DAFTAR PUSTAKA. Alais C, Linden G Food Biochemistry. London: Ellis Harwood

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Alais C, Linden G. 1991. Food Biochemistry. London: Ellis Harwood. Allen LH, Wood JR. 1994. Calsium and Phosporus. Dalam Modern Nutrition in Health and Disease ed. 8 vol 1. Shils EM, Olsen JA, Shilke M (eds). Lea & Febringer. USA. Almatsier S. 2002. Prinsip Dasar Ilmu Gizi. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Almond N. 1989. Biscuits, Cookies and Crackers. London: Apllied Science Publishers. Anggorodi R. 1985. Ilmu Makanan Ternak Umum. Jakarta: PT Gramedia. Anggraeni D. 2003. Analisa Mineral Plasma Darah. Bogor: Fakultas Peternakan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Anonim 1981. Pedoman Pembuatan Roti dan Kue. Jakarta: Penerbit Djambatan. Anonim 1992. Pengolahan Limbah. Pertemuan Teknis Pembinaan Mutu Hasil Perikanan dan Latihan Penerapan HACCP. Jakarata: Ditjen Perikanan. Anonim 2000. Perbedaan antara Margarine dan Mentega. www.clickwok.com [5 April 2007]. Anwar F. 1990. Mempelajari sifat fisik, organoleptik dan nilai gizi protein makanan bayi dari campuran tepung beras konsentrat protein jagung dan tepung tempe [tesis]. Bogor: Program Pascasarjana, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Apriyantono A, Fardiaz D, Puspitasari NL, Sedarwati, Budiyanto S. 1989. Analisis Pangan. Bogor: Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Asni Y. 2004. Studi pembuatan biskuit dengan penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius hipothalmus) [skripsi]. Bogor: Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Astawan M. 1999. Membuat Mi dan Bihun. Jakarta: Penebar Swadaya. Blaney S, Zee JA, Mongeau R, Marin J. 1996. Combined effect of various tiped of dietary fiber and protein on in vitro calsium availability. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44 : 3587-3590. Booth RG. 1990. Snack Food. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

[BPPIS] Badan Penelitian Pengembangan Industri Surabaya 1989. Pembuatan Prototipe Alat Uji Derajat Putih tepung Tapioka. Surabaya. Buckle KA, Edward RA, Fleet GH, Wootton N. 1987. Food Science. Edisi Kedua. Penerjemah: Purnomo H, Adiono. Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Indonesia (UI Press). Charley H. 1982. Food Science. 2nd ed. New York: Jhon Wiley and Sons. Clydesdale FM. 1988. Minerals : Their chemistry and fate in food. Dalam Smith KT. (ed). Trace Mineral in Foods. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc. de Man JM. 1997. Principles of Food Chemistry. Edisi kedua. Penerjemah: Padmawinata K. Bandung : Penerbit Institut Teknologi Bandung. Desrosier NW. 1988. The Technology of Food Preservation. Penerjemah: Muljohardjo M. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia (UI Press) Faridah DN, Kusumaningrum HD, Wulandari N, Indrasti D. 2006. Modul Praktikum Analisis Pangan. Bogor: Departemen Ilmu dan Teknologi Pangan, Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian, Intitut Pertanian Bogor. Faridi H, Faubion JM. 1990. Dough Rheology and Baked Product Texture. New York: Nostrand Reinhold. Fardiaz D, Andarwulan N, Wijaya H, Puspitasri LN. 1992. Petunjuk Laboratorium: Teknik Analisis Sifat Kimia dan Fungsional Komponen Pangan. Bogor: Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Fox MRS. 1988. Nutrient Interaction. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc. Gaman PM, Sherrington KB. 1990. The Science of Food: An Introduction of Food Science, Nutrition and Microbiology. 3rd ed. Oxford: Pergamon Press. Greger JL. 1999. Nondigestable carbohydrates and mineral bioavailability. Am. J. Clin. Nutr : 0022-3166:1434S-1456S. Groff JL, Gropper SS. 2001. Advanced Nutrition and Human Metabolism. Belmont:Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Guthrie HA. 1975. Introductory Nutrition. Saint Louis: Mosby Company. Halver JE. 1989. Fish Nutrition. New York: Academic Press, Inc. Hardinsyah, Martianto D. 1992. Gizi Terapan. Bogor: Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Hardman TM. 1989. Water and Food Quality. London: Elsevier Apllied Science.

Harland FB, Oberleas D. 2001. Effect of dietary fiber and phytat in the homeostatis and bioavailability of mineral. Di dalam: Spiller AG, editors. Handbooks of Dietary Fiber in Human Nutrition 3rd Edition. USA: Library of Congress. Iodarine A, Khan MJ, Weber CW. 1996. In vitro binding capasity of wheat bran, rice bran and oat fiber for Ca, Mg, Cu and Zn alone and in different combination. J Agric. Food Chem. 44: 2067-2072. [ISA] International Seafood of Alaska. 2002. Analysis of Fish Meal. www.kodiak.com [5 April 2007]. Kaup SM, Greger JL, Lee K. 1991. Nutritional evaluation with animal model of cottage cheese fortified with calcium and guar gum. J. Food Sci. 56(3) : 692-695. Kaplan A. 1971. Element of Food Production and Baking. New York: ITT Educational Service Inc. Karyadi D, Muhilal. 1996. Kecukupan Gizi yang Dianjurkan. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Khairuman, Suhendra. 2002. Budidaya Patin Secara Intensif. Jakarta: Agro Media Pustaka. Lehninger AL. 1984. Principles of Biochemistry. Penerjemah: Thenawidjaja M. Jakarta: Penerbit Erlangga. Lin CS, Zayas JF. 1987. Functionality of defatted corn germ proteins in a model system: Fat binding capacity and water retention. J. Food Sci. 52:13081311. Linder MC. 1982. Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism. Penerjemah : Parakkasi A. Jakarta: UI Press. Lovell T. 1989. Nutrition and Feeding on Fish. New York: AVI Book Publishing by Van Nostrand Reinhold. Lutwak L. 1982. Dietary calcium: Source, interaction with other nutrients and relationship to dental, bone and kidney disease. Dalam Beittz DC, Nansen RC (eds). Animal Products in Human Nutrition. New York:Academic Press. Mahani. 1999. Pembuatan cookies yang diperkaya dengan kalsium [skripsi]. Bogor: Jurusan Gizi Masyarakat dan Sumberdaya Keluarga, Fakultas Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Manley DJR. 1983. Technology of Biscuits, Crackers and Cookies. Chichester: Ellis Horwood Limited.

