[AOAC] Association of Official Analytical Chemist. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis. Wahshington DC (US): Association of Officia Analytical Chemist. [BPS] Badan Pusat Statistik. 2015. Rata-rata konsumsi per kapita seminggu beberapa macam bahan makanan penting 2007-2014 [Internet]. [diunduh
2015 November].Tersedia pada:
http://www.bps.go.id/linkTabelStatis/view/id/950 .
Amerah AM, Ravindran V. 2008. Influence of method of whole-wheat feeding on the performance, digestive tract development and carcass traits of broiler chickens. Anim feed Sci Technol. 147:326-339.
Andarwulan N, Palupi NS, Susanti. 2006. Pengembangan metode ekstraksi dan karakteristik minyak buah merah (Pandanus conoideus L.). Prosiding Seminar Nasional Perhimpunan Ahli Pangan Indonesia (PATPI). Yogyakarta, Indonesia. 2-3 Agustus 2006.
Amoo IA, Adebayo OT, Oyeleye AO. 2006. Chemical evaluation of winged beans (Psophocarous tetra gonolabus), pitanga cherries (Eugenia uniflora) and orchid fruit (Orchid fruit myristica). African. J. Food. Agr. Nutrr. Dvlpmnt. 2:1-12.
Anwar MN, Ravindran V, Morel PCH, Ravindran G, Cowieson AJ. 2015. Measurement of true ileal calcium digestibility in meat and bone meal for broiler chicken using the direct method. Poult. Sci. 00:1-7.
De Foliart G, Dunkel FV, Gracer D. 2009. The food insect newsletter-chronicle of changing culture. Salt Lake City: Aardvark Global Publishing, p.ix+414. Djunaidi IH, Yuwanta T, Nurcahyanto M. 2009. Performa dan bobot organ
pencernaan ayam broiler yang diberi pakan limbah udang hasil fermentasi Bacillus sp. Med Petern. 32(3):212-219.
Durst PB, Hanboonsong Y. 2015. Small-scale production of edible insects for enhanced food security and rural livelihoods: experience from Thailand and Lao People Democratic Republic. JIFF. 1:25–31.
Farkhoy M, Modirsanej M, Ghavidel O, Sadegh M, Jafarnejad S. 2012. Evaluation of protein concentration and limiting amino acids including lysine and met-cys in prestarter diet on performance of broiler. Veterinary Medicine Intern. Hindawi Publishing Corporation. 2012 : pp. 1-7. doi:10.1155/2012/394189. Fasina OO, Sokhansaj. 1993. Effect of moisture content on bulk handling properties
of alfalfa pellets. J. Canad. Agric. Engine 35(4): 269-273.
Finke MD. 2002. Complete nutrient composition of commercially raised invertebrates used as food for insectivores. J. Zoo Biol. 21 (3):269-285. Gornowicz E, Lewko L, Pietrzak M, Gornowicz J. 2009. The effect of broiler
chicken origin on carcase and muscle yield and quality. JCEA. 10 (3) : 193-200.
Grabowski T, Kijowski J. 2004. Poultry meat and processed products. Chapter 13, pp. 540. Warszawa.
Hao XY, Xin HS, Gao H, Zhang XY, Lin C, Xu WB, Wang YZ, Zhang YG. 2015. Relationship between the physical parameters, chemical composition and rumen degradation kinetics parameters of certain feedstuff for ruminants. Anim feed Sci Technol. 13418 : 1-8.
24
Kamińska, B. 1986. Comparative studies on the dynamics of growth in chicks. Biul. Inf. IZ, (postdoctoral thesis).
Karaoğlu M, Aksu M İ, Esenbuğa N, Kaya A, Macit M. 2014. Carcass and
commercial cuts yield in broilers of different ages fed diets supplemented with probiotics. Afric J Food Sci Technol. 5(2):46-52.
