International Food Research Journal 21(6): 2161-2167 (2014)
Journal homepage: http://www.ifrj.upm.edu.my

Pasting properties mixtures of mangrove fruit flour (Sonneratia caseolaris)and starches
1,2*

Jariyah, 3Widjanarko, S. B., 3Yunianta, 3Estiasih, T. and 4Sopade, P. A.

Department of Food Technology,Faculty of Industrial Technology, University of Pembangunan Nasional“Veteran”, Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia 60294
2
Doctoral Program of Agriculture Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Universityof Brawijaya, Malang, East
Java, Indonesia 65145
3
Departement ofFood Science and Technology, Faculty of AgriculturalTechnology, University of Brawijaya,
Malang, East Java, Indonesia 65145
4
Centre for Nutrition and Food Sciences,Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation,
University of Queensland, St Lucia QLD 4072, Australia.
1

Article history

Abstract

Received: 5 March 2014
Received in revised form:
19 April 2014
Accepted: 22 April 2014

Mangrove fruit from species Sonneratia caseolaris can be an important raw material infunctional food with dietary fiber, vitamins, and flavonoid, as well as its anti-cholesterol andanti-diabetic properties. Understanding its pasting properties of the flour from it when mixed
with starches will further enhance its utilization as a functional ingredient, so its can be added
to food as a supplement to enhance the beneficial health properties.The aims of this researchwere to study pasting properties, including physicochemical. An experiment the mangrove fruit
flour (Mang) mixed with waxy maize starch (WaMa), potato starch (PS) and wheat flour (WhF)
at level ranges of 0-100% were studied in water using the Rapid Visco-Analyser (RVA). The
results showed that the mangrove fruit flour did not change the pasting patterns of the mixtures,and the pasting temperatures of the samples ranged 65.1–77.3oC. The mangrove fruit flour
significantly decreased (p < 0.05) the pasting parameters of the WaMa and PS as it diluted thestarch contents in the mixtures. The peak viscosity of the Mang:WaMa mixtures decreased
from 4342 to 1617cP. Similarly, in the Mang:PS it decreased from 10883 to 3127cP and in the
Mang:WhF from 4079 to 1651 cP. The mangrove fruit flour did not change the setback viscosityof the Mang:PS and Mang:WhF mixtures, and there were significant positive correlations (r ≥0.89; p ≤ 0.01) between the breakdown and peak viscosities of the mixtures. In mangrove fruit
composite flours, therefore, more starch-containing base flours are required to achieve the sameconsistency as the undiluted flours.

Keywords
Mangrove fruit flour
Potato starch
Waxy maize
Wheat flour
Pasting properties© All Rights Reserved

Introduction
Mangrove fruit has been long consumed by societyliving in coastal area in Indonesia as a food material
or ingredient in various processed food products.
At present this fruit is consumed only for domestic
needs, not for commercialization. Especially EastJava Province of Indonesia, there are nine species
of mangrove that produce edible fruits (Kesemat,
2007; Mangrove Information Center, 2009). Theseare Sonneratia, Ceriops, Bruguiera, Avicennia,
Xylocarpus, Aegiceras, Lumnitcera, Waru andBariringtonia asiatica (Noor et al., 2006). Sonneratia
caseolaris is a popular one, which is non-toxic (Chenet al., 2009), soft in texture having specific flavours
and nice taste, various food products have been
produced from it, including syrup (Abeywickrama
and Jayasooriya, 2010), cakes and steamed pudding(Brown et al., 2006). During harvesting season,each mangrove tree can produce up to two kg per*Corresponding author.
Email: jariyah_icha@yahoo.co.id/jariyahupn65@gmail
Tel: +62 318782179; Fax: +62 318782257

day. Despite its availability, information on the foodproperties of mangrove fruit from Indonesia is limited,
and this has hindered these mangrove resources frombecoming a valuable commodity, economically andfunctionally.
Previous research has shown that the mangrove
fruits (Sonneratia caseolaris) contain about 15.95%
carbohydrate (by difference), moisture 77.10%, fat
0.86%, ash 3.85% and protein 2.24%. While themangrove species Bruguiera ghymnorrhiza having
high calorific value (300.29 Kcal/100 g), crude fiber
10.09% and 68.88% of carbohydrate (Patil and Chavan,2013). Moreover, amylose content of mangrove
species Rhizophpora stylosa has been reported to beabout 22.3–26.3% (Hanashiro et al., 2004). Starchin Canavalia cathartica mangrove seeds about 44.752%, crude protein 25.9%, carbohydrate 58.5-73.3%,
magnesium, zinc, manganese were 122.65; 18.38;
8.15 mg/100 g, respectively and calorific value ofabout 1516-1517 kJ/100 g (Bhagya et al., 2007).