Martinez I, Santaella M, Ros G, Periago MJ. 1998. Content and in Vitro availibility of Fe, Zn and P in homogenized fish-base weaning food after bone addition. Food Chem. 63: 299-305. Matz SA, Matz TD. 1978. Cookies and Crackers Technology. Westport Connecticut: The AVI Publishing Company Inc. Matz SA. 1993. Snack Food Technology. 3rd (edition). Mc Allen, Texas: PanTech International, Inc. Maynard LA, Loosli JK. 1956. Animal Nutrition. 4th (edition). New York: Mc Graw Hill Book Company. Miller DD. 1989. Calsium in the diet: Food source, recommended intake, and nutritional bioavailability. Di dalam : Fennema OR (eds). Food Chemistry. 3th Edition. New York: Cornell University. Morrison, FB. 1958. Feed and Feeding. Nineth Edition. Washington DC: The Morrison Research Council, National Academy of Science. Muchtadi TR, Sugiyono. 1989. Teknologi Proses Pengolahan Pangan. Bogor: Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Muchtadi D, Palupi NS, Astawan M. 1993. Metabolisma Zat Gizi. Jakarta. Pustaka Sinar Harapan. Mulia. 2004. Kajian potensi limbah tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) sebagai altnernatif sumber kalsium dalam pembuatan mi kering [skripsi]. Bogor: Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Nasution A. 1980. Metode Penilaian Cita Rasa I. Bogor: Departemen Ilmu Kesejahteraan Keluarga, Fakultas Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Newman MC, Jagoe CH. 1994. Ligands and the Bioavailibility of Metals in Aquatic Environments. Boca Raton : CRC Press, Lewis Publishers. Nurdiani R. 2003. Pemanfaatan tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sutchi) untuk meningkatkan kandungan kalsium susu kacang hijau [skripsi]. Bogor: Jurusan Gizi Masyarakat dan Sumberdaya Keluarga. Fakultas Pertanian. Institut Pertanian Bogor. O’Dell BL. 1984. Bioavailability of trace elements. Nutr Rev.42:301-308. Piliang WG, Djojosoebagio S. 2006. Fisiologi Nutrisi,Volume II. Bogor: IPB Press. Purnawijayanti HA. 2001. Sanitasi, Higiene dan Keselamatan Kerja dalam Pengolahan Makanan. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Purnomo H 1995. Aktivitas Air dan Peranannya dalam Pengawetan Pangan. Jakarata: Penerbit Universitas indonesia (UI Press). Rahayu WP. 2001. Penuntun Praktikum Penilaian Organoleptik. Bogor: Departemen Teknologi Pangan dan Gizi, Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Rangganan S. 1986. Hand Book of Analysis and Quality Control for Fruit and Vegetable Product. New Delhi: Tata Mc Graw Hill Publ. Co. Ltd. Rasyaf M. 1990. Bahan Makanan Unggas di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Kanisius. Reitz LL, Smith WH, Plumlee MP. 1987. A Simple Wet Oxidation Procedure for Biological Materials. West Lafayette: Animal Science Department. Purdue University. Saanin H. 1984. Taksonomi dan Kunci Identifikasi Ikan. Jakarta: Bina Cipta. Santoso J. 2003. Studies on nutritional components and antioksidants activity in several Indonesian seaweeds [disertasi]. Tokyo: Laboratory Chemistry of Food and Nutrition, Department of Food Science and Technology, Tokyo University of Fisheries. Santoso J, Gunji S, Yoshie-Stark Y, Suzuki T. 2006. Mineral content of Indonesian seaweeds and mineral solubility affected by basic cooking. Food Sci. Tech. Res. 12: 59-66. Sediaoetama AD. 2006. Ilmu Gizi: untuk Mahasiswa dan Profesi, Jilid I. Jakarta: Dian Rakyat. [SNI] Standar Nasional Indonesia 1992. Mutu dan Cara Uji Biskuit. SNI 01-29731992. Jakarta: Dewan Standarisasi Nasional. Soedarno YE. 1998. Substitusi parsial tepung terigu dengan tepung asia dan tepung kecamba kacang hijau dalam pembuatan cookies [skripsi]. Bogor: Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian. Institut Pertanian Bogor. Soekarto ST. 1985. Penilaian Organoleptik untuk Industri Pangan dan Hasil Pertanian. Jakarta: Bhratara Karya Aksara. Spiller AG. 2001. Definition of Dietary Fiber. Di Dalam: Spiller AG, (ed). Handbooks of Dietary Fiber in Human Nutrition 3rd Edition. USA: Library of Congress. Steel RD, Torrie JH. 1993. Prinsip dan Prosedur Statistik Suatu Pendekatan Biometrik. Penerjemah : Sumantri B. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Subasinghe S. 1996. Inovative and value-added tuna product and markets. Infofish International. Number 1/96. January/February.

