Physicochemical quality of dry noodles from maize flour and fish protein hydrolyzate (Mizepi) as a potential emergency food

Abstract

Mizepi is a product that can be consumed during emergencies and certain conditions for vulnerable groups such as children. Mizepi provides benefits in supporting children’s growth and development process because of its high protein content to prevent stunting and noodle snacks that children like especially in formula F4. Mizepi is a ready-to-eat noodle product from maize flour and FPH to be used as food during natural disasters. Currently, many emergency food products still have low nutritional content, so Mizepi is here with the innovation of maize flour and FPH which are rich in protein and have good physicochemical quality and are liked by consumers. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the nutritional value, protein digestibility, color, and texture of Mizepi. The methods are water content using gravimetry, ash with dry ashing, fat by Soxhlet, protein by Kjeldahl, protein digestibility was carried out in vitro. A total of seven formulations of Mizepi with maize flour and FPH ratio were compared in grams, 1:1 (F1), 4:7 (F2), 4:11 (F3), 7:4. (F4), 7:11 (F5), 11:4 (F6), 11:7 (F7). FPH has the effect of a higher level of product protein content. Mizepi has a protein digestibility content of 43.6–75.3%, which is a very good value. The color of Mizepi products based on ⁰hue is yellow red and has a good crunchy texture because it is made from maize flour. In conclusion, F4 was the best formulation that has nutrient content appropriate to the quality requirements of emergency food products.

Graphical Abstract

Introduction

Indonesia is a country located at the meeting point of four tectonic plates, namely the continent of Asia, Australia, the Indian Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean, which makes it prone to natural disasters (Atmoko & Rudarti, 2021). Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (BNPB) reported data on 3,115 events dominated by floods, extreme weather, and landslides with more than 8.6 million people displaced (BNPB, 2021). Natural disasters have serious impacts on victims, one of which is food insecurity and even hunger (Fitzpatrick et al., 2020). However, the reality in the field is that emergency food aid is often late and unsustainable. This phenomenon underlies the importance of creating innovative emergency food products to fulfill the daily nutritional needs of natural disaster victims, especially for vulnerable groups who require the selection of certain ingredients.

Emergency Food Products (EFP) are food products that are produced and consumed during emergencies such as natural disasters to meet daily nutritional needs (Fatmah et al., 2021). Emergency food must include an energy content of 233–250 kcal, carbohydrates 40–50%, fat 35–45%, protein 10–15%, water content must not be more than 9.5% and can be consumed directly (ready to eat). Emergency food is presented in practical forms such as cookies, snack bars, or food bars (Hasan et al., 2020). The choice of ready-to-eat products is in line with banana bar research which explains that it is stable during the storage process or has a longer shelf life (Ekafitri & Isworo, 2014). This research chose noodle products as an alternative emergency food because Mizepi can be ready to eat. It is known that disaster conditions where cooking utensils are limited, and raw material assistance is late and unsustainable.

Fish Protein Hydrolysate (FPH) is a protein resulting from the hydrolysis of fish protein into peptide compounds and amino acids using enzymes (Prayudi et al., 2020). The composition of FPH in this study is protein hydrolyzate from trash fish (bycatch) and maltodextrin which is processed by hydrolysis using protease enzymes at a degree of hydrolysis of 80–90%. Trash fish are small fish with a maximum size of 10 cm, and are the by-catch of fishermen that have not been utilized properly (Hermawati et al., 2021). Trash fish was chosen as the basis for making FPH because it has a fairly high protein content is 14%, carbohydrates 0.48%, and water 78.94% (Nugroho et al., 2019).

Mizepi is a dry noodle product made from maize flour and FPH aimed at children to have a filling effect as an alternative emergency food product. Mizepi made from FPH is expected to provide a feeling of fullness due to its high protein content (Fath et al., 2020),(Sharkey et al., 2020). The satiety mechanism occurs from high protein foods which stimulate the release of Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) by carbohydrate content as well as the release of cholecystokinin (CCK) and peptide YY (PYY). Sensory, cognitive, post-ingestive, and post-absorptive signals will simultaneously determine feelings of fullness and fullness (Morell & Fiszman, 2017).