2162

Jariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

In medicine, mangrove fruits are also used
as analgesic and anti-inflammatory agent, antibacteria (Bandaranayake, 2002) and they possess
hepatoprotective (Charoenteeraboon et al., 2007),
antihyperglycemic (Sadhu et al., 2006; Ashok etal., 2010) and contain antioxidants (Banerjee, 2008;
Minqing et al., 2009; Phaechamud et al., 2012).
Mangrove fruit and consequently, its flour, isusually used with starch-containing materials forvarious food preparations. Wheat flour is widely used
for baked goods, while maize and potato starches,for example, have unique properties, and can form
pastes with high viscosity and high clarity, and arewidely used in the food industry as, for instance,
thickeners (Park et al., 2009 and Cai et al., 2011). It
is, therefore, possible, to mix these starch-containing
materials with mangrove fruit flour for various
products with the added benefits of the functional
properties of mangrove fruits. Pasting properties
are important in the food industry when materials
are heated in (excess) water. Pasting properties ofvarious materials, individually and in mixtures, havebeen studied (Collar et al., 2006; Sopade et al., 2006;
Park et al., 2009; Sharma et al., 2009; Tsakama etal., 2010; BeMiller, 2011; Cai et al., 2011; Waramboi
et al., 2011), but despite being a food ingredient,pasting characteristics of mangrove fruit flours havenot been studied alone or mixed with other materials.
Hence, this research investigated pasting propertiesof mangrove fruit flour when mixed with starchcontaining materials with a view to guiding food usesof mangrove resources.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Mangrove fruits from species Sonneratia
caseolaris (growing period, July – September) wereobtained from Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia. Waxy
maize and potato starches were products of National
Starch (Pty) Ltd., Epping Rd, Lane Cove, NSW
2066, while plain wheat flour was obtained from a
local shop in Brisbane, Australia, where the studies
were done. These starches and flour were chosen
to represent cereals, root crops and tubers that canbe combined with mangrove fruit flours to prepare
various and diverse foods. The starches and flour
were individually mixed with the mangrove fruit
flour in ratios 0-100%, with the mixing done in arotary mixer overnight (about 12 hr) for homogeneity
before analysis.
Processing of mangrove fruit flour
The mature mangrove (Sonneratia caseolaris)

fruits were collected and selected randomly
from different parts of mangrove trees, and wereimmediately transferred to the laboratory, where
they were peeled and blended (Speed 1; Philips
HR-2810/A, Mexico) with distilled water (1:3). The
resulting dispersion was sieved 50 mesh (Tristar-237,
Surabaya, Indonesia) to remove seeds, was dried in acabinet drier (Kersa Jaya, Surabaya, Indonesia) for
15-18 h at 50-60oC, and ground to pass through 80mesh sieve.
Chemical properties
Mineral analysis was done using the proceduresin Waramboi et al. (2011), and calcium, potassium,magnesium, phosphorus, and sulphur contents arereported. Moisture content of the mangrove flour
was determined using the oven dry method (AOAC,
2007). The procedure (Dumas method) in Waramboi
et al. (2011) was followed for the protein content,
and crude protein was defined as N x 6.25.
Dietary fibre
The MegazymeTM dietary fibre procedure(K-TDFR) was used. The mangrove fruit flour (1 g)
was dissolved in 40 mL MES-TRIS 0.05 M buffer
solution (pH 8.2) at 24oC and stirred, before 50 μL
thermostable α-amylase solution was added, shaken
in a water bath at 95-100oC for 35 min, cooled to 60oC,
and 100 μL protease solution was added. The mixture
was incubated at 60oC for 35 min before 5 mL 0.56 N
HCl was added and pH adjusted to 4.1–4.8, and 200
μL amyloglucosidase was added, prior to incubation
at 60oC for 30 min., with stirring. The mixture wasfiltered with two portions of 10 mL water at 70oC.
Insoluble dietary fibre was determined by
dividing the residue into two parts; one residue wasanalysed for protein (Kjeldahl procedure), and thesecond residue was analysed for ash. Soluble dietary
fibre was determined using the filtrate by adding 95%
ethanol at 60oC, precipitating for 60 min, filteringand drying the residue, with one residue analysed forprotein and the second residue analysed for ash as
before.
Pectin content
This was determined following the procedure inRanggana (1979), and it involved weight about 50 g of
the mangrove flour into a beaker, to which 300 mL of
0.01 N HCl was then added, boiled and filtered undersuction. The residue was washed with hot water, andthe filtrate was collected. To the residue was added
100 mL of 0.3 N HCl, boiled for 10 min, and filtered.
All the filtrate was pooled, cooled and made to 500
mL, before 100–200 mL aliquot was pipetted into

Jariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

a beaker, into which 250 mL of distilled water wasadded prior neutralization with 1 M NaOH. About 10
mL of 1 M NaOH was added, stirred before standing
overnight, after which 50 mL of 1 N acid was added,
allowed to stand for 5 min, before 25 mL of 1 N
calcium chloride was added, stirred, left to stand for
1 h before boiling for 1-2 min, and filtering using awashed, dried and pre-weighed Whatman No.1 filter
paper to collect the formed calcium pectinate. The
pectinate was washed with boiling water until freeof chloride (silver nitrate, AgNO3 test), and the paperwith the pectinate was dried overnight at 100oC,
cooled and weighed for the amount of the calcium
pectinate produced.
Galacturonic acid
The galacturonic acid of
the pectin wasdetermined following the procedure of Ranggana(1979). About 50 mg was weighed into a conicalflask, before 50 mL of 0.05 N NaOH was added,
and allowed to stand for 30 min. About 1 mL of thesolution was taken, and 50 mL of water was added
before 1 mL was pippetted into a tube, to which 1 mLof carbazole and 12 mL of H2SO4 were added. This
was allowed to stand for 10 min before the colour was
read at 525 nm in a spectrophotometer (Pharmacia
LKB-Ultrospec III UV-Vis Spectrophotometer)against a sample blank.
Pasting properties
The pasting properties of the mixtures of thepotato starch, waxy maize strach and wheat flour
individually with the mangrove fruit flour were
determined using the Rapid Visco Analyser (RVA-4,
Newport Scientific Pty Ltd., Warriewood, NSW2102,
Australia). Distillled water was added to the sample
mixtures to give a total weight of 25 g and 15%
solids content (from preliminary studies). The RVA
Standard Profile 1 (Mahasukhonthachat et al., 2010)
was used, and pasting parameters were obtainedusing Thermocline for Windows. In order to further
characterise the pasting behaviours, the visosity
breakdown ratios (BDR) was defined as the ratio oftrough to peak viscosity (Waramboi et al., 2011).
Statistical analysis
Samples were randomised and duplicated in all
the analyses above. The Minitab_ver15 software(Minitab Inc., 1829 Pine Hall Road, State College, PA
16801-3008, USA) was used for analysis of variance(ANOVA). A 95% confidence level was used to judge
significance. Instead of the standard deviations of themeans, standard errors of the means (SE of mean), as
obtained from the Minitab, are reported.

2163

Results and Discussion
Chemical properties
Table 1 shows the mineral content of themangrove fruit flour with potassium being about 23
g/kg. This value is higher than the value reported
for sweet potato by Waramboi et al. (2011). The
mangrove fruit flour would, therefore, be a bettersource of potassium than sweet potato. Minerals arevery important for biochemical reactions in the bodyas a co-factor of enzyme. For examples, calcium,
phosphorus and magnesium build and maintainbones and teeth, whereas sodium and potassium help
maintain balance of water, acids and bases in body
fluids, and are involved in acid-base balance andtransfer of nutrients in and out of individual of cells(Ensminger et al., 1995).
The total dietary fiber in mangrove fruit flour
was about 63.7%, which is distributed amongst
soluble (9.8%) and insoluble components (53.9%). In
comparation, bread fruit flour was measured to havea slightly higher (68%) total dietary fiber (Manullang
and Vivin, 1995), while seaweeds have comparable
fiber content (64%) (Benjama and Mansniyom, 2012).
It is well recognised that dietary fiber is importantin human wellness because, for example, it binds
and/or encapsulates bile salts to reduce cholesterol(Lisa et al., 1999). The mangarove fruit flour pectincontent measured (9%) is lower than 11% reportedby Duke and Jackes (1987). The starch content of
the mangrove fruit flour, which was determinedfollowing the modified MegazymeTM procedure in
Mahasukhonthachat et al. (2010), was negligible.
General observation of the pasting properties of thesamplesFigures 1-3 show the pasting properties of the
mixtures of the mangrove fruit flour, waxy maize
starch (MaWa), potato starch (Mang-PS), andwheat flour (Mang-WhF), while Table 2 shows thepasting parameters of these mixtures. Potato starchdisplayed higher peak and final viscosities than pure
waxy maize starch and wheat flour. The higher RVA
viscosity of potato starch than that of waxy maize
starch has been discussed before (Sorba and Sopade,2013). The mangrove fruit flour on its own pasted
without the characteristic starch pasting pattern (notshown). As reported above, the starch content of themangrove fruit flour was negligible, and the changes
in the pasting viscosity of the mangrove fruit flour in
the RVA could have resulted from the swelling of its
pectin. As expected because of its no-starch diluting
effects, the pasting parameters of the mixtures weresignificantly (p < 0.05) affected by the presence ofJariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