Khalil. 1999. Pengaruh kandungan air dan ukuran partikel terhadap sifat fisik pakan lokal: kerapatan tumpukan, kerapatan pemadatan tumpukan dan berat jenis. Med Petern .22(1): 1-11.
Kidd MT, Kerr BJ, Halpin KM, McWard GW, Quarles CL. 1998. Lysine level in starter and grower-finisher diets affect broiler performance and carcass traits. J. Appl Poultry Res. 7:351-358.
Klunder HC, Wolkers RJ, Korpela JM, Nout MJR. 2012. Microbiological aspect of processing and storage of edible insects. Food Control. 26:628-631.
Leeson S, Summers JD. 2001. Nutrition of The Chicken. 4th Ed. Canada : University Books. Guelph. Ontario.
Leeson S, Summers JD. 2008. Commercial Poultry Nutrition. 3rd Ed. Canada : University Books. Guelph. Ontario.
Leeson S, Walsh T. 2004. Feathering in commercial poultry II. Factors influencing feather growth and feather loss. World’s Poult Sci J. 60:52-63.
Makkar HPS, Tran G, Heuze V, Ankers P. 2014. State of the art on use of insects as animal feed. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 197:1-33.
Marcu A, Stef L, Dumitrescu G, Ciochina LP, Dronca D, Pet I, Baul S, Marcu A. 2014. Influence of nutrition, sex and slaughter age on the carcass characteristics at broiler chicken ross-308. Animal Science and Biotechnologies. 47 (2) : 271-278.
Meeker DL, Hamilton CR. 2006. An overview of the rendering industry. In : DL Meeker editor, Essential rendering. Nasional Renderers Association, Alexandria. VA. p. 1-16.
Muchtadi D. 1993. Teknik Evaluasi Nilai Gizi Protein. Bogor (ID) : IPB Press. Murawska D, Kleczek K, Wawro K, Michalik D. 2011. Age-related Changes in the
Percentage Content of Edible and Non-edible Components in Broiler Chickens. Asian-Aust J Anim Sci. 24(4) : 532 – 539.
Nahrowi, Sari IP, Sumiati. 2015. Metabolizable energy of ration containing mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L) as a substitute for meat bone meal in broiler. Proceeding of The International Seminar of Animal Nutrition and Feed Science; 2015 Sept 8-9; Manado, Indonesia.
Pesti GM. 2009. Impact of dietary amino acid and crude protein levels in broiler feeds on biological performance. J. Appl. Poult. Ress. 18 : 477-486.
Purnamawati Y, Sumiati, Nahrowi. 2016. Effect of substitution of meat bone meal with protein concentrate of mealworm (Tenebrio molitor l) on performance of broilers. Proceeding of The 3rd Animal Production International Seminar and The 3rd ASEAN Regional Conference on Animal Production; 2016 Okt 19-21; Malang, Indonesia. Malang (ID): UB Press. Hlm 611-613.
PT. Japfa Comfeed Indonesia. 2008. Broiler Management Program. Jakarta. Ramos EJ, Avila GE, Rocha HA, Pino JM.. 2002. Use of Tenebrio molitor
(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) to recycle organic wastes and as feed for broiler chickens. J. Econ. Entomol. 95 (1): 214-220.
25 Romero LF, Zuidhof MJ, Renema RA, Naeima A, Robinson FE. 2011. Effects of maternal energy efficiency on broiler chicken growth, feed conversion, residual feed intake, and residual maintenance metabolizable energy requirements. Poult. Sci. 90:2904–2912.
Safaa HM, Moreno EJ, Valencia DG, Frikha M, Serrano MP, Mateos GG. 2009. Effect of main cereal of the diet and particle size of the cereal on productive performance and egg quality of brown egg-laying hens in early phase ofproduction. Poult. Sci. 88:608-614.
Samsudin M, Sarengat W, Maulana HN. 2012. Pengaruh perbedaan lama periode (starter - finisher) pemberian pakan dan level protein terhadap nisbah daging tulang dan massa protein daging dada dan paha ayam pelung umur 1 minggu sampai 11 minggu. Animal Agricultural Journal. 1(1) : 43-51.
