Aplication of Natural Preservative “Atung”
(Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk) on
Enzymatic Fish Sauce Nutrition
Produced of Tuna Loin Waste in
Parigi Wahai Village North Seram Sub-district
Central Maluku District
Trijunianto Moniharapon, Fredy Pattipeilohy and R. B. D. Sormin
Department of Fish Product Technology, Pattimura University, Ambon, Indonesia
Keywords: Natural Preservatives, Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk, Nutrition, Tuna Loin Waste, Parigi Village,
North Seram, Central Maluku.
Abstract: The aim of this study is to find out the effect of “atung” (Parinarium glaberimum, Hassk) applications as
natural preservative for washing of red tuna flesh, salt concentration and long fermentation with pineapple
extract (3 times) on the nutrition and calorie value of fish sauce. The nutrition content of fish sauce i.e. water,
protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate, treated by washing without atung solution, added 15% salt, at fermentation
range 3 days, (K1) were 61.42%, 5.68%, 0.32%, 5.86%, and 10.19%; respectively with a calorie value 66.4
kcal. Fish sauce with the same as previous treatment but 4 days of fermentation (K2) were: 63.26%, 5.36%,
0.72%, 5.53%, and 8.55% respectively with a calorie value 62.1 kcal. The nutrition content of fish sauce i.e.
water, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate, treated by washing without atung solution, added 20% salt, at
fermentation range 3 days, (K3) were 63.34%, 5.62%, 1.08%, 5.87%, and 9.31% respectively with a calorie
value 69.4 kcal. Fish sauce with the same as previous treatment but 4 days of fermentation (K4) were: 60.42%,
5.53%, 0.71%, 5.94% and 12.22% respectively with a calorie value 77.4 kcal. The nutrition content of fish
sauce i.e. water, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate, treated by washing without atung solution, added 20%
salt, at fermentation range 2 days, (K5) were 62.32%, 3.51%, 0.61%, 4.92%, and 9.39% respectively with a
calorie value 57.1 kcal, and the nutrition content of fish sauce i.e. water, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate,
treated by washing atung solution, added 20% salt, at fermentation range 2 days (K6) were: 57.66%, 3.62%,
0.30%, 5.91% and 10.07% with a calorie value 57.5 kcal.
1 INTRODUCTION
The fish sauce industry, a part of fish processing
industry, has a great opportunity of being developed
to provide added value of fish as perishable food. By
that processing diversification, the fish processor
community will ultimately increase their income,
absorb labor, and increase foreign exchange through
exploiting export opportunities. In the future fish
sauce industry will be the replacement to the soy
sauce industry.
Soy sauce is one of fermented products used as
flavor ingredient, especially in Asian countries,
which is the oldest condiment in China for more than
3000 years (Muangthai et al, 2009). Meanwhile,
Chinese soy sauce is usually produced by put a very
small amount or even no wheat flour. Sausage is a
product in which flesh is mixed with additives,
stuffed into suitable casings and heat processed
(Raju et al, 2003). The word sausage comes from
the Middle English sausige, which came from sal,
Latin for salt. In France they are called sausissons
and in Germany, wurst. There are several basic
categories of sausages, namely, fresh sausage,
cooked sausage, cooked and smoked sausage,
uncooked and smoked sausage, dry sausage and
specialty meats (Fillppone, 2009). Many research
based on non-soy sauce has been carried out in
Indonesia including “koro pedang” sauce (Astuti,
2012), “kacang gude” sauce (Andriana, 2014) and
Moniharapon, T., Pattipeilohy, F. and Sormin, R.
Aplication of Natural Preservative “Atung” (Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk) on Enzymatic Fish Sauce Nutrition Produced of Tuna Loin Waste in Parigi Wahai Village North Seram Sub-district
Central Maluku District.
DOI: 10.5220/0010506800003108
In Proceedings of the 6th Food Ingredient Asia Conference (6th FiAC 2020) - Food Science, Nutrition and Health, pages 5-11
ISBN: 978-989-758-540-1
Copyright
c
2022 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
5
“lamtoro gung” sauce as well as “moromi” (Rahayu
et al, 1992).
