## 3 Results and Discussion
### Main Characteristics of the Fruits and Overall Composition  
The results of the overall analyses are presented in Table 1.  
The results observed in Table 1 indicate that the loengo fruit had an average mass of approximately 14 g, with the pulp mass fraction ranging from 7 to 8 g. The fractional yield of the pulp after depulping averaged 55%, which was explained by the large seed size and the strong attachment of the pulp to the seed, making separation challenging regardless of the method used. The fruit was characterized as a red drupe, with an ellipsoid shape, an average longitudinal diameter ranging between 28 mm and 31 mm, and an average transverse diameter of 24 mm, with minimal variation observed between the samples. The  
Figure 4: Survey response analysis of usage and consumption elements of the fruit: (**a**) shelf life in its fresh state before consumption and/or processing; (**b**) monthly consumption frequency across all areas; and (**c**) interest in processed products across all areas. physical parameters of the 2021 sample could not be measured due to a lack of measurement conditions at the time of acquiring these samples and subsequently freezing the fruits for 60 days. This period led to modifications in the fruits' physical characteristics, preventing measurement. The analyzed samples showed high homogeneity in terms of size, with standard deviations of less than 10% of the average values obtained from 30 randomly selected fruits. These results were lower than those obtained by [PERSON] et al. [9] for the same fruit species in Burundi, where the average fruit mass ranged from 16 to 25 g, with a  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Components** & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Samples**} \\  & **Ab21** & **AbM22** & **AbHb22** & **AbHa22** \\ \hline Mass per fruit (g) & - & 14.3 (1.0) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 14.0 (1.1) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 13.4 (1.1) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ Pulp mass per fruit (g) & - & 8.2 (0.7) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 7.7 (1.0) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 7.2 (1.2) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ Pulp mass fraction obtained & - & 57.7 (1.7) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 55.1 (2.1) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 53.2 (2.3) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ after processing (\%) & - & 30.6 (2.0) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 28.5 (2.3) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 29.1 (2.0) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) \\ Longitudinal diameter (mm) & - & 23.9 (1.2) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 24.6 (1.9) \({}^{\mathrm{ab}}\) & 24.0 (1.4) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) \\ \hline DM (g\(\cdot\)100 g\({}^{-1}\)) & 24.71 (0.51) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 21.89 (0.15) \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) & 22.73 (0.21) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 20.24 (0.19) \({}^{\mathrm{d}}\) \\ TSSs (g\(\cdot\)100 g\({}^{-1}\) FM) & 19.80 (0.40) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 17.91 (0.38) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 18.05 (0.54) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) & 16.29 (0.24) \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) \\ pH & 3.27 (0.05) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 3.14 (0.07) \({}^{\mathrm{bc}}\) & 3.11 (0.03) \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) & 3.24 (0.02) \({}^{\mathrm{ab}}\) \\ TA (g eq.cit\(\cdot\)100 g\({}^{-1}\) FM) & 2.62 (0.08) \({}^{\mathrm{a}}\) & 1.99 (0.01) \({}^{\mathrm{bc}}\) & 1.86 (0.06) \({}^{\mathrm{c}}\) & 2.09 (0.03) \({}^{\mathrm{b}}\) \\ TSSs/TA (g\({}_{\mathrm{uspar}}\)\({}_{\mathrm{8 det}}\)\({}_{\mathrm{8}}\)\({}_{\mathrm  
longitudinal diameter varying between 33 and 40 mm and a transverse diameter between 29 and 34 mm. Similarly, for the same fruits that were collected in Huambo, [PERSON] et al. [13] reported an average fruit mass of 9.4 g, a longitudinal diameter of 34.8 mm, and a transverse diameter of 20 mm. These variations in physical characteristics could be influenced by the variety, but also by several other factors, including geographical location, climatic conditions, harvest year, and maturity stage. The DM content of the samples ranged from 20 to 25 g\(\cdot\)100 g\({}^{-1}\), which was relatively high for a fleshy fruit. The highest DM content was found in the Ab21 sample. Statistically, significant differences were observed at \(p<0.05\) between the samples.