Mizepi has the advantage of basic ingredients isFPH flour and maize flour. maize flour is flour made from maize flour and has hydrophilic protein (like water) and have polar gaps such as carboxyl and amino groups which can ionize so it has a crunchy texture (Zainuddin, 2016). Maize flour has a distinctive sweet corn aroma and is white.

Maize flour has sufficient carbohydrate content but is low in protein. Maize flour has a low protein content of around 0.5%, so it is combined with FPH flour to achieve SNI 8217 − 2015 (Mi Kering, 2015) dry noodle protein content ranges from at least 8%. Mizepi can be consumed in phase I of the initial emergency response stage to maintain the nutritional status of refugees and the equipment is not yet available (Hosseini et al., 2022).

Making ready-to-eat products in the form of “Mizepi” seeks to help provide adequate nutrition, especially for vulnerable groups such as toddlers, pregnant women, breastfeeding mothers, the elderly and people with certain diseases (Septanaya & Fortuna, 2023). The most common micronutrient deficiency problems during disasters are vitamin A, iron, and iodine deficiencies in vulnerable subjects, in pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers. However, this product only contributes part of the micronutrient content. Mizepi is designed to have complete nutrition and an acceptable taste compared to instant noodles from a ratio of 15% snakehead fish protein and 40% sago starch where the water content (14.08 ± 0.134) exceeds standards as well as protein (6.77 ± 0.24) less than standard noodle characteristics and emergency food requirements (Briliannita & Marlissa, 2020).

Patent number JP2018074986A regarding dry noodle products made by mixing soybean flour and hydrolyzed konjac flour, explains that this type of dry noodle product is better for society (Shoten, 2018). Preliminary tests have been carried out for product optimization in composition of maize flour and FPH with brand and code the same. Mizepi products are sought to reach the commercial stage among the public with superior quality.

Based on this background, this study aims to analyze the physical and chemical qualities of Mizepi. Analyze chemicals such as nutritional value carbohydrates, protein, fat, ash, water contents, and protein digestibility. Physical quality products such as color with colorimetry and texture with a texture analyzer. Mizepi products are rich in nutrients so they can be a snack choice for children. Recommendations in the future that can be implemented are Mizepi product interventions for children where high protein levels can provide benefits in growth and development.

Material and method

Mizepi Formulation

Raw materials

The ingredients used to make the “Mizepi” formula are maize flour (Maizenaku brand), FPH from trash fish flour with a hydrolysis degree of 80–90% (Aruna product of the Bintan food and craft industry), salt (Revina brand), coconut oil (Sania brand), and water (Le Mineral brand).

Mizepi Formulation and Production

Mizepi with formulation from maize flour and fish protein hydrolizate in gram units are F1 (1:1), F2 (4:7), F3 (4:11), F4 (7:4), F5 (7:11), F6 (11:4) and F7 (11:7). The comparison ratio for this formulation had been selected using a completely randomized design method. Preliminary research had been conducted to compare various materials such as tapioca flour and mocaf flour, but it had been found that maize flour with this ratio provides the best texture.

Mizepi were prepared by mixing all the ingredients, starting with the dry ingredients (maize flour, FPH, and salt) then the wet ingredients (coconut oil and water) were added and the mixture was stirred until all components were well mixed with the used Oxone 537 jumbo noodle maker. Next insert the ingredients of maize flour, FPH flour, salt, and coconut oil into the noodle maker tool and close the tool according to the appropriate sensor so that the tool can function and pressed the fast noodle button for the process of mixing the ingredients. Add water through the glass provided in the noodle maker’s glass so that the water droplets can be monitored properly. After all the ingredients are mixed, press the elastic noodle button to make the dough more elastic and mix well until the time provided by the tool will automatically finish if the dough is deemed sufficient. Continue kneading the dough to make it more elastic by selecting the knead dough menu until the dough is ready to be molded into noodles. Afterward, the Mizepi was baked at a temperature of 110 ℃ for 35 min and fried at 140 ℃ for 60 s. Table 1 shows the Mizepi formulation.