Fish sauce, a liquid clear brown color, is a
product based on a fish hydrolysis whether by salt,
enzymatic or chemical fermented (Astawan and
Astawan, 1988). Fish sauce is made of fish and fish
waste through fermentation, it has a distinctive taste
and smell and a long shelf life (Purwaningsih and
Nurhayati, 1995). Besides fermented process can
preserve food this process also provide a certain
properties that attract the consumers, unique and
increase an economic value (Hutkins, 2006). The
problem sometimes faced by the soy sauce industry
were the increase of soybean price and the long
duration of soy sauce procesed which can take
months. This has led some entrepreneurs to replace
soybean with other cheaper ingredients, such as
mixing water with sauce flavoring and coloring. As
a result, the quality of sauce tends to decline or the
sauce become liquor therefore the quantity is
increasing. Meanwhile, the soy sauce industry
development in Indonesia has grown in line with the
increasing of soy sauce consumption in society
(Maryani, 2007). The qualified sauce is produced
from high protein raw materials such as soybean.
For that reason, it’s a good thing to make sauce
based on fish. The raw material was a kind of dark
tuna flesh. Dark tuna flesh was the waste of tuna loin
produced is 18% of the whole tuna (logs). In order
to get the qualified fish sauce the raw material
should be as fresh as possible. To attain that, it
should be considered the cold chain process start
from fish handling on the ship and when tuna loin
processed. Sometimes, it is difficult to get an ice, as
an alternative it has been found “atung” (Parinarium
glaberimum Hassk) a natural preservative. "Atung"
has been shown to maintain the freshness of small
pelagic fish (Moniharapon and Pattipeilohy, 2018)
then handling of Tuna (Moniharapon et al, 2019).
Diversification of tuna loin waste-based processing
has been made since 2012, but it has been not for
fish sauce (Pattipeilohy et al, 2012). The aim of this
study was to determine the effect of natural
preservative “atung” (Parinarium glaberimum,
Hassk) solution applied in washing tuna red flesh,
salt concentration and fermentation time on the
quality and nutritional value of fish sauce.
2 MATERIALS AND METHOD
2.1 Sample Collection and Preparation
Tuna were gotten from fishermen in Parigi Hamlet,
Wahai Seram Village, Central Maluku, while the
"atung" fruit was gotten from Hutumuri village,
Ambon Island, Maluku Province. The materials used
are: red meat tuna (tuna loin waste), ice, “atung”
solution (4% W/V), salt, bay leaves, turmeric,
lemongrass, and brown sugar.
2.2 Proximate Composition
The proximate composition of the fish sausages was
determined according to the (AOAC, 2020). The
crude protein and crude lipid contents were
measured by Kjeldahl and Soxhlet methods
respectively. The ash content was determined by
ashing the samples at 550ºC. The moisture content
was determined by drying the samples overnight at
105°C and the carbohydrate content was calculated
by difference.
2.3 Statistics
The data were analized by factorially experimental
designed with block randomized design (BRD) with
4 (four) replications followed by the Honestly
Significant Difference test (HSD test) (Gaspersz,
1994).
2.4 Treatments
The research method is experimental by the following
procedure: The washing treatment of tuna flesh (A)
consists of 2 levels, namely: washing used 4% (w / v)
“atung” solution (A1) and washing used ice water as
a control (A2). Towards A1 was applied 2 treatments
of salt concentration namely 15% (B1) and 20% (B2)
salt concentrations. Next, towards A2B1 and A2B2
treatments was applied fermentation period for 3 days
(C1) and 4 days (C2) and it’s obtain 4 samples,
namely: A2B1C1 (K1), A2B1C2 (K2), A2B2C1 (K3)
and A2B2C2 (K4).Then toward the treatment of
A1B2 and A2B2 was applied 2 days of fermentation
(C3) and its obtained 2 treatments namely: A2B2C3
(K5) and A1B2C3 (K6). Thus, only 6 (six) samples
were treated along with 4 (four) replications. The test
parameters were: water, ash, protein, fat and
carbohydrate.
