Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products ORIGINAL RESEARCH Published 31 August 2022 Doi: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.vitae.v29n3a348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products Comparación de la Efectividad de Polisacáridos, Proteínas y Lípidos como Recubrimientos Compuestos Comestibles en la Calidad de los Productos Alimenticios Budianto 1,3* , Anik Suparmi2,3 , Muh Jaenal Arifin1,3 , Ratna Haryani4 ABSTRACT JOURNAL VITAE School of Pharmaceutical and Food Sciences ISSN 0121-4004 | ISSNe 2145-2660 University of Antioquia Medellin, Colombia Filliations 1 Chemical Engineering, Institute Sains & Teknologi Al-Kamal, Jakarta, Indonesia 2 SMK Negeri 3 Tarakan, Tarakan City, North Kalimantan, Indonesia 3 SMK Negeri 3 Madiun, Madiun City, East Java, Indonesia 4 Background: This research was motivated by the complaints of tomato farmers about their crops that quickly rotted before being sold, as well as the many research results (raw materials and methods) that edible coating films could not be applied optimally. Objectives: The research was a practical recommendation by comparing the effectiveness of raw materials (polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids) with the dipping and spray methods. Materials and methods used in the comparison process were the application of Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with the Partial Least Square (PLS) approach. Results: Dipping has a strong effect (f2 ≥ 0.35; p<0.05), while spray had a moderate effect (f2: 0.150.35; p<0.05). Thus, the role of dipping as a mediator was more dominant than spray. Compared to proteins and lipids, polysaccharides had the best effectiveness (β:0.460-0.584; f2: 0.15-0.35; p<0.05). Conclusion: the three ingredients improved the quality of tomatoes, and the dipping method was easier to apply by farmers than the spray method, which had many obstacles in its application. Keyword: Edible coating film, Dipping, Spray, and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) SMK Negeri 1 Cilegon, Banten, Indonesia. *Corresponding Budianto budianto_delta@yahoo.com Received: 16 November 2021 Accepted: 26 August 2022 Published: 31 August 2022 Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 1 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani RESUMEN Antecedentes: esta investigación está motivada por las quejas de los productores de tomate sobre sus cultivos que se pudren rápidamente antes de ser vendidos, así como por los muchos resultados de la investigación (materias primas y métodos) de que las películas de recubrimiento comestibles no se pudieron aplicar de manera óptima. Objetivos: La investigación consiste en recomendaciones prácticas mediante la comparación de la eficacia de las materias primas (polisacáridos, proteínas y lípidos) con los métodos de inmersión y aspersión. Métodos: El método utilizado en el proceso de comparación es la aplicación del modelo de ecuaciones estructurales (SEM) con el enfoque de mínimos cuadrados parciales (PLS). Resultados: La inmersión tiene un efecto fuerte (f2 ≥ 0,35; p<0,05), mientras que la pulverización tiene un efecto moderado (f2: 0,15-0,35; p<0,05). Por lo tanto, el papel de la inmersión como mediador es más dominante que el del rociado. Los polisacáridos tienen la mejor eficacia (β:0,460-0,584; f2: 0,15-0,35; p<0,05) en comparación con las proteínas y los lípidos. Conclusión: es que los tres ingredientes pueden mejorar la calidad de los tomates, y el método de inmersión es más fácil de aplicar por los agricultores que el método de aspersión, que tiene muchos obstáculos en su aplicación. Palabra clave: película de recubrimiento comestible, inmersión, pulverización y modelado de ecuaciones estructurales (SEM) INTRODUCTION myofibrillar proteins, egg white proteins, soy protein, wheat gluten, and zein [9]moisture and oil diffusion, gas permeability (O2, CO2. Using whey protein concentrate mixed with glycerol in various concentrations can prolong the strawberries’ life [10]20% and 40% with respect to the solids contained in the mixture WPC/glycerol. Whey protein mixed with glycerol and trehalose inhibited fruits’ total phenolics, browning, and weight loss [11]. A whey protein comparison has been made to extend Kilka fish’s shelf life [12]. Mixing proteinbased ECF ingredients with antioxidants can maintain the quality of fruits and vegetables [13]. Its use extends not only to perishable food products. The background of this research was based on the complaints of many farmers in Indonesia against tomatoes that quickly rot before they are sold out. This condition resulted in farmers selling their crops immediately before the spoilage occurred. Paying attention to this phenomenon, researchers offer a preservation process with a packaging method that can be eaten, namely edible coating film (ECF). The number of edible coating research references will assist in selecting edible coating raw materials, application methods, and the results of the preservation process. This research focused on applying previous research if it is widely applied, not just a theory or concept. This research helps in selecting raw materials and methods that are cheap and easy to apply. Lipid-based ECF ingredients include beeswax, paraffin, polyethylene, jojoba oil, and rice bran wax [13–15]. Lipid-based materials in several layers are used to obtain ideal quality [14]. The mix of ECF and antibacterial substances succeeded in suppressing the growth of mesophilic aerobic bacteria, molds/ yeasts, and Salmonella enterica in apples [15]. The use of natural waxes (rice bran, carnauba, candelilla, and bees), petroleum-based waxes (paraffin and polyethylene), mineral oils, petroleum-based oils, vegetable oils, acetoglycerides, and fatty acids have been proven effective for ECF ingredients [16]. The use of lipid-based ECF has been widely used in improving the quality and shelf life of food products. S o f ar t h e r aw mate r ial s of te n u s e d ar e polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids. Polysaccharidebased materials include starch, cellulose, pectin, alginate, carrageenan, chitosan, pullulan, gellan gum, and xanthan gum [1–4]. A mixture of