Table 1 Mizepi Formulation from Maize Flour and FPH

Nutritional content

The chemical analysis carried out included the water content using gravimetry method, ash with dry ashing method, fat by Soxhlet method, protein by Kjeldahl method. Furthermore carbohydrate with by difference, and energy with Atwater factor (AOAC, 2005). The analysis conducted on Mizepi products was closely related to proximate tests that help determine the nutritional content, and protein digestibility that assesses how much amino acids are absorbed by the body. Additionally, physical characteristics such as texture and color were also evaluated, which were beneficial in enhancing the quality of the product, particularly for children.

Protein digestibilty

Protein digestibility was carried out in vitro by analyzing the decrease in protein pH that occurred after the hydrolysis reaction. Protein digestibility was carried out in vitro by analyzing the decrease in protein pH that occurred after the hydrolysis reaction. Casein solution as standard and Mizepi in dry powder form were taken as much as 0.5 g for 2 repetitions. The sample was then added with 30 mL of distilled water pH 8.0 and stirred until homogeneous. Then 20 mL of the homogeneous mixture was taken for treatment, while the initial pH was measured from the remaining 20 mL sample that had been taken and then divided into two for 2 treatments. The first treatment was as a blank and the second treatment was given 1 mL of enzyme solution. The two samples were then incubated for 10 min at 37 ℃. The solution that had been incubated was then taken as much as 2 mL and put into a test tube, while the remaining pH was measured after incubation. 2 mL of solution in a test tube was then added to 4 mL of 0.1 M TCA then vortexed and centrifuged at 3500 rpm for 10 min. 1.5 mL of the supernatant produced from centrifugation was taken then 5 mL of Na₂CO₃ and 1 mL of foline were added. The solution was then incubated for 20 min at 37 ℃, and finally, the absorbance was measured using a spectrophotometer with a wavelength of 578 nm.

Color analysis

Color analysis used a colorimeter by taking samples every 4 h and added phosphate buffer pH 7 to carry out testing with a colorimeter. Black and white calibration references were used to standardize the tool before measurement. The analysis results were then converted to L* (Lightness), a* (redness), and b* (yellowness) values. Determine targets L, a, b, where; L, is brightness, positive value (+) means bright, value (-) means gloomy; axis a, positive value (+) means red, value (-) means green; axis b, a positive value (+) means yellow, and a negative value (-) means blue.

$$Hue=h^{*}=tan^{-1}\frac{a^{*}}{b^{*}}$$

(1)

$$Chroma = C^{*}=\sqrt{a^{2}+b^{*}}$$

(2)

Texture test

Mizepi’s texture test was first, activated the computer and texture analyzer machine equipped with a 1000 N load cell. Then installed a cylinder probe with a diameter of 2 mm and a lenght of 20 mm, then filled the compression percentage to 70%, test speed 5 mm/second, wait time 5 s, and code per sample. After that, calibrate the press distance. Next, place the sample according to the sample code to be tested. Finally, organize the graph and print the test results in units according to category.

Statistic analysis

Univariate analysis was used to determine the average value (mean) and standard deviation (standard deviation) of data on water content, ash content, protein, fat, carbohydrates and energy from the “Mizepi” product. Then the data will be tested for normality (p value) using the Shapiro Wilk test because the samples used are < 50 samples. The research results explained that bivariate analysis using the One Way Anova test included water, ash, fat, protein, carbohydrate, energy, protein digestibility, L*, a*, b*, hardness, and cohesiveness color tests. Multivariate analysis uses Duncan’s test, such as water, ash, fat, protein, carbohydrate, protein digestibility, L*, a*, b* color test because the diversity coefficient value is more than 10, while the Tukey test is energy and chroma value because the diversity coefficient value less than 5.

Results

Nutritional content

Table 2 showed that the water content in all Mizepi formulation has a water content ranging from 2 to 3.96%, where all formulas meet the standard emergency food requirements of less than 14% (Zoumas et al., 2002). The research results explain that the highest water content value is F6, while the lowest water content is F4.