6th FiAC 2020 - The Food Ingredient Asia Conference (FiAC)
6
* Seasoning for Hydrolyzate 1000 ml:
1 clove garlic, 4 cm ginger, 4 cm galangal, 1/2 tablespoon cumin, 1 roll of bay leaves, 1 stick of lemon grass, 1 hazelnut, 3
tablespoons of granulated sugar, 300 g of brown sugar and 1 gram of jelly.
Figure 1: Flowchart of tuna sauce processing.
Soaked without Atung
Soaked in “Atung” 14% (w/v)
3 days
Fermentation
K
1
Filtering
Hidrolizate
Seasoning and boiling
Fish sauce (K
1
, K
2
, K
3
, K
4
, K
5
, K
6
)
Read (dark) meat of Tuna
Tuna : Pinaple extract
(1:3)
(ikan:ekstrak)
Salt 20 % (w/v)
Salt 20 % (w/v)
Fermentation
4 days
3 days
4 days
Fermentation
2 days
2 days
K
2
K
3
K
4
K
5
K
6
Aplication of Natural Preservative Atung” (Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk) on Enzymatic Fish Sauce Nutrition Produced of Tuna Loin
Waste in Parigi Wahai Village North Seram Sub-district Central Maluku District
7
Table 1: Recapitulation of the honest real difference test (HRD) of the objective parameters.
Treatments
The average of objective parameters and its difference
Water
Content (%)
Protein
Content (%)
Lipid
Content (%)
Ash
Content (%)
Carbohydrate
content (%)
Calori (kcal)
K1
61,42b
5,68a
0,32 b
5,86a
10,19 b
66,4 b
K2
63,26ab
5,36a
0,72ab
5,53 b
8,55d
62,1 c
K3
63,34a
5,62a
1,08a
5,87a
9,31c
69,4 b
K4
60,42b
5,53a
0,71ab
5,94a
12,22a
77,4a
K5
62,32ab
3,51b
0,61b
4,92c
9,39c
57,1 d
K6
57,66c
3,62b
0,30b
5,91a
10,07b
57,5 d
BNJ 0.05
2,47
0,37
0,44
0,23
0,54
3,60
BNJ 0.01
3,42
0,51
0,61
0,32
0,75
4,99
3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION
K1: washing without atung solution, added 15% salt,
at fermentation range 3 days;
K2 washing without atung solution, added 20% salt,
at fermentation range 4 days;
K3: washing without atung solution, added 15% salt,
at fermentation range 3 days;
K4: washing without atung solution, added 20% salt,
at fermentation range for 4 days;
K5: washing without atung solution, added 20% salt,
at fermentation range for 2 days;
K6: washing by applied atung solution 4% (w / v),
added 20% salt, at fermentation range 2 days.
The proximate compositions, i.e., moisture, protein,
fat, ash and carbohydrate and the mineral contents of
the sausages are shown in the Table 1. The fish
sausages showed significant differences (p<0.05) in
all the proximate compositions among the samples.
The proximate compositions were in the ranges of
57.66-63.34% for moisture, 3.62-6.6% for protein,
0.30-1.08% for fat, 4.92-5.94% for ash and 8.55-
12.22% for carbohydrate.
3.1 Water Content
The Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Table
1), showed the highest average protein content of fish
sauce was the treatment K3 63.34% followed by K2
63.26; K5 62.32; K1 61.42; and the lowest was at
treatment K6 57.66%. It showed treatment K3
significantly different from treatment K1, K4 and K6,
but not significantly different from K2 and K5.