2164

Table 1. Chemical properties of the mangrove fruit flour
Component
Ca (g/kg)
K (g/kg)Mg (g/kg)
Na (g/kg)
P (g/kg)
S (g/kg)
Crude protein (%)
Crude fats (%)
Moisture (%)
Pectin (%)
In vitro protein digestibility (%)
Galatorunic acid (%)
IDF (%)SDF (%)

Content
0.9 ± 0.1
23.0 ± 1.2
0.8 ± 0.0
8.0 ± 0.5
2.2 ± 0.0
1.5 ± 0.0
6.2 ± 0.1
4.7 ± 0.3
11.3±0.2
9.0± 0.1
69.1±0.2
2.2±0.0
53.9 ±0.0
9.8 ±0.0

Values are mean ± standard deviation.
In vitro protein digestibility was dtereminedusing the procedure Tinus et al. (2012).

Figure 3. Typical pasting curves the mangrove fruit flourwith wheat flour mixtures

Figure 1. Typical pasting curves the mangrove fruit flourwith wazy maize starch mixtures

Figure 2. Typical pasting curves the mangrove fruit flourwith potato starch mixtures

Typical pasting curves for the mangrove fruit flour with potato starch mixtures

the mangrove fruit flour, and all the mixtures pasted
at a higher viscosity than the mangrove fruit flour.
The presence of the mangrove fruit flour did
not significantly (p > 0.05) change the pasting
temperatures of the mixtures (Table 2). This suggeststhat the pectin and dietary fiber in the mangrove fruit
flour did not preferentially bind and/or withdraw waterfrom the starches. For the waxy maize starch, the peak,trough, breakdown, and final viscosities reduced withthe mangrove fruit flour at all the concentrations.
The setback viscosity, which is a measure of starchretrogradation, increased as the mangrove fruit flourcontent increased in the Mang:WaMa mixtures.
Pasting properties of mangrove fruit flour and waxy
maize starch mixtures
The peak viscosity of the Mang:WaMa mixtures

Figure 4. Relationship between the peak and breakdown
viscocities of the mangrove fruit flour with waxy maize
starch mixtures

decreased from 4323-1617 cP and there were
insignificant (p > 0.05) differences at substitutions 4080% (Table 2). The mangrove fruit flour substantiallyreduced the viscosity, and being a non-starchmaterial, this is akin to the dilution effects of dietaryfiber on sweet potato pasting properties as reportedby Mais (2008). Moreover, the soluble dietary fibrein magrove fruit flour are pectins, whereas insoluble
dietary fiber are cellulose, hemicellulose, lignins,and these are generally known to reduce viscosityof starch (Gomez et al., 2003; Collar et al., 2006).
However, guar gum has been reported to increase thepasting properties of starch-water systems (Sharma
et al., 2009).
Reduction in peak viscosity indicates a decreased
ability to swell and/or gelatinise. Beta and Corke(2001) reported peak viscosity indicates the waterbinding capacity and has a positive correlation
with the quality of the final product, for example,
the volume of dough development. Peak viscosity
is considered to represent the equilibrium point
between swelling and the rupture of starch granules(Sharma et al., 2009). Peak viscosity can also reduce
relative to one another if the amount of ungelatinised
starch decreases prior to pasting. Trough viscosity ofthe mixtures ranged from 794 cP (80:20) to 912 cP(20:80), and were significantly (p < 0.05) affectedby the mangrove fruit flour. Trough viscosity is theviscosity at the end of holding time at 95oC. The final
viscosity ranged from 1122 cP to 1315 cP. The final

Jariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

2165

Table 2. Pasting properties of the mangrove fruit flourwith waxy maize starch, potato starch and wheat flour
FractionPV (cP)TV (cP)

0:100
20:80
40:60
60:40
80:20

4323.3 ± 38.7 a4052.0 ± 71.2 a
2731.3 ± 870.5b
2438.0 ± 66.1 b
1617.3 ± 65.7b

1091.3 ± 15.2 a
911.7 ± 10.3b
881.0 ± 92.7b
815.0 ± 10.7b
794.0 ± 30.6b

0:100
20:80
40:60
60:40
80:20

10883.3 ± 457.1b
12513.3 ± 119.7a
11128.3 ± 102.9b
7069.0 ± 117.3c
3127.0 ± 206.9d