Sukarni M, Kusno SR. 1980. Metode Penilaian Citarasa II. Bogor: Departemen Ilmu Kesejahteraan Keluarga, Fakultas Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Sulaeman A, Anwar F, Rimbawan dan Marliyati SA. 1995. Metode Penetapan Zat Gizi. Bogor: Jurusan Gizi Masyarakat dan Sumberdaya Keluarga. Fakultas Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Sunaryo E. 1985. Pengolahan Produk Serealia dan Biji-bijian. Bogor: Jurusan Teknologi Pangan dan Gizi, Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Susanto H, Amri K. 1997. Budidaya Ikan Patin. Jakarta: Penebar Swadaya. Tabakaka R. 2004. Pemanfaatan tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) sebagai bahan tambahan kerupuk [skripsi]. Bogor: Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Tanuwidjaya N. 2002. Pemanfaatan tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius pangasius Ham Buch) dalam pembuatan mi kering [skripsi]. Karawaci: Universitas Pelita Harapan. Torre M, Rodriquez RA, Calixto-Saura F. 1995. Interaction of Fe (II) and Fe (III) with high dietary fibre materials: A phsycochemical approach. Food Chem. 5: 23-31. Urbano MG, Goni I. 2002. Bioavailability of nutrition in rats fed on edible seaweeds, nori (Porphyra tenera) and wakame (Undaria pinnatifida) as a source of dietary fiber. Food Chem.76: 281-286. Van

Mosevelde B. 1997. Culinary Curies: Calsium www.foodproductiondesign.com [ 15 Desember 2006].

Fortification.

Vail GE, Philips JA, Rust LO, Griswold RM, Justin M. 1978. Foods. 7th (eds). Boston: Houngthon Mifflin Company. Watzke HJ. 1988. Impact of processing on bioavailability examples of minerals in foods. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 8:320-327. Whiteley PR. 1971. Biscuit Manufactory. London: Applied Science Publishing. Widya Karya Pangan dan Gizi. 2004. Risalah Widya Karya Pangan dan Gizi IV. Jakarta: Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia. Winarno FG, Fardiaz S. 1973. Dasar Teknologi Pangan. Bogor: Fakultas Teknologi dan Mekanisasi Pertanian, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Winarno FG. 1985. Limbah Pertanian. Jakarta: Kantor Menteri Muda Urusan Peningkatan Produksi Pangan.

Winarno FG. 2002. Kimia Pangan dan Gizi. Jakarta: PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Wirakartakusumah MA, Abdullah K, Syarif AM. 1992. Sifat Fisik Bahan Pangan. Bogor: Pusat Antar Universitas Pangan dan Gizi, Institut Pertanian Bogor. Yoshie Y, Suzuki T, Clydesdale FM. 1997. Iron solubility from seafoods with added iron and organic acid under stimulated gastrointestinal conditional. J. Food Quality. 20: 235-246.

Lampiran 1 Lembar penilaian organoleptik Nama panelis : Jenis produk : Biskuit Tgl penilaian : Instruksi : Saudara dimohonkan untuk memberikan penilaian terhadap kelima macam sampel biskuit yang ada sesuai dengan tingkat kesukaan saudara. Isilah nilai tingkat kesukaan pada kolom yang disediakan. Penilaian : Dengan skala 1-7 A. Penampakan 7 : Sangat rapih 6 : Rapih 5 : Agak rapih 4 : Biasa 3 : Agak kurang rapih 2 : Tidak rapih 1 : Sangat tidak rapih C. Rasa 7 : Sangat enak 6 : Enak 5 : Agak Enak 4 : Biasa 3 : Agak kurang Enak 2 : Tidak enak 1 : Sangat tidak enak

B. Warna 7 : Coklat 6 : Kuning kecoklatan 5 : Kuning 4 : Agak kekuningan 3 : Agak hangus 2 : Hangus 1 : Sangat hangus D. Aroma 7 : Sangat harum 6 : Harum 5 : Agak harum 4 : Biasa 3 : Agak kurang harum 2 : Tidak harum 1 : Sangat tidak harum

Parameter 351 Penampakan Warna Rasa Aroma Tekstur Komentar panelis :

287

E. Tekstur 7 : Sangat Renyah 6 : Renyah 5 : Agak Renyah 4 : Biasa 3 : Agak keras 2 : Keras 1 : Sangat keras

Kode sampel 425

571

735

Lampiran 2 Lembar isian uji organoleptik biskuit tulang ikan patin terbaik dengan biskuit komersial (biskuit yang ada di pasaran). Nama Panelis

:

Hari/tanggal

:

Produk

: Biskuit

Instruksi

: Bandingkan Warna, Kerenyahan, Aroma dan Penampakan produk yang disajikan terhadap produk pembanding, berilah tanda X (silang) pada pernyataan yang sesuai dengan penilaian saudara.

Kode produk

:

Kode pembanding : Warna Sangat lebih cerah

Kerenyahan Sangat lebih renyah

Lebih cerah

Lebih renyah

Agak lebih cerah

Agak lebih renyah

Tidak berbeda

Tidak berbeda

Agak kurang cerah

Agak kurang renyah

Kurang cerah

Kurang renyah

Sangat kurang cerah

Sangat kurang renyah

Rasa Sangat lebih enak

Penampakan Sangat lebih rapih

Lebih enak

Lebih rapih

Agak lebih enak

Agak lebih rapih

Tidak berbeda

Tidak berbeda

Agak kurang enak

Agak kurang rapih

Kurang enak

Kurang rapih

Sangat kurang enak

Sangat kurang rapih

Komentar panelis :

Lampiran 3 Analisis ragam derajat putih tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

