香蕉淀粉中的硬饼干享乐测试与环节和追溯法

Ruhil Fida
{"title":"香蕉淀粉中的硬饼干享乐测试与环节和追溯法","authors":"Ruhil Fida","doi":"10.56869/kaliagri.v3i2.412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aims to determine the hedonic test conducted by panelists of hard biscuit products using annealing and retrogrdation modified banana flour. Consisting of three treatments, each treatment was repeated 6 times. The results showed that the hard biscuit color hedonic test of Hard biscuit treatment A, namely 100% wheat flour, had an average score of 4.94. Hard biscuit treatment B has an average score of 3.74 and hard biscuit treatment C has an average score of 3.02. In the texture hedonic test, hard biscuit treatment A had a mean score of 4.43, while hard biscuit treatment B had a mean score of 3.77 (somewhat dislike) and hard biscuit treatment C had a mean score of 3.52 (somewhat dislike). The hedonic test of hard biscuit aroma of treatment A has a mean score of 4.50 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.83 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.45 (somewhat dislike). Meanwhile, the hedonic test of hard biscuit flavor treatment A has a mean score of 4.72 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.74 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.41 (somewhat dislike).","PeriodicalId":156648,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Prodi Agribisnis","volume":"1122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uji Hedonik Produk Hard Biscuit Pada Tepung Pisang Dengan Metode Annealing Dan Retrogradasi\",\"authors\":\"Ruhil Fida\",\"doi\":\"10.56869/kaliagri.v3i2.412\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aims to determine the hedonic test conducted by panelists of hard biscuit products using annealing and retrogrdation modified banana flour. Consisting of three treatments, each treatment was repeated 6 times. The results showed that the hard biscuit color hedonic test of Hard biscuit treatment A, namely 100% wheat flour, had an average score of 4.94. Hard biscuit treatment B has an average score of 3.74 and hard biscuit treatment C has an average score of 3.02. In the texture hedonic test, hard biscuit treatment A had a mean score of 4.43, while hard biscuit treatment B had a mean score of 3.77 (somewhat dislike) and hard biscuit treatment C had a mean score of 3.52 (somewhat dislike). The hedonic test of hard biscuit aroma of treatment A has a mean score of 4.50 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.83 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.45 (somewhat dislike). Meanwhile, the hedonic test of hard biscuit flavor treatment A has a mean score of 4.72 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.74 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.41 (somewhat dislike).\",\"PeriodicalId\":156648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Prodi Agribisnis\",\"volume\":\"1122 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Prodi Agribisnis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56869/kaliagri.v3i2.412\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Prodi Agribisnis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56869/kaliagri.v3i2.412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是确定用退火和退化改性香蕉粉对硬饼干产品进行小组成员的享乐性测试。共3组,每组重复6次。结果表明,硬饼干处理A即100%小麦粉的硬饼干颜色享乐性测试平均得分为4.94分。硬饼干处理B的平均得分为3.74,硬饼干处理C的平均得分为3.02。质地享乐性测试中,硬饼干处理A的平均得分为4.43分,硬饼干处理B的平均得分为3.77分(有点不喜欢),硬饼干处理C的平均得分为3.52分(有点不喜欢)。处理A硬质饼干香气的享乐性测试平均得分为4.50(相似),处理B硬质饼干香气的平均得分为3.83(有点相似),处理C硬质饼干香气的平均得分为3.45(有点不喜欢)。同时,硬饼干口味处理A的享乐测试平均得分为4.72(喜欢),硬饼干口味处理B的平均得分为3.74(有点喜欢),硬饼干口味处理C的平均得分为3.41(有点不喜欢)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uji Hedonik Produk Hard Biscuit Pada Tepung Pisang Dengan Metode Annealing Dan Retrogradasi
This study aims to determine the hedonic test conducted by panelists of hard biscuit products using annealing and retrogrdation modified banana flour. Consisting of three treatments, each treatment was repeated 6 times. The results showed that the hard biscuit color hedonic test of Hard biscuit treatment A, namely 100% wheat flour, had an average score of 4.94. Hard biscuit treatment B has an average score of 3.74 and hard biscuit treatment C has an average score of 3.02. In the texture hedonic test, hard biscuit treatment A had a mean score of 4.43, while hard biscuit treatment B had a mean score of 3.77 (somewhat dislike) and hard biscuit treatment C had a mean score of 3.52 (somewhat dislike). The hedonic test of hard biscuit aroma of treatment A has a mean score of 4.50 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.83 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.45 (somewhat dislike). Meanwhile, the hedonic test of hard biscuit flavor treatment A has a mean score of 4.72 (like), while hard biscuit treatment B has a mean score of 3.74 (somewhat like) and hard biscuit treatment C has a mean score of 3.41 (somewhat dislike).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信