DAFTAR PUSTAKA
Adawiyah,D.R. 2006. Hubungan Sorpsi Air, Suhu Transisi Gelas dan Mobilitas Air Serta Pengaruhnya Terhadap Stabilitas Produk Pada Model pangan. Disertasi. Sekolah Pasca Sarjana IPB. Bogor.
Andarwulan, N dan P. Hariyadi. 2004. PerubahanMutu (fisik, kimia, mikrobiologi) Produk Pangan selama Pengolahan dan Penyimpanan Produk Pangan. Pelatihan Pendugaan Waktu kadaluwarsa (Shelf Life). Bogor, 1-2 Desember 2004. Pusat Studi Pangan dan Gizi. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
Anonymous. 1993. Majalah Warta Pertanian. Bo. 126 Th. X (8-13). Oktober- November 2006. Penerbit Biro Humas Departemen Pertanian RI, Jakarta. Apriyantono, A. 2001. Aplikasi Flavour Dalam Produk Pangan. Workshop Sehari.
Kerjasama antara Jurusan Teknologi Pangan dan Gizi. Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian dan PT. Quest International Indonesia.
Arpah. 2001. Penentuan Kadaluwarsa Produk pangan. Progam Studi Ilmu Pangan. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
AOAC. 1984. Official Methods of Analysis. Association of Official Analytical Chemist, Inc. Arlington, Virginia.
AOAC. 1995. Official of Analysis of The Association of Official Analytical Chemist. AOAC Inc, Arlington.
Aula, H. 1987. Pembuatan Tepung Sari Buah Nanas. Fateta IPB. Bogor.
Balagopalan C, Padmaja G, Nanda S K and Moorthy S N. 1988. Cassava in Food. CRC Press Inc. Florida
Bertolini, A. C., Siani, A. C., & Grosso, C. R. 2001. Stability of Monoterpenes Encapsulation in Gum Arabic by Spray Drying. Journal of Aglicultural and Food Chemistry, 49, 780 – 785.
Bhandari, B.R., E.D. Dumoulin, H.M.J. Richard, I. Noleau, and A.M. Lebert. 1992. Flavour Encapsulation by Spray Drying : Apllication to citral dan Linalyl Acetate. Jof food Science. 57. Page 27-36.
Bucle, K.A., R.A. Edwards, G.H. Fleet and M. Woofon. 1987. Ilmu Pangan. UI Press. Jakarta.
Burdock, G. A. 1991. Flavour and Fragrance Materials. Allured Publishing Co., New York.
Chee-Teck Tan. 1995. Physical chemistry in Flavor Products Preparation. Dalam Chi Tang Ho,(ed). Chee-Teck Tan (ed) dan Chao Hsiang Tong (ed). Physical Chemistry, Modification and Process, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.
Dorland, W. E. dan Rogers, J.S. 1977. The Fregrance and Flavour Industry. Wayne E. Dorland Co., New York.
Durr. 1994. Understanding Natural Flavour dalam J. Piggot. A. Peterson (ed). Sensory Analysis of Flavours. Blackie AC and Prof., London.
Ellis, M. J. 1994. The Methodology of Shelf Life Determination. Di dalam : Shelf Life Evaluation of Foods. C.M.D. Man dan A.A. Jones (ed). Hal 27. Blackie Academic & Professional. London.
Floros, J.D. and V. Gnanasekharan. 1993. Shelflife Prediction of Packaged Foods : Chemical, Biological, hysical and Nutritional Aspects. Charalambous (Ed.). Elsevier Publ. London.
Food Science and Technology Committee. 2005. Encapsulated and Powdered Foods. CRC Press, New York: 300-465.
Heath, H.B. 1978. Flavor Technology. AVI Publishing Company Inc., Westport Connecticut.
Heath, H.B dan G. Reineccius. 1986. Flavour Chemistry and Technology AVI. Book-New York.
Hariyadi, P. 2004. Prinsip –Prinsip Pendugaan Masa Kadaluwarsa dengan Metode Accelerated Shelf Life Test. Pelatihan Pendugaan waktu Kadaluwarsa (Shelf Life). Bogor, 1 – 2 Desember 2001. Pusat Studi Pangan dan Gizi. Institut Pertanian Bogor.
Heiss, R. and E. Eichner. 1971. Moisture Content and Shelf Life. Food Manufacture 46(6):37-42.