0,395

1

0,395

2,44

0,193

0,649

4

0,162

1,044

5

Lampiran 4 Uji T daya serap air tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangsius sp) Group Statistics kriteria kering basah

daya_serap_air

N 3 3

Mean .485367 .627667

Std. Deviation .0073460 .0142339

Std. Error Mean .0042412 .0082179

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

F daya_serap_ Equal varianc assumed Equal varianc not assumed

2.075

Sig.

t-test for Equality of Means

t

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Mean Std. Error Sig. (2-tailed)Difference Difference Lower Upper

df

.223 -15.387

4

.000 .1423000 .0092478 1679761 1166239

-15.387

2.995

.001 .1423000 .0092478 1717595 1128405

Karena pada Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances nilai Sig. > 0.05. artinya asumsi kehomogenan ragam terpenuhi, sehingga kita pakai Equal variances assumed. Pada t-test for Equality of Means nilai Sig. < 0.05 kesimpulannya tolak H0 artinya Metode kering dan basah berbeda nyata pada taraf Alpha 5%. Lampiran 5 Analisis ragam densitas kamba tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

0,000000

1

0,000000

0,00

1,000

0,000733

4

0,000183

0,000733

5

Lampiran 6 Uji T kadar air tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Group Statistics

kadar_air

kriteria kering basah

N 3 3

Mean .065333 .049467

Std. Deviation .0004619 .0023438

Std. Error Mean .0002667 .0013532


F kadar_ai Equal varianc assumed Equal varianc not assumed

7.817

Sig.


t

.049


df

11.504

4

.000 .0158667 .0013792 0120374 0196960

11.504

2.155

.006 .0158667 .0013792 0103235 0214099

Karena pada Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances nilai Sig. < 0.05. artinya asumsi kehomogenan ragam tidak terpenuhi, sehingga kita pakai Equal variances not assumed. Pada t-test for Equality of Means nilai Sig. < 0.05 kesimpulannya tolak H0 artinya Metode kering dan basah berbeda nyata pada taraf Alpha 5%. Lampiran 7 Analisis ragam kadar abu tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Group Statistics

kadar_abu


N 3 3

Mean .563833 .581467

Std. Deviation .0024007 .0053725

Std. Error Mean .0013860 .0031018


F kadar_abu Equal variance assumed Equal variance not assumed

2.700

Sig. .176


t

Mean Std. Error Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference

df

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper

-5.190

4

.007 -.0176333 .0033974 0270660 0082007

-5.190

2.768

.017 -.0176333 .0033974 0289763 0062904

Karena pada Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances nilai Sig. > 0.05. artinya asumsi kehomogenan ragam terpenuhi, sehingga kita pakai Equal variances assumed. Pada t-test for Equality of Means nilai Sig. < 0.05 kesimpulannya tolak H0 artinya Metode kering dan basah berbeda nyata pada taraf Alpha 5%.

Lampiran 8 Analisis ragam kadar kalsium tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

631

1

631

0,70

0,451

3617

4

904

4248

5

Lampiran 9 Analisis ragam kadar fosfor tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

162,9

1

162,9

2,01

0,229

324,1

4

81,0

486,9

5

Lampiran 10 Analisis ragam nilai pH tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Group Statistics

pH


N

Mean .075633 .078767

3 3

Std. Deviation .0010970 .0005132

Std. Error Mean .0006333 .0002963


pH

F Equal variance 3.571 assumed Equal variance not assumed

Sig. .132


t


df

-4.481

4

.011 .0031333 .0006992 0050746 0011920

-4.481

2.835

.023 .0031333 .0006992 0054334 0008332

Karena pada Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances nilai Sig. > 0.05. artinya asumsi kehomogenan ragam terpenuhi, sehingga kita pakai Equal variances assumed. Pada t-test for Equality of Means nilai Sig. < 0.05 kesimpulannya tolak H0 artinya Metode kering dan basah berbeda nyata pada taraf Alpha 5%.

Lampiran 11 Analisis ragam (Pangasius sp)

kadar

protein

tepung

tulang

ikan

patin

Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

2,907

1

2,907

6,75

0,122

0,861

2

0,431

3,768

3

Lampiran 12 Analisis ragam kadar lemak tepung tulang ikan patin (Pangasius sp) Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

0,4032

1

0,4032

7,31

0,114

0,1103

2

0,0551

0,5135

3

Lampiran 13 Data uji organoleptik penampakan biskuit Biskuit K A B C 1 6 6 6 3 2 5 5 5 5 3 6 7 7 6 4 6 6 6 5 5 7 7 6 5 6 7 7 7 7 7 6 7 7 6 8 6 6 5 5 9 6 7 5 4 10 6 7 6 6 11 6 6 6 7 12 6 5 6 5 13 7 6 6 7 14 5 7 5 6 15 7 5 5 6 16 5 6 6 6 17 7 6 4 4 18 4 7 6 6 19 4 6 6 4 20 5 5 5 5 21 5 6 4 4 22 6 4 6 3 23 6 4 6 4 24 6 7 7 7 25 6 7 5 5 26 4 5 7 4 27 6 5 5 7 28 6 5 4 3 29 4 5 5 6 30 7 6 6 6 K = Kontrol / tidak ada penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (0%) A = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% B = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% C = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 6% D = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 8% Panelis

