, 10


16% protein, 10 20% starch, 3 8% reducing sugars, 8 11% hemicelluloses,
10 12% celluloses, 6 15% crude fiber and 6.5 10% ash content. Rice bran is
abundant in vitamins of the B group and tocopherols, although it is poor in
vitamins A and C (Sharma, 2004).
Rice bran is also known as source of antioxidant, one of the natural
antioxidant found in the rice bran is gamma oryzanol. Gamma oryzanol is a group
of ferulic acid esters of phytosterols and triterpene alcohols which has been
reported to exhibit antioxidant activity and has other health beneficial properties.
Gamma oryzanol exists mainly in bran layers and therefore it is also found in
extracted rice bran oil. Gamma oryzanol has potential in lowering blood
cholesterol (Cicero and Gaddi, 2001).
The oryzanol is the most important bioactive compound of rice bran
and has the ability to reduce cholesterol oxidation. Because of the antioxidant
activity of these components in rice bran, rice bran has potential
hypocholesterolemic property. The component in rice bran which has the highest
antioxidant activity is 24-methylenecycloartanyl ferulate (Xu et al, 2001).
Rice bran also contains carbohydrate, mostly in the form of cellulose,
hemicelullose and starch. The endosperm of rice bran is rich in starch. Naturally,
the starch is not present in the outer layer of the bran. But during the milling
process, the outer layer (pericarp) will be released. The endosperm will be broken
down during the abrasion process and causing the starch to be released and
developed in the bran. The starch content in the bran is affected by the degree of
9

milling which determine the amount of breakage (Hargrove, 1994). The chemical
composition of rice bran could be seen in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Chemical Composition of Rice Bran
Component
Amount
Protein (%)
12 15.6
Fat (%)
15 19.7
Crude Fiber (%)
7 11.4
Carbohydrate (%)
34.1 52.3
Ash (%)
6.6 9.9
Calcium (mg/g)
0.3 1.2
Magnesium (mg/g)
5.0 13.0
Phosphor (mg/g)
11.0 25.0
Silica (mg/g)
5.0 11.0
Zinc (mg/g)
43.0 258.0
Thiamin (g/g)
12.0 24.0
Riboflavin (g/g)
1.8 4.0
Tocopherol (g/g)
149 154
Source : Luh et al, 1991

The protein in the rice bran is rich in nutrient compared to the milled
rice, the majority of protein in rice bran is lysine. Most protein in rice bran exists
in the form of albumin and globulin with the ratio of albumin-globulin-prolaminglutelin is 37 : 36 : 5 : 33 (Champagne, 2008). Rice bran is also rich in fatty acid,
especially unsaturated fatty acid which is about 80 %. The palmitic acid, oleic
acid and linoleic acid is the main fatty acid component which contained in the rice
bran oil.
Table 2.2 Rice Bran Fatty Acid composition
Type of Fatty Acid
%
Myristic Acid
0.2
Palmitic Acid
15.0
Stearic Acid
1.9
Oleic Acid
42.5
Linoleic Acid
39.1
Linolenic Acid
1.1
Arachidonic Acid
0.5
Behenic Acid
0.2
Source : McCaskill and Zhang, 1999

Rice bran also has an antinutrient compound, which is phytic acid,


anti trypsin and hemaglutinin or lectin (Luh, 1991). These anti nutrient
compounds exist in a low amount in the rice bran and can be inactivated by heat
10

treatment as stated by Hargrove (1994). There are several enzymes which are
contained in rice bran such as amylase, amylase, catalase, peroxidase,
esterase, lipase, glucosidase, glucosidase, maltase, pectinase, phytase,
poliphenoloxidase, and so on. The enzymatic activity in the germs and the outer
layer of the paddy is higher compared to the other part of the paddy. This higher
activity of the enzyme in the outer layer causing rice bran also have high activity
of the enzyme (Luh, 1991).
2.2 Dietary Fiber
Dietary ber is a class of compounds which includes a mixture of
plant carbohydrate polymers, both oligosaccharides and polysaccharides, such as
cellulose, hemicelluloses, pectic substances, gums, resistant starch, inulin, it could
be associated with lignin and other non-carbohydrate components such as
polyphenols, waxes, saponins, cutin, phytates, and resistant protein. Resistant
starch and resistant protein withstand digestion in the small intestine. Resistant
starch is composed of four groups, which are RS1 as the physical inaccessible
starch, RS2 as the ungelatinised starch granules, RS3 as the retrograded starch and
RS4 as the chemically modied starch as stated by FuentesZaragozaet al (2010).
As stated by Turowski (2007), dietary fiber could be divided into two categories
which are soluble dietary fiber and insoluble dietary fiber. These two categories
are distinguished by their solubility in water.
There are many health benets which associated with an increased
intake of dietary ber which including the reduced risk of coronary heart disease,
diabetes, obesity, and some forms of cancer. Some food commodity which are rich
in dietary fiber such as oat bran, barley bran, and psyllium,mostly soluble bre,
11

have earned a healthy reputation for their ability to lower blood lipid levels.
Wheat bran and other more insoluble bres are typically linked to laxative
properties (American Dietetic Association, 2008). Dietary ber supplementation
can result in tness-promoting foods, low in calories, cholesterol and fat. Food
and Nutrition Board, Institute of Medicine (2001) recommend the average daily
requirement of dietary ber is 25 g per day for women younger than 50, 21 g per
day for women older than 50; 38 g per day for men younger than 50, and 30 g per
day for men older than 50. Most nutritionists and diet experts suggest that 20
30% of human daily dietary fiber intake should come from soluble fiber.
Dietary ber also have effects toward functional properties of foods
such as increase water holding capacity, oil holding capacity, emulsication
and/or gel formation. When dietary ber incorporated into food products (bakery
products, dairy, jams, meats, soups) it can modify the textural properties, avoid
syneresis (the separation of liquid from a gel caused by contraction), stabilise high
fat food and emulsions, and improve shelf-life (Elleuch et al, 2011).
2.3 Brownies
Brownies is a type of cookies which is usually has dark brown colour.
Brownies is classified as bar cookies. Bar cookies is the simplest type of cookies
to made, the process is spreading the batter in a pan and bake it. Basically, cookies
are made from a batter or dough that may be similar to some types of cake batter
(Suas, 2008).
There are two types of brownies which are steamed brownies and
baked brownies. Similar with cake, brownies has specific structure which are
slightly porous and has soft texture. But different with cake, brownies structure is
12

more compact compared to cake and does not leaven as much as in cake. The
main ingredients of brownies are eggs, fat, sugar, and wheat flour (Sulistyo,
2006). Brownies also can be categorized as fudgy brownies or cakey brownies, for
fudgy brownies, less flour is used during the processing, for cakey brownies, more
flour is used during the processing (Corriher, 2008). Because brownies is a type of
cookies, it can be produced using wheat flour that have relatively weak gluten
strength. In general cookies processing, the gluten development in the dough
during mixing is very low. Minimum gluten formation is contribute in the
crispness and softness of the cookies product, such as brownies (Hui,2006).
2.3.1 Eggs
Eggs have five major components which is the yolk, albumen, shell
membranes, air cell and shell. Eggs, and especially the egg white are composed of
dozens of different proteins. Each of these proteins has its own characteristics and
functions (Brown, 2008).
In the brownies processing, the function of eggs is as the substitute of
water, to form the brownies structure, contribute to the softness of the brownies
structure, aeration and to distribute the dough. The eggs also contribute to the
color, aroma and the flavour of the brownies.
2.3.2 Wheat Flour
Wheat is the seed of a grass like plant which is cultivated widely in
temperate climates. The grains or seeds consist of about 85% endosperm, 2%
embryo or germ and 13% husk (bran). The seeds are ground to produce a variety
of flours where most wheat being used in this form. The endosperm and hence
flour consist mainly of starch and also contains from 7 to 15% protein. The
13

proteins can be divided into four groups, the water soluble albumins (15%),
globulins (7.5%), prolamins which consist of gliadin (32.5%) and glutelins which
consist of glutenin (45%). These last two groups, making up the majority of wheat
protein, interact in the presence of water to form a viscous, colloidal complex,
known as gluten. The elastic, network forming gluten plays a major role in the
structure and texture of the food product (Street, 1991). In the brownies
processing the function of the wheat flour is to form the brownies structure and
texture and also to bind the other ingredients evenly (Matz, 1991).
Gluten, or the gluten matrix, is noted for its strong, three dimensional
viscoelastic structure that is created by specific proteins. Specifically, it is the
hydrophobic, inslouble gliadin proteins that contribute sticky, fluid properties to
the dough and the insoluble glutenins that contribute elastic properties to the
dough. Not all flours and therefore not all dough, forms gluten. Nongluten flours
contain starch that provides some structure; however, it is gluten protein that
provides the major framework for many batters and dough (Vaclavik, 2007).
2.3.3 Sugar
Sugar in high concentration can act as a preservative by inhibiting the
growth of microorganisms. The concentration of sugar dehydrates the bacteria or
yeast cells to the point of inactivation or death. The hygroscopic nature of sugars
is responsible to their influence on a foods moistness and texture. The main
ability of sugar in the food is act as sweetener (Brown, 2008). In the brownies
making, the function of sugar is to act as sweetener and also bind the water in
brownies.
2.3.4 Fat
14

All baked products contain lipids. Fat has versatile function in baked
products, the major function of fat are affecting the richness and tenderness in
bakery product, improving the flavor and eating characteristics, enhancing the
aeration for leavening and volume, promoting desirable grain and texture
qualities, providing flakiness in pastry product, provide lubrication for wheat
gluten, affecting the moisture retention of the bakery product and also providing
structure for cakes. Product like cake is highly dependent on fat to gain proper
aeration that will affect the quality of the final product. Fat will contribute to the
texture, mouthfeel and lubricity of the cake. In cookies making, fat acts as
lubricant, it keeps the dough from sticking to the feeding and forming equipment.
It also facilitates mixing by lubricating with other ingredients (Hui et al, 2008).
2.4 Brownies Processing
The making process of brownies is almost similar with the making
process of cake. There are several steps in the making of brownies which are
mixing, depositing, baking, cooling and packaging. There are several methods of
mixing, such as sugar batter method, flour batter method and single stage mixing
method. In the flour batter method, the mixing process is done by mixing the flour
and shortening together, but the egg and sugar is mixed together with medium
speed mixer in a separated container. In the sugar batter method, the shortening,
sugar, and the dry ingredients is mixed in low speed until the ingredients are
mixed properly, after that the addition of eggs, milk and flour is done. In the
single stage mixing, all of the ingredients is mixed together in a container, and
mixed together until the mixture is properly homogenized (Suas, 2008). After the
mixing process is done, the next step in the making of brownies is to pour the
15

mixed dough into the baking pan. After that the pan is put into the oven. The
baking is the main factor that determine the quality of the cake. The improper
baking time will result in the lower quality of the end product. The improper
temperature during baking can affect the color, the texture, and the volume of the
brownies product.
2.5 Potato Flour
Potato Flour is the oldest commercial potato product and it can be
used in several processed food products, such as bakery product. Potato flour has
long been used in baking, and it could be used to impart the potato flavor and also
improve retention of freshness in bread. Potato has the ability to increase the
growth of yeast cells and also increase the activity of sugar fermentation. Potato
flour also has a distinctive flavor while incorporated in bakery product, and also
able to reduce product firming and staling and also helps in the leavening of the
product (Preedy et al, 2011). Misra et al (2003) stated that potato is not an rich
source of protein, but contain good quality protein, dietary fiber, several minerals
and trace elements. It also contains essential vitamins and little or no fat.

2.6 Rice Flour


Rice flour is a flour made from rice which has soft taste, colourless,
hypoallergenic properties, low levels of sodium and easy digestible carbohydrate.
Because of this properties, rice flour is the most suitable cereal to make gluten
free product. But, when utilizing rice flour, it cannot be used to produce fermented
food products because their proteins cannot develop viscoelastic network like
gluten. According to Hui et al (2006), The source of rice flour is from rice grain, it
16

could be from long rice grain, medium rice grain, short rice grain, or waxy rice.
The chemical composition of rice flour is affected by different types of grain, and
furthermore it will also affect the starch content. The chemical composition of rice
flour is consist of glucose polymer made of amylose and amylopectin, the
amylose and amylopection has different ratio which depends on the variety of
rice. The starch content in the rice flour is about 80% from carbohydrate content.
2.7 Cassava Flour
Cassava flour is the product prepared from dried cassava chips or
paste by a pounding, grinding or milling process and then followed by sifting to
separate the fiber from the flour. The production of cassava flour is done by
milling of the dried raw root, whereas the starch is obtained by washing and wet
milling of the root, followed by multi-stage purification of the slurry. Cassava
flour has been utilized for making gluten free product such as bread. Flours are
fine, powdery materials which is obtained by grinding and by sifting the starchcontaining plant organelles such as grain, seed, root, tuber, fruit and so on.
Basically flours contain almost the same components as the components present
in the raw materials, except the moisture content. Some components that are often
found in flours include starch, non-starch polysaccharide, sugar, protein, lipid, and
inorganic materials (Shittu et al, 2009).

CHAPTER 3
17

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Materials and Equipments


3.1.1 Materials
The materials used in the making of rice bran brownies are stabilized
rice bran which was obtained from rice milling unit at Semarang, cassava flour
which was obtained from PD Sumberwangi Semarang, rice flour Rose Brand,
potato flour which was obtained from PD Sumberwangi Semarang, sugar
Gulaku, cocoa powder Bensdorp, vanilla powder, egg, margarine Blueband.
The chemical materials used in the proximate analysis are aquadest, concentrated
H2SO4, NaOH, selenium, H3BO3, methyl red indicator, HCl, petroleum benzene,
K2SO4,

ethanol

95

%,

sodium

phosphate,

-amylase,

phosphate,

amyloglucosidase, ethanol, acetone.


3.1.2 Equipments
The main equipments used to produce rice bran brownies in this
research are analytical balance, oven, mixer, wok, frying spatula, sifter, aluminum
pan, brush, bowl, spoon, graduated cylinder, and glassware. The equipment used
in the analysis are oven, desicator, texture analyzer, aw meter, furnace, reflux,
watch glass, burette, heating bath, crucible, kjeldahl tube, buchner, fat extractor,
stirrer, thermometer, volumetric pippete, spatula, filter paper, and funnel.