Institute of Food Science & Technology. 2005. Shelflife of Food. J. Food Sci. P 861 – 865.
Kusnandar, F., 2010. Metode Pendugaan Umur Simpan Model Kadar Air Kritis. Food Review Indonesia. Bogor.
Krishnan,S., Kshrisagar, A.C. & Singhal, R.S. 2005. The Use of Gum Arabic of Modified Starch in the Microeencapsulation of a Food Flavouring Agent. Carbonhydrate Polymer, 62, 309 – 315.
Lindsay, R.C. 1985. Flavour. Di dalam : Food Chemistry. Fennema, O.R (ed). Marcel Dekker Inc., New York.
Labuza,T.P. 1982. Shelf Life Dating of Foods. Food and Nutrition. Press Inc., Westport, Connecticut.
Labuza, T.P. 1984. Moisture Sorption: Practical aspect of isotherm measurement and use. Am. Assoc. Cereal Chem., St. Paul Minnesota.
Labuza, T.P and Schmidl, M.K. 1985. Accelerated Shelf Life Testing of Foods. Food Technology, 39 (9), 57 – 62, 64 , 134.
Master, K. 1979. Spray Dtying Handbook. John willey and Sons. New York. May, C.G. 1991. Process Flavours, di dalam Reineccius, G.A. (ed). Source Book of
Flavours. Chapman & Hall, New York.
Moyler, D. 1991. Oleoresins, tinctures and extracts dalam Ashurst, P.R. (ed). Food Flavouring. Blackie, Glasgow.
Nurdjannah, N dan K. Kadarisma. 1988. Pengeringan Bunga Cengkeh Menggunakan Kamar Pengering Energi Surya dan Udara Panas. Prosiding Seminar Penelitian Pascapanen Pertanian (Buku 1). Bogor.
Nurdjannah N, S. Rusli dan A. Vianna. 1990. Pengaruh Bobot dan Waktu Penyulingan tangkai Cengkeh Terhadap Mutu dan Rendemen Minyak Cengkeh. Pemberitaan Littri. 15(4) : 153 – 157.
Nurdjannah, N, S. Yulianni dan L. Yanti. 1997. Pengolahan dan Diversifikasi Hasil Cengkeh. Monograf Tanaman Cengkeh. Balai Penilitian Tanaman Rempah dan Obat. Hal 118 – 130.
Onwulata, C.I., Smith, P.W., Cooke, P., and Holsingre, V.H. 2005. Particle Structured of Encapsulated Milk Fat Powder. Lebensm Technology 29 : 163 - 172.
Perry, L.M And Metzger. 1990. Medical Plant of East And Shouteast Asia. The MIT Press. London. Page 285.
Purseglove, J.W, E.B. Brown, C.L Green. 1981. Spices. Vol 1. Longman London and New York. Page 229 – 285.
Potter, N.N. 1980. Food Science. The AVI Publ. Co. Inc., Wesport. Connecticut. Pomeranz, Y. 1978. Food Analysis. The AVI Publ. Co. Inc. Wesport. Connecticut. Rahayu, W.P. 1994. Penuntun Praktikum Organoleptik. Jurusan Teknologi Pangan
dan Gizi. Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian. IPB. Bogor.
Reineccius, G.A. 1994. Souce of Book of flavor. 2 nd edition. Chapman & Hall. New York.
Reineccius, G. A., Ward, F. M., Whorton, C., & Andon, S. A. 1995. Development in Gum Acacias for Encapsulation Flavors. In S. J. Risch, & G. A. Reineccius (Eds). Encapusulation and Controlled Release of Food Ingredients. ACS Symp. Ser. No. , Vol. 5. , page 161 - 168.
Reineccius, G.A. 2002. Spray drying of Food Flavor. Symposium Series No. 370 on Flavour Encapsulation. Washinton D.C. Page 66 – 72.
Ruchnayat, A. 1997. Flutuasi Hasil Cengkeh. Monograf Tanaman Cengkeh. Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pertanian. Balai Penelitian Tanaman Rempah dan Obat. Hal 50 – 53.
Rudolf, F.B. 1986. Prediction of Shelf Life of Package Water Sensitive Foods. Lebenm Wiss. Tecnol. 20(1):19-21.
Tan C.T. 1995 Flavour Technology. Ho, C. T. TanC.T. dan Tong, C.H. (eds_. Symphosium of The American Chemical Society. 21-25 Agustus 1994. American Chemical Society. Washington D.C.