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

Lampiran 14 Data uji organoleptik warna biskuit Biskuit K A B C 1 6 6 6 4 2 5 6 6 7 3 6 6 6 7 4 6 6 7 3 5 7 7 6 6 6 7 7 6 7 7 6 7 7 6 8 6 6 6 6 9 7 6 5 4 10 6 7 7 6 11 7 7 6 7 12 5 4 6 5 13 4 7 6 5 14 7 7 5 6 15 5 6 6 5 16 7 6 6 6 17 5 6 5 4 18 7 7 5 6 19 4 6 6 4 20 4 4 5 5 21 5 6 3 4 22 6 5 5 5 23 5 5 6 5 24 6 7 7 7 25 6 7 5 5 26 6 4 7 3 27 6 5 5 7 28 6 5 4 3 29 5 4 4 6 30 7 6 6 6 K = Kontrol / tidak ada penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (0%) A = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% B = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% C = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 6% D = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 8% Panelis

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

Lampiran 15 Data uji organoleptik aroma biskuit Biskuit K A B C 1 7 7 7 4 2 5 6 7 7 3 6 7 6 5 4 4 7 6 4 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 5 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 6 6 6 6 9 4 6 6 5 10 6 6 6 6 11 6 6 7 6 12 4 7 5 4 13 4 6 7 6 14 5 6 7 7 15 4 7 6 6 16 6 7 7 6 17 6 6 6 5 18 7 7 7 6 19 5 7 6 4 20 5 6 6 4 21 3 7 6 6 22 5 7 6 5 23 6 6 6 6 24 6 5 6 7 25 6 7 6 6 26 6 6 6 4 27 7 6 6 6 28 5 6 6 6 29 4 6 6 5 30 7 7 7 6 K = Kontrol / tidak ada penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (0%) A = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% B = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% C = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 6% D = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 8% Panelis

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

Lampiran 16 Data uji organoleptik tekstur biskuit Biskuit K A B C 1 7 7 6 2 2 7 7 6 7 3 7 7 7 6 4 6 7 6 2 5 6 7 6 4 6 6 7 6 6 7 6 6 7 7 8 6 7 6 5 9 6 6 6 5 10 6 7 6 6 11 7 7 6 7 12 5 7 6 2 13 7 6 6 5 14 7 7 7 7 15 4 7 6 6 16 6 7 6 7 17 6 6 5 5 18 7 7 5 6 19 4 7 6 5 20 6 7 6 4 21 4 7 6 6 22 6 7 6 5 23 5 7 6 6 24 5 7 6 7 25 5 6 6 3 26 3 7 7 6 27 6 6 5 4 28 6 7 6 5 29 5 7 6 4 30 5 7 6 5 K = Kontrol / tidak ada penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (0%) A = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% B = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% C = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 6% D = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 8% Panelis

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

Lampiran 17 Data uji organoleptik rasa biskuit Biskuit K A B C 1 6 7 7 4 2 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 6 6 4 3 7 5 5 5 7 7 6 6 6 7 6 6 6 7 6 7 6 7 8 7 6 5 6 9 4 7 5 5 10 7 6 6 6 11 7 7 6 7 12 5 4 6 3 13 7 7 6 6 14 7 7 7 6 15 4 7 6 4 16 6 7 7 6 17 6 7 6 6 18 7 7 6 5 19 3 7 7 5 20 5 7 6 7 21 7 7 6 6 22 6 7 6 5 23 4 7 5 6 24 4 6 6 7 25 6 7 6 6 26 3 6 7 5 27 6 7 6 6 28 5 6 6 4 29 4 7 6 5 30 4 4 6 6 K = Kontrol / tidak ada penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin (0%) A = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% B = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% C = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 6% D = Penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 8% Panelis

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

Lampiran 18 Data uji perbandingan pasangan biskuit A Panelis 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

Penampakan 1 2 -1 2 -1 2 -1 2 0 1 3 2 1 1 -1 0 2 2 1 1 -1 1 2 2 0 -1 2 1 1 0

Parameter Warna Kerenyahan 3 -1 2 -1 -1 0 3 -1 2 -1 2 -1 2 -1 3 -1 2 -2 2 -2 2 -1 1 -1 3 -1 2 -2 2 0 1 0 1 -1 2 1 2 -1 3 -1 -1 -1 2 1 1 -1 2 -2 0 -1 0 -2 2 1 2 -2 0 -1 2 0

Rasa 1 1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 -1 0 1 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 0

Lampiran 19 Data uji perbandingan pasangan biskuit B Panelis 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

Penampakan 0 2 -1 2 -1 2 1 2 -1 1 3 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 2 2 1 1 -1 1 1 1 0

Parameter Warna Kerenyahan 1 -2 2 -2 1 0 3 -2 1 -1 3 -1 2 -1 2 1 1 -1 1 -1 2 -1 1 -1 2 1 3 -1 1 1 2 -1 2 -1 1 2 2 -1 3 -2 0 0 3 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 0 -2 2 1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1

Rasa 1 0 1 -1 -1 2 0 2 -1 1 2 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 -1 -1 2 -1 0 0 0 -1 -1 -1

Lampiran 20 Hasil uji Kruskal Wallis terhadap penampakan biskuit Rank Penampakan

Perlakuan 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% Total

N 30 30 30 30 30 150

Mean Rank 80.83 87.17 75.53 62.52 71.45

Test statistics ab Penampakan 6.068 4 .193

Chi-square df Asymp.Sig a. Kruskal Wallis Test b. Grouping Variable : Perlakuan

Lampiran 21 Hasil uji Kruskal Wallis terhadap warna biskuit Rank Warna


N 30 30 30 30 30 150

Mean Rank 82.23 87.47 75.68 65.75 66.37

Test statistics ab Chi-square df Asymp.Sig a. Kruskal Wallis Test b. Grouping Variable : Perlakuan

Warna 6.375 4 .173

Lampiran 22 Hasil uji Kruskal Wallis terhadap aroma biskuit dan uji lanjut multiple comparison Rank Aroma