3.2 Research Procedure


3.2.1 Preliminary Research

18

The preliminary research was done to determine the best gluten free
flour that would be used as the wheat flour replacer in the making of rice bran
brownies. The rice bran brownies were made by using three different types of
flour, i.e cassava flour, potato flour and rice flour. The addition of 10 % of rice
bran concentration was done as the substitute of each flour used in the formula.
The formulas could be seen in the Table 3.1. The best gluten free flour used in the
making of rice bran brownies was determined by sensory evaluation. The sensory
evaluation method (hedonic test) could be seen in appendix 1. The physical and
chemical parameter of the rice bran brownies were also analyzed, i.e. hardness,
moisture content, and water activity. The procedure of making the rice bran
brownies could be seen in Figure 3.1, with 35 minutes baking time.
Table 3.1 Rice bran brownies formula
Ingredients
Amount
Flour (g) + Rice Bran Flour 100
(g)
Margarine (g)
225
Sugar (g)
225
Eggs
3
Vanilla Powder (g)
1.25
Cocoa Powder (g)
50
Source : Wulandari (2011), with modification

3.2.2 Main Research


The procedure of the main research was divided into several steps.
The first step was making the gluten free rice bran brownies using the best wheat
flour replacer obtained from the preliminary research. The next step was
evaluating the brownies produced by observed the physical and chemical
parameter, including texture, moisture content and water activity. The next step
was sensory evaluation of gluten free rice bran brownies using the hedonic test,
which then the best gluten free rice bran brownies formula could be determined.
Proximate analysis was done for the best gluten free rice bran brownies formula
19

including moisture content, protein, ash, fat, carbohydrate and dietary fiber
content. Proximate analysis for the rice bran flour was also conducted.
The formula which was used in the making of the gluten free rice bran
brownies was modified from formula stated by Wulandari (2011). The
modification done was the substitution of wheat flour with potato flour, rice flour
or cassava flour. The formula of brownies could be seen in Table 3.1, while the
modification according to the treatment could be seen in Table 3.2. The flowchart
of the main research activities can be seen in Figures 3.1.
Table 3.2 Treatments (Composition of Flour)
Treatment
Flour and rice bran flour ratio
1
100 % selected
2
90 % selected flour + 10 % rice
bran flour
80
%
selected
flour + 20 % rice
3
bran flour
70 % selected flour + 30 % rice
4
bran flour
60% selected flour + 40% rice
bran flour
5
Selected Flour and Rice Bran Flour (see Table 3.2) + Cocoa Powder, Margarine, Eggs, Sugar and
Vanilla Powder

Mixing of all of the ingredients using mixer with medium speed for 5 minutes

Depositing the dough into aluminium pan and the dough was spread evenly in the pan

The dough was put to the oven in 200o C temperature and baked according to the treatment (35, 45
and 55 minutes)

Gluten Free Rice Bran Brownies


Figures 3.1 Flowchart of main research
Source : Wulandari (2011) with modification

The selected flour and rice bran flour (see Table 3.2), sugar, cocoa
powder, margarine, eggs, and vanilla powder were mixed using mixer with
medium speed for 5 minutes which then the dough was deposited in the
20

aluminium pan and spread evenly. The dough was put to the oven in 200 o C
temperature and baked according to treatment (35, 45 and 55 minutes). After the
baking process was done, the gluten free rice bran brownies was produced and
ready to be further analysed.
3.3 Experimental Design
3.3.1 Preliminary Research
The treatment that was done in the preliminary research is the
replacement of wheat flour (A1) with cassava flour (A2), rice flour (A3), and
potato flour (A4). Based on the treatment, the experimental design in the
preliminary research was complete random design with one factorial. Factors
observed were the different types of flour used for making the rice bran brownies,
which consists of A1, A2, A3 and A4. The preliminary research was done in six
replications. The randomized factorial design is :
Yij = + Ri + 1 (ij)
Where :
Yij = Random variable denoting the (ij)th variable
= Real mean value
Ri = Effect of different types of flour on level i
1 (ijk) = Galat factor
Hypothesis of the preliminary research :

21

Ho : There is no effect of different types of flour towards the physico chemical


characteristics and sensory acceptance of rice bran brownies
H1: There is effect of different types of flour towards the physic chemical
characteristics and sensory acceptance of rice bran brownies.
3.3.2 Main Research
The treatment that was done is the main research consists of two
treatments which are :
1. Ratio of substituted flour : rice bran flour (R), which consists of five levels
:
-

100 % substituted flour : 0 % rice bran flour (R0)

90 % substituted flour : 10 % rice bran flour (R1)

80 % substituted flour : 20 % rice bran flour (R2)

70 % substituted flour : 30 % rice bran flour (R3)

60% substituted flour : 40% rice bran flour (R4)

2. Baking time (B), which consists of three levels :


-

35 minutes baking time (B1)

45 minutes baking time (B2)

55 minutes baking time (B3)


Based on the treatment, the experimental design used in this research

is complete random design with two factorials, R x B (5x3). The main research
was conducted in three replications. Factor which observed were :
1. The concentration of rice bran which was added to the formulation, which
consist of R0, R1, R2, R3 and R4.
2. The different baking time, which were B1, B2 and B3.
22

The combination of the factors can be seen in Table 3.3.


Table 3.3 Combination of Factors
Baking Time
Rice Bran Concentration
R0
R1
B1
R0B11
R1B11
R0B12
R1B12
R0B13
R1B13
B2
R0B21
R1B21
R0B22
R1B22
R0B23
R1B23
B3
R0B31
R1B31
R0B32
R1B32
R0B33
R1B33

R2
R2B11
R2B12
R2B13
R3B21
R3B22
R3B23
R2B31
R2B32
R2B33

R3
R3B11
R3B12
R3B13
R3B21
R3B22
R3B23
R3B31
R3B32
R3B33

R4
R4B11
R4B12
R4B13
R4B21
R4B22
R4B23
R4B31
R4B32
R4B33

The randomized factorial design is :


Yijk = + Ri + Bj + (RB)ij + (ijk)
Where :
Yijk = value of observation at level one, with factor of concentration of rice bran
flour on level i and different baking time on level j
= Real mean value
Ri = Effect of concentration of rice bran flour on level i
Bj = Effect of different baking time on level j
(RB)ij = effect of interaction between factor of concentration of rice bran flour on
level i and factor of different baking time on level j
(ijk) = Galat factor
Hipotesis of this research :
Ho :
1. There is no effect of concentration of rice bran flour towards the physico
chemical characteristics and sensory acceptance of gluten free rice
bran brownies.

23

2. There is no effect of concentration of different baking time towards the


physico chemical characteristics and sensory acceptance of gluten free
rice bran brownies.
3. There is no effect of interaction between concentration of rice bran flour
and different baking time towards the physico chemical characteristics
and sensory acceptance of gluten free rice bran brownies.
H1 :
1. There is effect of concentration of rice bran flour towards the physico
chemical characteristics and sensory acceptance of gluten free rice bran
brownies.
2. There is effect of concentration of different baking time towards the
physico chemical characteristics and sensory acceptance of gluten free
rice bran brownies.
3. There is effect of interaction between concentration of rice bran flour and
different baking time towards the physico chemical characteristics and
sensory acceptance of gluten free rice bran brownies.
3.4 Analysis Procedure
The parameters which were observed in this research were the sensory
qualities, physical, and chemical characteristic of the gluten free rice bran
brownies. The proximate analysis and the dietary fiber analysis was done for the
best gluten free rice bran brownies formulation.
3.4.1 Sensory Qualities
The sensory qualities of the gluten free rice bran brownies was
determined by using sensory evaluation test which was the hedonic test
24

(Meilgaard, 2007). The hedonic test was conducted to determine the gluten free
rice bran brownies formula which was most preferred by the panelist. The panelist
in this sensory evaluation procedure was untrained panelist. The method for the
hedonic test could be seen in Appendix 2.
3.4.2 Physical Characteristic
The physical characteristic of the gluten free rice bran brownies was
determined by using texture analyzer towards the hardness parameter. The method
of determining the texture of the gluten free high rice bran brownies could be seen
in Appendix 3.
3.4.3 Chemical Characteristic
The chemical characteristic of the gluten free rice bran brownies
which was evaluated consists of moisture content and water activity. The water
activity was measured using Aw meter while the method of determining moisture
content could be seen in Appendix 4.
3.4.4 Proximate Analyses for the best gluten free - high dietary fiber brownies
formulation
The proximate analyses of the gluten free rice bran brownies included
the oven method to determine the moisture content of the rice bran (AOAC,
2005), ash content using the dry ashing method (AOAC, 2005), protein content
using the micro Kjehdahl method (AOAC, 2005),fat content using the soxhlet
extraction (AOAC, 2005) and carbohydrate content using by difference method.
The proximate analyses methods could be seen in Appendix 4. The dietary fiber
content of the gluten free - high dietary fiber brownies was also analyzed by using

25

enzyme analysis (AOAC,2005). The method for dietary fiber analysis could be
seen in the Appendix 4.

CHAPTER IV
26

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Determination of Wheat Flour Replacer


The preliminary research was conducted to determine the best gluten
free flour that used as the wheat flour replacer in the making of rice bran
brownies. There were four types of flour which were used in the preliminary
research which were cassava flour, rice flour, potato flour and wheat flour. The
sensory evaluation and parameter measurements were conducted to analyze the
rice bran brownies that made with different types of flour. The hedonic test was
conducted in order to determine the best wheat flour replacer. There were four
quality parameters of the hedonic test that observed, that were aroma, taste,
texture and overall acceptance.
4.1.1 Sensory Acceptance
Determination of the best gluten free flour was conducted based on
sensory evaluation procedure (hedonic test). According to Moskowitzt et al
(2006), the number of panelists required for conducting the consumer sensory
acceptance tests was 50 100 panelists, hence this research used 70 panelists. The
panelists were untrained and they were asked to evaluate each of rice bran
brownies samples using a 7 points hedonic scale. The scale was ranged from 1 to
7, 1 stands for extremely dislike and 7 stands for extremely like. The evaluation of
each samples were done based on the preference of the panelists toward each
samples. All of data obtained from the hedonic test were analyzed using the IBM
SPSS 19 utilizing the one way ANOVA.
4.1.1.1 Aroma
27

Aroma was considered as an important parameter in determining the


quality of food product (Rothe, 1988), therefore aroma was chosen as one of the
parameter in the hedonic test to observe the consumer preference towards the
different types of flour used to make the rice bran brownies.
7
6
5.09

5.2

5
Hedonic Score
Wheat
of Aroma 4

4.76
Cassava

Rice

4.59
Potato

3
2
1
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.1 Panelists preference on the aroma of rice bran brownies with different flour

Result showed that there was effect of different types of flour toward
the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies aroma. Rice bran brownies made
from cassava flour and rice flour had the similar acceptance with rice bran
brownies made from wheat flour as shown in the Figure 4.1. Katama et al (2002)
substituted the wheat flour with cassava flour in chapatti, in that research,
substitution 50 % of wheat flour with cassava flour still produced chapatti with
acceptable aroma. Cassava flour also had been utilized in the making of cake as
studied by Gan et al (2007) and also produced cassava cakes which was
acceptable for the consumer. Rice flour was known to have the neutral aroma as
stated by Mutters et al (2009) so it could be inferred that rice flour did not give
28

significant changes toward the aroma properties of the rice bran brownies
produced.
The rice bran brownies made from potato flour gave the lowest score
of the consumer acceptance toward aroma parameter, it was not significantly
different with the rice bran brownies made from rice flour but it was different with
the rice bran brownies made from cassava flour and wheat flour. According to
Berger (2007) approximately 50 compounds contributed to the aroma of raw
potato. Because of the existence of such aromatic compounds, it could be inferred
that potato flour would have a distinctive aroma. Thybo et al (2006) also found
that potatoes from different cultivars possesed several aromatic compounds which
were contributed to their aroma. These aroma compounds might give changes
towards the aroma properties of the rice bran brownies and affect the consumer
preference towards the rice bran brownies aroma.
4.1.1.2 Taste
Taste of food is the combination of five basic tastes that could be
perceived by the taste buds. Those include salt, sweet, sour, bitter and umami
(Vaclavik et al, 2007). The replacement of wheat flour with cassava flour, rice
flour or potato flour might affect the taste of the rice bran brownies, therefore taste
was chosen as one of the parameter in the hedonic test to observe the consumer
preference towards the different types of flour used to make the rice bran
brownies. Besides, Brown (2008) also stated that taste is the most influential
factor in the people selection of foods.

29

7
6
5
4.4
Hedonic Score
Wheat
of Taste 4

Cassava

4.21

4.1
Rice

Potato
3.59

3
2
1
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.2 Panelists preference on the taste of rice bran brownies with different flour

Result showed that there was effect of different types of flour toward
the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies taste. As shown in Figure 4.2, the
rice bran brownies made from wheat flour, cassava flour and rice flour had similar
taste acceptance although it was significant different with the one made using
potato flour. There was a research conducted by Gan et al (2007) about the
optimization of cassava cake formulation which produce cassava cake with high
consumer acceptance, the research was stated that the baked cassava cake had a
strong cassava flavour. However in the brownies making, it was found that those
aroma were not interfering with the consumer acceptance.
The rice bran brownies made from potato flour was slightly
unacceptable because as shown in the Figure 4.2 the mean score for taste
parameter was 3.5857, while based on the hedonic scaling range, the score 3
already categorized as slightly dislike. Thybo et al (2006) stated potato could

30

possibly have an off flavour which was correlated with the non volatiles
compounds in the potato. So it might possible that the off flavour which was
possesed by potato contribute in lowering the rice bran brownies acceptance.
7
6
5.09
5
Wheat
Hedonic Score
of Texture 4

4.91
4.46

Cassava

Rice

Potato
3.31

3
2
1

4.1.1.3 Texture
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.3 Panelists preference on the texture of rice bran brownies with different flour

Texture is defined as an sensory attributes which is perceived by sight,


touch and sound, could be one of those or the combination of those (Lawless et al,
2010). The replacement of wheat flour with cassava flour, rice flour and potato
flour might affect the texture of the rice bran brownies product, therefore texture
was chosen as one of the parameter in the hedonic test to observe the consumer
acceptance toward the rice bran brownies product.
Result showed that there was effect of different types of flour toward
the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies texture. As shown in Figure 4.3,
The texture acceptance of rice bran brownies made from cassava flour is similar
31

with the rice bran brownies made from wheat flour while rice bran brownies made
using rice flour and potato flour showed lower acceptance in term of texture.
From the result of texture analysis as shown in Figure 4.5, The rice
bran brownies made from rice flour had softer texture while the one made from
potato flour had harder texture compared to rice bran brownies made from wheat
and cassava flour. Therefore, it could be inferred that the rice bran brownies which
was too soft was not preferred by the consumer, and the one which was too hard
was also disliked by the consumer. It might be concluded that the rice bran
brownies which had medium hardness was preferred by the consumer. This would
be further explained in the texture analysis result.
4.1.1.4 Overall Acceptance
The overall acceptance parameter was chosen as one of the parameter
to be evaluated in the hedonic test as its importance to determine the preference of
the consumer towards the rice bran brownies product in terms of combined
evaluation regarding the aroma, taste and texture of the rice bran brownies.
Result showed that there was effect of different types of flour toward
the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies regarding the overall acceptance.
As shown in Figure 4.4, the rice bran brownies made from cassava flour had
similar acceptance with the rice bran bran brownies made from wheat flour, while
the overall acceptance of rice bran brownies made from rice flour was similar with
the one made from potato flour.

32

7
6
5.13
5

4.91
4.21

Hedonic Score
Wheat
of Overall 4

Cassava

Rice

3.94
Potato

3
2
1
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.4 Panelists preference on the overall parameter of rice bran brownies with different flour

Based on the sensory evaluation result of hedonic test, the best gluten
free flour which could be used in the making of rice bran brownies was the
cassava flour. Rice bran brownies made from cassava flour showed no significant
difference compared to the one made from wheat flour.

33

4.1.2 Physico Chemical Characteristics


10000
8982.16

9000
8000
7000
6000

5676.04

Hardness (g)
Wheat5000

Cassava

6158.58
Rice

4156.07

Potato

4000
3000
2000
1000
0

4.1.2.1 Texture
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.5 Hardness Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour

The texture of rice bran brownies made from different types of flour
were observed using texture analyzer. The textural parameter which was observed
was hardness. As stated by Sczcneiak (2002), hardness could be defined
physically as force give to attain a given deformation and from sensory
perspective hardness was defined as force require to compress between molar
teeth and palate. The hardness parameter of rice bran brownies made with
different types of flour could be seen in the Figure 4.5.
From the result, there was effect of different types of flour towards the
hardness value of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.5 it could be seen that the
highest level of hardness was given by rice bran brownies made using potato
flour, and the lowest one was the rice bran brownies made using rice flour. Singh
34

et al (2003) also stated that potato flour had different size of starch granules which
varied according to its cultivars. Potato flour which has smaller starch granules
would produce harder and more cohesive product, which might be the cause of
higher level of hardness of rice bran brownies made from potato flour compared
to the others.
The low hardness level of rice flour could be caused by the protein
content of rice flour. As stated by Muksprasirt (2001), rice flour has lower level of
protein compared to wheat flour, therefore the hardness of the rice bran brownies
made from rice flour was lower and significantly different compared to rice bran
brownies made from other flour. Hui (2008) stated that the protein content of
wheat flour is 11.8 12.6 % while the protein content of rice flour is about 7% as
stated by Nura et al (2011). This was also supported by the theory stated by Hui et
al (2008) that in the making of cake, flour which has low level of protein would
produce softer texture.
From the result of sensory analysis, the acceptance toward texture
parameter of rice bran brownies made from cassava flour and wheat flour was not
significantly different. This was coherent with the result of textural analysis,
whereas the hardness value of rice bran brownies made from cassava flour and
rice bran brownies made from wheat flour was similar.

