## 3 Results and Discussion
### Physicochemical and Sensorial Characterization of Gummy Candies  
The results in Table 2 reveal significant changes in the proximate composition of gummy candy when higher concentrations of encapsulated erythrocytes were used. The moisture content decreases from 52.02 to 43.27%, which is expected due to the higher proportion of solids in the formulations. In contrast, protein content increases from 10.10 to 11.44%, reflecting the protein-rich nature of the erythrocytes. Ash, which represents the mineral content, increases from 0.68 to 3.14%, correlating with the increase in iron content (from 1.96 to 2.63 mg Fe/g), enhancing the gummies' nutritional value [4]. As moisture decreases, the carbohydrate content increases (from 37.11 to 42.06%). Color parameters indicate a decrease in lightness (\(L^{*}\)) and the yellow component (\(b^{*}\)), while the red component (\(a^{*}\)) increases proportionally [19; 42]. This change reflects the erythrocytes' visual impact on the gummies' hue (Figure 2). The pH experiences a slight increase from 3.96 to 4.01, suggesting a slight neutralization of the tumbo juice with the addition of encapsulated erythrocytes. Finally, soluble solids also increase slightly, reaching 62.00 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix in formulation F3 (6% EEGPB) [19; 43]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Properties**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**F1 (4\% EEGPB)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**F2 (5\% EEGPB)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**F3 (6\% EEGPB)**} \\ \cline{2-10}  & \(\updelta\) & \(\pm\) & SD & \(\updelta\) & \(\pm\) & SD & \(\updelta\) & \(\pm\) & SD \\ \hline Moisture (\%) & 52.02 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.27 & 48.45 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.57 & 43.27 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.54 \\ Protein (\%) & 10.10 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.03 & 10.59 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.10 & 11.44 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.06 \\ Fat (\%) & 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 0.07 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 \\ Ash (\%) & 0.68 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.02 & 1.58 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.03 & 3.14 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.06 \\ Fiber (\%) & 0.05 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 0.06 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 0.04 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.02 \\ Carbohydrates (\%) & 37.11 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.35 & 39.28 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.45 & 42.06 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.55 \\ Iron content (mg Fe/g) & 1.96 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 2.47 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.04 & 2.63 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.03 \\ \(L^{*}\) & 22.47 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.42 & 20.93 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.10 & 19.90 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.14 \\ \(a^{*}\) & 1.27 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.04 & 1.28 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.07 & 1.30 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.11 \\ \(b^{*}\) & 0.59 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.08 & 0.42 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.04 & 0.35 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.10 \\ pH & 3.96 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 3.98 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 & 4.01 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.01 \\ Soluble solids (\({}^{\text{c}}\)Brix) & 60.00 \({}^{\text{a}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.05 & 61.00 \({}^{\text{b}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.08 & 62.00 \({}^{\text{c}}\) & \(\pm\) & 0.02 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Results of the physicochemical analysis. Figure 1: Characterization of the microcapsules: (**a**) morphology of powders obtained via SEM; (**b**) elemental analysis by SEM-EDS in terms of iron content and particle size. The results indicate that the gummies' soluble solid content is lower than the typical standard for gelatin products, which generally exceeds 70 \({}^{\circ}\)Brix, a key value to ensure the product's textural and microbiological stability [44; 45; 46].