Formulation Of Rich-Dietary Fiber Drink Powder From Pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata)

Formulation Of Rich-Dietary Fiber Drink Powder From Pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata) Widaningrum dan Sri Usmiati Indonesian Center for Agricultural Postharvest Research and Development (ICAPRD) Indonesian Agency for Agricultural Research and Development (IAARD) Jl. Tentara Pelajar No. 12, Bogor 16114, Indonesia Keywords: Pumpkin, Cucurbita moschata, dietary fiber, drink powder. Abstract Pumpkin fruit (Cucurbita moschata) is one of vegetables plant found abundantly in Indonesia which has potential to be processed as alternatives food. The purpose of this research was to determine the suitable formula to produce a tasty richdietary fiber drink from pumpkin powder mixed with the other fruits and vegetables. Research consisting of two phases; preliminary and main experiments. Preliminary experiment consisting of the determination of the other raw materials that was combined with pumpkin as food dietary fiber sources, the determination of initial formula, hedonic test, and initial physico-chemical analysis on each substance. The main experiment consisting of the determination of drink powder formula, drink powder production, organoleptic test, and physico-chemical analysis of drink powder. Drink powder was produced using rotary dryer at temperature of 70 C (3 hours, 6 rpm). Organoleptic test was conducted to obtain products which were most preferred by consumer. Based on organoleptic test, four best formula can be obtained. First formula was percentage ratio of puree of pumpkin : carrot : apple : guava of 25:25:25:25 and ratio of puree mix to sugar of 1:1. Second formula was puree percentage ratio of 25:50:12.5:12.5 and ratio of puree mix to sugar of 1:1. Third formula was puree percentage ratio of 25:25:25:25 and ratio of puree mix to sugar of 2:1; and the fourth formula was puree percentage ratio of 25 :50 :12.5 :12.5 and ratio of puree mix to sugar of 2:1. Yield of drink powder produced was 31.28-45.39%. The product has a viscosity of 5-7 cp, density of 0.77-0.82 g/ml, ph of 6.0-6.5; moisture content of 3.79-4.07%, ash content of 0.45-0.59%, protein content of 3.42-4.12%, and 27.25-46.55% sugar content, while the food dietary fiber content was 12.78-15.22%. The best formula for the highest food dietary fiber content was formula that has percentage puree ratio of pumpkin : carrot : apple : guava of 25:50:12.5 : 12.5%. INTRODUCTION Pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata) is a type of fruit-vegetables found abundantly in Indonesia which has not optimally utilized yet. The mature ones were used to make compote or lunkhead, meanwhile the young ones were used to be mixed in vegetable mixture. On the contrary, developed countries have used pumpkin widely processed into industrial-scale products such as jelly, jam, canned products and others. Vegetables and fruits grown in the tropics, including yellow pumpkin, generally have a high moisture, which is about 95% (Middleton, 1977). Almost all types of pumpkin as fruit vegetables contain high starch content and generally decreased during maturation process because hydrolyzed to form sucrose (Pantastico, 1986). Pumpkin containing nutrients such as carbohydrates (starches and sugars), protein, dietary fiber (pectin and 475

cellulose), minerals calcium, phosphorus, iron and vitamins such as vitamin A (mainly ß- carotene), B and C (Keller, 1998). As rich-dietary fiber commodity, pumpkin has a promising business prospects due to its easy cultivation and its availability along year (Setiawan and Trisnawati, 1993). Pumpkin contains high -carotene or pro-vitamine A (180 IU/g) (Murdijati-Gardjito et al., 1989 in Anggrahini et al., 2006) thus has potency to be exploited as a natural source of - carotene. Besides, yellow pumpkins plant is found almost in all islands in Indonesia. Data from FAO also indicates that pumpkin production in Indonesia was very high, in 1999 production reached 73,744 tons then raised to 83,333 tons in 2000, then increased again to 96,667 tons in 2001 (Pahlevie, 2011). Relating to diversification products, pumpkin could be used as raw material for juice and for making drink powder rich in dietary fiber. According