These results also did not significantly diffrerent
(slightly lower and slightly higher ranges) when
compared to studies (Moniharapon et al, 2014;2016)
and (Moniharapon et al, 2016). Further report the
water content of fish sauce was between 57.15 -
65.94% with an average of 61.06%. As a comparison,
the water content of Bango soy sauce was between
74.28 - 77.46% with an average of 75.96%. The range
of moisture contents in Malaysian fish sausages was
similar to the fish sausage evaluated was (68.64%)
(Raju et al, 2003). Reported that the moisture content
of a meat based product will affect the qualities of the
product such as gel strength and whiteness (Park,
2000). Reported that was 67.33-73.36% for moisture
(Huda et al, 2012).
3.2 Protein Content
The Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Table
1), showed the highest protein content of fis sauce
was on treatment K1 5.68% followed by K3 5.62; K4
5.53; K2 5.36; K6 3.62 and the lowest was K5 3.51%.
Treatment K1 significantly different from treatment
K5 and K6, but not significantly different from K2,
K3 and K4.
These results also did not significantly diffrerent
(slightly lower and slightly higher ranges) when
compared to studies where stated that fish sauce
protein content ranged between 3.30 5.24 % by the
average of 4.34% (Moniharapon et al, 2014) and
(Moniharapon et al, 2016).. On the other hand, the
protein content of Bango soy sauce less than protein
content of fish sauce produced where the protein
content was between 1.30 - 2.06% with an average of
1.62% (Moniharapon et al, 2014). Sweet soy sauce is
a typical Indonesian flavoring ingredient which is
generally made through a traditional fermentation
process. Protein content indicated the quality of sweet
soy sauce, where according to SNI 154 3543: 2013
the protein content of sweet soy sauce is 1% (National
Standardization Institution, 2013). The amount of its
protein content is due to an ability of sweet soy sauce
producers in Indonesia as long with the justification
the sweet soy sauce is not used as the main food for
daily consumption but it’s only a part of the seasoning
6th FiAC 2020 - The Food Ingredient Asia Conference (FiAC)
8
or flavoring (Meutia, 2015). Furthermore, based on
the protein content of sweet soy sauce tested from 24
small and medium industry in Indonesia, it was found
the average 1.30%. The analysis of producer
encompass soy sauce companies a large and small
scale in Indonesia. The previous SNI of soy sauce
(SNI 3543 - 1999) mentioned the protein content of
sweet soy sauce at least 2.5% and minimum 4% for
salt soy sauce, with consideration that sweet soy
sauce has been added sugar and other spices (National
Standardization Institution, 1999).
The results of the study by Purwoko and Handajani
(Purwoko dan Handajani, 2007), on protein content of
fermented sauce by Rhyzopus oryzae and R.
oligosporus showed the fermented soy sauce without
moromi provided a higher dissolved protein and total
protein than fermented sweet soy sauce by moromi.
Dissolved protein and total protein of fermented sweet
soy sauce by R. oligosporus higher than that of
fermented sweet soy sauce by R. oryzae.
The dissolved protein content of fermented soy
sauce by R. oligosporus without moromi was 8.2%,
while that of R. oryzae was 4.1%. The protein content
of Malaysian fish sausage (8.18-10.77%) was lower
than the protein content of fish sausage reported by
(Raju et al, 2003) was (16.76%). The lower protein
contents of the samples were related to the lower
percentages of fish flesh used in their preparation.
Based on the Malaysian Food Regulation of 1985,
article 167 stated that fish balls and fish cakes shall
contain not less than 50 percent fish. However, the
Malaysian Food Regulation did not state a specific
protein content required for fish sausage or fish (huda
et al, 2012). The protein content of eel sauce ranges
from 7.64% to 10.57% (Widowati, 2018). Protein is
important nutritional indicator in food product
including fish sauce, and it also important for human
body as builder and regulatory substances, it seems
that the protein content of soy sauce varies depend on
the type and the quality of the raw material, initial
handling and processing (Winarno, 1997).