Table 2 Contribution Nutrition Value from Mizepi Formulation with Maize Flour and FPH

Mizepi has an ash content ranging from 1.17 to 1.90%. This ash contentmeans that all formulations do not meet emergency food standardsis 2–3% (Zoumas et al., 2002), which can be interpreted as Mizepi products having better quality. The ash content of Mizepi products with the highest content is in the F6 formulation and the lowest is F3. Mizepi has a fat content ranging from 18.28 to 40.78%, which means some products meet standards, with an emergency food standard range of 35–45% (Zoumas et al., 2002). The highest fat content of Mizepi products is in the F2 formulation and the lowest is F6. Mizepi has a protein content of 8.67 – 27.99%.

These results show in Table 2 that the protein contribution of the F6 formulation does not meet the standard, while for F3 and F5 it exceeds the standard limit is range of 10–15% (Zoumas et al., 2002). The protein content of Mizepi products with the highest content is in the F5 formulation and the lowest is F6. Mizepi has a carbohydrate content of 39.29 − 67.19%. These results show that the carbohydrate contribution of the F2 formulation almost meets the standard is less than 0.71%, while for F6 and F7 it exceeds the standard limit, in standard range of 40–50% (Zoumas et al., 2002). The carbohydrate content of the Mizepi product is highest in the F6 formulation and the lowest is F1. Mizepi has a carbohydrate content of 231.77-238.57 kcal. These results show that the energy value contribution of all formulations meets standards in the range of 233–250 kcal (Zoumas et al., 2002). The highest energy content of Mizepi products is in the F5 formulation and the lowest is F6.

Protein digestibility

Table 3 shows the results of the protein digestibility of Mizepi products. The protein digestibility value is 43.6-75.3%. The protein digestibility value of the Mizepi product was highest in the F1 formulation and the lowest was F6. The results of this research also explain that using a higher ratio of FPH compared to maize flour does not guarantee a higher protein digestibility value isF2 and F3. However, the comparison results of using more maize flour will result in lower protein digestibility compared to products that use higher FPH, this is by F2 (7:4) and F3 (7:11) compared to F6 (11:4 ) and F7 (11:7).

Table 3 Protein digestibility from Mizepi with maize flour and FPH

Colour analysis

Table 4 shows the results of the color analysis of Mizepi products. Mizepi’s research results explain that the value of a is highest in formula F1 and lowest in F2, which can be interpreted as F1 getting closer to red while F2 is getting closer to green. The results of the research explain that all Mizepi samples are becoming increasingly yellow in the order of F3, F1, F5, F6, F4, F2, and F7. The research results explain that Mizepi products in order of brightest or whiter are F3, F1, F7, F5, F2, F4, and F6. These results show that using more maize flour than protein hydrolyzate will make the product brighter. Mizepi products are based on wavelength (⁰hue), which ranges from 56.2 to 57.33, which means the product is categorized as yellow-red. A higher chroma value interprets a very high color intensity, 

Table 4 Color Analysis Mizepi with Maize Flour and FPH

Texture test

The results of texture tests carried out on various parameters, namely hardness, springiness, cohesiveness, and adhesiveness, can be seen in Table 5. Mizepi with the highest hardness value is the F2 formulation, this is because it uses a higher FPH ratio while maize flour is lower. Mizepi has the highest cohesiveness in formula F6 and the lowest in F7, while for F3 and F5 it has the same value. Mizepi has the highest elasticity value at F4 and the lowest at F5. In Mizepi products, the ratio of a lot of maize flour ingredients makes the springiness value higher compared to using a lot of FPH, the springiness value is lower, as in F4 and F5. The highest adhesiveness value is F5 and the lowest is F3 and F7. The adhesiveness value is determined from a comparison of the two materials with different optimal levels of combination. Using more FPH will increase the adhesiveness value as in formula F5 (7:11), but this optimization also applies by looking at the maize flour combination side, namely in F3 (4:11) and F7 (7:11) which proves the adhesiveness value low even with higher FPH usage.