3777.3 ± 1104.1a
3032.0 ± 808.5ab
3427.0 ± 99.8 ab2715.0 ± 50.0 ab
1549.0 ± 60.7 b

0:100
20:80
40:60
60:40
80:20

4079.3 ± 305.5 b
5679.0 ± 218.1 a
4230.7 ± 64.8b
2907.0 ± 58.7 c
1650.7 ± 74.8 d

1767.0 ± 31.6 c
2777.0 ± 52.9 a
1929.3 ± 53.9 b
1418.0 ± 40.6 bc
1063.0 ± 46.1 c

BV (cP)
Mang:WaMa
3232.0 ± 47.2a
3140.3 ± 80.7a
1850.3 ± 790.1 b
1673.0 ± 58.8b
823.3 ± 35.1b
Mang:PS
7106.0 ± 726.3b
9481.3 ± 910.1 a
7701.3 ± 165.5b
4354.0 ± 67.5 c
1578.0 ± 146.3d
Mang:WhF
2977.3 ± 284.4a
2902.0 ± 171.9a
2301.3 ± 12.3 b
1489.0 ± 22.8 c
587.7 ± 49.7 d

FV (cP)SV (cP)PT ( 0 C)

1315.3 ± 7.5a1224.0 ± 13.4ab
1223.6 ± 59.1ab
1121.7 ± 17.8b
1223.7 ± 47.0ab

224.0 ± 8.8 c
312.3 ± 15.2b
342.7 ± 53.4ab
306.7 ± 7.1bc
429.7 ± 16.6a

72.6 ± 0.2 c
75.7 ± 0.2 b
76.8 ± 0.5 ab
77.4 ± 0.1 a
77.3 ± 0.5 a

6817.3 ± 286.4a
4825.7 ± 293.7b
4314.0 ± 146.4b
3359.7 ± 67.8 c
2288.0 ± 96.1 d3040.0 ± 1353.2a
1793.7 ± 1100.5a
887.0 ± 47.7a
644.7 ± 40.0a
739.0 ± 38.1a

63.5 ± 0.4 b
65.1 ± 0.0 a
65.5 ± 0.0 a
65.8 ± 0.4 a
65.2 ± 0.4 a

2321.3 ± 1053.0b
3938.0 ± 91.1 a
2868.0 ± 68.2 ab2321.3 ± 40.5 b
1902.7 ± 49.7 b

1219.3 ± 516.3a
1161.0 ± 49.7a
938.7 ± 16.9a
903.3 ± 7.1 a
839.7 ± 3.7 a

66.2 ± 0.5 a
68.0 ± 0.5 a
68.7 ± 0.3 a
68.0 ± 0.6 a
68.8 ± 0.5 b

In a column for each mixture, values with different letters are significantly (p < 0.05) different.
PV: peak viscosity, TV: trough viscosity, BD: breakdown visosity, FV: final viscosity, SV: setback
viscosity, PT: pasting temperature, Mang:mangrove fruit flour; WaMa: waxy maize starch, PS:
potato starch, and WhF: wheat flour

viscosity of the mixtures are significantly different(p < 0.05), and the results (Table 2) indicated that
the Mang:WaMa mixtures had a very rigid viscousformation than the non-substituted waxy maize
starch (Mang:WaMa, 0:100). The final viscosity is
the most commonly used parameter to define sample
quality, as it indicates the ability of the material toform a viscous paste or gel after cooking and cooling(Sopade et al., 2006). The setback viscosity ranged
between 224 and 430 cP with Mang:WaMa (80:20)
having the highest and Mang:WaMa (0:100) was thelowest (Table 2). A low setback viscosity indicatesa higher resistance to retrogradation (Ikegwu et al.,2009), and the results in Table 2 implies that the
mangrove fruit flour enhanced retrogradation of thewaxy maize starch. For food systems, for example,
soups, puddings and thickeners, where retrogradation
is desirable for high final viscosity, the mangrove fruit
flour would be an ingredient of choice. However, forbaked goods, where retrogradation is not desirable
because of attendant quality and sensory issues(e.g. staling), the mangrove fruit flour would not be
preferred.
Figure 4 shows a significant positive relationship(r = 0.89, p ≤ 0.01) between the breakdown and peakviscosities. The breakdown viscosity is a derived
pasting parameter, and it is the difference between
the peak and trough viscosities. The observed positive
relationship indicates that the Mang:WaMa mixtures,
which exhibited high peak viscosity, are likely to havehigh breakdown values. A high breakdown viscosity
indicates a lower ability to withstand heating andshear stress during cooking (Tsakama et al., 2010).
This is important for heat processing that involves
shearing such as extrusion. From the trends between
the primary RVA parameters (peak, trough and final
viscosities) and the mangrove fruit flour substitution,
an exponential relationship could be used to describe
the trends (not shown). It appeared that the peakviscosity was the most sensitive to the mangrove fruit
flour substitution, and the final viscosity was the leastsensitive, while the substitution did not materially