3.3 Lipid Content
Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Table 1)
showed the fat content of treatment K1 average
1.08% was the highest followed by K2 0.72; K4 0.71;
K5 0.61; K1 was 0.32 and the lowest was K6 at
0.30%. There is a significant difference between
treatment K3 and K1 also K6, but its not significantly
different from K2, K4 and K5. These results turned
out to be significantly different (slightly higher and
much higher) when compared (Moniharapon et al,
2014) and (Moniharapon et al, 2016). Furthermore,
reported the fat content of fish sauce ranged from 3.16
to 4.26% with an average 3.96%. Meanwhile, the
protein content of Bango soy sauce as a comparison
of fat content was between 0.21 - 1.16% with average
0.86% (Moniharapon et al, 2014). While reported that
0.93-6.53% for fat (Huda et al, 2012).
3.4 Ash Content
Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Table 1),
showed the highest ash content of fish sauce was on
treatment K1 average 5.68%, followed by K3 5.62%;
K4 5,53%; K2 5.36%; K6 was 3.62% and the lowest
was K5 at 3.51%. There is a significant difference
between treatment K1 and K5 also K6, but not
significantly different from K2, K3 and K4. This
result is also not significantly different (still in the
range slightly lower and slightly higher) compared to
studies which reported that the ash content of fish
sauce was between 3.67 - 5.28% with a mean of
4.63% (Moniharapon et al, 2014) and (Moniharapon
et al, 2016). Meanwhile, the ash content of Bango soy
sauce as comparison, it was between 1.98 - 2.48%
with an average 2.22% (Moniharapon et al, 2014).
Previously reported that 1.71%-2.61% for ash (Huda
et al, 2012).
3.5 Carbohydrate Content
The Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test (Table
1), showed the highest carbohydrate content of fish
sauce was treatment K4 average 12.22%, followed by
K1 10.19%; K6 10.07%; K5 9.39%; K3 9.31 and the
lowest was K2 at 8.55%. Based on HSD there was a
significant difference between treatment K4 and all
other treatments, whereas it was not a significant
difference between treatment K1 and K6 also
between K3 and K5. These results significantly
different (much higher) compared to studies
(Moniharapon et al, 2014) and (Moniharapon et al,
2016). Furthermore, it was reported that the
carbohydrate content of fish sauce ranged from 17.95
to 29.31% with an average of 24.25%, while the
carbohydrate content of Bango soy sauce as a
comparison was between 14.49 - 21.21% with an
average of 18.85% ((Moniharapon et al, 2014) . The
previous, for carbohydrates was 8.55-12.22% (Huda
et al, 2012).
3.6 Calorie Value
The Honest Significant Difference (HSD) test
(Table 1), showed the highest calorie value of fish
sauce was on treatment K4 average 77.4 kcal,
Aplication of Natural Preservative Atung” (Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk) on Enzymatic Fish Sauce Nutrition Produced of Tuna Loin
Waste in Parigi Wahai Village North Seram Sub-district Central Maluku District
9
followed by K3 69.4; K1 66.4; K2 62.1; K6 is 57.5
and the lowest was on treatment K5 average 57.1
kcal. The treatment K4 showed a significant
difference with all other treatments, while treatment
K1 with K3 and treatment K5 with K6 was not
significantly different. (Auliana, 2001), stated the
energy value of a food can be determined using the
Atwater factor, where each gram of fat, carbohydrates
and protein were equivalent to 9, 4, and 4 calorie
respectively. The results in Table 1 showed a
significant difference compared to studies
(Moniharapon et al, 2014) and (Moniharapon et al,
2016). Furthermore, it was reported that the caloric
value of fish sauce ranged from 130.1 to 165.0 kcal
with an average 149.3 kcal. While, the calorie value
of Bango soy sauce as comparison was ranged 137.3
- 163.1 kcal with an average 148.6 kcal (Moniharapon
et al, 2014). When compared with Bango soy sauce,
the calorie value was 60 kcal.