to AACC (2001), dietary fiber is the edible parts of plants or analogous carbohydrates that are resistant to digestion and absorption in the small intestine with completed or partial fermentation in the large intestine. In general, dietary fiber is defined as a group of polysaccharides and other polymers that can-not be digested by the gastrointestinal system of the upper body. Dietary fiber includes starch, polysaccharides, oligosaccharide, lignin and other plant parts. Dietary fiber consists of soluble dietary fiber (SDF) and insoluble dietary fiber (IDF). Soluble dietary fiber is a component enable to dissolve in warm or hot water and also in the digestive tract. Dietary fiber could form a gel by absorbing water. Insoluble dietary fiber is a component that can not dissolve in hot or cold water. Properties of the dietary fiber group are their ability to absorb water and to improve the texture and volume of stool so that food can easily passing through the colon. Pumpkin flour contains high insoluble dietary fiber (IDF) includes a cellulose (40.4/100g), hemicellulose (4.3 g/100g) and lignin (4.3 g/100g). Based on the above statement it can be seen that insoluble dietary fiber content in the pumpkin flour is quite high. Research on the food process using combination of food sources containing ß- carotene with the ones containing dietary fiber to produce beverages that can support the body's health are necessary to be done. The research objective is to formulate rich-dietary fiber-drink powder made from yellow pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata) that meets the requirements as a beverages which is rich in dietary fiber and favored by the consumers. MATERIAL AND METHODS Materials and Equipment Raw materials used was a 4 months harvest age of yellow pumpkin as source of dietary fiber obtained from farmer s garden in Cipanas, Cianjur district, West Java. Other raw materials as source of dietary fiber were carrots, red bean, guavas, and apples bought from open market in Bogor, West Java. Chemicals for analysis was distilled water (aquadest), concentrated H 2 SO 4, NaOH, alcohol 80%, KOH, methanol, K 2 SO 4, HgO, HCl, methyl red, methyl blue and phenol red indicator, NaOH-NaS2O3, ZnSO4, Nelson reagent, petroleum, benzene, hexane, sodium phosphate buffer solution, termamyl enzyme, pepsin enzyme, HCl, ethanol 78% and 95%, acetone, starch solution, iodine standards, KOH 5%, anhydrous Na 2 SO4 (PA), and others. The tools used were rotary (Mollen) dryer, blender, oven, desiccator, analytical balance, spectrophotometer, furnace, filter paper, rotary, phmeter, water bath, viscometer, distillation tools and glass tools for chemical analysis. 476

Methodology The initial experiment aimed to select which commodities (fruits and vegetables) will be combined with pumpkin as a source of dietary fiber. This selection was made through the study of literature with the criteria of high content of dietary fiber as well as consideration of the suitability of flavor, color and aroma of the products produced. After passing through an intensive literature study, it was determined that there were four types of commodities will be used to add to the pumpkin, they were the guava, red beans, apples, and carrots. Afterward, fruit puree from each commodities were made (Table 1). Production of puree (fruit pulp) of each commodity was made firstly by apportioning between the materials used (pulp) with the unused (the skin and seeds). Nonetheless, for apple and guava, their skin part that contains dietary fiber components were not discarded. Once weighed, washed and cut into square forms with the size of 2-3 cm, then they were steamed at 90 C for 10 minutes and blended by adding enough water for the destruction process. Subsequently they incorporated into a heat resistant plastic packaging (polypropylene), then pasteurized at 60-70 C for 2 hours. After coolind down to a room temperature, puree then stored in the freezer. Once puree had been produced from each raw materials, then the composition of the initial formulation (mix ratio between the pumpkin and other four raw materials, in particular comparisons) (Table 2) were determined. The sensory properties of puree mixture of five raw materials with a certain ratio were