Figure 5. Relationship between the peak and breakdown
viscocities of the mangrove fruit flour with potato starch
mixtures

Figure 6. Relationship between the peak and breakdown
viscocities of the mangrove fruit flour with wheat flour
mixtureschange the final viscosity of the Mang:WaMa mixtures
when the non-substituted sample (Mang:WaMa,
0:100) was excluded.
Pasting properties of mangrove fruit flour and potato
starch mixtures
The pasting temperature of the Mang:PS mixtures
was also not significantly affected by the mangrove
flour substitution (Table 2). Figure 5 also shows
the significant positive relationship (r = 0.97, p ≤0.01) between the peak and breakdown viscosities.
Like the Mang:WaMa mixtures, the peak viscosity
appeared to be the most sensitive to the mangrove
fruit flour substitution, while the trough viscosity of
the Mang:PS seemed to be the least sensitive.
Pasting properties of mangrove fruit flour and wheat
flour mixtures
The mangrove fruit flour did not significantly (p> 0.05) affect the setback viscosityof the Mang:WhF
mixtures (Table 2). This shows that possibly becauseof differences in the constituents of waxy maize
starch, potato starch and wheat flour, the mangrove
fruit flour affected the pasting parameters differently.
Of particular mention is the increase in the pasting
parameters at the 20% substitution (Mang:WhF,
20:80). Perhaps, the mangrove fruit flour interactedwith the starch and non-starch (e.g. protein and fiber)components of the wheat flour to increase swelling.
Sasaki et al. (2000) reported that addition of nonstarch polysaccharide to wheat flour can increase
peak and breakdown viscosity and cause rigid gel aswater binding capacity is modified.

2166

Jariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

Like for the other mixtures, the peak andbreakdown viscosities of the Mang:WhF mixtures
were significantly positively related (r = 0.89, p≤ 0.01) as shown in Fig. 6. With or without thenon-substituted mixture, the peak viscosity of the
Mang:WhF mixtures appeared to be the most sensitive,
while the final viscosity seemed to show the leastsensitivity to the substitution like the Mang:WaMa
mixtures. Comparing the three groups of mixtures,
however, the Mang:PS mixtures appeared to be themost sensitive to the substitution, while both the
Mang:WaMa and Mang:WhF seemed to be equallysensitive.

Acknowledgements

Conclusions

Abeywickrama, W.S.S. and Jayasooriya, M.C.N. 2010.
Tropical Agricultural Research and Extension 1: 1618.
AOAC. 2007. Official Method of Analysis (18th Ed.).
Arlington, USA: Association of Official Analysis
Chemistry.
Ashok, K.T., Viswanadh, V., Ponnapali, M.G., Amtul, Z.A.,
Radhakrishnan, S.V.S., Sachin, B.A., Madhusudana,
K. and Janaswamy, M.R. 2010. Oleanic acid-an
α-Glucosidase inhibitory and antihyperglycemic active
compound from the fruits of Sonneratia caseolaris.
Journal of Medicinal Aromatic Plants 1 (1): 19-23.
Bandaranayake, W.M. 2002. Bioactive, bioactive
compounds and chemical constituents of mangrove
plants. Wetlands Ecology and Management 10: 421452.
Banerjee, D., Chakrabarti, S., Hazra, A.K., Banerjee, S.,
Ray, J. and Mukherjee, B. 2008. Antioxidant activity
and total phenolics of some mangroves in Sundarbans.
African Journal of Biotechnology 7(6): 805-810.
BeMiller, J.N. 2011. Pasting, paste, and gel properties ofstacrh-hydrocolloid commbinations. Carbohydrate
Polymers 86: 386-423.
Benjama, O. and Masniyom, P. 2012. Biochemicalcomposition and physicochemical properties of two
red seaweeds (Gracilaria fisheri and G. tenuistipitata)from the Pattani Bay in Southern Thailand.
Songklanakarin Journal of Science Technology 34(2):223-230.
Beta, T. and Corke.H. 2001. Noodle quality as related tosorghum starch properties. Cereal Chemistry 78: 417420.
Bhagya, B., Sridhar, K.R., Seena, S. and Bhat, R. 2007.
Nutritional qualities of ripened beans of mangrove
wild legume Canavalia cathartica Thouars. Journalof Agricultural Technology 3: 255-274.
Brown, B., Kuilu, Ibnu, Ben. 2006. Cooking with
mangroves 36 Indonesian mangrove recipes. Mangrove
Action Project Indonesia.p.26-34.
Cai, X., Hong, Y., Gu, Z. and Zhang, Y. 2011. The effectof electrostatic interactions on pasting propertiesof potato starch/xanthan gum combinations. Food
Research International 44: 3079-3086.
Charoenteeraboon, J., Wetwitayaklung, P., Limmatvapirat,
C. and Paechamud, T. 2007. Hepatoprotective activity