35

4.1.2.2 Moisture Content


25
19.87

20

15
Moisture Content
Wheat (%)

17.86
14.99
Cassava

Rice

13.13
Potato

10

0
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.6 Moisture Content Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour

The moisture content of rice bran brownies made using different types
of flour was analyzed in this preliminary research. Moisture content is an
important parameter to determine the quality of bakery products, such as
brownies. Moisture content of the bakery product would affect the eating quality
of the finished products, as stated by Hui et al (2008). The moisture content of
rice bran brownies made using different types of flour could be seen in the Figure
4.6. Result showed that different types of flour would affect the moisture content
of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.6 it could be seen that the highest level of
moisture content was given by rice bran brownies made using rice flour, and the
lowest one was the rice bran brownies made using potato flour.
As shown in Figure 4.6, all of the rice bran brownies made with
different types of flour were significantly different towards each other. Hui et al
36

(2008) stated that the amount of water could affect the texture and mouth feel of
bakery products. The presence of water is also very important in baking because it
is essentially needed in order to gelatinize the starch during heating, besides it also
plays an important role by interact with proteins in order to give desirable features
for bakery products.
From the result of texture analysis, it could be seen that there was a
correlation between the moisture content and the hardness value of the rice bran
brownies made with different flours. Rice bran brownies made from rice flour
which had the highest moisture content had the lowest value of hardness, while
the rice bran brownies made from potato flour which had the lowest moisture
content had the highest value of hardness. This assumption was supported by
theory stated by Kilcast (2004) about the relation between moisture content and
the hardness of food products whereas loss of moisture could increase the
hardness of bakery products. The source of starch might also affect the moisture
content of the product, this was related to the theory which stated by Belitz et al
(2009) regarding the effect of different starch source toward its gelatinization
characteristics. Each starch possessed different starch granules, according to
deMan (1999), potato flour had the largest starch granule, followed by wheat
flour, cassava flour and rice flour. This difference in granule size would affect the
amount of water which could be swollen into the starch granule.

37

4.1.2.3 Water Activity


0.69
0.68
0.68
0.67

0.66

0.67

0.66
Wheat 0.65
Water Activity
0.64

Cassava

Rice

Potato
0.63

0.63
0.62
0.61
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.7 Water Activity Value of Rice Bran Brownies with Different Flour

Hui et al (2008) stated that water activity has a relationship with


moisture content, and furthermore, in bakery products water provides lubrication
when the bakery product is being eaten and affects its texture. Result showed that
there was effect of different types of flour toward rice bran brownies water
activity value. From Figure 4.7 it could be seen that the highest level of water
activity was given by rice bran brownies made using rice flour, and the lowest one
was the rice bran brownies made using potato flour. All of the rice bran brownies
product had water activity value ranged from 0.634 0.681, according to
Barbosa-Canovas (2007), foods which have water activity values from 0.6 0.9
are categorized as intermediate moisture foods. The highest water activity was
given by the rice bran brownies made using rice flour, and it could be related with
the moisture content of the rice bran brownies made using rice flour which was
38

also the highest compared to the others as shown in Figure 4.6. On the other hand,
the least water activity was given by rice bran brownies made from potato flour,
and it also could be related with its moisture content which was also the least
among the others as shown in Figure 4.6.
Related to the result of texture analysis, the rice bran brownies made
from potato flour which had the lowest water activity had the highest hardness
value, while the rice bran brownies made from rice flour which had the lowest
water activity had the lowest hardness value. Therefore this result was coherent
with the theory stated by Barbaso-Canovas (2007) regarding the effect of water
activity toward the textural properties of foods. Foods with high Aw have moist
and juicy texture, while foods with lower Aw have harder and tougher texture.

4.2 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time on Gluten Free
Rice Bran Brownies Qualities
The main research was conducted to determine the best rice bran
concentration and the best baking time in the making of rice bran brownies. The
rice bran brownies was made using cassava flour, which was selected from the
result of the preliminary result. The rice bran concentration which was
incorporated as the substitute for cassava flour consists of five different
concentrations which were 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, and 40%, while the baking time
was 35, 45 and 55 minutes. The subjective and objective test were conducted to
analyze the rice bran brownies which were made using different rice bran
concentrations and different baking time. The subjective test that was conducted
was sensory evaluation using hedonic test. The objective analysis was conducted
39

to observe several physical and chemical parameters which consist of moisture


content, water activity and the texture of rice bran brownies.
4.2.1 Sensory Acceptance
The determination of the best rice bran concentration and the best
baking time in the making of rice bran brownies was conducted based on sensory
evaluation procedure. The hedonic test was conducted using 70 panelists. The
panelists were untrained panelists and the panelists were asked to evaluate each of
the rice bran brownies samples using a 7 points hedonic scale. The scale was
ranged from 1 to 7, 1 stands for extremely dislike and 7 stands for extremely like.
The evaluation of each samples were done based on the preference of the panelists
toward each samples. All of data obtained from the hedonic test were analyzed
using the IBM SPSS 19 utilizing the one way ANOVA.
4.2.1.1 Aroma
Table 4.1 Effect of Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time towards Aroma
Parameter
Rice Bran Concentration
Baking Time
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

35 minutes

5.5429e

4.9714bcd

4.8857bcd

4.4857ab

4.2429a

45 minutes

5.2286de

5.1000cde

4.9429bcd

4.9714bcd

4.6000ab

55 minutes

4.7286bc

4.8429bcd

4.9857bcd

4.9429bcd

4.5857ab

Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like

Result showed that there was an effect of rice bran concentration


towards the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies in terms of aroma. Result
also showed that there was effect of interaction between rice bran concentrations
and baking time towards the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies in terms

40

of aroma. From Table 4.1, it could be seen that as the rice bran concentration
increased the consumer acceptance was decreased.
There was a research conducted by Caesario (2011) which was
incorporation of rice bran in the meat ball. In that research, increasing the rice
bran concentration resulted in the decreasing of the consumer acceptance toward
aroma parameter, therefore it was coherent with the result of this research.
Kusumasari (2011) also incorporated rice bran in the making of ready to eat
breakfast cereal, and at certain point of rice bran addition, decreasing of consumer
acceptance towards aroma parameter was occurred. The decreasing of the
consumer acceptance in term of aroma parameter as the rice bran concentration
increased could be attributed to the unpleasant odor which was possessed by rice
bran as stated by Kaewka (2009), it also supported by another theory by
Sukonthara (2009) which stated that rice bran had several volatiles compound
contributed to its unpleasant aroma.
According to Hui et al (2008), the production of aromatic compounds
in bakery products is related to the baking process, therefore baking time is one of
the important consideration which will determine the quality of bakery products.
However, result showed there was no effect of baking time towards the consumer
acceptance of rice bran brownies in terms of aroma. However, from Table 4.1, it
could be seen that for the rice bran brownies baked for 55 minutes the consumer
acceptance was similar even though the rice bran concentration was increased.
Therefore, it might be possible that increasing the baking time would reduce the
unpleasant aroma possessed by rice bran. Fehaili et al (2010) stated that there
were changes in concentration of certain aromatic compounds during baking as
41

the baking time increased. Therefore, it might be possible that the unappealing
aroma possessed by rice bran was lost due to prolonged baking time.
4.2.1.2 Taste
7
6
5.24
5
Hedonic Score
0% of Taste 410%

4.7
20%

4.4
30%

4.19
40%
3.72

3
2
1
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.8 Effect of Rice Bran Concentrations Towards Taste Parameter

Result showed that there was an effect of rice bran concentration


towards the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies in terms of taste. From the
result, it could be assumed that increasing the rice bran concentration would
reduce the taste acceptance of the rice bran brownies. This was also coherent with
the research conducted by Huang et al (2005) about the incorporation of rice bran
in the pork meatballs. In that research, the increasing of rice bran concentration
lowered the consumer acceptance towards taste parameter.

42

7
6
5
4.44
Hedonic Score
35ofminutes
Taste 4

45 minutes

4.54

4.36
55 minutes

3
2
1
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like
Figure 4.9 Effect of Baking Time Towards Taste Parameter

The taste of rice bran brownies product might be affected by several


aromatic compounds contained in rice bran, which has been studied and
characterized by Jarunrattanasri (2004). Hui et al (2008) also stated that there is
correlation between aromatic compounds toward sensory perception of taste. Luh
(1991) stated that the dominant flavor characteristics of rice bran are sweet taste
which is attributed to high sugar content in bran and bitter taste which is attributed
to saponin content in rice bran. The decreasing of consumer acceptance in term of
taste parameter as the rice bran concentration increasing could be affected by the
unpleasant flavor given by rice bran prior to the flavor profile described above.
Result also showed that there was no significant different of the rice bran
brownies made using different baking time towards its taste acceptance. There
was no effect of interaction between rice bran concentrations and baking time
towards the taste acceptance of rice bran brownies.
43

4.2.1.3 Texture
Table 4.2 Effect of Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time towards Texture
Parameter
Rice Bran Concentration
Baking Time
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

35 minutes

5.3143d

4.4143abc

4.3714abc

4.2429ab

3.9857a

45 minutes

4.8714cd

4.6571bc

4.6857bc

4.8000c

4.3714abc

55 minutes

4.5000abc

4.6286bc

4.6714bc

4.2286ab

4.0000a

Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like

From the result, there was effect of rice bran concentration towards
the texture acceptance of rice bran brownies. From Table 4.2, it could be seen that
as the rice bran concentration increased, the acceptance towards texture was
decreased. This result was coherent with the research conducted by Huang et al
(2005), in that research the increased rice bran concentration lowered the
consumer acceptance of the pork meatball products in term of texture parameter.
This result was also supported by another research conducted by Delahaye et al
(2005) which was the study of rice bran utilization in frozen pizza. Sensory
analysis was conducted to determine the consumer acceptance of frozen pizza,
and textural acceptance was one of the parameter observed in the sensory analysis,
which specifically was hardness. The research resulted with lowered sensory
acceptance toward the hardness parameter as the rice bran concentration
increased. This hedonic test result could be correlated with the result from texture
analysis where the hardness value was increased as the rice bran concentration
increased, this might be one of the factor which decreasing the texture acceptance
of rice bran brownies.
44

Result showed that there was effect of baking time toward the texture
acceptance of rice bran brownies. From Table 4.2, it could be seen that higher
baking time (45 and 55 minutes) shown the ability to give slightly higher
acceptance in texture parameter compared than 35 minutes baking time.
According to Hui et al (2008), there are many features which are occurred during
baking such as Maillard reaction, starch gelatinization, and moisture loss. Those
occurrences could possibly affect the texture of the final product which could
affect the consumer preference toward the texture of the rice bran brownies.
Result also showed that there was effect of interaction between rice bran
concentrations and baking time towards the consumer acceptance of rice bran
brownies in term of texture. Higher baking time might also induce the occurrence
of other phenomenon that might affect the acceptance of the rice bran brownies.
4.2.1.4 Overall
Table 4.3 Interaction of Rice Bran Concentration and Baking Time towards Overall Parameter
Rice Bran Concentration
Baking Time
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

35 minutes

5.5143e

4.8000cd

4.5714bc

4.2286ab

3.8857a

45 minutes

5.2286de

4.8000cd

4.5429bc

4.6286bc

4.0571a

55 minutes

4.7286c

4.8000cd

4.5714bc

4.8000cd

3.8143a

Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
The range of hedonic scaling : 1=extremely dislike, 2=dislike, 3=slightly dislike, 4=neutral,
5=slightly like, 6=like, 7=extremely like

Result showed that there was effect of rice bran concentration towards
the consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies in terms of overall parameter. The
result was similar with the research conducted by Huang et al (2005) about the
utilization of rice bran in the making of pork meatballs. In that research,

45

increasing the concentration of rice bran would reduce the overall acceptance of
the pork meatballs.
Result also showed that there was no effect of baking time towards the
consumer acceptance of rice bran brownies in term of overall parameter.
However, there was effect of interaction between rice bran concentrations and
baking time towards the texture acceptance of rice bran brownies. From the result,
it could be assumed that increasing the rice bran concentration in the making of
rice bran brownies up to 30% concentration would produce rice bran brownies
which was still acceptable for the consumer. The use of higher baking time was
also proven to slightly maintain the acceptability of the rice bran brownies up to
30% rice bran concentration. The gluten free rice bran brownies which was
selected as the best gluten free rice bran brownies formulation was the rice bran
brownies made using 30% rice bran concentration and 55 minutes baking time.

46

4.2.2 Physico Chemical Characteristics


8000

7535.64
7073.38

7000
6000

6050.52

6910

6363.71

5000
Hardness0%
(g) 4000

10%

20%

30%

40%

3000
2000
1000
0

4.2.2.1 Texture
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.10 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Hardness Value

Result showed that there was effect of rice bran concentration towards
the hardness parameter of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.10, It could be seen
that as the rice bran concentration increased the value of hardness also increased.
The hardness value of rice bran brownies made with 40% rice bran concentration
was higher and significantly different compared to the rice bran brownies made
with 0 and 10% rice bran concentration, however it was not significantly different
with rice bran brownies made with 20 and 30% rice bran concentration. This
result is similar with several result which was already conduced, regarding the
incorporation of rice bran in the food products. Huang et al (2005) studied the
effect of rice bran concentration towards the hardness of pork meatballs, and it
resulted in the increasing of hardness value as the rice bran concentration
increased. Another research was conducted by Sairam et al (2011), and showed
47

similar result, in that research the rice bran was incorporated in the bread making,
and as the rice bran concentration increased, the value of hardness also increased.
Therefore it could be assumed that the rice bran concentration had positive
correlation toward the increasing of the hardness value in a food product. The
increasing in hardness value might be caused by the increasing dietary fiber
content as the rice bran concentration increased, because as stated by Brennan et

8000
7214.98
7000

6366.13

6778.85

6000
5000
minutes
Hardness (g) 354000

45 minutes

55 minutes

3000
2000
1000
0

48

al (2011) addition of ingredients which is rich in dietary fiber content would


increase the hardness of the food product.
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.11 Effect of Baking Time Towards Hardness Value

Result also showed that there was effect of baking time towards the
hardness parameter of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.11, It could be seen that
as the baking time increased the value of hardness also increased. Hui et al (2008)
stated that the duration of baking is related to the characteristic of the finished
product. During baking process, moisture loss is occurred gradually, and this
could be the cause why the hardness of the rice bran brownies increased as the
baking time increased. It could be assumed that as the baking time increased, the
moisture content decreased and therefore affected the textural properties of the
rice bran brownies, in term of hardness. There was no effect of interaction
between rice bran concentrations and baking time towards the hardness parameter
of rice bran brownies. This result was also coherent with the result obtained from
observing the moisture content and water activity. As the baking time increased,
the moisture content and the water activity value decreased, and this is coherent
with the theory which stated that moisture loss would increase the hardness of the
bakery product.

49

18

17.09
15.67

16
14

14.03

14.48

12.96

12
Moisture 0%
Content (%)

10
10%
8

20%

30%

40%

6
4
2
0

4.2.2.2 Moisture Content


Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.12 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Moisture Content

Moisture content was considered as an important parameter in


determining the quality of baking, as stated by Hui et al (2008), water plays a
major role during baking process because water reacts with baking ingredients
and evaporates when heated. From the result, there was effect of rice bran
concentration towards the moisture content of rice bran brownies.
From Figure 4.12, It could be seen that as the rice bran concentration
increased the moisture content also increased. This result was coherent with the
result which was conducted by Saputra (2008), in that result rice bran was
incorporated in cookies, and by substituting wheat flour with 25 % rice bran in the
cookies the moisture content of the product was increased. Similar result was
obtained from research conducted by Delahaye (2005), whereas as the rice bran
concentration increased the moisture content of the product was also increased.
50

From this information, it could be assumed that increasing the rice bran
concentration might be contributed in the increasing of moisture content in a
bakery product.
20

18.77

18
16

14.31

14
11.46

12
Moisture Content
35 Minutes
(%) 10

45 Minutes

55 Minutes

8
6
4
2
0
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.13 Effect of Baking Time Towards Moisture Content

Result also showed that there was effect of baking time towards the
moisture content of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.13, It could be seen that as
the baking time increased the moisture content was decreased. It could be
correlated with the theory stated by Sakin et al (2007), during baking moisture
transfer is occurred, which consists of internal and surface evaporation. So it
could be assumed that the prolonged baking time would reduce the amount of
moisture in bakery products. There was no effect of interaction between rice bran
concentrations and baking time towards the moisture content of rice bran
brownies.