Table 5 Texture Analysis from Mizepi with Maize Flour and FPH

Discussion

Nutritional content

Protein

The results showed Table 2 that the higher composition of the fish protein hydrolyzate material used, the higher the protein contribution provided. This is in line with research on nugget products that the greater the addition of catfish protein hydrolyzate, the greater the protein content of the nuggets produced, and has a real effect (Darmawan, 2022). Apart from that, this research is in line with sago noodles with rebon shrimp protein hydrolyzate, namely that the higher the use of protein hydrolyzate products, the higher the protein content (Purba et al., 2020).

The use of high-protein fish hydrolysate contributes to higher protein levels because FPH flour itself has a fairly high protein content, namely 67 g/100 grams of FPH. However, the possibility of damage to the protein so that the protein content is reduced could occur due to the process of making Mizepi, such as the heating process (Maillard reaction) which makes condensation of amino acids with reducing sugar. The oven at 115 ⁰C for 35 min in this study was minimized to reduce protein loss.

Adequate protein intake is very important in emergencies. One of the functions of protein is as an antibody in the body to fight viruses and bacteria that can cause infections (Berdanier & Lynnette, 2021). Foods high in protein are very effective in feeling full for a long time (Chambers et al., 2015). This is because protein has a longer transit time and during the digestion process protein can release the hormone cholecystokinin which can increase feelings of fullness. So protein is a macronutrient that has a longer satiety effect than fat or carbohydrates (Probosari, 2019).

Fat

Mizepi product fat contribution in coconut oil ingredients and frying process. Coconut oil can contribute a fat content of 25% (Hatta & Laboko, 2021). The addition of coconut oil is not only used as a source of fat but also as a binding agent to improve the texture of Mizepi. Coconut oil added to flour will create stability in the dough and can also help create a light and soft texture in the dough. Coconut oil can help retain gases (carbon dioxide and steam) released during the roasting process. Another function of coconut oil is to reduce the hardness of the products made.

The fat content of Mizepi products has different ranges based on the combination of ingredients used. There are several formulations of the fat content in Mizepi products (F3, F5, and F6) which are almost similar to the results from research on instant noodles from sagon flour and combined flour protein, namely around 18.86–20.04% (Briliannita & Marlissa, 2020). The fat content of Mizepi formulas F1, F2, F4, and F7 in Table 2 obtained higher results than research on Sagon from lindur flour, namely around 28–30% (Afifah et al., 2022). The research results also explain that the higher the FPH product used, the lower the fat content of the product, this is in line with research conducted on sagon noodle products with rebon shrimp protein hydrolyzate (Purba et al., 2020).

It is feared that food products with a high fat content will easily go rancid due to the oxidation of lipids from coconut oil which can affect product quality. The lipid oxidation process in coconut oil encourages oxidation, such as in fish floss products for emergency food (Maharani et al., 2023). The oxidation process is avoided because it can damage food, so continue by looking at the free fatty acid levels in the product to see the shelf life of the product. The oxidation process hurts taste and undesirable aroma during the storage process at a temperature of 35 ⁰C in line with research on the shelf life of dry noodles from composite flour (corn-cassava) which shows that the recommended storage temperature is in the range of 28 ⁰C − 38 ⁰C (Kumalasari et al., 2022).

Carbohydrate

Mizepi’s carbohydrate content is getting higher in line with the comparison of the use of maize flour which is given as a carbohydrate contribution, 100 g of flour contains 85 g of carbohydrates (Ayuningtyas, 2019). This means that maize flour is made from corn kernels which contain 61 − 78% starch in dry form (db), non-starch polysaccharides (around 10%, db.), protein (6–12%, db), and lipids (3–6%, db) (Watson, 2003). The addition of maize flour reduces the protein content while on the other hand, FPH increases the protein and reduces the carbohydrate content. Fulfilling the need for carbohydrate content in emergency food has an effort to help provide a satiating effect on refugees so they are full and avoid hunger.