then tested by twenty five semi-trained panelists (to be expected as the representation of consumers) at the Organoleptic Laboratory of ICAPRD. Quality attributes tested including the taste, color, aroma, and texture of each formulated product. Elected formulas then analyzed for those chemical contents including moisture, ash, fat, and protein using AOAC methods (2005), as well as dietary fiber (Asp et al., 1983). In principle, every formula contained pumpkin as a base for producing powder beverage products to meet the ß-carotene content (Table 2). After the best formula had been chosen, the next was to do main experiment. The main experiment was to make drink powder formula made with addition of other materials (sugar flour, skim milk, Arabic gum, and water) through thoroughly blending process (using a blender) and rotary drying until a dry drink powder were obtained. Organoleptic test was conducted again by panelists to obtain the most preferred formula and then physicochemical analysis of the powder drink was done. After the initial stage of experiment had been done, the main experiment was conducted on the formulation, followed by producing rich-dietary fiber powder drink, and then sensory evaluation and physico-chemical analysis of the product. Dietary fiber-rich drink powder formulation was made based on the modification of Tangkanakul et al., (2000) research. Formulation consisted of selected commodities as a source of dietary dietary fiber, sugar flour, skim milk, Arabic gum, and water. Treatment in the formulation was a weight ratios between puree of each dietary fiber source-commodity and weight ratios between the puree mixture with sugar flour as listed in the Table 3. Weight ratios between puree mixture with sugar flour mixture were 2:1 and 1:1. Purposes of this mix ratios was to meet one of the characteristic taste preferred by consumers. Drink powder formulation can be seen in Table 4. Production process of drink powder include mixing of puree, sugar flour, skim milk, and Arabic gum using high powered blender. This stage was aimed to homogenize the materials used evenly with a slight addition of water. The materials then dried by rotary (Mollen) dryer at 70 C for 3 hours with 6 rpm rotary speed (Ginting, 2004). Once dried, the material were crushed using a blender, sieved to 80 mesh and packed. Hedonic test on sensory evaluation aimed to get the most preferred formulation determined by panelists. 477

This test was performed by 29 semi-trained panelists on the parameters of taste, color, and aroma of drink powder. The best results were analyzed for its physico-chemical properties including yield, moisture, ash, bulk density, viscosity, ph, total sugars, and protein and dietary fiber content. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Preliminary Sensory Evaluation Sensory evaluation in the preliminary experiment was the acceptance test, the assessment of a person's marks on nature or substance that caused the person love to or like to. Panelists suggested responses whether like or not like to the sensory properties of the material being assessed (Soekarto, 1985). In the acceptance test, panelists judge the taste, color, aroma, and texture of the product, to determine the most acceptable. ratios/combination puree. Sensory evaluation results can be seen in Table 5. Formula 6 (a combination of pumpkin, carrot, and apple puree) was the most preferred by panelists in terms of flavor. Formula 3 (combination of pumpkin, guava and carrot puree) was the most preferred by panelists in terms of color and texture, while the formula 5 (combination of pumpkin, carrot, guava, and apple puree) was the most preferred by panelists in terms of aroma. Therefore panelists preferrences were vary for each parameter, then weighing test was conducted to determine the best formula. In the weighing test, a number of parameters given a weight which were determined by how the importance of the parameters in the product. Assessment of weight were sorted by value of importance of each parameter. The appearance of a product determines consumer interest in the product. Moehyi (1992) stated that color of food plays a major role in the appearance of food, meaning that although the food is delicious, but if served in unattractive