51

0.720
0.713
0.709

0.710
0.700
Water Activity
0%

0.690

10%

20%

0.690

30%

40%

0.682
0.680

0.678

0.670
0.660

4.2.2.3 Water Activity


Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.14 Effect of Rice Bran Concentration Towards Water Activity

From the result, there was effect of rice bran concentration towards
the water activity of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.14, It could be seen that as
the rice bran concentration increased the water activity was also increased. This
result could be correlated with the moisture content of the rice bran brownies, as
the rice bran concentration increased, the moisture content was increased,
therefore it could be assumed that the increasing moisture content affect the water
activity in rice bran brownies, as stated in the theory above regarding the relation
of moisture content and water activity.

52

0.720

0.714

0.710
0.700
0.692
0.690
Waer Activity35 minutes
0.680

45 minutes

55 minutes
0.677

0.670
0.660
0.650
Notes : Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different in Duncan Test at =0.05
Figure 4.15 Effect of Baking Time Towards Water Activity

From the result, there was effect of baking time towards the water
activity of rice bran brownies. From Figure 4.15, It could be seen that as the
baking time increased the water activity was decreased. This phenomenon could
be correlated with the result of the moisture content analysis, whereas it showed
similar result. As the baking time increased, the moisture content decreased. Since
water activity had a relationship with moisture content, it could be inferred that
the decreasing of water activity as the baking time increased was affected by the
moisture content of the food product. There was no effect of interaction between
rice bran concentrations and baking time towards the water activity of rice bran
brownies.
4.3 Nutritional Composition
Figure 4.16 The Best Gluten Free Rice Bran Brownies Formulation

The proximate analysis of rice bran flour and the best gluten free rice
bran brownies formula was conducted to determine the nutritional value of rice
53

bran flour and the final product of the best formula. The result of the proximate
analysis could be seen in the Table 4.4.
Table 4.4 Proximate Composition of Rice Bran Flour and The Best Gluten Free Rice Bran
Brownies Formula
Conventional
Analysis
Rice Bran Flour
Rice Bran Brownies
Brownies (Rolfes
et al, 2006)
Moisture Content
5.59%
11.06%
12.5%
Ash Content
18.81%
2.68%
0.5%
Protein Content
17.18%
6.74%
4%
Fat Content
15.51%
30.91%
29%
Carbohydrate Content
42.91%
48.61%
50%
Total Dietary Fiber
22.67%
7.79%
4%
Content

From Table 4.4, it could be seen that rice bran flour which was used in
this research had different amount of proximate composition. This difference
could be attributed to the variety of the rice from which the rice bran was derived.
Huang et al (2005) studied the composition of rice bran flour obtained from
different rice cultivator, and rice bran which derived from different rice varieties
would have different proximate composition. The total dietary fiber in rice bran
flour used in this research was 22.67% as shown in Table 4.4, and according to
Delahaye et al (2005) rice bran was considered as a good source of dietary fiber.
The nutritional composition of rice bran brownies made using 30%
rice bran and 55 minutes baking time could be seen in Table 4.4. The serving size
of the gluten free rice bran brownies is 100 grams. Because the total dietary
54

fiber content was 7.79%, so the total dietary fiber in the rice bran brownies per
serving size was 7.79 grams. As stated by Cho and Dreher (2001), food containing
20% or more RDI of dietary fiber could be categorized as high in or rich in
fiber, Therefore the best gluten free rice bran brownies formulation obtained from
this research could be labeled as high fiber food.

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

55

5.1 Conclusions
Based on sensory analysis, among the cassava flour, rice flour and
potato flour, the highest value of overall acceptance was resulted from rice bran
brownies made from cassava flour. Therefore it could be concluded that cassava
flour was the best wheat flour replacer in the making of gluten free rice bran
brownies.
From the result of sensory analysis it could be concluded that rice bran
concentration contributed to the consumer perception of taste, aroma and texture
where increasing the rice bran concentration would decrease the consumer
acceptance. The increase of rice bran concentration would increase the hardness,
moisture content and water activity of the rice bran brownies. However,
increasing the baking time would decrease the moisture content and water activity
while increase the hardness of the rice bran brownies. Prolonged baking time
might be assumed to slightly maintain the acceptability of the rice bran brownies,
such as in the aroma parameter. The best rice bran concentration to produce the
gluten free rice bran brownies was 30% rice bran concentration, with 55 minutes
baking time.
The nutritional composition of the best gluten free rice bran brownies
formulation was 6.74 % protein content, 30.91 % fat content, 48.61 %
carbohydrate content, 11.06 % moisture content, 2.68 % ash content and 7.79%
dietary fiber content. The best gluten free rice bran brownies formulation was
considered as high fiber food because it contained more than 20% of dietary fiber
RDI per serving size.

56

5.2 Suggestions
The use of different baking time had also proven to maintain the
acceptability of the gluten free - rice bran brownies, hence, further study regarding
the baking condition such as temperature or baking method during the making of
gluten free - rice bran brownies could be done in order to improve the
acceptability of the rice bran brownies.
Further study on the shelf life of the product made using addition of
rice bran needs to be done. Furthermore, study towards method to increase the
shelf life stability of a food product with rice bran addition also needs to be done,
it might be possible that pre treatment of the rice bran before processing could
affect the shelf life stability of the food product incorporated with rice bran
although it has not yet studied extensively.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

57

American Dietetic Association, 2008. Health Implication of Dietary Fiber. Journal


of American Dietetic Association (108): 1716 1731.
Aftasari, F., 2003. Sifat Fisikokimia dan Organoleptik Sponge Cake yang
Ditambah Tepung Bekatul Rendah Lemak. Bogor: Institut Pertanian
Bogor.
Alvita, O. N., Rohimah, E., and Mulyani, S. R., 2007. Sereal Bekatul sebagai
Alternatif Added Value Residu Penggilingan Padi, National Paper
Competition of Agriculture Sector. Bogor: Institut Pertanian Bogor.
AOAC International. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis, 18th ed. USA: AOAC
International.
BadanPusatStatistik. 2012. Produksi Tanaman Padi Indonesia, BPS Online.
Home page online. Available from http://www.bps.go.id/tnmn_pgn.php?
kat=3; Internet; accessed on May 6th 2012.
Barbosa-Canovas, G. V., 2007. Water Activity in Foods: Fundamentals and
Applications. USA: John Wiley and Sons.
Belitz, H.D., Grosch, W., and Schieberle, P., 2009. Food Chemistry. Germany:
Springer.
Berger, Ralf G., 2007. Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and
Sutainability. Germany: Springer.
Brennan, J. G., and Grandison, A. S., 2011. Food Processing Handbook.
Germany: John Wiley and Sons
Brown, A., 2008. Understanding Food. USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Bunde, M. C., Osundahunsi, F. O. and Akinoso, R., 2010. Supplementation of
Biscuit Using Rice Bran and Soybean Flour. Journal of Food,
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Development 10 :4047-4059.
Caesario, S., 2011. Effect of Different Rice Bran Concentrations and Cooking
Methods in Meatball Product on Consumer Preferences and PhysicoChemical Characteristics. Karawaci: Universitas Pelita Harapan.
Champagne, 2004. Rice Science and Technology. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Cho, S., and Dreher, M.L., 2001. Handbook of Dietary Fiber. New York: Marcell
Dekker.
Choi,S.P, Kim, S.P, Kang, M. Y., Nam, S. H, Friedman, 2010. M. Protective
Effects of Black Rice Bran against Chemically-Induced Inflammation
of Mouse Skin, J. Agric. Food Chem., 58 (18), pp 1000710015
58

Choo, S.S Leon P. and Mark D., 1999. Complex Carbohydrates in Foods. New
York : Marcell Dekker.
Chotimarkorn, C. and Silalai, N., 2008. Oxidative Stability of Fried Dough from
rice Flour Containing Rice Bran Powder during Storage, Journal of
Food Science and Technology 41: 561-568.
Cicero, A.F.G. and Gaddi, A., 2001. Rice bran oil and gamma oryzanol in the
treatment of hyperlipoproteinaemias and other conditions.
Phytotherapy research. 15(4) : 277-289
Corriher, S.O, 2008. BakeWise: The Hows and Whys of Successful Baking with
Over 200 Magnificent Recipes. USA: Simon and Schuster.
Delahaye, E. P., Jimenez, P., and Perez,E., 2005. Effect of Enrichment with High
Content Dietary Fiber Stabilized Rice Bran Flour on Chemical and
Functional Properties of Storage Frozen Pizzas, Journal of Food
Engineering 68: 1-7.
DeMan, J.M., 1999. Principles of Food Chemistry. Maryland: Aspen Publication
Elleuch, M., Dorothy, B., Olivier, R., Souhail, B., Christophe, B., and Hamadi, A.,
2010. Dietary Fibre and Fibre-Rich by-Products of Food Processing
Characterisation, Technological Functionality and Commercial
Applications: A Review. Food Chemistry Journal: 411-421.
Faccin, G. L., Vieira L. D. N., Miotto L. A., Barreto, P. L. M. and Amante, E. R..
2009. Chemical, Sensorial, and Rheological Properties of New
Organic Rice Bran Beverage, Journal of Rice Science 16: 226-234.
Fauziyah, A., 2011. Analisis Potensi dan Gizi Pemanfaatan Bekatul dalam
Pembuatan Cookies. Bogor: Departemen Gizi Masyarakat, Fakultas
Ekologi Manusia, Institut Pertanian Bogor.
Fehaili, S., Courel, M., Rega, B. and Giampaoli, P., 2010. An Instrumented Oven
for The Monitoring of Thermal Reaction During The Baking of
Sponge Cake. Journal of Food Engineering 101: 253 263.
Fuentez-Zaragosa, E., Riquelme-Navarrete, M.J., Sanchez-Zapata, E., PerezAlvarez, J.A, 2010. Resistant Starch as Functional Ingredient: A
Review. Food Research International Volume 43, Issue 4, Pages 931
942.
Gan, H.E, Karim R., Muhammad, S.K.S, Bakar, J.A., Hashim, D.M., Rahman,
R.A., 2007. Optimization of the Basic Formulation of a Traditional
59

Baked Cassava Cake Using Response Surface Methodology. 2006.


Swiss Society of Food Science and Technology, Elsevier.
Hargrove, K. L.,1994. Processing and Utilization of rice bran in the United
States. New York: Marcell Dekker.
Hu, G., Huang, S., Cao, S., Zhengzhi, M., 2009. Effect of Enrichment with
Hemicellulose from Rice Bran on Chemical and Functional Properties
of Bread. Food Chemistry 115: 839 842.
Huang, S.C., Shiau, C.Y., Liu, T.E., Chu, C.L., Hwang, D.F., 2005. Effects of Rice
Bran on Sensory and Physico Chemical Properties of Emulsified Pork
Meatballs. Journal of Meat Science 70: 613 619.
Hui, Y. H and Corke, H., 2006. Bakery Products : Science and Technology. USA:
John Wiley and Sons.
Hui, Y. H., R. C. Chandan, S. Clark, N. Cross, J. Dobbs, W. J. Hurst, L. M. L.
Nollet, E. Shimoni, N. Sinha, E. B. Smith, S. Surapat, A. Totchenal, F.
Toldra, 2007. Handbook of Food Products Manufacturing: Principles,
Bakery, Beverages, Cereals, cheese, Confectionary, Fats, Fruits, and
Functional Foods. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Jarunrattanasri, A., 2004. Aroma Formation from Rice Bran Protein Concentrate
by Acid Hydrolisis and The Maillard Reaction. Kasetsart University.
Kaewka, K. Therakulkait, C. and Cadwallader, K. R., 2009. Effect of Preparation
Conditions on Composition and Sensory Aroma Characteristics of
Acid Hydrolyzed Rice Bran Protein Concentrate. Journal of Cereal
Science 50 (2009) 56 60.
Katama, C. K., R.W. Muinga, H.M Saha and J.G Gethi. 2002. Increased Food
Security and Poverty Reduction in Coastal Kenya Through
Substitution of Wheat with Cassava Flour in Chapatti and Mahamri.
KARI (Kenya Agricultural Research Institure).
Kilcast, D. 2004. Texture in Food: Solid Foods, Volume 2. USA: Woodhead
Publishing.
Korus, J., Witzcak, M., Ziobro, R., Juszczak, L., 2009. The Impact of Resistant
Starch on Characteristics of Gluten Free Dough and Bread, Journal of
Food Hydrocolloids 23: 988 995.
Kusumasari, C., 2011. Optimization of Ready-To-Eat Cereal Flakes from Rice
Flour, Rice Bran, and Glutinous Rice Flour Using Response Surface
Methodology. Karawaci: Universitas Pelita Harapan.

60

Lawless, H. T. and Heymann, H., 2010. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles


and Practices. New York: Springer.
Luh, B. S., 1991. Rice Utilization. USA: Springer.
Matz, S. A., 1991. The Chemistry and Technology of Cereals As Food and Feed.
USA: Springer.
McCaskill and Zhang F, 1999. Use of rice bran oil in foods. Food Technology 53 :
50 53.
Meilgaard, M.C., Civille, G.V., and Carr, B.T., 2007. Sensory Evaluation
Technique. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group.
Metta, I., 2003. Pemanfaatan minyak bekatul dalam pembuatan pasta kacang
merah. IPB
Misra, A., and Kulshrestha, K., 2003. Effect of Storage on Nutritional Value of
Potato Flour Made From Three Potato Varieties. Plant Foods for
Human Nutrition 58: 1 10.
Moskowitz, Howard R., Beckley, Jacqueline H., and Ressurecion, Anna V.A.
2006. Sensory and Consumer Research in Food Product Design and
Development. Blackwell Publishing and The Institute of Food
Technologist: Iowa, USA.
Mukprasirt, A., Herald, T. J., and Seib. P. A. 2002. Pasting Characteristics of Rice
Flour Based Batter Compared to Wheat Flour Based Batter. Journal of
Food Quality 25:139-154
Mutters, R. G., and Thompson, James F. 2009. Rice Quality Handbook.
California: ANR Publications.
Nura, M., Kharidah, M., Jamilah, B. and Roselina, K. 2011. Textural Properties of
Laksa Noodle as Affected by Rice Flour Particle Size. International
Food Research Journal 18(4): 1309-1312
Preedy, V.R., Watson, R. R., Patel, V. 2011. Flour and Breads and Their
Fortification in Health and Disease Prevention. Academic Press.
Rolfes, S. R., Pinna, K., and Whitney, E. N., 2006. Understanding Normal and
Clinical Nutrition. USA: Cengage Learning.
Rothe, M. , 1988. Introduction to Aroma Research. USA: Springer.
Sairam, S., Gopala Krishna, A.G., Urooj, A., 2011. Physico chemical
Characteristics of Defatted Rice Bran and Its Utilization in a Bakery
Product.
61