N 30 30 30 30 30 150

Mean Rank 59,48 106,93 68,40 59,47 65,22


Aroma 31,022 4 .000

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: aroma Tukey HSD Mean (I) Konsentrasi tepung (J) Konsentrasi tepung Difference Std. Error tulang ikan patin tulang ikan patin (I-J) 0% 2% -1,133* ,236 4% -,767* ,236 6% -,067 ,236 8% -,133 ,236 2% 0% 1,133* ,236 4% ,367 ,236 6% 1,067* ,236 8% 1,000* ,236 4% 0% ,767* ,236 2% -,367 ,236 6% ,700* ,236 8% ,633 ,236 6% 0% ,067 ,236 2% -1,067* ,236 4% -,700* ,236 8% -,067 ,236 8% 0% ,133 ,236 2% -1,000* ,236 4% -,633 ,236 6% ,067 ,236 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

95% Confidence Interval Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound ,000 -1,78 -,48 ,012 -1,42 -,12 ,999 -,72 ,58 ,980 -,78 ,52 ,000 ,48 1,78 ,528 -,28 1,02 ,000 ,42 1,72 ,000 ,35 1,65 ,012 ,12 1,42 ,528 -1,02 ,28 ,028 ,05 1,35 ,061 -,02 1,28 ,999 -,58 ,72 ,000 -1,72 -,42 ,028 -1,35 -,05 ,999 -,72 ,58 ,980 -,52 ,78 ,000 -1,65 -,35 ,061 -1,28 ,02 ,999 -,58 ,72

Lampiran 23 Hasil uji Kruskal Wallis terhadap tekstur biskuit dan uji lanjut multiple comparison Rank Aroma


N 30 30 30 30 30 150

Mean Rank 71.28 116.13 78.37 57.40 54.32


Aroma 43.308 4 .000

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: tekstur Tukey HSD Mean (I) Konsentrasi tepung (J) Konsentrasi tepung Difference Std. Error tulang ikan patin tulang ikan patin (I-J) 0% 2% -1,033* ,273 4% -,300 ,273 6% ,567 ,273 8% ,600 ,273 2% 0% 1,033* ,273 4% ,733 ,273 6% 1,600* ,273 8% 1,633* ,273 4% 0% ,300 ,273 2% -,733 ,273 6% ,867* ,273 8% ,900* ,273 6% 0% -,567 ,273 2% -1,600* ,273 4% -,867* ,273 8% ,033 ,273 8% 0% -,600 ,273 2% -1,633* ,273 4% -,900* ,273 6% -,033 ,273 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

95% Confidence Interval Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound ,002 -1,79 -,28 ,806 -1,05 ,45 ,236 -,19 1,32 ,186 -,15 1,35 ,002 ,28 1,79 ,061 -,02 1,49 ,000 ,85 2,35 ,000 ,88 2,39 ,806 -,45 1,05 ,061 -1,49 ,02 ,015 ,11 1,62 ,011 ,15 1,65 ,236 -1,32 ,19 ,000 -2,35 -,85 ,015 -1,62 -,11 1,000 -,72 ,79 ,186 -1,35 ,15 ,000 -2,39 -,88 ,011 -1,65 -,15 1,000 -,79 ,72

Lampiran 24 Hasil uji Kruskal Wallis terhadap rasa biskuit dan uji lanjut multiple comparison Rank Aroma


N 30 30 30 30 30 150

Mean Rank 68.72 107.57 76.60 62.65 61.97


Aroma 25.298 4 .000

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: rasa Tukey HSD Mean (I) Konsentrasi tepung (J) Konsentrasi tepung Difference Std. Error tulang ikan patin tulang ikan patin (I-J) 0% 2% -1,067* ,260 4% -,500 ,260 6% -,067 ,260 8% ,000 ,260 2% 0% 1,067* ,260 4% ,567 ,260 6% 1,000* ,260 8% 1,067* ,260 4% 0% ,500 ,260 2% -,567 ,260 6% ,433 ,260 8% ,500 ,260 6% 0% ,067 ,260 2% -1,000* ,260 4% -,433 ,260 8% ,067 ,260 8% 0% ,000 ,260 2% -1,067* ,260 4% -,500 ,260 6% -,067 ,260 *. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

95% Confidence Interval Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound ,001 -1,78 -,35 ,308 -1,22 ,22 ,999 -,78 ,65 1,000 -,72 ,72 ,001 ,35 1,78 ,192 -,15 1,28 ,002 ,28 1,72 ,001 ,35 1,78 ,308 -,22 1,22 ,192 -1,28 ,15 ,456 -,28 1,15 ,308 -,22 1,22 ,999 -,65 ,78 ,002 -1,72 -,28 ,456 -1,15 ,28 ,999 -,65 ,78 1,000 -,72 ,72 ,001 -1,78 -,35 ,308 -1,22 ,22 ,999 -,78 ,65

Lampiran 25 Analisis ragam kadar air biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

5,6355

3

1,8785

88,71

0,000

0,1694

8

0,0212

5,8049

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: air Tukey HSD

(I) konsentrasi tepung tulang ikan patin biskuat

2%

0%

4%

(J) konsentrasi tepung tulang ikan patin 2% 0% 4% biskuat 0% 4% biskuat 2% 4% biskuat 2% 0%

Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error -.95000* .11881 -1.89333* .11881 -1.28667* .11881 .95000* .11881 -.94333* .11881 -.33667 .11881 1.89333* .11881 .94333* .11881 .60667* .11881 1.28667* .11881 .33667 .11881 -.60667* .11881

Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .084 .000 .000 .004 .000 .084 .004

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -1.3305 -.5695 -2.2738 -1.5129 -1.6671 -.9062 .5695 1.3305 -1.3238 -.5629 -.7171 .0438 1.5129 2.2738 .5629 1.3238 .2262 .9871 .9062 1.6671 -.0438 .7171 -.9871 -.2262