appearance can lead to loss of appetite. Furthermore Moehyi (1992) stated that the taste of the food is a second factor that affects the taste of food. On the other hand, deman (1989) argued that the viability of a product for continuing consumpted by consumers was that it has good taste and give the impression to the consumers. The opinion of the two can be seen that Moehyi (1992), prioritizes appearance, while deman (1989), prioritizes sustainability based on taste. Based on low consumption of dietary fiber of Indonesian population (one third of the ideal consumption) and their lifestyle which tend to consume a practical and instant product, then to fill the needs of practicality and convenience in presenting product, excellent product performance of product must be considered. Therefore, the parameters of color and flavor of a product are very important things, especially if the product is a new product. Aroma, according to Winarno (1997), is closely related to the senses of smell or taste. Therefore, odor/smell of food can cause a sensation of a food delicacy. Meanwhile, the texture of the food is important, among others, because it can determine the mechanical behavior of food eaten (deman, 1989). Weighed test results was further sorted and ranked. Ranked number adjusted by the number of products that are ranked, in this case there were 8 formulas (Table 6). Thus, the best rank rated 8 and the lowest ranking was given a value of 1. By multiplying the weight and ranking, the results of each parameter was added, so that the best formula was a formula that had the largest sum. Table 6 shows that the best formula was the formula 5 (combination of puree of pumpkin 25%, carrots 25%, guava 25%, and apples 25%) because it had the largest sum i.e. 6.70 (Table 2). 478

Chemical Composition of Puree Chemical analysis of each puree aimed to determine the proximate composition of selected commodities that was subsequently used i.e. yellow pumpkin, carrot, apple, and guava. Proximate analysis results are presented in Table 7. Table 7 shows that all puree containing high moisture content (above 90%). almost comparable The ash content (range 0.31 to 0.58%) and fat content (range 0.23 to 0.51%) were almost comparable, but with quite different levels of protein, especially protein levels in apple which was quite low (0.14%) compared to the levels of protein in pumpkin that was quite high (0.87%), also in carrots and guava (each respectively 0.82% and 0.73%). As for the dietary fiber content of food, guava has enough food dietary fiber content (5.47%) higher than that in apple (3.54%), carrots (2.43%) and pumpkin (0.90%). Levels of dietary fiber in the yellow pumpkin in this research was lower than three other selected commodities (carrot, apple, and guava). In this research, this reason can be brought into consideration that the pumpkin puree must be added/substituted with other fruit puree for the production of dietary fiber-rich drink powder. Drink Powder Formula Formulation of drink powder is referred to Tangkanakul et al., (2000). Commodities used were selected based on the result from initial sensory evaluation i.e. yellow pumpkin, carrot, apple, and guava. Treatments in the formulation was weight ratio/comparison of each puree which were source of dietary fiber. and ratio/comparison between puree mix with sugar flour, namely 2:1 and 1:1. In this formulation, sugar, skim milk powder, and gum Arabic were added. The addition of sugar aimed to give a sweet taste to the product so that one of the characteristics of consumer acceptance of the drink powder product was expected to be fulfilled. Sugar used was finely grounded sucrose. Refined sugar flour particles could prevent clotting powder. The skim milk powder was used as filler material in drink powder which could speed up the drying process. The addition of filler will increase the volume and the amount of total dissolved solids. Arabic gum was added to stabilize drink powder when dissolved in water. Beside that, addition of stabilizer is useful to improve viscosity, texture and form of products. Drink powder was made using mollen dryer. Working principle of this device is a combination of working principles of spray dryer and drum/rotary dryer. Drying process conditions