The mangrove fruit flour is a rich mineral source,
and can also be a valuable source of dietary fiber withfunctional properties. While harvesting time and post
harvest handling can affect the nutrients, the mangrove
fruit flour can be incorporated in cereals, root crops
and tubers to make foods. Mixing the mangrove fruit
flour with the waxy maize starch, potato starch andwheat flour did not change the pasting patterns or
viscograms of the non-substituted samples, but thepasting parameters were mostly reduced with theincrease of mangrove fruit flour. Without starch,the mangrove fruit flour diluted the starch matrix inthe samples, the effects of the mangrove fruit flour
additional differed with the base material, and theinfluence on starch retrogradation depended on theconcentration of the mangrove fruit flour. The peakviscosity was the most sensitive to the mangrove fruit
flour substitution, irrespective of the base material,
and this shows that the mangrove fruit flour affectedwater binding and swelling. With a low viscosity,
more solids are required to main the consistency ofmangrove fruit composite flours, and consequently,
this will increase nutrient (e.g. minerals and dietaryfiber) intakes without bulk. However, the mangrove
fruit flour did not affect the pasting temperature of
the mixtures, and this suggests that the pectin andother fiber components did not preferentially bindor withdraw water from the starches. Practically,
with a constant pasting temperature despite thelevel of substitution by the mangrove fruit flour, it
implies that heating or processing will not requirea change in energy before viscosity development.
The information in this study will help utilization ofmangrove resources for human foods, and it suggeststhat mangrove fruit flour can be used in food products
which do not require expansion such as food bars andbiscuit. For fiber and protein enrichments, mangrove
fruit flour can be extruded in a cereal mixture.

This study was conducted at the Centre for
Nutrition and Food Sciences, Queensland Alliance
for Agriculture and Food Innovation, Universityof Queensland, St Lucia, QLD 4072, Australia.
This paper is a part of doctoral program researchin Agriculture Technology, Faculty of Agriculture,
University of Brawijaya. I am grateful for this support,
and the sponsorship of the Indonesian Directorate ofHigher Education.
References