The results of this research are in line with the findings of Tomo et al. that the greater the use of maize flour, the higher the carbohydrate content (Utomo et al., 2017). Maize flour can contribute 98.8% of carbohydrates (Istiqomah et al., 2019). The results of Mizepi’s carbohydrate content are in line with research on products from cookies made from a combination of maize flour and banana flour, namely 68 g (Ramadhiany et al., 2022). The results of research on products made from banana flour (70%) and maize flour (30%) explain that they can achieve a carbohydrate content of up to 86.75% and a low protein content of only 2% (Diniyah et al., 2019). This is in line with the results of research on Mizepi products where maize flour is more suitable as a carbohydrate contribution.

Water content

The water content value of Mizepi is influenced by the raw material, namely maize flour or FPH. The results of research on Mizepi products show that the higher the ratio of maize flour used, the higher the water content of the product, and the combination with the use of a higher FPH ratio means that less water is needed so that the water content of the product is lower. This is because maize flour is made from corn which is composed of starch-type carbohydrate components consisting of amylose and amylopectin (Obadi et al., 2023). The ratio of amylose to amylopectin in maize flour is around 30% amylose and 75% amylopectin. The amylose contained in maize flour binds more water (hygroscopic), so the more maize flour you add, the higher the water content.

The water content of an emergency food product has an important meaning, namely low water content can inhibit the growth rate of microorganisms so that it can be stored for a long time and the product has quality that is maintained (Tapia et al., 2020). Controlling the water content or activity in a product is the main parameter responsible for food stability, modulating microbial responses, and determining the type of microorganisms (Tapia et al., 2020). The water content of Mizepi products is low because the ingredients used are dry in the heating process such as oven and frying. The frying process can reduce water content due to the evaporation process (Tamsir et al., 2021).

The water content in the material ranges from 3 to 7% to reach optimum stability so that microbial growth and chemical reactions can damage the material such as browning, hydrolysis, or fat oxidation Mizepi products are strictly avoided due to high water content with various heating treatments. Apart from that, heat treatment, namely oven at 115⁰C for 35 min, reduces the water content and attempts to avoid damage to the protein structure that is susceptible to heat (Rao et al., 2021). According to Ayustaningwarno et al., this is also consistent, namely that increasing temperature causes a decrease in water content (Fitriyono et al., 2020).

The results of Mizepi’s water content with research on cheese stick products from tapioca flour and corn flour, namely that using ingredients from corn flour with a higher ratio will result in a higher water content of the food product (Adimarta, 2022). Maize flour has a high content of amylopectin which makes the starch structure require more water. Amylopectin has a high ability to bind water. Cornstarch has many hydroxyl groups which can form hydrogen fish with water molecules. So, the higher the use of cornstarch, the higher the water content (Wang et al., 2022). The results of the research explain that the water content of dry noodles with corn flour substitution obtained comparable results where the water content was around 3.20–3.59% (Lena et al., 2022).

Ash content

Ash content is used to see the total amount of minerals in a food. Minerals contained in a material consist of two types of salts, namely organic and inorganic salts. Food ingredients consist of 96% inorganic materials and water, while the rest are mineral elements. The ash content is high in Mizepi products when a higher ratio of maize flour is used as raw material. The ash content increases when more maize flour is used because it contains mineral salts such as 20 mg calcium, 2 mg iron, and 30 mg phosphorus. The ash content of food products is influenced by raw materials, processing materials, and the processing methods carried out. Ash content is a chemical component that is not burned in the ashing process, such as SiO₂ and other metals. The effects of ashing are more likely to be caused by the quality of the raw materials and processes used (Sumartini et al., 2022).

The results of the ash content of Mizepi products do not meet standards. These results are not in line with research on dry noodle products made from tuna flour can reach (4.88% db) higher than wheat flour (0.53% db) (Canti et al., 2020). Other similar research also obtained results that meet the standard, namely 2.42–5.07% for dry noodles substituted with seaweed (Aditia et al., 2021). Mizepi’s ash content results are still low when compared with emergency food requirements, but the ash content required in the SNI for dry noodles, namely a maximum of 0.1%.