4 CONCLUSION
The nutrition content of fish sauce i.e. water, protein,
fat, ash, and carbohydrate, treated by washing without
atung solution, added 15% salt, at fermentation range
3 days, (K1) were 61.42%, 5.68%, 0.32%, 5.86%,
and 10.19%; respectively with a calorie value 66.4
kcal. Fish sauce with the same as previous treatment
but 4 days of fermentation (K2) were: 63.26%,
5.36%, 0.72%, 5.53%, and 8.55% respectively with a
calorie value 62.1 kcal. The nutrition content of fish
sauce i.e. water, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate,
treated by washing without atung solution, added
20% salt, at fermentation range 3 days, (K3) were
63.34%, 5.62%, 1.08%, 5.87%, and 9.31%
respectively with a calorie value 69.4 kcal. Fish sauce
with the same as previous treatment but 4 days of
fermentation (K4) were: 60.42%, 5.53%, 0.71%,
5.94% and 12.22% respectively with a calorie value
77.4 kcal. The nutrition content of fish sauce i.e.
water, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrate, treated by
washing without atung solution, added 20% salt, at
fermentation range 2 days, (K5) were 62.32%,
3.51%, 0.61%, 4.92%, and 9.39% respectively with a
calorie value 57.1 kcal, and the nutrition content of
fish sauce i.e. water, protein, fat, ash, and
carbohydrate, treated by washing atung solution,
added 20% salt, at fermentation range 2 days (K6)
were: 57.66%, 3.62%, 0.30%, 5.91% and 10.07%
with a calorie value 57.5 kcal.
4.1 Suggestion
For further research, its necessary to exploit the red
tuna meat (tuna loin waste) to diversified products
such as nuggets and fish burgers. It is also necessary
investigate the effectiveness of atung solutions with
concentrations lower than 4%.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Thank you to the Directorate General of Research
Strengthening and Development. Ministry of
Research and Technology/National Research and
Innovation Agency for funding this research by
contract No: 077 / SP2H / PPM / DRPM / 2020.
REFERENCES
Andriana, D. 2014. Effect of substitution of Gude Beans
(Cajanus cajan) on Protein Levels and Acceptability of
Soy Sauce.Unnes Journal of Public Health 3 (3): 1-8.
(In Indonesian)
Astawan, M.W. dan Astawan, M. 1988. Appropriate
Animal Food Processing Technology. The Book.
Akademika Pressindo. Jakarta. (In Indonesian)
Astuti, B.B. 2012. Moromic Characteristics Resulting from
Moromi Fermentation of Koro Sword Soy Sauce
(Canavalia ensiformis L.) in Different Fermentation
Conditions. Thesis. Universitas of Gajah Mada.
Yogyakarta. (In Indonesian)
AOAC, 2000. Association of Official Analytical Chemists,
Official Methods of Analysis. The book. 17th Edition,
Washington, DC.
Auliana, R., 2001. Nutrition and Food Processing. The
Book. Adicita Karya Nusa. 155 hal. (In Indonesian)
Fillppone, P.T. 2009. Sausage History. http://home
cooking.about.com/od/foodhistory/a/sausagehistory.ht
m (date of accessed 10 July 2009).
Gaspersz, V., 1994. Experimental Design Methods For
Agroindustry Sciences, Biology and Technik Sciences.
The Book. CV Armico. Bandung. 472 page. (In
Indonesian)
Huda, N, T.L.J. Alistair, H.W. Lim and R. Nopianti. 2012.
Some Quality Characteristics of Malaysian
Commercial Fish Sausage. Pakistan Journal of
Nutrition 11 (8): 700-705, 2012.ISSN 1680-5194.
Hutkins RW. 2006. Microbiology and Technology of
Fermented Foods. USA: IFT Press. Blackwell
Publishing.
Maryani, R. 2007. Analysis of Demand and Supply of Soy
Sauce Industry in Indonesia. Thesis.Departemen of
Economic Science. Economic and Management
Faculty. IPB University. Bogor. (In Indonesian).
Meutia Y.R. Standardization of Sweet Soy Sauce Products
as a Typical Indonesian Product. Standardization
6th FiAC 2020 - The Food Ingredient Asia Conference (FiAC)
10
Journal. Volume 17 Number 2: hal 147-156. (In
Indonesian)
Moniharapon, T., Pattipeilohy, F., Gaspersz, F.F., dan
Latucosina, A. 2014. Study of Processed Products from
Tuna Loin Waste Final Report. Collaboration of
Regional Planing Agency of Mollucas Province with
Fishery and Marine Science Faculty. Pattimura
University, Ambon. (In Indonesian)
Moniharapon, T., Pattipeilohy, F., dan Moniharapon, A.