Sakin, M., Kaymak ertekin, F., and Ilicali, C., 2007. Modeling the Moisture
Transfer During the Baking of White Cake. Journal of Food
Engineering Volume 80 (3): 822 - 831
Saputra, I., 2008. Evaluasi Mutu Gizi dan Indeks Glikemik Cookies dan Donat
Tepung Terigu yang Disubstitusi Parsial dengan Tepung Bekatul.
Szczesniak, A.S., 2002. Texture is a Sensory Property. Food Quality and
Preference 13: 215 225.
Schramm, R., Abadie, A., Hua, N., Zhimin, X., and Lima, M., 2007. Fractionation
of The Rice Bran Layer and Quantification of Vitamin E, Oryzanol,
Protein and Rice Bran Saccharides. Journal of Biological Engineering
1:9.
Shahidi, F., 2005. Baileys Industrial Oil and Fats Product. John Wiley and Sons.
Sharma, H. R., Chauhan, G. S., Agrawal, K., 2004. Physico Chemical
Characteristics of Rice Bran Processed by Dry Heating and Extrusion
Cooking. International Journal of Food Properties Volume 7, No. 3:
603 614.
Shittu, T.A., Aminu, R.A., Abulude, E.O., 2009. Functional Effects of Xanthan
Gum on Composite Cassava Wheat Dough and Bread. Food
Hydrocolloids 23: 2254 2260.
Silva, M. A., Sanches, C., Amante, E. R., 2006. Prevention of Hydrolitic
Rancidity in Rice Bran. Journal of Food Engineering 75: 487 491.
Singh, J., Singh, N., Sharma, T. R., and Saxena, S. K., 2003. Physicochemical,
Rheological and Cookie Making Properties of Corn and Potato Flours.
Food Chemistry 83: 387 393.
Street, C. A., 1991. Flour Confectionery Manufacture. Wiley IEEE.
Suas, M., 2008. Advanced Bread and Pastry : A Professional Approach. USA:
Cengage Learning.
Sukonthara, S., Theerakulkait, C., and Miyazawa, M., 2009. Characterization of
Volatile Aroma Compounds from Red and Black Rice Bran. Journal
of Oleo Science 58(3):155 161
Sulistiyo, 2006. Pengembangan Brownies Kukus Tepung Ubi Jalar (Ipomoea
batatas L.) di PT Fits Mandiri Bogor. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
Takakori, Z., Zare, M., Iranparvare, M., and Mehrabi, Y., 2005. Effect of Rice
Bran and Blood Glucose and Serum Lipid Parameter in Diabetes II
Patients. The Internet Journal of Nutrition and Wellness 2(1).
62

Thybo, A. K., Christiansen, J., Kaack, K., and Petersen, M.A., 2006. Effect of
Cultivars, Wound Healing and Storage on Sensory Quality and
Chemical Components in Pre Peeled Potatoes. LWT 39: 166 176.
Turowksi, M., Deshmukh, B., Harfmann, R., Conklin, J., Stephanie, L., 2007. A
Method for Determination of Soluble Dietary Fiber in Methycellulose
and Hydroxypropyl Methycellulose Food Gums. Journal of Food
Composition and Analysis 20: 420 429.
Vaclavik, V and Christian, E. W., 2007. Essential of Food Science. USA: Springer.
Widowati, S., 2001. Pemanfaatan Hasil Samping Penggilingan Padi dalam
Menunjang Sistem Agroindustri di Pedesaan. Buletin Agro Bio 4(1):33
38.
Wulandari, 2011. Optimasi Formula Brownies Berbasis Tepung Talas Banten
Sebagai Pangan Sumber Serat. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
Xu, Z., Hua, N., Godber, J.S, 2001 Antioxidant Activity of Tocopherols,
Tocotrienols, and -Oryzanol Components from Rice Bran against
Cholesterol
Oxidation
Accelerated
by
2,2-Azobis(2methylpropionamidine)
Dihydrochloride,
J.
Agric.
Food
Chem., 2001, 49 (4), pp 20772081.
Yu, L. L., Tsao, R. and Shahidi, F., 2012. Cereals and Pulses: Nutraceutical
Properties and Health Benefits. USA: John Wiley and Sons.

63

APPENDICES

64

Appendix 1. Hedonic Test Questionnaire


QUESTIONNAIRE UJI HEDONIK
NAMA :

TANGGAL :

SAMPEL : BROWNIES
Intruksi: Cicipilah sampel dari kiri ke kanan sesuai kode sampel yang tertera
pada kuesioner, lalu berikan penilaian berdasarkan aroma, rasa, warna, tekstur,
dan penerimaan keseluruhan (berdasarkan tingkat kesukaan anda) dengan spontan
tanpa membandingkan antar sampel. Bilaslah mulut dengan air mineral setiap
selesai mencoba sampel. Pencicipan sampel dilakukan satu kali saja tanpa
pengulangan. Terima kasih.
Kode
Sampel
Aroma
Rasa
Warna
Tekstur
Overall
Keterangan :
1=sangat tidak suka

5=agak suka

2=tidak suka

6=suka

3=agak tidak suka

7=sangat suka

4=netral

65

1.

Appendix 2. Sensory Analysis Procedure


Hedonic Test (Meilgaard et al, 2007)
The hedonic test is a sensory evaluation method to determine the
consumer acceptance of the product based on the overall sensory qualities of the
food product. The hedonic test is done using scale from 1 to 7 (1 = extremely
dislike, 2 = dislike, 3 = slightly dislike, 4 = neutral, 5 = slightly like, 6 = like, 7 =
extremely like). This test is performed by 70 untrained panelist. The panelists are
required to taste and evaluate the sample. The panelists are informed not to
compare the sample with the other samples.

66

1.

Appendix 3. Physical Analysis Procedure


Texture Profile Analysis
The physical characteristic of the rice bran brownies was done by measuring the
hardness parameter of the brownies. The equipment which was used to measure
the texture of the brownies is Stable Micro System texture analyzer. The texture
was measured by using cylindrical probe TA 25/1000 with 50 mm diameter. The
measure the texture of the brownies, the brownies sample should be put in the
texture analyzer table, and then the proper probe should be used based on the
texture characteristic of the food product. The test speed for the texture
measurement was 1.0 mm/s and the measurement result in terms of number and
graph are shown by Texture Exponent software.

67

Appendix 4. Chemical Analysis Procedure


A. Moisture content analysis using Oven method (AOAC, 2005).
1. Moisture content analysis is done by weighing five grams of sample
and put the sample into the evaporating dish which has constant
weight.
2. The sample is then dried in the oven for 6 hours at 105C. Before
weighed in analytical balance, the sample should be cooled down first
in the desicators, and then the sample should be dried again until the
constant weight is obtained. The moisture content calculated is wet
basis moisture content.
Moisture content (%) =

x y
x

100%

Where:
x = initial weight of the sample before drying in gram
y = final weight of the sample after drying in gram

B. Ash content determination, using Dry ashing method (AOAC, 2005).


1. Ash content determination is done by weighing five grams of sample
using analytical balance, the sample is put into crucible. The crucible
should have constant weight before used for weighing.
2. After the sample is put in the crucible, the sample is burnt on the burner
until the white smoke disappears.
3. The next step is ashing the sample in the furnace at 450C for 1 hour
and then after 1 hour the temperature should be raised up to 550C. The
ashing process is finished when the color changed from grey to white.
68

4. The resulted ash is then weighed using analytical balance and the ash
content is calculated using the formula below.
Ash content (%) =

x y
z

100%

Where:
x = weight of evaporating dish and the sample after ashing in gram
y = weight of evaporating dish in gram
z = weight of the sample in gram

C. Protein content determination using Micro Kjeldahl method (AOAC,


2005).
1. The protein analysis is conducted by weighing two grams of sample and
then the sample is put into Kjeldahl tube and the addition of 7 grams of
K2SO4, 5 mg of selenium, 15 ml of 96% H2SO4, and 10 ml of 35% H2O2
are done.
2. And then, the next step is the destruction of the sample at 420C, the
sample is destructed until the solution became clear and then sample is
cooled down.
3. The next step is placing the tube the Kjeldahl distillation equipment.
After that, the addition of 25 ml of 4% saturated boric acid and 3 drops of
mixed indicator are done. The mixed indicator is mixture of methyl red
and methylene blue and should be put into erlenmeyer flask. The flask is
placed below the condenser and the tip of condenser pipeline should be
soaked in boric acid solution.

69

4. The next step is the distillation process. The distillation process is done
by the addition of NaOH 35% for 5 minutes.
5. 0.2 N HCl is used to titrate the result of distillation until slightly pink
color appeared. The protein content is calculated as percent of nitrogen as
showed by the equation below.
%N=

( ml HClml blank ) N HCl 14.007


weight of sample(mg)

100%

The percentage of nitrogen is multiplied by specific conversion factor


based on type of sample used to obtain the percentage of protein content.

D. Fat content, using Soxhlet method (AOAC, 2005).


1. In the fat content analysis using soxhlet method, the sample used is five
grams of water-free sample, the sample is wrapped using filter paper
(thimble) and then it is put into Soxhlet equipment.
2. After that, the condenser should be put above Soxhlet equipment. The
round bottom flask is filled with petroleum benzene (solvent) and boiling
chips. The round bottom flask is put under Soxhlet equipment. The
extraction process of fat from sample is required for about 6 hours.
3. The extraction result is heated in oven at 105C. Then the sample should
be cooled down in desiccators and weighed until reaching the constant
weight. The fat content can be calculated using the equation below.
Fat content =

weight of fat extracted( g)


weight of sample (g)

100%

70

E. Carbohydrate content, using By difference method (AOAC, 2005)


Carbohydrate content (%) = 100% - (% moisture + % ash + % protein + % fat)

F. Total Dietary Fiber Analyses (AOAC, 2005)


1. 1 grams of sample was weighed, and the 50 ml phosphate buffer at pH
6.0 and 50 L -amylase was added.
2. The sample was incubated in 100 oC for 30 minutes and then the pH was
adjusted until it reached 7.5, the 100 L protease was added.
3. The sample was incubated again in 60 oC for 30 minutes. After that the
pH was adjusted until 4.5 then 200 L Amyloglucosidase was added.
4. The sample was incubated again in 60 oC for 30 minutes. Then the
sample was sedimented with 280 mL ethanol 95% at 60 oC. The sediment
was cooled for 1 hour, at room temperature.
5. The sample was filtered with no. 42 filter paper which had been
weighed.
6. The sample was washed with 78% ethanol, 10 mL ethanol 95% and 10
mL acetone.
7. The sample was dried at vacuum oven at 70 oC.
8. The residue which were protein and ash was removed, then the
remaining residue was the total dietary fiber.
9. The total dietary fiber was calculated with the formula below.
71

Total dietary fiber = Residue (gram protein + gram ash)/ sample x 100%

72

Appendix 5. Hedonic Test for Aroma Parameter Result of The Preliminary Research

Panelist
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40

Cassava
Flour
5
5
6
6
7
3
5
6
6
6
4
4
7
6
6
5
6
5
5
2
6
4
2
4
4
5
2
5
4
4
6
6
5
5
6
4
5
6
6
6

Rice Flour

Potato Flour

Wheat Flour

6
5
5
5
6
4
6
6
4
5
5
4
2
3
4
6
6
4
7
2
3
2
5
4
4
5
2
3
4
6
6
6
6
5
3
4
6
4
3
5

6
6
4
2
5
2
6
2
4
4
5
4
5
6
6
6
6
2
5
2
5
5
6
6
5
6
3
3
5
2
6
6
6
6
5
3
5
5
2
6

6
5
6
5
7
4
5
6
5
6
3
4
4
7
6
5
6
6
6
3
6
2
5
4
5
5
2
3
4
5
6
7
5
5
4
5
6
5
6
6
73

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

4
6
4
5
2
6
3
7
5
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
5
6
5
6
6
6
4

7
4
4
6
6
6
3
5
5
4
6
6
4
6
6
5
7
5
6
3
3
7
6
4
5
5
4
4
5
5

7
5
4
4
3
6
3
5
6
1
3
6
6
5
5
3
7
4
7
1
6
7
4
4
3
4
4
5
4
5

5
6
5
5
3
6
2
7
3
6
6
5
4
6
7
5
7
2
5
5
7
7
6
6
4
5
4
5
4
7

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

74

ANOVA
Aroma
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
17.043
502.543
519.586

df
3
276
279

Mean Square
5.681
1.821

F
3.120

Sig.
.026

Aroma
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Flour
N
1
2
Potato
70
4.5857
Rice
70
4.7571
4.7571
Wheat
70
5.0857
Cassava
70
5.2000
Sig.
.453
.067
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

75

Appendix 6. Hedonic Test for Taste Parameter Result of The Preliminary


Research
Panelist
Cassava
Rice Flour
Potato Flour Wheat Flour
Flour
1
3
4
6
4
2
5
5
5
5
3
3
4
3
4
4
6
3
4
6
5
6
5
4
7
6
5
4
2
5
7
1
5
6
3
8
2
6
2
3
9
2
5
3
3
10
4
5
3
4
11
1
2
4
2
12
2
3
2
2
13
6
3
3
4
14
4
4
5
4
15
5
3
2
4
16
5
5
6
6
17
3
3
3
2
18
6
3
2
5
19
6
7
5
5
20
2
4
4
5
21
3
5
2
4
22
6
3
2
6
23
4
5
3
5
24
2
5
6
5
25
3
5
5
4
26
2
3
6
2
27
2
3
3
3
28
4
5
5
4
29
5
5
2
5
30
6
4
5
7
31
3
5
4
3
32
6
6
6
5
33
4
4
3
6
34
2
3
1
3
35
6
3
3
6
36
2
3
3
3
37
3
2
3
4
38
3
3
4
3
39
7
1
2
6
40
5
6
5
4
76

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

2
3
6
6
5
5
3
5
4
5
2
6
5
6
3
5
5
6
3
5
2
5
4
6
5
5
5
6
7
5

2
5
2
7
4
5
6
5
2
2
3
3
3
6
3
5
3
5
6
4
3
4
6
6
4
4
4
4
5
4

5
6
2
5
4
4
3
5
2
5
2
2
5
5
5
3
6
2
5
3
3
3
3
2
3
2
2
2
3
2

4
3
5
5
5
5
3
6
4
5
2
5
5
4
4
5
4
3
3
6
6
5
4
6
5
5
6
5
4
5

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

77

ANOVA
Taste
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
25.554
539.871
565.425

df
3
276
279

Mean Square
8.518
1.956

F
4.355

Sig.
.005

Taste
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Flour
N
1
2
Potato
70
3.5857
Rice
70
4.1000
Cassava
70
4.2143
Wheat
70
4.4000
Sig.
1.000
.234
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

78

Appendix 7. Hedonic Test for Texture Parameter Result of The Preliminary


Research
Panelist
Cassava
Rice Flour
Potato Flour Wheat Flour
Flour
1
5
5
2
6
2
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
5
6
5
6
6
6
3
5
2
3
7
2
6
6
7
8
6
6
1
5
9
4
6
2
6
10
3
5
3
3
11
4
5
3
5
12
4
4
2
5
13
6
4
2
4
14
5
3
3
5
15
6
4
2
6
16
6
5
6
5
17
6
5
4
6
18
5
4
4
6
19
6
7
3
7
20
4
5
5
3
21
4
5
2
4
22
5
2
3
5
23
3
5
3
3
24
3
5
5
4
25
6
5
3
6
26
4
5
4
7
27
4
4
4
4
28
6
4
3
7
29
6
6
4
6
30
7
3
2
6
31
5
4
2
4
32
6
7
3
6
33
6
3
3
5
34
2
3
1
3
35
6
4
4
7
36
4
5
2
6
37
4
5
2
5
38
5
4
4
4
39
4
5
1
5
40
4
5
4
4
79

41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70

5
6
5
4
4
6
6
7
2
5
3
6
4
6
6
5
6
6
6
6
3
5
5
4
7
6
5
6
6
7

5
6
3
4
7
3
6
5
3
3
4
5
3
6
5
6
6
6
6
3
2
2
6
6
4
3
2
3
2
3

3
4
1
3
3
3
3
5
3
1
2
2
3
3
6
5
3
2
5
1
2
4
3
3
4
6
6
4
6
6

6
3
3
5
4
7
6
6
3
5
4
6
4
5
5
6
7
3
5
4
5
5
6
6
7
6
6
5
5
7

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

80

ANOVA
Texture
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
133.657
477.429
611.086

df
3
276
279

Mean Square
44.552
1.730

F
25.756

Sig.
.000

Texture
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Flour
N
1
2
3
Potato
70
3.3143
Rice
70
4.4571
Cassava
70
4.9143
wheat
70
5.0857
Sig.
1.000
1.000
.441
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