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Keterangan : 0% = Biskuit kontrol (K) 2% = Biskuit penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 2% (A) 4% = Biskuit penambahan tepung tulang ikan patin 4% (B)

Lampiran 26 Analisis ragam kadar abu biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

5,6355

3

1,8785

88,71

0,000

0,1694

8

0,0212

5,8049

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: abu Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error .22667 .08907 .70667* .08907 -.32333* .08907 -.22667 .08907 .48000* .08907 -.55000* .08907 -.70667* .08907 -.48000* .08907 -1.03000* .08907 .32333* .08907 .55000* .08907 1.03000* .08907

Sig. .126 .000 .028 .126 .003 .001 .000 .003 .000 .028 .001 .000

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -.0586 .5119 .4214 .9919 -.6086 -.0381 -.5119 .0586 .1948 .7652 -.8352 -.2648 -.9919 -.4214 -.7652 -.1948 -1.3152 -.7448 .0381 .6086 .2648 .8352 .7448 1.3152



Lampiran 27 Analisis ragam kadar protein biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

3,9960

3

1,3320

46,68

0,000

0,2283

8

0,0285

4,2234

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: protein Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error -1.18000* .13792 -1.12000* .13792 -1.54000* .13792 1.18000* .13792 .06000 .13792 -.36000 .13792 1.12000* .13792 -.06000 .13792 -.42000 .13792 1.54000* .13792 .36000 .13792 .42000 .13792

Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .971 .115 .000 .971 .062 .000 .115 .062

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -1.6217 -.7383 -1.5617 -.6783 -1.9817 -1.0983 .7383 1.6217 -.3817 .5017 -.8017 .0817 .6783 1.5617 -.5017 .3817 -.8617 .0217 1.0983 1.9817 -.0817 .8017 -.0217 .8617



Lampiran 28 Analisis ragam kadar lemak biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

38,046

3

12,682

49,54

0,000

2,048

8

0,256

40,094

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: lemak Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error -4.14333* .41310 -4.18667* .41310 -3.99667* .41310 4.14333* .41310 -.04333 .41310 .14667 .41310 4.18667* .41310 .04333 .41310 .19000 .41310 3.99667* .41310 -.14667 .41310 -.19000 .41310

Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 1.000 .984 .000 1.000 .966 .000 .984 .966

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -5.4662 -2.8204 -5.5096 -2.8638 -5.3196 -2.6738 2.8204 5.4662 -1.3662 1.2796 -1.1762 1.4696 2.8638 5.5096 -1.2796 1.3662 -1.1329 1.5129 2.6738 5.3196 -1.4696 1.1762 -1.5129 1.1329



Lampiran 29 Analisis ragam nilai pH biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

3,72447

3

1,24149

435,61

0,000

0,02880

8

0,00285

3,74727

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: pH Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) 1.34000* 1.42667* 1.35333* -1.34000* .08667 .01333 -1.42667* -.08667 -.07333 -1.35333* -.01333 .07333

Std. Error .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223 .07223

Sig. .000 .000 .000 .000 .644 .998 .000 .644 .746 .000 .998 .746

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1.1087 1.5713 1.1954 1.6580 1.1220 1.5846 -1.5713 -1.1087 -.1446 .3180 -.2180 .2446 -1.6580 -1.1954 -.3180 .1446 -.3046 .1580 -1.5846 -1.1220 -.2446 .2180 -.1580 .3046



Lampiran 30 Analisis ragam kadar kalsium biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

14,1638

3

4,7213

277,45

0,000

0,1361

8

0,0170

14,2999

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: kalsium Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) 1.36333* 2.58000* -.04667 -1.36333* 1.21667* -1.41000* -2.58000* -1.21667* -2.62667* .04667 1.41000* 2.62667*

Std. Error .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651 .10651

Sig. .000 .000 .970 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .970 .000 .000

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound 1.0222 1.7044 2.2389 2.9211 -.3878 .2944 -1.7044 -1.0222 .8756 1.5578 -1.7511 -1.0689 -2.9211 -2.2389 -1.5578 -.8756 -2.9678 -2.2856 -.2944 .3878 1.0689 1.7511 2.2856 2.9678



Lampiran 31 Analisis ragam kadar fosfor biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

15,1414

3

5,0471

197,41

0,000

0,2045

8

0,0256

15,3459

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: fosfor Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) -.82667* .21667 -2.63667* .82667* 1.04333* -1.81000* -.21667 -1.04333* -2.85333* 2.63667* 1.81000* 2.85333*

Std. Error .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055 .13055

Sig. .001 .402 .000 .001 .000 .000 .402 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -1.2447 -.4086 -.2014 .6347 -3.0547 -2.2186 .4086 1.2447 .6253 1.4614 -2.2281 -1.3919 -.6347 .2014 -1.4614 -.6253 -3.2714 -2.4353 2.2186 3.0547 1.3919 2.2281 2.4353 3.2714



Lampiran 32 Analisis ragam kadar karbohidrat by difference biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

100,176

3

33,392

56,32

0,000

4,743

8

0,593

104,920

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: karbohidrat Tukey HSD

(I) biskuit kontrol

A

B

komersil

(J) biskuit A B komersil kontrol B komersil kontrol A komersil kontrol A B

Mean Difference Std. Error (I-J) -.35000 .62872 .60667 .62872 -6.54000* .62872 .35000 .62872 .95667 .62872 -6.19000* .62872 -.60667 .62872 -.95667 .62872 -7.14667* .62872 6.54000* .62872 6.19000* .62872 7.14667* .62872