in the production of drink powder was referred to the best drying process conditions reported by Ginting (2004) which used drying temperature 70 ºC with rotational speed of 6 rpm for 3 hour. This process conditions produced the best yield and resulting most preferred drink powder. Drink powder obtained from mollen dryer was then ground using blender. Sensory Evaluation of Drink Powder Sensory evaluation aimed to obtain at least 4 best formula (from 10 formula) for physico-chemical analysis. This was done based on consideration that the final purpose was acceptable dietary fiber-rich drink powder by panelists. Based on sensory evaluation result (Table 8), panelists acceptance to taste parameter yielded 4 best formula i.e. formula III, V, VIII and X (composition of each formula stated in Table 4). For color parameter, panelists acceptance provided 5 best formula (formula V,VI,VIII, IX and X), while for aroma parameter, panelists acceptance provided 4 best formula (formula V, VI, IX, X). To obtain 479

the best results out of 4 formulas, the test was weighed again because the results vary according to each parameter. In determining ranking on Table 9, there were formulas that had similar average score of acceptance. Therefore, the determination of ranking was done based on the frequency distribution and mode preference level, i.e. the percentage of like and dislike. Table 9 shows that there are four formulas with the high value of the formula X, V, VIII, and III, and the highest grade was the formula X. Physico-Chemical Properties Physico-chemical analysis carried out on 4 best formula based on sensory evaluation results. The results are presented in Table 10. Yield The magnitude of the yield associated with the economic value of a product as a result of a process tested and used to determine the efficiency of the use of the equipment. Based on Table 10, the yield obtained ranged from 31.28 to 45.39%. Formula X had the lowest yield (31.28%), meanwhile the product with the highest yield was 45.39% which went to formula VIII. However, the formula X was chosen because it was the most preferred product by panelists. Process that was done in the ptoduction of drink powder was drying process (evaporating moisture from the material). Losing weight might occured because there were spilled out products out of the container when the drying process takes place. This might be caused by wind blowing coming from the blower or any material adhered to the walls of the container and hardening there. hence it could not be taken with the scraper tool. Bulk Density In the production of drink powder. bulk density values were very important. Bulk density showed porosity values of a material. which were the cavity amount contained in the material particles. Lower bulk density values meant for a light weight which required a larger space and vice versa. The greater the bulk density of the material, the smaller the space needed. In other words. these materials did not have voids. solid. or having fine powder particles form. According to Paleg and Bagley (1983), bulk density was strongly influenced by the nature of the constituent particles and is influenced by external factors such as the geometric and mechanical systems of materials due to thermal processes experienced by the material. Based on the result analysis, thr products had density value ranging from 0.77 to 0.82 g/ml. This suggests that the product requires a large space for their packaging. The implication was when packaging products, it requires larger packaging for save weight. Supriadi (1988) produced instant milk guava puree with bulk density of 0.31 g/ml and instant Bangkok guava puree with density value of 0.25 g/ml. Aider and de Halleux (2008) had made drained apricot juice and cherry juice which had bulk density about 1.042 g/ml and 1.069 g/ml respectively. This means instant of puree and fruit juice had a small bulk density, so it requires a large storage space. Viscosity Viscosity is the flow of molecules in dissolving system. Colloidal suspension in solution could bind each other by thickening the liquid, resulting absorption and colloid development. High viscosity of a material caused by big internal friction thus the liquid 480