Takeoka, G.R. et al . 2001. Chemistry and Sensory Properties. Oxford University Press.
Soekarto, S. T. dan M. Hubeis. 1992. Metodelogi Penelitian Organoleptik. Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi IPB. Bogor.
Suratmi. 1993. Pengaruh Jenis Bahan Pengisi dan Penambahan Natrium Metabisulfit terhadapa Mutu Tepung Sari Buah Sirsak Selama Penyimpanan. Fateta IPB. Bogor.
Syarief, R. dan H. Halid. 1993. Teknologi Penyimpanan Pangan. Kerjasama dengan Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi. IPB. Bogor.
Syarief,R. dan A. Irawati. 1989. Pengetahuan Bahan untuk Industri Pertanian. Mediyatama Sarana Perkasa. Jakarta.
Weiss, E.A. 1997. Essential Oil Corps. CAB International, Wallingford Oxon. United Kingdom. Page. 235 – 259.
Winarno, F.G. 1992. Kimia Pangan dan Gizi. Gramedia. Jakarta.Wong, K.C., C.L. Lim dan L.L. Wong. 1992. Volatile Flavor constituents of Cempedak and Jack Fruit from Malaysia. Flavor and Fragrance J., 7: 307-311.
Winarno, F.G. 2002. Flavour Bagi Industri Pangan. Mbrio Press. Cetakan 1. Bogor. Wood Roger et al. 2000. Analytical methods for food additives. CRC Press. New
64
Eugenol Spicy ( clove, cinnamon like)
Trans iso eugenol Spicy, woody, terpene note Eugenyl actetate Clove like, balsamic sweet
1.8 cineole Fresh ( eucalyptus – like)
Methyl salicilate Minty, sweet , spicy Caryophyllene Spicy woody, terpene note
Daftar penilaian jumlah minimum yang benar untuk seleksi panelis terlatih uji organoleptik dalam menrangking uji bau minyak cengkeh powder
Jumlah Percobaan Jumlah benar minimum agar panelis diterima 10 7 15 11 20 15 25 18 30 22
65
Panelis ke Total Percobaan Jawaban Benar
1 10 7 2 10 7 3 10 7 4 10 7 5 10 7 6 10 7 7 10 7 8 10 7 9 10 7 10 10 7
66 Nama :
Tanggal :
Petujuk : Berilah angka 1 -3 berdasarkan intensitas penciuman aroma minyak cengkeh pada sample dibawah ini.
Percobaan 1 Kode Rate Kode Rate Kode Rate
1 ABC DEF GHI
2 DBA EFG IHG
3 JHI KLM DGH 4 UBC KLO HKL 5 BNM MHJ PKL 6 HNK TGH UJD 7 JKU KFC WEH 8 JGS HJU GTF 9 CBN DEK YGB 10 HJK BGU OKS
67
Nama :
Tanggal :
Petunjuk : Dihadapan anda terdapat beberapa sample minyak cengkeh powder, mohon dapat memberikan rate 1 – 7 berdasarkan kesukaan terhadap parameter – parameter yang di berikan.