81

Appendix 8. Hedonic Test for Overall Parameter Result of The Preliminary


Research

82

Panelist
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54

Cassava
Flour
3
5
5
6
6
5
2
3
3
5
3
3
6
4
6
5
4
6
6
3
4
6
4
3
5
3
3
4
6
6
3
6
5
3
6
3
3
5
5
5
3
5
6
6
4
5
3
6
3
6
2
6
7
6

Rice Flour

Potato Flour

Wheat Flour

4
5
5
4
5
6
6
6
6
5
5
3
3
3
5
5
5
4
7
3
5
2
5
5
5
5
4
5
6
4
4
7
4
5
3
4
2
4
2
5
3
4
2
6
4
4
5
5
2
2
3
3
3
6

6
5
4
3
5
2
6
2
3
4
5
2
3
4
3
6
5
3
4
4
3
4
4
6
5
6
4
6
4
3
4
4
3
2
5
3
3
4
2
5
4
6
2
5
4
4
2
5
4
4
1
3
6
5

6
5
5
5
6
4
5
5
6
5
3
3
5
6
6
7
3
7
7
4
6
6
5
4
4
6
3
6
7
7
5
7
6
4
6
5
5
5
6
6
5
3
4
5
4
7
3
6
3
6
2
5
4
6

83

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

ANOVA
Overall
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
66.414
502.886
569.300

df
3
276
279

Mean Square
22.138
1.822

F
12.150

Sig.
.000

Overall
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Flour
N
1
2
Potato
70
3.9429
Rice
70
4.2143
Cassava
70
4.9143
Wheat
70
5.1286
Sig.
.235
.348
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

84

Appendix 9. Texture Analysis of The Preliminary Research


Hardness
(g.
Force)
Replication 1

Cassava Flour

Rice Flour

Potato Flour

Wheat Flour

5248.609

3715.686

6009.317

4822.847

4766.138

3938.524

6183.232

4443.458

Average

5007.374

3827.105

6096.275

4633.152

Replication 2

7707.611

4536.134

6522.175

6751.903

6331.653

4563.834

6972.743

5810.251

Average

7019.632

4549.984

6747.459

6281.077

Replication 3

6091.520

4324.873

10801.501

6567.101

5434.169

4534.274

10162.479

7302.796

Average

5762.845

4429.573

10481.99

6934.948

Replication 4

7346.344

5267.213

8998.610

7791.055

7846.385

4907.875

11325.384

5779.864

Average

7596.365

5087.544

10162

6785.460

Replication 5

5663.967

3416.502

10206.234

4556.668

5353.758

3117.869

8963.468

4528.831

Average

5508.862

3267.185

9584.851

4542.749

Replication 6

5997.534

3733.601

10069.733

5121.480

6115.361

3816.494

11571.029

4636.322

6056.448

3775.048

10820.38

4878.901

Average

85

ANOVA
Hardness
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
73120881.610
33759360.174
1.069E8

df
3
20
23

Mean Square
24373627.203
1687968.009

F
14.440

Sig.
.000

Hardness
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
Flour
N
1
2
3
Rice
6
4156.0733
Wheat
6
5676.0478
5676.0478
Cassava
6
6158.5877
Potato
6
8982.1587
Sig.
.056
.527
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 6.000.

86

Appendix 10. Moisture Content of The Preliminary Research


Cassava
Flour

Evaporation
Dish

Wet Sample

Evp. Dish +
Dry Sample

Moisture
Content

Average

Replication 1

41.0126
20.3799
22.6522
20.1297
34.1157

5.0185
5.0218
5.0697
5.0167
5.1211

45.1452
24.5065
26.7833
24.1874
38.4049

17.65%
17.83%
18.51%
19.12%
16.24%

17.74%

38.1409
27.2551
27.4057
41.8255
40.1991
30.8814
20.7188

5.0178
5.0891
5.0456
5.1255
5.0453
5.0678
5.0681

42.3436
31.406
31.4643
45.9812
44.2644
35.1254
24.9703

16.24%
18.44%
19.56%
18.92%
19.42%
16.26%
16.11%

Evaporation
Dish

Wet Sample

Evp. Dish +
Dry Sample

Moisture
Content

Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6
Rice Flour
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6

42.7812
43.6979
35.4775
38.6775
20.3656
22.3453
18.7256
18.7767
38.6576
41.2352
34.1213
43.2878

5.1975
5.0471
5.0446
5.0134
5.1215
5.0786
5.0445
5.0312
5.0256
5.0987
5.0345
5.2278

46.9481
47.7978
39.6328
42.6386
24.4716
26.3994
22.7749
22.8637
42.8147
45.2044
38.0967
47.3491

19.83%
18.77%
17.63%
20.99%
19.83%
20.17%
19.73%
18.77%
17.28%
22.15%
21.04%
22.31%

18.82%
16.24%
19.00%
19.17%
16.18%
Average
19.30%
19.31%
20.00%
19.25%
19.72%
21.68%

87

Potato Flour

Evaporation
Dish

Wet Sample

Evp. Dish +
Dry Sample

Moisture
Content

Average

Replication 1

22.0776
18.7285
18.792
41.0252
34.5775
41.7283
40.2551
22.6552
22.6213
18.9263
18.5671
34.6143

5.0754
5.0801
5.1014
5.1211
5.0871
5.1271
5.0665
5.0453
5.0298
5.1342
5.1217
5.0981

26.4715
23.0911
23.2755
45.4686
39.0363
46.2805
44.6851
26.9676
27.0367
23.4169
22.9448
38.9615

13.43%
14.12%
12.11%
13.23%
12.35%
11.21%
12.56%
14.53%
12.22%
12.54%
14.53%
14.73%

13.78%

Evaporation
Dish

Wet Sample

Evp. Dish +
Dry Sample

Moisture
Content

Average

Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6
Wheat Flour
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6

42.7812
41.2527
34.1613
42.7187
34.5356
34.2278
22.0717
22.1898
20.3756
41.0126
18.6785
18.7291

5.0404
5.1593
5.0751
5.0667
5.0781
5.2341
5.1435
5.0716
5.0312
5.1211
5.1672
5.0139

47.173
45.7014
38.575
46.9609
38.8201
38.7023
26.5233
26.413
24.5106
45.3334
23.0951
22.9545

12.87%
13.77%
13.03%
16.27%
15.63%
14.51%
13.45%
16.73%
17.81%
15.63%
14.53%
15.73%

12.67%
11.78%
13.54%
12.38%
14.63%

13.32%
14.65%
15.07%
15.09%
16.72%
15.13%

Example of Calculation
Moisture content (%) = Initial weight of sample Weight of dried sample x 100%
Initial weight of sample
= ((5.0185) g (45.1452-41.0126) g) x 100%
5.0185 g
88

= 17.74 %

ANOVA
Moisture
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
.016
.003
.019

df
3
20
23

Mean Square
.005
.000

F
42.874

Sig.
.000

Moisture
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
1
2
3
.131297
.149967
.178590

flour
N
potato
6
wheat
6
cassava
6
rice
6
Sig.
1.000
1.000
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 6.000.

.198746
1.000

89

Appendix 11. Water Activity of The Preliminary Research


Types of Flour

Cassava Flour

Rice Flour

Potato Flour

Wheat Flour

Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6
Replication 1
Replication 2
Replication 3
Replication 4
Replication 5
Replication 6

Aw
1
0.673
0.663
0.667
0.671
0.664
0.659
0.675
0.688
0.679
0.669
0.681
0.689
0.64
0.63
0.632
0.637
0.632
0.628
0.667
0.655
0.659
0.663
0.655
0.668

2
0.671
0.668
0.669
0.672
0.661
0.663
0.679
0.691
0.681
0.671
0.682
0.692
0.641
0.633
0.637
0.635
0.631
0.631
0.664
0.657
0.663
0.662
0.655
0.669

Average
0.672
0.666
0.668
0.672
0.663
0.661
0.677
0.690
0.680
0.670
0.682
0.691
0.641
0.632
0.635
0.636
0.632
0.630
0.666
0.656
0.661
0.663
0.655
0.669

90

ANOVA
Aw
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total

Sum of Squares
.007
.001
.008

df
3
20
23

Mean Square
.002
.000

F
59.220

Sig.
.000

Aw
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
flour
N
1
2
3
potato
6
.63433
wheat
6
.66317
cassava
6
.66700
rice
6
.68167
Sig.
1.000
.305
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 6.000.

91

Appendix 12. Hedonic Test for Aroma Parameter Result of The Main
Research
10% 35
M

20%35
M

30%35
M

40%35M

10%45
M

20%45
M

30%45
M

40%45M

10%55
M

20%55
M

92

93

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Aroma
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
a
Corrected Model
97.613
14
6.972
Intercept
24907.615
1
24907.615
ricebran
55.213
4
13.803
time
5.065
2
2.532
ricebran * time
37.335
8
4.667
Error
1664.771
1035
1.608
Total
26670.000
1050
Corrected Total
1762.385
1049
a. R Squared = .055 (Adjusted R Squared = .043)

F
4.335
15485.238
8.582
1.574
2.901

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.208
.003

94

Aroma
ricebran
N
1
40%
210
4.4762
30%
210
20%
210
10%
210
kontrol
210
Sig.
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.608.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 210.000.
b. Alpha = .05.

Subset
2

Duncana,b

4.8000
4.9381
4.9714
.193

4.9381
4.9714
5.1667
.081

Aroma
Subset
time
N
1
a,b
Duncan
55m
350
4.8171
35m
350
4.8257
45m
350
4.9686
Sig.
.137
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.608.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 350.000.
b. Alpha = .05.

95

Aroma
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
1
2
4.2429
4.4857
4.4857
4.5857
4.5857
4.6000
4.6000
4.7286
4.8429
4.8857
4.9429
4.9429
4.9714
4.9714
4.9857

interaction
N
3
40%RB 35M
70
30%RB 35M
70
40%RB 55M
70
40%RB 45M
70
KONTROL 55 70
4.7286
10%RB 55M
70
4.8429
20%RB 35M
70
4.8857
20%RB 45M
70
4.9429
30%RB 55M
70
4.9429
10%RB 35M
70
4.9714
30%RB 45M
70
4.9714
20%RB 55M
70
4.9857
10% RB 45M
70
5.1000
KONTROL 45 70
KONTROL 35 70
Sig.
.130
.052
.150
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

4.8429
4.8857
4.9429
4.9429
4.9714
4.9714
4.9857
5.1000
5.2286
.134

5.1000
5.2286
5.5429
.050

96

Appendix 12. Hedonic Test for Taste Parameter Result of The Main Research
10
%
35
M
4
4
3
4
1
3
5
3
4
3
3
6
6
6
3
2
2
5
7
4
5
6
5
6
6
3
7
3
6
6
5
4
6
5
5
3
6
2
2
5

20
%3
5M

30
%3
5M

40
%3
5M

10
%4
5M

20
%4
5M

30
%4
5M

40
%4
5M

10
%5
5M

20
%5
5M

30
%5
5M

40
%5
5M

CO
35
M

CO
45
M

CO
55
M

3
5
4
3
1
4
6
5
4
2
5
6
6
6
3
5
2
4
6
5
6
6
5
6
6
5
6
4
4
7
6
3
5
4
6
3
3
5
5
6

2
4
4
4
4
2
4
5
5
4
5
4
3
5
6
2
2
3
7
4
6
4
4
6
6
5
6
4
5
6
4
3
2
2
4
4
5
3
3
5

4
4
5
4
6
4
2
7
4
1
6
4
3
6
2
3
2
5
4
4
5
3
2
4
6
5
7
3
2
4
3
5
6
2
1
2
6
6
3
5

5
5
3
5
6
7
3
7
5
5
6
4
5
5
5
5
5
2
7
3
6
4
4
5
6
5
6
4
3
6
5
3
5
4
4
5
5
4
5
6

6
5
4
5
5
6
3
6
4
4
6
6
3
6
5
5
4
2
5
3
5
3
2
4
6
6
6
4
4
7
5
5
3
6
4
3
5
2
2
6

6
6
5
5
4
5
3
4
5
5
5
5
7
4
3
6
4
3
4
5
6
4
3
5
6
5
4
4
4
6
5
4
4
4
4
3
5
1
5
5

3
2
5
3
2
5
2
6
3
2
3
6
5
4
1
6
2
3
6
3
3
4
1
6
6
3
3
3
3
5
1
5
5
3
6
4
3
2
3
4

6
6
6
7
2
3
6
3
4
7
7
6
6
3
4
6
5
4
5
3
5
6
5
6
6
5
5
4
6
5
5
5
3
6
7
5
3
4
3
1

5
6
6
3
5
5
6
5
4
2
7
6
5
6
5
6
6
3
5
5
7
2
5
7
3
5
5
3
4
6
4
5
6
4
6
6
5
3
3
2

6
5
5
2
1
3
2
2
5
3
6
3
2
4
1
6
4
4
7
5
6
5
4
4
6
3
5
4
4
6
3
4
6
5
6
5
4
3
4
4

6
7
5
4
1
5
2
1
3
6
2
5
2
6
3
3
3
3
7
3
2
3
3
6
3
4
4
3
3
6
3
4
3
4
2
3
3
3
2
3

6
6
7
7
6
6
4
3
6
5
7
4
6
4
6
3
5
6
5
6
5
5
6
6
7
7
5
3
6
6
5
4
5
5
7
2
4
5
5
6

6
6
5
6
6
6
4
4
5
5
6
5
6
6
3
5
5
6
3
7
6
5
6
5
6
6
5
4
6
6
5
4
5
6
7
5
5
5
6
7

4
6
6
6
4
6
5
4
5
5
7
3
6
6
5
5
4
6
3
4
6
5
3
6
7
6
5
3
7
5
6
4
6
4
7
4
3
5
6
5

97

6
7
4
3
4
7
5
7
5
5
4
5
6
5
6
5
3
6
6
6
5
6
3
3
5
5
1
6
5
5

5
5
3
5
4
3
7
3
5
5
3
4
6
5
5
3
3
3
2
6
6
6
2
2
4
5
3
3
4
5

2
2
5
2
2
7
6
4
4
4
2
3
3
5
3
4
1
5
2
5
6
6
3
3
4
4
2
3
4
4

5
2
1
3
3
1
5
2
6
4
3
4
3
3
3
4
2
6
1
5
3
3
3
4
5
5
2
3
4
5

6
6
2
3
2
6
5
4
4
5
4
4
6
6
5
4
4
6
3
6
6
6
4
5
4
4
2
6
6
4

7
7
2
3
2
1
3
7
6
7
1
3
5
3
2
3
5
6
3
6
5
5
2
2
4
6
3
5
5
5

5
4
5
2
6
5
7
2
7
5
3
3
5
6
6
3
6
4
5
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
5

4
4
5
1
6
3
5
2
4
1
2
6
5
4
6
5
6
7
3
3
4
4
3
3
6
4
3
2
3
5

6
5
7
6
6
5
5
5
3
5
3
2
4
6
4
6
4
5
5
5
4
4
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
5

6
4
3
5
1
6
6
4
6
4
3
3
3
6
6
1
4
7
5
2
4
4
2
2
3
3
2
4
3
3

4
3
5
5
6
3
4
1
7
3
3
3
4
6
4
5
4
6
3
5
4
4
2
2
7
7
2
4
4
7

1
4
6
5
2
3
4
5
1
2
2
2
4
5
6
6
4
5
2
3
2
2
3
3
7
5
1
5
4
7

5
5
5
5
5
3
6
5
4
5
6
6
6
7
5
6
6
6
6
7
6
7
6
7
5
5
6
7
6
6

5
4
5
7
5
6
2
6
4
7
6
6
5
7
5
6
7
6
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
6
5
5
6
6

3
3
5
4
5
5
2
2
3
3
3
6
3
7
5
4
3
4
6
6
6
5
5
6
7
6
4
6
4
4

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

98

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Taste
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
a
Corrected Model
298.768
14
21.341
Intercept
20788.175
1
20788.175
ricebran
271.177
4
67.794
time
5.693
2
2.847
ricebran * time
21.897
8
2.737
Error
2075.057
1035
2.005
Total
23162.000
1050
Corrected Total
2373.825
1049
a. R Squared = .126 (Adjusted R Squared = .114)

F
10.644
10368.756
33.815
1.420
1.365

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.242
.208

Taste
Duncana,b
Subset
ricebran
N
1
2
3
40%
210
3.7238
30%
210
4.1857
20%
210
4.3952
10%
210
4.7000
kontrol
210
Sig.
1.000
.130
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 2.005.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 210.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

5.2429
1.000

Taste
Duncana,b
Subset
time
N
1
55m
350
35m
350
45m
350
Sig.
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 2.005.

