## 2 Results and Discussion
### Moisture, \(a_{w}\), Viscosity, Sulfur Content, Total, and Reducing Sugar Contents  
The changes in the moisture content, \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\), total sugar, reducing sugar, viscosity, and sulfate content of the strawberry fruit concentrate-based drinking jelly made of varying concentrations of GF gelling agent are shown in Figure 5A-F. Moisture content is critical, as it ensures uniform hydration across all samples, essential for maintaining product quality and shelf life [39]. Non-significant differences were observed in the moisture content of the drinking jelly samples despite the variants (Figure 5A). The moisture content in the drinking jelly ranged between 95.04 and 96.52. The overall trend of moisture content in the drinking jelly was in decrement. S1 samples had slightly higher moisture than the S4-S5. Generally, the gelling agent forms a network that entraps the water molecule within its structure. The ability of this network to retain water is more dependent on its structural integrity rather than the concentration of the gelling agent [40; 41]. This could be the reason why increased GF concentration did not impact the moisture content in the drinking jelly. The controlled level of \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) contributes to the preservation of the jelly by inhibiting growth and extending the shelf life of semi-wet food products [42; 43]. The present study showed that the \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) level in drinking jelly decreased steadily with increased GF gelling agent concentration. Compared with moisture content, the \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) in drinking jelly significantly decreased and was influenced by the GF gelling agent concentrations. The S1 sample showed a high \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) level of 0.99, whereas the S2, S3, and S4 samples showed intermediate \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) levels of 0.98, 0.95, and 0.93, respectively, and the S5 sample showed the lowest \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) level of 0.92. The present study \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) range (0.92-0.99) was at the standard level for drinking jelly or fruit jelly-based products. This is in accordance with the  
Figure 4: Change in pH (**A**), TSS (**B**), TA (**C**), and TSS/TA ratio (**D**) ratio of drinking jelly made of strawberry fruit concentrate and different concentrations of GF gelling agent. Note: Different letters of the alphabet in the figure show significant differences, and ns represent the non-significant. S1-S5 represent the drinking jelly samples prepared with varying concentrations of GF gelling agent: S1 (0.2%), S2 (0.4%), S3 (0.6%), S4 (0.8%), and S5 (1.0%). study of [PERSON] et al. [9]. Generally, seaweed polysaccharide-based gelling agents such as agar, carrageenan, and alginate have a high water-binding capacity, which contributes to the reduction of \(\mathrm{a_{w}}\) in jellies, and this is due to their ability to form a gel matrix that entraps water molecules [44]. On the other hand, the total sugar and reducing sugar levels did not change in the drinking jelly samples despite the GF concentration variations, indicating that the gelling agent did not influence the sugar content in the drinking jelly (Figure 5C, D). However, when comparing the reduced sugar, the total sugar content was high, almost double the amount of reduced sugar. The higher total sugar content in drinking jelly than in reducing sugar is due to the dominance of non-reducing sugars such as sucrose in the formulation. The consistent levels of total sugar and reducing sugar in the samples contribute to a consistent taste profile and uniform flavor. Viscosity plays a critical role in drinking jelly's formulation and properties by impacting texture, stability, sensory appeal, and overall functionality [45]. The viscosity levels in the drinking jelly continuously increased with the GF gelling agent concentrations (Figure 5E). The viscosity levels in the drinking jelly ranged between 63.40 and 263.3 cP. This is in accordance with the study of [PERSON] et al. [46].