Parameter Uji AGF HKL MGP DPT BRS
Aroma Minthy Aroma Spicy Aroma Sweet Uji Daya Mawur Warna
Keterangan :
1 : Sangat Tidak Suka 2 : Tidak Suka
3 : Agak Tidak Suka 4 : Biasa
5 : Agak Suka 6 : Suka
68 Percobaan 1 : gum Arabic : native starch = 100 : 0 Rendemen (%) = 28.560 x 100 = 95.20 %
30.000
Percobaan 2 : gum Arabic : native starch = 75 : 25 Rendemen (%) = 28. 480 x 100 = 94.96 %
30.000
Percobaan 3 : gum Arabic ; native starch = 50 : 50 Rendemen (%) = 28.510 x 100 = 95.03 %
30.000
Percobaan 4 : gum Arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Rendemen (%) = 28.490 x 100 = 94.96 %
30.000
Percobaan 5 : gum Arabic ; native starch = 0 : 100 Rendemen (%) = 28.380 x 100 = 94.60 % 30.000
69 Kelarutan (%) = 100 - ( 0.9 - 0.7) (100 – 4.18) X 5 100 = 99.96 %
Percobaan 2 : gum Arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Kelarutan (%) = 100 - ( 0.9 - 0.7) (100 – 5.12) X 5 100 = 99.96 %
Percobaan 3 : gum Arabic : native starch = 50 : 50 Kelarutan (%) = 100 - ( 0.9 - 0.7) (100 – 3.79 ) X 5 100 = 99.96 %
Percobaan 4 : gum arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Kelarutan (%) = 100 - ( 0.9 - 0.7) (100 – 5.79 ) X 5 100 = 99.96%
Percobaan 5 : gum arabic : native starch = 0 : 100 Kelarutan (%) = 100 - ( 0.9 - 0.7) (100 – 7.15 ) X 5 100 = 99.96%
70 Kadar Air (%) = ( 9 – 8.9022) X 100 ( 9 – 7) = 4.89 %
Percobaan 2 : gum Arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Kadar Air (%) = ( 9 – 8.8976)
X 100 ( 9 – 7)
= 5.12 %
Percobaan 3 : gum Arabic : native starch = 50 : 50 Kadar Air (%) = ( 9 – 8.9242)
X 100 ( 9 – 7)
= 3.79 %
Percobaan 4 : gum arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Kadar Air (%) = ( 9 – 8.8842)
X 100 ( 9 – 7)
= 5.79%
Percobaan 5 : gum arabic : native starch = 0 : 10 0 Kadar Air (%) = ( 9 – 8.8570)
X 100 ( 9 – 7)
= 7.15 %
71 Berat Jenis (gr/ml) = 10
15
= 0.67
Percobaan 2 : gum Arabic : native starch = 75 : 25 Berat Jenis (gr/ml) = 10
14.2
= 0.70
Percobaan 3 : gum Arabic : native starch = 50 : 50 Berat Jenis (gr/ml) = 10
13.4
= 0. 75
Percobaan 4 : gum arabic : native starch = 25 : 75 Berat Jenis (gr/ml) = 10
12.4
= 0. 81
Percobaan 5 : gum arabic : native starch = 0 : 10 0 Berat Jenis (gr/ml) = 10
11.8
= 0. 85
72 1. Uji Aroma Spicy
Panelis DBE CDA TGP GHI HKL
1 5 5 4 5 5 2 6 5 5 6 4 3 6 5 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6 5 5 6 5 4 5 6 4 6 5 6 4 7 5 5 5 5 6 8 4 5 6 4 5 9 5 5 6 5 5 10 5 4 5 5 5 Rata - rata 5.10 5.20 5.10 5.00 4.90
2. Uji Aroma Sweet
Panelis DBE CDA TGP GHI HKL
1 5 5 4 5 5 2 5 5 6 5 5 3 5 6 6 4 5 4 6 5 5 6 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 6 5 5 7 5 6 5 6 5 8 5 6 6 6 5 9 5 5 5 5 5 10 5 5 5 5 5 Rata - rata 5.30 5.30 5.30 5.20 5.00
73
Panelis DBE CDA TGP GHI HKL
1 5 5 5 4 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5 5 4 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 5 6 5 4 5 5 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 8 5 6 6 6 5 9 5 5 5 5 4 10 5 5 5 5 4 Rata - rata 5.10 4.90 5.10 5.00 4.80
74 On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean rendemen 4 94.8725 .39475 .19737 On e -S a m p le Te s t Test Value = 94.6 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
rendemen 1.381 3 .261 .27250 -.3556 .9006
kesimpulan : tidak ada perbedaan rendemen
On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Daya Mawur 4 .7325 .06131 .03065 On e -S a m p le Te s t Test Value = 362.4 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Daya Mawur -3.833 3 .031 -.11750 -.2151 -.0199
75 On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean kelarutan 4 99.9600 .00000 .00000 On e -S a m p le Te s t Test Value = 99.96 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
kelarutan .000 3 1.000 .00000 .0000 .0000
kesimpulan : tidak ada perbedaan kelarutan
On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean kadarair 4 5.4250 1.74910 .87455 On e -S a m p le Te s t Test Value = 7.15 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
kadarair -1.972 3 .143 -1.72500 -4.5082 1.0582
76 On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Densitas Kamba 4 99.9600 .00000 .00000 On e -S a m p le S ta tis tic s N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean Densitas Kamba 4 .7325 .06131 .03065 On e -S a m p le Te s t Test Value = 0.85 t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper Densitas Kamba -3.833 3 .031 -.11750 -.2151 -.0199
kesimpulan : Tidak ada perbedaan densitas kamba