4.3629
4.4429
4.5429
.113

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 350.000.


b. Alpha = 0.05.

99

Appendix 13. Hedonic Test for Texture Parameter Result of The Main
Research
10
%
35
M
4
4
3
5
4
4
3
2
3
3
5
6
5
4
4
2
2
5
6
5
2
6
5
4
5
4
5
3
5
4
5
5
5
5
3
4
6
5
4

20
%3
5M

30
%3
5M

40
%3
5M

10
%4
5M

20
%4
5M

30
%4
5M

40
%4
5M

10
%5
5M

20
%5
5M

30
%5
5M

40
%5
5M

CO
35
M

CO
45
M

CO
55
M

3
5
2
5
4
6
3
5
5
3
3
5
5
5
3
3
2
4
6
4
7
6
5
5
6
3
6
3
5
5
5
3
4
5
5
3
3
6
4

2
6
3
4
4
4
3
5
5
5
3
4
6
3
6
5
2
4
7
3
7
4
5
5
7
4
5
4
4
4
2
4
2
5
3
3
3
5
3

4
5
2
5
5
6
2
7
6
4
3
6
5
3
1
3
1
4
5
4
6
5
2
4
5
5
6
4
4
4
1
5
6
6
1
1
4
4
4

5
2
3
5
6
6
3
7
5
4
5
6
6
3
5
4
5
6
7
4
5
4
5
4
6
5
5
3
4
4
6
2
5
4
3
2
5
3
4

6
5
2
5
5
5
2
5
6
5
5
5
6
5
4
5
4
6
6
4
5
4
2
4
5
6
7
3
3
4
7
5
5
5
3
2
7
4
4

6
6
3
4
3
5
3
4
5
5
5
5
7
3
5
2
6
6
5
6
7
5
6
4
6
5
3
4
4
5
4
3
3
5
4
4
5
2
6

5
6
5
4
2
4
6
6
5
5
5
6
5
4
4
7
3
6
5
4
6
5
5
6
6
4
4
3
6
6
1
5
5
4
6
2
5
2
6

6
6
5
3
3
5
5
4
5
7
5
6
6
4
5
6
6
6
5
3
7
3
6
6
6
4
5
3
6
4
3
4
2
5
7
5
3
4
3

6
5
6
6
3
6
5
5
4
2
6
5
5
6
4
5
6
6
6
3
6
5
5
6
6
5
5
3
6
6
3
4
5
5
4
4
5
4
6

3
2
3
3
1
5
3
2
4
5
3
5
2
4
4
6
6
5
7
6
6
5
2
4
6
2
5
4
2
5
4
4
6
4
4
5
5
3
5

7
7
4
5
2
5
3
1
3
6
2
5
2
6
3
6
4
6
7
4
2
5
6
6
6
3
3
2
5
5
2
5
5
2
2
2
5
2
5

6
7
6
6
7
6
5
1
5
6
3
4
7
4
5
4
4
6
4
5
5
6
6
6
6
3
5
3
4
6
5
4
5
6
7
6
4
5
5

6
5
3
5
7
6
3
3
3
5
6
5
6
4
2
4
6
3
5
6
3
6
5
4
4
3
5
4
5
5
3
2
6
6
7
5
4
3
3

3
6
6
5
6
6
4
2
4
5
5
3
3
5
5
6
4
3
3
5
4
6
3
5
2
3
3
4
6
6
6
4
5
7
7
5
5
3
4

100

5
6
7
5
3
4
6
6
7
3
4
4
6
3
3
6
5
4
6
6
6
5
5
3
3
5
4
3
4
4
4

5
5
6
5
4
4
4
7
3
4
5
4
4
4
6
6
4
4
3
2
6
6
6
1
1
5
5
4
4
4
5

6
3
5
4
3
3
3
7
4
3
5
4
5
4
3
6
4
4
5
1
6
5
5
4
4
5
6
4
4
4
5

4
5
6
3
3
3
2
7
2
2
4
5
5
4
4
3
4
4
4
1
6
3
3
3
4
5
5
2
4
5
6

5
6
6
5
3
4
7
6
4
5
6
2
5
5
6
6
5
5
6
4
3
5
5
3
3
5
5
4
5
6
5

5
7
7
4
3
5
5
7
5
6
6
4
4
4
6
6
5
5
5
4
6
4
4
2
2
5
5
4
3
4
5

3
6
3
6
2
6
5
7
2
7
5
3
4
6
6
6
4
7
4
5
5
5
4
5
5
7
6
5
5
6
7

2
5
3
3
6
6
6
6
1
1
4
3
6
5
4
4
3
6
6
2
4
4
4
5
5
2
4
3
3
3
3

2
6
5
6
6
6
4
3
5
5
5
5
2
4
4
3
6
5
5
5
5
4
4
5
5
3
6
1
4
4
4

2
6
4
3
5
2
5
6
5
6
5
6
5
5
5
7
1
4
3
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
5
2
4
3
5

2
5
5
5
6
6
4
5
2
7
2
4
5
5
3
6
4
5
2
6
5
4
3
5
5
7
6
1
3
2
6

2
2
3
6
6
3
6
4
2
1
3
3
3
3
6
6
4
4
4
2
2
3
3
5
5
7
5
1
4
4
7

6
5
5
5
6
5
6
6
6
3
5
6
5
6
3
5
6
5
6
7
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
7

7
6
3
6
7
6
4
2
4
4
5
5
5
6
5
5
7
7
7
5
6
6
5
6
4
6
5
6
4
5
6

3
4
2
5
4
6
6
5
3
2
1
2
7
4
3
3
4
5
6
7
5
6
6
5
6
6
5
4
6
3
4

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

101

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Texture
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
Corrected Model
118.082a
14
8.434
Intercept
21415.775
1
21415.775
ricebran
66.377
4
16.594
time
14.230
2
7.115
ricebran * time
37.474
8
4.684
Error
1984.143
1035
1.917
Total
23518.000
1050
Corrected Total
2102.225
1049
a. R Squared = .056 (Adjusted R Squared = .043)

F
4.400
11171.236
8.656
3.712
2.443

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.025
.013

Texture
Duncana,b
Subset
2

ricebran
N
1
3
40%
210
4.1190
30%
210
4.4238
10%
210
4.5667
20%
210
4.5762
kontrol
210
4.8952
Sig.
1.000
.291
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.917.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 210.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.
Texture
Duncana,b
Subset
time
N
1
2
55m
350
4.4057
35m
350
4.4657
45m
350
4.6771
Sig.
.567
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.917.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 350.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

102

Texture
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
2
3

interaction
N
1
40%RB 35M
70
3.9857
40%RB 55M
70
4.0000
30%RB 55M
70
4.2286
4.2286
30%RB 35M
70
4.2429
4.2429
20%RB 35M
70
4.3714
4.3714
40%RB 45M
70
4.3714
4.3714
10%RB 35M
70
4.4143
4.4143
KONTROL 55
70
4.5000
4.5000
10%RB 55M
70
4.6286
10% RB 45M
70
4.6571
20%RB 55M
70
4.6714
20%RB 45M
70
4.6857
30%RB 45M
70
KONTROL 45
70
KONTROL 35
70
Sig.
.061
.105
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

4.3714
4.3714
4.4143
4.5000
4.6286
4.6571
4.6714
4.6857
4.8000
4.8714
.075

4.8714
5.3143
.059

103

Appendix 14. Hedonic Test for Overall Parameter Result of The Main
Research
10
%
35
M
4
4
4
5
2
4
4
3
4
2
5
6
6
6
3
2
2
5
6
5
5
6
5
6
6
3
6
4
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
7
3
4

20
%3
5M

30
%3
5M

40
%3
5M

10
%4
5M

20
%4
5M

30
%4
5M

40
%4
5M

10
%5
5M

20
%5
5M

30
%5
5M

40
%5
5M

CO
35
M

CO
45
M

CO
55
M

3
5
4
4
2
5
4
5
4
2
5
6
6
6
3
5
2
3
6
5
6
5
6
5
6
4
6
4
4
6
5
4
4
4
6
3
3
5
5

2
5
4
4
4
3
3
6
4
3
4
5
5
5
5
4
2
2
6
4
7
4
5
6
6
4
6
4
5
5
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
4
3

4
5
4
4
5
5
2
7
5
2
5
5
4
6
2
4
2
5
5
4
6
4
2
4
6
5
7
4
2
5
1
5
6
5
1
2
6
3
4

5
5
3
5
6
6
3
7
5
4
6
4
6
6
4
5
4
3
6
4
6
4
4
5
6
6
6
4
3
5
6
3
5
4
4
4
5
2
4

6
5
3
5
5
4
2
6
6
3
6
5
5
6
5
5
3
2
5
4
5
4
2
4
6
7
6
4
4
5
6
5
5
5
4
3
6
2
4

6
6
4
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
6
4
3
4
4
3
5
5
7
4
3
5
6
5
4
4
4
6
4
3
4
4
4
4
5
3
5

5
5
5
3
3
5
5
6
4
2
5
6
5
4
3
7
3
4
6
4
3
5
2
6
6
3
3
4
4
5
1
5
5
4
6
4
5
2
3

6
6
5
4
3
3
6
4
5
7
6
6
6
4
4
6
5
4
5
3
6
5
5
6
6
5
5
4
6
4
4
4
3
6
7
5
4
4
2

6
6
5
4
5
5
6
5
4
3
7
5
5
5
4
6
6
5
5
4
7
4
5
6
5
4
5
4
5
6
4
4
6
4
5
4
5
4
4

5
5
3
5
6
6
3
7
5
4
6
4
6
6
4
5
4
3
6
4
6
4
4
5
6
6
6
4
3
5
6
3
5
4
4
4
5
2
4

7
7
5
4
2
5
2
1
3
6
2
5
3
6
3
5
3
2
7
4
3
4
4
6
5
3
4
4
5
6
2
4
3
4
2
3
4
2
2

6
7
6
7
7
6
5
4
5
6
5
4
7
5
6
4
5
7
4
6
5
6
7
6
6
5
5
4
5
6
4
4
5
6
7
5
4
5
5

6
6
5
6
6
6
4
4
4
5
6
5
6
4
3
4
6
5
4
6
4
6
5
4
4
4
5
5
6
5
3
3
5
6
7
5
5
4
5

3
6
6
6
6
6
4
3
5
5
5
4
3
5
5
6
4
3
3
5
5
6
3
5
5
5
4
4
6
5
4
4
6
7
7
5
5
4
5

104

5
6
7
4
4
5
7
6
6
4
4
5
5
6
5
6
5
4
6
6
7
6
7
3
3
5
5
2
5
5
6

6
5
5
3
5
5
5
7
4
6
6
4
4
6
6
5
5
3
3
3
6
6
6
2
2
5
5
3
4
4
5

5
3
5
4
3
2
6
6
4
3
5
3
4
3
5
4
4
2
5
2
6
5
5
3
4
6
6
5
4
4
6

5
5
3
2
4
3
1
6
2
4
4
1
4
4
5
4
4
2
5
2
6
2
2
3
4
4
4
2
4
4
4

5
6
5
3
4
3
7
6
4
5
6
2
5
6
6
5
6
5
6
3
5
6
6
3
4
5
5
4
6
6
5

6
7
7
3
3
3
2
5
5
6
6
3
4
4
6
1
5
5
6
3
6
5
5
3
4
5
6
3
4
4
5

4
5
4
6
2
6
4
7
2
7
5
4
3
5
6
6
5
7
4
6
4
5
4
3
4
6
6
5
5
5
6

4
4
4
4
3
6
5
6
2
3
2
2
6
5
4
4
4
6
6
3
3
4
4
3
4
3
4
2
3
2
3

4
6
5
6
6
5
5
4
5
5
6
4
2
4
6
4
6
6
5
6
5
4
4
3
3
5
5
5
4
4
5

4
6
3
3
5
2
6
6
4
6
5
3
3
4
5
6
5
5
6
4
2
4
4
3
3
5
5
1
3
2
5

5
6
5
3
4
3
7
6
4
5
6
2
5
6
6
5
6
5
6
3
5
6
6
3
4
5
5
4
6
6
5

4
1
3
5
6
2
4
4
5
2
3
2
2
4
5
6
4
4
4
2
2
3
3
3
4
7
5
1
4
4
7

6
5
5
5
6
5
6
6
6
3
5
6
6
4
4
6
6
5
6
6
5
6
7
6
6
6
7
6
6
6
6

7
6
4
6
6
6
5
2
5
4
6
5
6
5
6
5
7
7
7
6
6
6
6
6
5
6
5
6
6
5
6

5
4
4
5
5
5
6
3
3
3
2
3
6
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
6
6
5
5
6
6
6
4
6
4
4

Note:
1 = extremely dislike
2 = dislike
3 = slightly dislike
4 = neutral
5 = slightly like
6 = like
7 = extremely like

105

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Overall
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
a
Corrected Model
208.139
14
14.867
Intercept
22199.604
1
22199.604
ricebran
171.739
4
42.935
time
2.065
2
1.032
ricebran * time
34.335
8
4.292
Error
1630.257
1035
1.575
Total
24038.000
1050
Corrected Total
1838.396
1049
a. R Squared = .113 (Adjusted R Squared = .101)

F
9.439
14093.844
27.258
.655
2.725

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.519
.006

Overall
Duncana,b
Subset
ricebran
N
1
2
3
40%
210
3.9190
30%
210
4.5524
20%
210
4.5619
10%
210
4.8000
kontrol
210
5.1571
Sig.
1.000
.055
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 1.575.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 210.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

Overall
Duncana,b
Subset
1
4.5429
4.6000
4.6514
.284

time
N
55m
350
35m
350
45m
350
Sig.
Means for groups in
homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean
Square(Error) = 1.575.

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample


Size = 350.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

106

Overall
Duncana
Subset for alpha = 0.05
2
3
4

interaction
N
1
40%RB 55M
70
3.8143
40%RB 35M
70
3.8857
40%RB 45M
70
4.0571
30%RB 35M
70
4.2286
4.2286
20%RB 45M
70
4.5429
20%RB 35M
70
4.5714
20%RB 55M
70
4.5714
30%RB 45M
70
4.6286
KONTROL 55
70
10%RB 35M
70
10% RB 45M
70
10%RB 55M
70
30%RB 55M
70
KONTROL 45
70
KONTROL 35
70
Sig.
.074
.094
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 70.000.