flows (Glicksman. 1969). Analysis results of drink powder showed that viscosity value ranging between 5-7 cp. Degree od Acidity (ph) Based on the analysis, the ph value of the product ranging from 6.006 to 6.486. They indicates that the ph of drink powder approached neutral ph. This means the products had a relatively small number of acids. This might be caused by the composition of the final product (yellow pumpkin and carrot) which had relatively alkaline ph compared to guava and apple that had a low ph (acidic). For comparison. instant milk guava puree and guava Bangkok in Supriadi (1988) had ph of 3.95 and 3.96 which means in acidic conditions. Similarly. apricot and cherry juice researched by Aider and de Halleux (2008) had ph of 3.45 and 3.51. ph on the product is determined by the ph of the native fruit which made up the products. Moisture Moisture level indicates the amount of water contained per unit material and was one of the parameters of dried products to determine the tendency of the material damage. According to Winarno (1997). if the moisture ranged between 3-4% then the material had the optimum stability because microbial growth. chemical reactions such as enzymatic browning, hydrolysis. and oxidation of fat would be reduced. Moisture level of products ranged from 3.79 to 4.07%. This moisture level were low enough and indicates that the product produced had optimum stability. It could reduce and inhibit microbial growth and chemical reactions rate as well as enzymatic browning. Thus the products can be stored longer. Ash Content Based on Table 10, the ash content of dietary fiber-rich drink powder ranged from 0.45 to 0.60%. The ash come from the minerals contained in pumpkin. carrot. guava. and apple in the form of calcium. phosphorus. and iron, same as the ash content of the mineral content of a food (Winarno. 1997). Sugar flour used as sweetener and fillers also contain phosphorus. iron. and copper. Therefore ash content of the products were increased. For comparison, ash content in apricot and cherry juice on Aider and de Halleux (2008) research were 0.47% and 0.65%. This value was close to the ash content in the drink powder in this study. Protein Content Dietary fiber-rich drink powder produce had protein content ranged from 3.27 to 4.12%. while protein content in apricot and cherry juice were 0.59% and 0.51% (Aider and de Halleus. 2008). The addition of skim milk as a filler material probably greatly affected the value of protein of drink powder produced, compared to the results of Aider and de Halleux (2008) research which was come from protein content of apricot and cherry fruit. Sugar Content Sugar content of rich-dietary fiber drink powder from this study ranged from 27.25 to 46.55%. High sugar levels due to the addition of sugar in each formulation. Glucose values between formula III and V compared with formula VIII and X had a big difference. Formula III and V had high levels of glucose; 45.75% and 46.55%. respectively. While the formula VIII and X had the sugar content 28.11% and 27.25% respectively. This was due to 481

differences in the amount of sugar which was added to the formula III and V compared with formula VIII and X. In the formula III and V, weight of sugar that been added was 400 g, whereas in the formula VIII and X sugar added was 250 g. High levels of sugar in the beverage powder also has functions as a preservative (Winarno. 1997). Food Dietary Fiber Content Based on analysis result, it was found that the highest level of soluble dietary fiber (SDF) went to formula III (4.24%), each dietary fiber source had the same composition in the formula. The highest levels of insoluble dietary fiber (IDF) went to the formula X (12.4%). The biggest sources composition of dietary fiber probably was from carrot. Highest levels of total dietary fiber (TDF) was from the formula X (15.22%). Formula X was a formula that has the largest component of the dietary fiber source used i.e. carrot. In addition to carrots and yellow pumpkin, apple are also a source of dietary fiber that contain bioactive components such as flavonoids, polyphenols and carotenoids which become a very good source of dietary fiber (ML Sudha et al.. 2007). The research results of Tangkanakul et al. (2000) showed that the acceptable ratio of drink powder