Sig. .942 .772 .000 .942 .469 .000 .772 .469 .000 .000 .000 .000

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -2.3634 1.6634 -1.4067 2.6200 -8.5534 -4.5266 -1.6634 2.3634 -1.0567 2.9700 -8.2034 -4.1766 -2.6200 1.4067 -2.9700 1.0567 -9.1600 -5.1333 4.5266 8.5534 4.1766 8.2034 5.1333 9.1600

Lampiran 33 Analisis ragam berat biskuit Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

2,250000

3

0,750000

0,00

0,00

0,000000

8

0,000000

2,250000

11

Lampiran 34 Analisis ragam ketebalan biskuit Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

9,000000

3

3,000000

0,00

0,00

0,000000

8

0,000000

9,000000

11

Lampiran 35 Analisis ragam diameter biskuit Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

0,2025000

3

0,0675000

0,00

0,00

0,0000000

8

0,0000000

0,2025000

11

Lampiran 36 Analisis ragam kekerasan biskuit dan uji lanjut Tukey Source of Variation Between Group Within Group Total

SS

df

MS

F

Sig

172058

3

57353

21,10

0,000

21747

8

2718

193805

11

Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: kekerasan Tukey HSD


2%

0%

4%


Mean Difference (I-J) -262.50333* -233.33667* -311.11667* 262.50333* 29.16667 -48.61333 233.33667* -29.16667 -77.78000 311.11667* 48.61333 77.78000

Std. Error 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051 42.57051

Sig. .001 .003 .000 .001 .900 .676 .003 .900 .329 .000 .676 .329

95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound -398.8291 -126.1776 -369.6624 -97.0109 -447.4424 -174.7909 126.1776 398.8291 -107.1591 165.4924 -184.9391 87.7124 97.0109 369.6624 -165.4924 107.1591 -214.1058 58.5458 174.7909 447.4424 -87.7124 184.9391 -58.5458 214.1058



Lampiran 37 Perhitungan nilai kalori per 100 g biskuit 1. Biskuit komersial Nilai kalori = 9 × 15,96 ÷ 4 × 6.52 ÷ 4 × 73.11 = 462,16 kal

2. Biskuit K Nilai kalori = 9 × 20,14 ÷ 4 × 7,64 ÷ 4 × 66,57 = 478,10 kal

3. Biskuit A Nilai kalori = 9 × 20,10 ÷ 4 × 7,70 ÷ 4 × 66,92 = 479,38 kal

4. Biskuit B Nilai kalori = 9 × 19,95 ÷ 4 × 8,06 ÷ 4 × 65,96 = 475,63 kal

Dengan demikian nilai kalori kedua formulasi biskuit sesuai dengan standar nilai kalori biskuit yang ditetapkan dalam SNI 01-2973-1992 yaitu sebesar minimum 400 kal/100 g.

Lampiran 38 Tepung tulang ikan patin

METODE BASAH

METODE KERING

Lampiran 39 Biskuit hasil formulasi dengan penambahan tepung tulang ikan

Biskuit K

Biskuit A

Biskuit B

Biskuit C

Biskuit D

Lampiran 40 Tulang ikan patin utuh

Lampiran 41 Tulang ikan patin yang sudah mengalami pengecilan ukuran

Lampiran 42 Tulang ikan patin siap diolah menjadi tepung

Lampiran 43 Perhitungan kadar kalsium dan fosfor pada biskuit A Kadar kalsium dalam biskuit A = 2,13 mg / 213 mg/100 g bk Kadar air = 3,58% 100 g berat kering = g berat basah – (3,58%bb) Berat basah = 103,58 g Kalsium dalam biskuit A = 213 mg/100 g bk = 213 mg/ 103,58 g biskuit = 2,06 mg/ g biskuit Kadar kalsium biskuit per takaran saji (35 g) = 2,06 mg/ g biskuit x 35 g = 72,10 mg % AKG = (72,10 / 800 mg) x 100% = 9,01%

Kadar fosfor dalam biskuit A = 1,48 mg / 148 mg/100 g bk Kadar air = 3,58% 100 g berat kering = g berat basah – (3,58%bb) Berat basah = 103,58 g Fosfor dalam biskuit A = 148 mg/100 g bk = 148 mg/ 103,58 g biskuit = 1,43 mg/ g biskuit Kadar fosfor biskuit per takaran saji (35 g) = 1,43 mg/ g biskuit x 35 g = 50,05 mg % AKG = (50,05 / 600 mg) x 100% = 8,34% Lampiran 44 Perhitungan kadar protein dan lemak pada biskuit A Kadar protein dalam biskuit A = 7,72% = 7,72 g/100 g biskuit Kadar air = 3,58% 100 g berat kering = g berat basah – (3,58%bb) Berat basah = 103,58 g Protein dalam biskuit A = 7,72 g/100 g bk = 7,72 g/ 103,58 g biskuit = 0,07 g/ g biskuit Kadar protein biskuit per takaran saji (35 g) = 0,07 g/ g biskuit x 35 g = 2,45 g % AKG = (2,45 g/60 g) x 100% = 4,08% Kadar lemak dalam biskuit A = 20,22% = 20,22 g/ 100 g biskuit Kadar air = 3,58% 100 g berat kering = g berat basah – (3,58%bb) Berat basah = 103,58 g

Lemak dalam biskuit A = 20,22 g/100 g bk = 20,22 g/ 103,58 g biskuit = 0,20 g/ g biskuit Kadar kalsium biskuit per takaran saji (35 g) = 0,20 g/ g biskuit x 35 g = 7,00 g % AKG = (7,77 g/85 g) x 100% = 8,23%

DAFTAR PUSTAKA. Alais C, Linden G Food Biochemistry. London: Ellis Harwood

Recommend Documents