4.5429
4.5714
4.5714
4.6286
4.7286
4.8000
4.8000
4.8000
4.8000
.319

4.8000
4.8000
4.8000
4.8000
5.2286
.072

5.2286
5.5143
.178

107

Appendix 15. Texture Analysis of The Main Research


Sample
0%RB
35M
Average
10%RB
35M
Average
20%RB
35M
Average
30%RB
35M
Average
40%RB
35M
Average
0%RB
45M
Average
10%RB
45M
Average
20%RB
45M
Average
30%RB
45M
Average
40%RB
45M
Average
0%RB
55M
Average
10%RB
55M
Average
20%RB
55M
Average
30%RB
55M
Average
40%RB
55M
Average

Replication 1
5343.904
5081.997

Replication 2
5094.883
5330.261

Replication 3
5469.449
5893.144

5212.951
4801.073

5387.039

5212.572
5313.586

6192.466

5681.297
6414.614

4513.258

5094.056
6404.485

8334.644

5753.026
6376.786

7011.467

5463.936
6963.992

6946.352

7369.565
7001.751

9605.660

6694.126
5868.820

6430.049

6955.172
6313.876

5631.513

8303.706
6913.898

7078.442

6149.435
6681.758

7167.674

5972.694
7517.641

7899.304

6996.170
7759.496

6243.180

6924.716
7703.615

6033.089

7708.473
5987.405

5802.741

7001.338
6208.658

6721.792

6868.352
6168.831

6715.935

5895.073
7447.289

7081.474

6465.225
7245.467

6475.871

6442.383
7381.072

5816.246

7264.382
7142.386

7309.411

6860.669
6169.520

5225.595

6598.659
5972.108

7012.776

7225.898
6706.977

5832.025189

5697.558
7731.314

6929.884

6492.442
8163.485

6808.267

6269.501
8517.173

7052.327

7330.599
6395.735

7342.072

7485.876
5603.399

5812.043

7784.750
5998.154

6014.829

6868.903
7547.132

7661.721

5707.721
7946.435

7069.485

6006.492
5353.344

6002.564

7604.426
7702.926

6761.687

7507.960
9709.637

8774.463

5677.954
5227.318

5736.592

7232.307
8251.2

7519.088

9242.050
7019.942

7703.753

5481.955
7619.413

8495.95

7354.819

7361.848
6366.519

7543.687

8057.682
8229.289

9232.61

7885.144
8453.505
7904.162

6955.103

8730.950

108

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Hardness
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
a
Corrected Model
23553343.403
14
1682381.672
Intercept
2.073E9
1
2.073E9
ricebran
12412686.151
4
3103171.538
time
5405477.613
2
2702738.806
ricebran * time
5735179.639
8
716897.455
Error
18155808.673
30
605193.622
Total
2.114E9
45
Corrected Total
41709152.076
44
a. R Squared = .565 (Adjusted R Squared = .362)

F
2.780
3424.752
5.128
4.466
1.185

Sig.
.009
.000
.003
.020
.341

Hardness
Duncana,b
Subset
ricebran
N
1
2
3
0%
9
6050.5221
10%
9
6363.7053
6363.7053
30%
9
6910.0011
6910.0011
20%
9
7073.3779
7073.3779
40%
9
7535.6443
Sig.
.400
.076
.117
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = 605193.622.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 9.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

Hardness
Duncana,b
Subset
time
N
1
2
35M
15
6366.1263
45M
15
6778.8470
6778.8470
55M
15
7214.9771
Sig.
.157
.135
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) =
605193.622.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 15.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

109

Appendix 16. Moisture Content Data of The Main Research

10%RB35m

20%RB35m

30%RB35m

40%RB35M

0%RB35M

10%RB45M

20%RB45M

Evaporatin
g Dish

Sample

38.4909
34.1284
27.5072
34.2527
22.0816
20.1289
35.4426
38.6628
35.1791
35.1867
22.0722
20.1156
41.8425
41.2216
40.2501
35.4478
38.6711
34.8091
34.8079
20.7238
18.9282
41.8375
41.2289
27.5071
40.9949
38.6870
35.2074
38.6527
34.1189
20.1245
35.4426
38.6728
35.1781
27.5063
20.1211
22.0725
22.0715
20.1186
19.5510
35.4146

5.0633
5.0449
5.0718
5.1231
5.0897
5.0451
5.0631
5.0987
5.2312
5.0667
5.0439
5.0551
5.0679
5.0452
5.0891
5.1298
5.0441
5.1312
5.0635
5.0575
5.0894
5.1573
5.2461
5.0834
5.0134
5.0556
5.1572
5.2312
5.0991
5.0867
5.0303
5.0791
5.0681
5.0664
5.1297
5.0455
5.0044
5.0991
5.0271
5.0255

Dry sample
+
Evaporatin
g Dish
42.6791
38.3523
31.6522
38.4267
26.2417
24.2898
39.6031
42.8675
39.5073
39.4290
26.1434
24.1650
45.8916
45.1651
44.3302
39.5755
42.6284
38.8865
38.7381
24.6902
23.1102
46.0584
45.1883
31.3884
45.3547
43.0047
39.3635
42.9041
38.4397
24.3834
39.7910
43.0647
39.4885
31.8856
24.5503
26.4544
26.4224
24.5011
23.8507
39.6994

Moistur
e
Content

Average

17.28%
16.27%
18.27%
18.53%
18.26%
17.53%
17.83%
17.53%
17.26%
16.27%
19.28%
19.90%
20.10%
21.84%
19.83%
19.53%
21.55%
20.54%
22.38%
21.57%
17.83%
18.16%
24.53%
23.65%
13.04%
14.60%
19.41%
18.73%
15.26%
16.27%
13.56%
13.53%
14.95%
13.56%
13.66%
13.15%
13.06%
14.05%
14.47%
14.74%

16.78%
18.40%
17.90%
17.68%
16.77%
19.59%
20.97%
19.68%
21.04%
21.98%
17.99%
24.09%
13.82%
19.07%
15.77%
13.54%
14.26%
13.40%
13.56%
14.60%

110

30%RB45M

40%RB45M

0%RB45M

10%RB 55M

20%RB 55M

30%RB 55M

40%RB 55M

18.5011
41.8436
34.9102
30.8960
46.6239
19.5075
22.0863
43.3189
34.1295
35.4434
38.6715
19.4641
19.3312
35.1876
34.1430
35.4599
41.2455
34.9121
19.5089
18.5028
19.5305
22.0761
20.7055
41.2198
38.6723
18.9401
20.1269
19.4600
19.3266
41.2176
40.9657
34.1281
43.3260
35.1895
18.9330
41.2098
35.4244
19.3316
27.5059
41.2312
40.9797
20.1367
22.0775
40.9591

5.1556
5.0785
5.0031
5.0324
5.1184
5.1526
5.0776
5.0559
5.0789
5.0522
5.1617
5.1352
5.0897
5.0861
5.0094
5.0209
5.0121
5.1291
5.0995
5.0572
5.1033
5.0061
5.0669
5.0558
5.1121
5.1254
5.1935
5.0027
5.0593
5.0057
5.0976
5.0461
5.0144
5.0647
5.1536
5.2417
5.0661
5.0345
5.0616
5.0493
5.0044
5.0251
5.0157
5.0098

22.8596
46.1691
39.2092
35.2477
51.0156
23.8737
26.3943
47.6045
38.3917
39.7820
42.9806
23.7404
23.5413
39.3692
38.5084
39.8370
45.7045
39.4082
23.9243
22.9613
24.0581
26.5674
25.2464
45.7006
43.2442
23.5464
24.7369
23.8443
23.8738
45.7045
45.4881
38.6401
47.7574
39.6090
23.5019
45.8363
39.9257
23.7335
31.9240
45.6170
45.3333
24.4702
26.3641
45.2739

15.46%
14.83%
14.07%
13.53%
14.20%
15.26%
15.16%
15.24%
16.08%
14.12%
16.52%
16.73%
17.28%
17.78%
12.86%
12.82%
11.04%
12.34%
13.42%
11.84%
11.28%
10.28%
10.38%
11.37%
10.57%
10.13%
11.24%
12.36%
10.12%
10.36%
11.28%
10.58%
11.63%
12.74%
11.35%
11.74%
11.15%
12.56%
12.71%
13.14%
13.00%
13.76%
14.54%
13.87%

15.14%
13.80%
14.73%
15.20%
15.10%
16.62%
17.53%
12.84%
11.69%
12.63%
10.78%
10.88%
10.35%
11.80%
10.24%
10.93%
12.18%
11.54%
11.86%
12.93%
13.38%
14.20%

111

0%RB 55M

19.4759
22.0923
19.3428
41.2121
18.9512
22.0762

5.1276
5.0040
5.0917
5.0125
5.0557
5.0781

24.0569
26.6327
23.8663
45.7171
23.5096
26.6198

10.66%
9.26%
11.16%
10.12%
9.84%
10.53%

9.96%
10.64%
10.18%

112

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:Moisture Content
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
a
Corrected Model
.051
14
.004
Intercept
.992
1
.992
Ricebran
.009
4
.002
Time
.041
2
.020
Ricebran * Time
.001
8
.000
Error
.005
30
.000
Total
1.047
45
Corrected Total
.056
44
a. R Squared = .912 (Adjusted R Squared = .871)

F
22.132
6056.326
13.858
124.417
.698

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.691

Moisture Content
Duncana,b
Subset
Ricebran
N
1
2
3
0%
9
.129556
10%
9
.140322
.140322
20%
9
.144789
.144789
30%
9
.156667
40%
9
Sig.
.084
.465
.058
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .000.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 9.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

.170911
1.000

Moisture
Duncana,b
Subset
Time
N
1
2
3
55M
15
.114567
45M
15
.143093
35M
15
.187687
Sig.
1.000
1.000
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .000.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 15.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

113

Appendix 17. Water Activity Data of The Main Research


Sample

Aw

Average

Sample

Aw

Average

Sample

Aw

Average

10%rb
35m

0.700

0.708

10%rb45m

0.692

0.688

10%rb
55m

0.699

0.699

0.715
0.594

0.684
0.648

0.679

0.701
0.683
0.735

0.694

0.664

0.723

20%rb
45m

0.716

0.683

0.737

0.728

0.692

0.740

30%rb
45m

0.734

0.731

0.734

0.720

0.691

0.735

40%rb
45m

0.731

0.725

0.726

0.742
0.720

0.719

0.671

0%rb 45m

0.696

0.696

0.687

0.691

0.665
0.661

0.670

0.659

0.657

0.655
0.664

30%rb
55m

0.717

0.716

0.715
0.711

0.688

0.688

0.687
0.722

0.686

0.685

0.683
0.711

40%rb
55m

0.664

0.663

0.661
0.722

0.712

0.702

0.691
0.734

0.706

0.680

0.654
0.701

0%rb
55m

0.666

0.669

0.672
0.677

0.667
0.672

0.666

0.693

0.705

0.691
0.672

0.646

0.749

0.713
0.700

0.678

0.718

0.745
0%rb
35m

0.712

0.651
0.680

0.709

0.715
0.739

20%rb
55m

0.753

0.735
0.747

0.680

0.690

0.705
40%rb
35m

0.652

0.651

0.649

0.676

0.737
0.735

0.652

0.690

0.742
0.730

0.665

0.673

0.731
30%rb
35m

0.681

0.673

0.654

0.679

0.704
0.724

0.691

0.665

0.711
0.727

0.679

0.678

0.705
20%rb
35m

0.698

0.678

0.671

0.663
0.663

0.661

0.666

0.671

114

Tests of Between-Subjects Effects


Dependent Variable:AW
Type III Sum of
Source
Squares
df
Mean Square
Corrected Model
.023a
14
.002
Intercept
21.700
1
21.700
Ricebran
.009
4
.002
Time
.010
2
.005
Ricebran * Time
.003
8
.000
Error
.009
30
.000
Total
21.732
45
Corrected Total
.032
44
a. R Squared = .708 (Adjusted R Squared = .572)

F
5.199
69690.266
7.291
16.398
1.354

Sig.
.000
.000
.000
.000
.256

AW
Duncana,b
Subset
Ricebran
N
1
2
10%
9
.67833
0%
9
.68167
20%
9
.68989
30%
9
.70889
40%
9
.71333
Sig.
.199
.597
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are
displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .000.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 9.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

AW
Duncana,b
Subset
Time
N
1
2
3
55M
15
.67707
45M
15
.69240
35M
15
.71380
Sig.
1.000
1.000
1.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
Based on observed means.
The error term is Mean Square(Error) = .000.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 15.000.
b. Alpha = 0.05.

115

Appendix 18. Proximate Analysis Result of Best Formulation


ASH CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT

Sampl
e
1
2

Wsam
ple
initial
(g)

Empty
Ev.Dis
h (g)
34.143
4
41.254
7

Wdish+
dry
sample
(g)

Wdry
sample
(g)

5.0129

34.2767

0.1333

5.0887

41.3831

0.1374

Average

Ash
2.66
%
2.70
%
2.68
&

Example of Calculation
Ash content

= Ash resulted after furnace (g) x 100%


Sample before furnace (g)
= 0.1333g x 100% = 2.66 %
5.0129 g

MOISTURE CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT


Sample

Wconstant
Ev.Dish(g)

38.6713

Wsampl
e
initial(g)
5.1121

40.2502

5.0671

Average

Wdish+dry
sample(g)

Moisture
Content

43.2190

11.04%

44.7559

11.08%

11.06%

Example of Calculation
Moisture content = Sample before drying (g) Sample after drying (g) x 100%
Sample before drying (g)
= (5.1121 g (43.2190 g 38.6713 g)) x 100% = 11.04 %
5.1121 g

116

PROTEIN CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT

Samp
le
1
2

Wsample
(g)
2.0121
2.0056

mL HCl
for
Wsample(
Sample(a
mg)
)
2012.1
7.81
2005.6
6.99
Average

mL HCl
for
Blank(b)
0,1
0,1

a-b
(mL)
7.71
6.89

Prote
in
6.71%
6.77%
6.74%

Example of Calculation
%N

= normality of HCl x corrected acid vol (mL) x 14.007 g N x 100


g of sample
mol
= 0.2 N x (7.81 0.11) mL x 14.007 x 100 = 1.07 %
2012.1 mg

%Protein = %N x Protein Factor = 1.07 % x 6.25 = 6.71 %

FAT CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT

Sample

Wsample
initial (g)

Wfilter
paper
(g)

5.0897

1.0564

Winitial
sample
+
Filter
paper(g)
6.1461

5.0412

1.0761

6.1173

Final
weight

Final
sample

Lipid

4.5764

3.52

30.84%

4.5555

3.4794

30.98%

Average

30.91 %

Example of Calculation
Fat content = Sample before extraction(g) Sample after extraction(g)x 100%
Sample before extraction (g)
= (5.0897 g 3.52 g) x 100% = 30.84 %
5.0897 g

117

CARBOHYDRATE CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT


Sample

% Moisture

% Protein

% Fat

% Ash

1
2

11.04
11.08

6.71
6.77

30.84
30.98

2.66
2.70

Average

%
Carbohydrate
48.75
48.47
48.61

Example of Calculation
%Carbohydrate = 100% - (%Moisture+%Ash+%Protein+%Fat)
= 100% - (11.04+2.66+6.71+30.84) = 48.75 %

118

Appendix 19. Proximate Analysis Result of Rice Bran


ASH CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT

Sampl
e
1
2

Wsam
ple
initial
(g)

Empty
Ev.Dis
h (g)
23.259
7
16.570
1

5.0889

Wdish+
dry
sample
(g)

Wdry
sample
(g)

Ash

27.4005

0.9481

18.63 %

5.0565
20.6664
Average

0.9602

18.99 %
18.81%

MOISTURE CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT


Sample

Wconstant
Ev.Dish(g)

40.2509

Wsampl
e
initial(g)
5.0119

35.2069

5.0341

Wdish+dry
sample(g)

Moisture
Content

44.9811

5.62%

39.9611

5.56%

Average

5.59%

PROTEIN CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT

Samp
le

Wsample
(g)

mL HCl
for
Sample(a
)

Wsample(
mg)

mL HCl
for
Blank(b)

a-b
(mL)

2.0561

2056.1

20.28

0,1

20.18

2.0078

2007.8

19.73

0,1

19.63

Average

Prote
in
17.21
%
17.15
%
17.18
%

FAT CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT


Sample

Wsample
initial (g)

Wfilter
paper
(g)

Winitial
sample
+
Filter

Final
weight

Final
sample

Lipid

119

paper(g)
1

5.0112

1.0445

6.0557

5.2804

4.2359

15.47%

5.0089

1.0658

6.0747

5.2958

4.23

15.55%

Average

15.51 %

CARBOHYDRATE CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULT


Sample

% Moisture

% Protein

% Fat

% Ash

1
2

5.62
5.56

17.21
17.15

15.47
15.55

18.63
18.99

Average

%
Carbohydrate
43.08
42.75
42.91

120

Appendix 20. Dietary Fiber Analysis Result of Best Formulation

121

Appendix 21. Dietary Fiber Analysis Result of Rice Bran

122