Scheuermann GN, Bilgili SF, Hess JB, Mulvaney DR. 2003. Breast muscle development in commercial broiler chickens. Poult Sci. 82 : 1648–1658. Scott ML. Nesheim MC. Young RJ. 1982. Nutrition of the Chicken. Ed ke-3. Ithaca
(US): ML Scott & Ass.
Sediaoetama AJ. 1985. Ilmu Gizi 1. Ed ke 1. Jakarta (ID) : Dian Rakyat.
Siemianowska E, Agnieszka K, Marek A, Krystyna A, Skibniewska, Lucyna PJ, Adrian J, Marta J. 2013. Larvae of mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) as European novel food. J. Agri.Sci. 4(6):287-291.
Sibarani J, Yunianto VD, Mahfudz LD. 2014. Percentage of carcass and non-carcass and abdominal fat of broiler chickens were given acidifier citric acid in feed double step down. Anim Agri J. 3(2):273-280.
Steel RGD, Torrie JH. 1993. Prinsip dan Prosedur Statistika (Pendekatan Biometrik). Ed ke 2. Terjemahan: B. Sumantri. Jakarta (ID): Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Tatli P, Seven I, Yilmaz M, Simsek UG. 2007. The effect of Turkish propolis on growth and carcass characteristics in broiler under heat stress. Anim Feed Sci Technol. 146:137-148.
Wirakartakusumah MA, Abdullah K. Syarif AM. 1992. Sifat Fisik Pangan. Depdikbud. Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Tinggi. Pusat Antar Universitas. Bogor (ID) : Institut Pertanian Bogor.
26
27 Lampiran 1 Hasil T-test konsumsi ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 10 2804.94 126.37 0.477
R1 10 2846.84 131.57
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 2 Hasil T-test bobot badan akhir ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 10 1596.40 97.80 0.238
R1 10 1644.50 76.95
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 3 Hasil T-test PBB ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 10 1549.68 98.02 0.238
R1 10 1597.78 76.93
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 4 Hasil T-test FCR ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 10 1.81 0.06 0.285
R1 10 1.78 0.06
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 5 Hasil T-test persentase karkas ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 67.62 2.20 0.414
R1 20 66.89 3.27
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 6 Hasil T-test persentase dada ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 34.91 1.85 0.044*
R1 20 36.06 1.65
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, *Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 7 Hasil T-test persentase paha ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 30.77 1.99 0.990
R1 20 30.77 1.35
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
28
Lampiran 8 Hasil T-test persentase punggung ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 23.38 1.82 0.265
R1 20 22.67 2.13
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 9 Hasil T-test persentase sayap ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 10.94 0.77 0.72
R1 20 10.50 0.72
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 10 Hasil T-test persentase daging dada ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 89.51 2.24 0.853
R1 20 89.67 1.73
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 11 Hasil T-test persentase tulang dada ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 10.49 2.24 0.853
R1 20 10.33 1.73
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 12 Hasil T-test persentase daging paha ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 80.49 2.58 0.511
R1 20 81.14 1.97
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 13 Hasil T-test persentase tulang paha ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 19.51 2.58 0.511
R1 20 18.86 1.97
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 14 Hasil T-test persentase darah ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 3.69 0.68 0.941
29 R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 15 Hasil T-test persentase bulu ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 5.35 1.75 0.117
R1 20 4.49 1.58
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 16 Hasil T-test persentase kepala ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 4.87 2.64 0.773
R1 20 5.08 1.91
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
Lampiran 17 Hasil T-test persentase kaki ayam broiler umur 35 hari
N Rataan SD Sig.
R0 20 3.39 1.18 0.491
R1 20 3.11 1.36
R0 = ransum mengandung 5 % MBM, R1 = ransum mengandung 5 % konsentrat protein ulat hongkong, N = jumlah sampel, SD = standar deviasi, Sig = signifikansi (P<0.05)
30