Based on SNI, maize flour products have an ash content of 0.7% (Mahendra et al., 2019). The ash content in starch comes from minerals in the seeds, and also from soil and air contamination during processing. The ash content of a material made from flour is influenced by the extraction process and washing the flour/starch with water so that water-soluble minerals are easily wasted with dregs (Rahman, 2018).

Energy

Mizepi has an energy content of 231.77–238.57 kcal shows in Table 2. Where all formulations, both F1 – F7, are by the recommended emergency food standards. So Mizepi products can be used as a solution for emergency food products. The energy contribution provided comes from raw materials, namely maize flour, FPH flour, and coconut oil which contribute to forming complete nutritional content.

Energy adequacy that meets the total emergency food energy standards is suitable to be provided in phase I of the initial emergency response stage to maintain the nutritional status of refugees and prevent hunger. It is important to provide adequate energy intake to disaster victims to prevent nutritional problems resulting from inadequate intake.

The increasing use of maize flour in this study increased the total energy of the Mizepi product. This is because the energy content of corn as a basic ingredient for maize flour is 366 kcal/100 grams. The energy content of the selected formulation has a total energy of 232.57 kcal per 50 g of Mizepi product. The research results show that the energy content of Mizepi products is by emergency food requirements but is not as high as biscuit products made from banana flour and the addition of maize flour, reaching 439.61 calories. This research is in line with this research, where the addition of maize flour formula will increase the calorie contribution (Utomo et al., 2017).

Protein digestibility

Mizepi has a protein digestibility content of 43.6–75.3% which can be interpreted as a very good value shows in Table 3. The protein digestibility value of Mizepi products is influenced by the basic raw material used, namely fish protein hydrolyzate, which has been known by basic material research to have a degree of hydrolysis of 80–90%. The results of Mizepi protein digestibility prove that the use of maize flour with the best FPH is in a ratio of 1:1. The results of this research also explain that using a higher ratio of FPH compared to maize flour does not guarantee a higher protein digestibility value, namely F2 and F3. However, the comparison results of using more maize flour will result in lower protein digestibility compared to products that use higher FPH, this is by F2 (7:4) and F3 (7:11) compared to F6 (11:4 ) and F7 (11:7).

Protein digestibility is needed in a product, namely to be able to be hydrolyzed into amino acids by digestive enzymes. High protein digestibility means that protein can be hydrolyzed well into amino acids so that the amount of amino acids that can be absorbed and used by the body is high and vice versa (Almeida et al., 2020). Apart from that, products targeted at children also have high protein digestibility, indicating that the amount of amino acids that can be absorbed and used by the body is high and is beneficial for children’s growth and development (Day et al., 2022).

Color analysis

The L* (dark to bright value), a* (red to green value), and b* (yellow to blue value) values displayed on the monitor screen are recorded (Suita et al., 2023). Color measurements were carried out on 3 different surface parts of each Mizepi sample. Psychometric parameters which include 3 equations, namely hue (1) and chroma (2) are calculated using the results of color measurements (L*, a*, and b* values) with the following formula.

The third color dimension is the brightness of the color which is expressed by the symbol L. This L value has a range from the value 0 which indicates the color is getting blacker to the value 100 which shows the color getting white (Iswara et al., 2019). The research results explain that using more maize flour than protein hydrolyzate will make the product brighter. Optimizing the color of emergency food products can make them more appealing to refugees.

Hue value is a color characteristic based on light reflected by an object which is the overall value that is dominated by a product or the main color of the product (Hudayati et al., 2021). One of the factors that influence the Mizepi hue value, namely yellow-red, is temperature. When processed using heat, a non-enzymatic browning process will occur. This browning produces the desired smell, aroma, and taste. The frying process will cause changes in the hue of Mizepi. Mizepi’s color change is caused by a non-enzymatic browning reaction (Maillard reaction) that occurs during the frying process.