2016. Utilization of Tuna Loin Waste Red Meat in
Enzymatic Fish Sauce Processing. Proceeding National
Conference MPHPI 2016 (Indonesia) Meet Sciences
8th. ISBN: 978-602-61551-0-8. Published: Department
of Fish Processing Technology. Fishery and Marine
Science Faculty. Pattimura University. Ambon. Hal:
297-302. (In Indonesian)
Moniharapon, T dan Pattipeilohy, F., 2018. Method of
Making Fresh Fish Preservative from Atung Powder.
Patent. Number IDP000050840 at 30 A April 2018,
Departemen KumHam R.I.(In Indonesian)
Moniharapon, T., Pattipeilohy, F., Mailoa, M.N., dan
Soukotta, L.M. 2019. Application of Atung
Preservative (Parinarium glaberimum, Hassk) in the
Tuna Loin Industry in Parigi Hamlet, Wahai Village
Jurnal of BIAM e-ISSN: 2548-4842; p-ISSN: 0215-
1464. No. 25: 70-76. (In Indonesian)
Muangthai, P, U. P. Suwunna, and W. Patumpai. 2009.
Development Of Healthy Soy Sauce From Pigeon Pea
And Soybean. Asian Journal of Food and Agro
Industry sVol.2: 291 301
National Standardization Institution. (1999). National
Standardization Indonesian (SNI) 3543:1999. Soy
Sauce. Jakarta. (In Indonesian)
National Standardization Institution. 2013. National
Standardization Indonesian (SNI) 3543: 2013. Sweet
Soy Sauce. Part 1: Jakarta. (In Indonesian)
Park, J.W. 2000. Surimi and Surimi Seafood. Marcel
Dekker., New York.
Pattipeilohy, F., Gaspersz, F.F., dan Moniharapon, A. 2012.
Surimi Technology Development and Diversification
of Processed Products by Utilizing Tuna Loin
Production Waste Research Journal of Fishery and
Marine Sciences. Ichthyos. Vol. 11 No.1. : 57-63.(In
Indonesian)
Purwaningsih, S dan Nurhayati.1995. Making Fish Soy
Sauce Using Enzymatic and Fermentation Combination
from Tuna Fish Offal (Thunnus sp.). Buletin THP.
Vol-I. No 1-1995. (In Indonesian)
Purwoko, Tj. dan N.S. Handajani. (2007). Protein Content
of Sweet Soy Sauce without Moromi Fermentation
Result of Fermentation Rhyzopus oryzae and R.
oligosporus. Biodiversity 8: 223 227. (In Indonesian)
Rahayu, W.P., Ma'oen, S., Suliantari dan Fardiaz, S. 1992.
Fishery Product Fermentation Technology. PAU
Pangan dan Gizi. IPB. Bogor. The Book. (In
Indonesian)
Raju, C.V., B.A. Shamasundar and K.S. Udupa, 2003. The
use of nisin as a preservative in fish sausage stored at
ambient (28±2°C) and refrigerated (6±2°C)
temperatures. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., 38:171-185
Widowati. 2018. Protein Analysis of Eel Fish Sauce
(Monopterus albus) with Volume Variation of
Pineapple Extract (Ananas comosus). Agritepa.
Volume V. Number 1. Juli-Desember 2018. ISSN:
2407-1315. (In Indonesian)
Winarno F.G. 1997. Food Chemistry and Nutrition. PT.
Gramedia. 251 hal. The Book. (In Indonesian).
Aplication of Natural Preservative Atung” (Parinarium Glaberimum, Hassk) on Enzymatic Fish Sauce Nutrition Produced of Tuna Loin
Waste in Parigi Wahai Village North Seram Sub-district Central Maluku District
11