Jariyah et al./IFRJ 21(6): 2161-2167

from various parts of Sonneratia caseolaris. Planta
Medica 73: 561-565.
Chen, L., Zan, Q., Li Mingguang, Shen, J. and Liao,
W. 2009. Litter dynamics and forest structure of
introducted Sonneratia caseolaris mangrove forest in
Shenzhen, China. Estruarine, Coastal and Self Science85(2): 241-246.
Collar, C., Santos, E. and Rosell, C.M. 2006. Significanceof dietary fiber on the viscosimetric pattern of pasted
and gelled flour-fiber blends. Cereal Chemistry 83(4):370-376.
Duke, N.C. and Jackes, B.R. 1987. A Systematic Revisionof The Mangrove Genus Sonneratia (Sonneratiaceae)
In Australia. Blumea 32: 277-302.
Ensminger, A.H., Ensminger, M.E., Konlande, J.E. andRobson, J.R.K. 1995. The Concise Encyclopedia ofFoods and Nutrition. CRC Press, Boca Raton Florida.
Gomez, M., Ronda, F., Blanco, C.A., Caballero, P and
Apesteguia, A. 2003. Effect of dietary fibre on doughrheology and bread quality. European Food Research
and Technology 216: 51-56.
Hanashiro, I., Ikuo, I., Osama, H., Sadamichi, K., Fujimori,K. and Yasuhito, T. 2004. Moleculer structures andsome properties of starches from propagules ofmangrove species. Journal Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 309: 141-154.
Ikegwu, O. J., Nwobasi, V. N., Odoh, M.O. and Oledinma,
N. U. 2009. Evaluation of the pasting and somefunctional properties of starch isolated from some
improved cassava varieties in Nigeria. African Journalof Biotechnology 10: 2310-2315.
Kesemat. 2007. The potential of mangrove fruit as analternative food source. http://www.kesemat.undip.
ac.id. on 16/06/2011.
Lisa, B., Bernand, R., Walter, W.W. and Frank, M.S. 1999.
Cholesterol-lowering effects of dietary fiber: a metaanalysis. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 69:
30-42.
Mahasukhonthachat, K., Sopade, P.A. and Gidley, M.J.
2010. Kinetics of starch digestion and funtional
properties of twin-srew extruded sorghum. Journal of
Cereal Science 51: 392-401.
Mais, A. 2008. Utilization of sweet potato starch, flourand fibre in bread and biscuits:physico-chemical
and nutritional charactetistics. Massey University,
Palmerston North, New Zealand, Mc thesis.
Manullang, M. and Vivin, Y. 1995. Extraction and analysisof pollysaccharides from bread fruit (Artocarpus
altilis). Bulletin of Food Technology Indonesia 6: 5459.
Mangrove Information Center. 2009. Sonneratia caesolaris.
www.mangrovecenter.com. on 27/12/2010.
Minqing, T. D., Haofu, L.I. and Xiaoming, W.B. 2009.
Chemical constituents of marine medical mangrove
plant Sonneratia caseolaris. Chinese Journal of
Oceanology and Limnology 27(2): 288-296.
Noor, Y.R., Khazali, M. and Suryadiputra, I.N.N. 2006.
Guide of Introduction Mangroves in Indonesia.
PHKA/WI-IP.Bogor. p.74-130.

2167

Park, E.Y., Hyun-Na, K., Jong-Yea, K. and Seung-Talk,
L. 2009. Pasting properties of potato starch and waxy
maize starch mixtures. Starch/Starke 61: 352-357.
Patil, P.D. and Chavan., N.S. 2013. A need conservation ofmangrove genus Bruguiera as a famine food. Annals
Food Science and Technology 14(2): 294-297.
Phaechamud,T., Yodkhum, K., Limmatvapirat, C. andWetwitayaklung, P. 2012. Morphology, Thermaland Antioxidative Properties of Water Extracts fromSonneratia caseolaris (L.) Engl. Prepared with
Freeze Drying ang Spray Drying. Research Journalof Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences3(1): 725-733.
Ranggana, S. 1979. Manual of Analysis Fruit andVegetables Product, p:634-638, New Delhi: Tata
McGraw-Hill Publ. Co. Ltd.
Sadhu, S.K., Ahmed, F., Ohtsuki,T. and Ishibashi, M.
2006. Flavonoid from Sonneratia caseolaris. Journalof Natural Medicines 60: 264-265.
Sasaki, T., Yasui, T. and Matsuki, J. 2000. Influence of
non-starch polysaccharides isolated from wheat flouron the gelatinization and gelation of wheat starches.
Food Hydrocolloid 14: 295–303.
Sharma, R., Oberol, D.P.S., Sogi, D.S. and Gili, B.S. 2009.
Effect of sugar and gums on the pasting propertiesof cassava starch. Journal of Food Processing and
Preservation 33: 401-413.
Sopade, P.A., Hardin, M., Fitzpatrick, P., Desmee, H.
and Halley, P. 2006. Macromolecular interactions
during gelatinisation and retrogradation in starchwhey systems as studied by Rapid Visco-Analyser.
International Journal of Food Engineering 2: 1-15.
Sorba, A. and Sopade, P.A. 2013. Changes in Rapid ViscoAnalysis (RVA) viscosity reveal starch digestion
behaviours. Starch-Starke 65: 437 – 442.
Tinus, T., Damour, M., Van Riel, V. and Sopade, P.A. 2012.
Particle size-starch-protein digestibility relationships
in cowpea (Vignaungui culata). Journal of FoodEngineering 113: 254 – 264.
Tsakama, M., Mwangwela, A.M., Manani, T.A. and
Mahungu, N.M. 2010. Physicochemical and pasting
properties of strach extracted from eleven sweetpotato
varieties. African Journal of Food Science andTechnology 4: 90-98.
Waramboi, J.G., Dennien,S., Gidley, M.J. and Sopade,P.A. 2011. Characterisation of sweetpotato from
Papua New Guinea and Australia: Physicochemical,
pasting and gelatinisation properties. Food Chemistry126: 1759-1770.