This is in line with pumpkin flour and sword koro flour, namely that the higher the b value, the color intensity (chroma), the more intense the color (Loelinda et al., 2017). Chroma describes how much color intensity a food product or food ingredient has. A higher chroma value interprets a very high color intensity, Mizepi products are in order of lowest intensity, starting from F7, F2, F6, F4, F5, F1, and F3.

Texture analysis

Mizepi with the highest hardness value is the F2 formulation, this is because it uses a higher FPH ratio while maize flour is lower. The use of maize flour in a much higher ratio than FPH makes the product have a lower hardness value or be crunchier. However, using maize flour with a combination of almost comparable FPH will get a better hardness value than using very little maize flour. Maize flour has been proven to have a role in helping improve the texture of a product because it makes the product crunchier due to its amylopectin content.

Mizepi has a crunchy texture because it contains 74–76% amylopectin and 24–26% amylose. Maize flour is very good for emulsified products because it can bind water and retain water during cooking. Maize flour produces a slightly cloudy paste with a stiff viscosity and gel. The functions of maize flour include improving texture, taste, water-holding capacity, and improving elasticity in the final product.

Cohesiveness is the compression area from the second compression to the first compression (Iswara et al., 2019). Cohesiveness is the level of material when it can be destroyed by mechanical movement (Waziiroh et al., 2023). The use of maize flour plays a role in creating a higher cohesiveness value, but the combination with FPH will also result in a lower cohesiveness value. In addition, the increase in cohesiveness value is due to a decrease in the amount of water content, so that the cavities between particles become closer.

Springiness or elasticity is the recovery time between the first bite and the second bite (Rahmadi et al., 2021). Mizepi with a large ratio of maize flour makes the springiness value higher compared to using a lot of FPH, the springiness value is lower as in F4 and F5.

Formula F4, namely the ratio of maize flour to FPH (7:4), has the highest time to return to its initial position after the first compression compared to other Mizepi formulas. The maize flour content can create continuous bonds in the dough. Maize flour does not contain gluten but still has elastic properties due to its ability to absorb water and its gel-forming (gelatinization) properties (Iswara et al., 2019). This is also explained in research on optimizing brownie formulas using a mixture, explaining that using non-wheat flour will still form protein-starch-lipid (Haliza et al., 2012). Protein and starch have a role in forming the structure of the dough by trapping air in the starch-protein-lipid matrix.

Adhesiveness can be referred to as the force required to attract food from a surface. The adhesiveness value is determined from a comparison of the two materials with different optimal levels of combination. Using more FPH will increase the adhesiveness value as in formula F5 (7:11), but this optimization also applies by looking at the maize flour combination side, namely in F3 (4:11) and F7 (7:11) which proves the adhesiveness value low even with higher FPH usage.

Texture research on purple sweet potatoes explains that the higher the adhesiveness, the higher the sticky power of the material (Shaliha et al., 2017). Formula F5 has the highest stickiness because it has the highest adhesiveness. Heating dough containing gluten can cause the formation of sticky properties (Iswara et al., 2019). A high adhesiveness value is directly proportional to higher sticky properties. Wheat flour mixed with water will cause the formation of polymers which form a film layer so that the product becomes sticky. The stickiness of this FPH product is very high. If it is not mixed with ingredients such as maize flour, the product will not be finished and will be difficult to combine. Amylopectin contained in starch can increase its adhesive properties and thus also affect its stickiness.

Conclusions

Variations in Mizepi formulations affected the energy (231.77-238.57 kcal), ash content (1.17–1.90%), water content (2-3.96%), protein (8.67 – 27.99%), fat (18,28–40,78%), and carbohydrates (39,29% − 67,19%). Mizepi has a protein digestibility content of 43.6–75.3% which can be interpreted as a very good value. Mizepi products that protein content increases with FPH ingredient formulations, while the carbohydrate content increases with more maize flour ingredients. The texture of Mizepi products is crunchy in formulations that use more maize flour than PFH, because of the amylopectin content in maize flour. The texture value for the adhesiveness category gets higher along with the use of more FPH material. Mizepi has a color in the yellow red category. Mizepi with the formulation F4 (7:4) grams meets emergency food requirements both in terms of nutrient content.