and water was 1 part of drink powder versus 4 parts of water. If one serving is one cup (250 ml), then the necessary drink powder drink as much as 50 g. Based on this, formula with the highest dietary fiber content of food (formula X) in a single serving had sufficient dietary fiber of 7.6 g. It has fulfilled about 25.33% the need of dietary fiber in a day. CONCLUSION Formula of drink powder that had the highest dietary fiber content (15.2%) was the formula X, with the composition of carrots 250 g (50%), yellow pumpkin 125 g (25%), apple 62.5 g (12.5%), and guava 62.5 g (12.5%). Formula X could cover 76% the requirements of the average of dietary fiber intake average in Indonesia's daily diets (approximately 20 g/kg/day). Panelists acceptance level to taste, color, and aroma on the formula X is the best. Formula X contained 3.42% of protein; 0.8016 g/ml of bulk density. 45.78% sugar content. 3.79% of moisture and 0.53% of ash. In one serving. a total of 250 ml (drink powder with water ratio was 1:4), drink powder could meet the needs of 7.6 g dietary fiber. In a day, it need twice servings a day to meet the dietary fiber need of 15.2 g equivalent to 50.66% of the dietary fiber requirements. REFERENCES American Association of Cereal Chemist (AACC) 2001. The Definition of dietary fiber. Cereal World. Aider, M. and de Halleux, D. 2008. Production of concentrated cherry and apricot juices by cryoconcentration technology. J.of LWT Food Science and Technology. 41(2008): 1768-1775. Anggrahini S., I. Ratnawati and A. Murdijati. 2006. Pengkayaan -Karoten Mi Ubi Kayu dengan Tepung Labu Kuning (Cucurbita moschata). Majalah Ilmu dan Teknologi Pertanian. Vol. XXVI No. 2:81-82. Anonymous. 2001. hhtp://www.gigara.com/pated/etdgs01html. Diakses tanggal 5 Mei 2002. Anonymous. 2002. hhtp://nusaindah.tripod.com Diakses tanggal 10 Agustus 2002. AOAC. 1995. Official Method of Analysis. 16 th ed. AOAC International. Gaithhersburg. Maryland. 482

Asp, N. G., Johansson, C.G., Hallmer, C.C. and Siljestrom. 1983. Rapid Enzymtic Assay of Insoluble and Soluble Dietray Dietary dietary fiber. J. Agric. Food Chem. 31: 476-482. deman, J.M. 1989. Kimia Makanan. terjemahan K. Padmawinata. Penerbit ITB. Bandung. Floch, M.H. 1981. Nutrition and Diet Therapi in Gastroinstestinal Disease. New York. Ginting, M.O. 2004. Pengaruh Kondisi Pengeringan Terhadap Kualitas Serbuk Minuman Labu Kuning. Skripsi. Departemen Teknologi Industri Pertanian. FATETA. IPB. Bogor. Glicksman, M. 1969. Gum Technology in the Food Industry. Academic Press. New York. Keller, H. 1998. Re-emergence of the threat of vitamin A deficiency. Crisis Bulletin. Year 1. Issue 2. October 1998. Helen Keller Int. Ind. Helen Keller International. Page:1-3. Middleton, J. T. 1977. Encyclopedia of Food. Agriculture and Nutrition. Mc-Graw Hill. New York. Sudha, M.L. Baskaran V., Leelavathi L. 2007. Apple pomace as a source of dietary dietary dietary fiber and polyphenols and its effect on the rheological characteristics and cake making. J.of Food Chemistry. Vol. 104 (2007): 686-692. Moehyi, S. 1992. Penyelenggaran Makanan Institusi dan Jasa Boga. Bharata. Jakarta. Pahlevie, I. 2011. Pengaruh Perlakuan Pengukusan dan Penentuan Proporsi Sari Buah Labu Kuning (Cucurbita moschata) dalam Pembuatan Minuman Ringan. Skripsi. Departemen Teknologi Hasil Pertanian. Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian Universitas Jember. Jember. Paleg, M and Bagley, E.B. 1983. Physical Properties of Foods. AVI Publishing Co. Inc. Wetsport. Connecticut. Pantastico, B. 1986. Fisiologi Pasca Panen. Penanganan dan Pemanfaatan Buah-buahan dan Sayur-sayuran Tropika dan Subtropika. terjemahan Kamariyani. Gajah Mada University Press. Yogyakarta. Prasanappa, G and Chandrasekhar. 1972. Preccooked Ball Ahar and Indian Multipurpose Food. J. Food Science and Tech. Vol. 12. 9: 174. Setiawan, A.S dan Trisnawati, Y. 1983. Pare dan Labu. Penebar Swadaya. Jakarta. Soekarto, S.T. 1985. Penilaian Organoleptik. Penerbit Bharata Karya Aksara. Jakarta. Storey, M.K., Forshee, R.A., and Anderson, P.A. 2006. Drink consumption in the US population. J.of the American Dietetic Association. 106 (12): 1992-2000. Sudarmadji, S. 1989. Analisis Bahan Makanan dan Pertanian. Penerbit Liberty. Yogyakarta. Supriadi, A. 1988. Pengaruh Jenis Jambu Biji. Konsentrasi Sodium Metabisulfit dan Suhu Pengeringan Beku terhadap Mutu Puree Instant Jambu Biji. Skripsi. Jurusan Teknologi Pangan dan Gizi. Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor. Tangkunakul, Plernachi, H., and Capra K. 2000. Development of Instant High Dietary dietary fiber Processed Food. Bangkok. Winarno, F.G. 1997. Kimia Pangan dan Gizi. PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta. Yoshido, S., D.A. Forno, Cock, J.H., and Gomez, K.A. 1972. Laboratory Manual For Physiological Studies of Rice. The International Rice Research Institute. Los Banos. Phillipines. 483

Tables: Tabel 1. Commodities combined with pumpkin No. Commodities Dietary fiber content (per 100 g of material) 1. Guava 5.6 g* 2. Red bean 4.5 g** 3. Apple 3.9 g** 4. Carrot 2.9 g*** Sources: * Anonymous (2002), **Anonymous (2001), ***Floch, M.H (1981). Table 2. Formula based on combination of puree mixtures. Formula Puree mixture combination Ratios (%w/w) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Pumpkin: Guava: Apples Pumpkin Yellow: Carrots: Red Beans Yellow pumpkin: Guava: Carrots Pumpkin Yellow: Red Beans: Apples Pumpkin Yellow: Carrots: Guava: Apples Yellow pumpkin: Apples: Carrots Yellow pumpkin: Guava: Red Beans: Carrots Yellow pumpkin: Guava: Red Beans Table 3. Comparison of dietary dietary fiber source materials. 50: 25: 25 50: 25: 25 50: 25: 25 50: 25: 25 25: 25: 25: 25 50: 25: 25 25: 25: 25: 25 50: 25: 25 No. Dietary fiber source Comparation (%w/w) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. pumpkin: carrot: apple: guava pumpkin: carrot: apple: guava pumpkin: carrot: apple: guava pumpkin: carrot: apple: guava pumpkin: carrot: apple: guava Table 4. Formulations of rich dietary fiber drink powder made of pumpkin Materials Formula 12.5: 12.5: 25: 50 12.5: 12.5: 50: 25 25: 25: 25: 25 50: 25: 12.5: 12.5 25: 50: 12.5: 12.5 I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X Mixture of puree (% w/w) 40 40 40 40 40 50 50 50 50 50 Sugar flour (% w/w) 40 40 40 40 40 25 25 25 25 25 Skim milk (% w/w) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Arabic gum (% w/w) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Moisture (% w/w) 6 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 8 484

Table 5. Sensory evaluation results against early formula. Formula Average score of general acceptance Taste Color Aroma Texture 1 3.21 3.50 3.57 3.43 2 2.79 2.64 3.00 3.14 3 3.14 4.14 3.43 3.93 4 2.86 2.36 3.00 3.14 5 3.36 3.71 3.57 3.29 6 3.50 3.29 3.00 3.64 7 2.00 1.86 2.50 2.93 8 2.50 2.43 2.86 3.29 Table 6. Weighting Test Results. Formula Total Multiplication Between Weight With Value Rating Best to- 1 6.48 3 2 3.59 6 3 6.65 2 4 3.84 5 5 6.70 1 6 6.23 4 7 1.00 8 8 2.65 7 Table 7. Results of chemical analysis of each puree. Analysis Yellow pumpkin Carrot Apple Guava Moisture (%) 93.29 92.84 90.99 90.06 Ash (%) 0.31 0.58 0.34 0.42 Protein (%) 0.87 0.82 0.14 0.73 Fat (%) 0.44 0.51 0.48 0.23 Food dietary fiber (%) 0.90 2.43 3.54 5.47 485

Table 8. Result of sensory evaluation of drink powder. Formula Average Score of Acceptance Taste Color Aroma I 2.93 ab 3.03 bc 3.10 a II 2.93 ab 2.52 bc 2.97 a III 3.45 ab 3.14 d 2.86 a IV 2.93 ab 2.79 a 3.07 a V 3.24 ab 3.21 c 3.17 a VI 2.79 b 3.21 d 3.17 a VII 3.14 b 3.03 bc 3.00 a VIII 3.17 ab 3.28 bc 3.10 a IX 2.93 a 3.62 bc 3.14 a X 3.45 ab 3.76 ab 3.27 a Note: Number followed by different letters in the same column showed a significant effect of the interaction between treatment at the 5% level test of Duncan. Tabel 9. Weighting test results. Formula Total Multiplication Between Weight With Value Rating Best to- I 3.33 9 II 2.51 10 III 6.10 4 IV 3.76 8 V 7.59 2 VI 4.73 6 VII 4.59 7 VIII 6.83 3 IX 5.98 5 X 9.58 1 Table 10. Physico-chemical analysis results. Parameter Analysis Results Formula III Formula V Formula VIII Formula X Yield (%) 40.89 34.22 45.39 31.28 Bulk density (g/ml) 0.80 0.79 0.82 0.77 Viscosity (cp) 6 5 7 5.5 ph 6.18 6.01 6.14 6.49 Moisture (% db) 3.79 3.85 4.07 3.95 Ash (% db) 0.53 0.45 0.55 0.60 Protein (% db) 3.42 4.12 3.27 4.11 Sugar total(% db) 45.78 46.55 28.11 27.25 Food dietary dietary fibers (%) Dissolved food dietary fiber Non-dissolved food dietary fiber 4.24 8.79 13.03 3.84 8.94 12.78 2.76 11.78 14.54 2.81 12.41 15.22 486