two polysaccharides (chitosan and pectin) can increase the shelf life of fruit and vegetable products [5]. Sodium alginate and pectin (2%) can increase the shelf life of fruit [6]. Cassava flour with calcium chloride can maintain the color of French fries [7]. Aloe vera plus carrageenan can increase the lifespan of fruit and vegetable products [8]. The use of polysaccharides as ECF ingredients is not only for vegetables and fruit but also for products such as bread, crackers, and other dry processed products. The effectiveness of ECF is influenced by the composition and the ECF application method [3]. In this research, we used the dipping and spray method. Dipping is the most common ECF application method [3,17], which comprises 3 Protein-based ECF ingredients include caseins, whey proteins, collagen, gelatin, plasma proteins, Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 2 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products steps: i) immersion & dwelling, ii) precipitation, and iii) solvent evaporation [18]. In the first step, the substrate is immersed in an emulsion/solution layer. The volume of the solution is sufficient to wet the substrate [19]. During evaporation, solvents and excess liquid are evaporated from the surface of the food product using heating and drying procedures [20]. Generally, fruits and vegetables are submerged for 5-30 seconds [21] to extend the shelf life [22]. researchers and explores the ECF method failures, especially in Indonesia. Spraying is the most common method used in applications for coatings on food products on an industrial scale [20]. There are three types of spraying techniques used in the food industry. The first is air spray atomization. This method uses a high-velocity air spray surrounding the liquid flowing from the tube. Fluid-air friction accelerates, disrupts the fluid flow, and induces atomization [19]. This method includes cost-effective spraying. The presence of an air jet nozzle is to break water (deflector) into fine droplets in spraying. The second is air-assisted airless atomization. In this spray method, the coating sample is atomized and evenly distributed on the substrate surfaces [23]. The third is Pressure atomization. This method does not use air or what is known as airless atomization. Small nozzles with high pressure will provide surface tension and coating viscosity on food products [20]. Mater ials for applic ations: solvent s water (polysaccharides) and ethanol (proteins and lipids). Laboratory test materials: Tomato variety of Zamrud (LV 2508), plate count agar (PCA), tryptic soy agar (TSA), buffered peptone water (BPW), distilled water, alcohol 90%. MATERIAL AND METHODS Composite edibles: a) Polysaccharides (starch, cellulose, carrageenan, and pectin); b) Proteins (soy, egg white, casein, gluten, and whey protein; c) Lipids (bee wax, rice bran wax, and paraffin). Equipment: a set of spray tools, a bucket for the dipping process, an autoclave, Petri dishes, an Water Activity meter (Aw) model EZ 200 - Freund, and a microscope MSC-B107. Research framework The research framework is shown in Figure 1. There are 14 hypothesis based on the relationship between variables. The spray method is greatly influenced by the size and type of the nozzle. Parameters that affect spraying efficiency include pressure, viscosity, surface temperature, and coating solution stress [24]. In some ECF processes, the spray method may be used for multiple applications, for example, gel layers formed with alginate or calcium chloride solutions [25]. All ECF raw materials play a role in packing food products, and the method used in its application. Product quality which is the measure in this study, includes a) product age, b) water activity (aw), c) total plate count (TPC), and d) Escherichia coli contaminants. These indicators are used to describe the food products quality to find the effectiveness of composite edible coatings and application methods in the ECF process [26, 27]. 9: 11. Protein ==> Spray ==> Product Quality 12. Protein ==> Dipping ==> Product Quality 13. Lipid ==> Spray ==> Product Quality 14. Lipid ==> Dipping ==> Product Quality Based on the description above, the raw materials used can improve the quality and protect food products from being damaged quickly through the dip and spray application methods. No research compares the effectiveness of raw materials against the methods used as practical, efficient, and inexpensive efforts. This study evaluates the effectiveness of several variables from previous Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae Polisaccharide ==> Spray ==> Product Quality 10. Polisaccharide ==> Dipping ==> Product Quality Figure 1. Research framework: Effect of Composite Edible on Product Quality with the Mediation of Application Methods. It has 2 lines of relationship, namely a direct relationship (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) and an indirect / mediational relationship (9,10,11,12,13,14). Independent variables (polysaccharide, protein, and lipid) are expected to increase/significantly positive effect on the dependent variable (product quality) through intervening/ mediation variables (spray and dipping). 3 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani 0.60 (10-3 Pa.s); (ii) spray tomatoes with a pressure of 1-2 kPa, additional pressure may be applied if there is a blockage of the spray nozzle; (iii) The thickness of the layer is made between 30-50 µm. Air-assisted airless atomization and pressure atomization can be done in layers because they are easily clogged in the nozzles. (iv) the tomatoes are drained and dried at 25-27oC with enough light (without direct sunlight) for 1-2 hours. Drying time may continue if the prick test shows uneven drying. Research Sample 95 tomato farmers from various regions in Indonesia were involved as respondents in this study. The number and areas of research were: East Java (15), North Sumatra (20), West Java (15), East Nusa Tenggara (20), Jogjakarta (12), and Banten (13). East Nusa Tenggara was the largest contributor of tomatoes in Indonesia, the six regions had uniformity in rainfall (750-1250 mm/year), daytime temperature (18-29oC), relative humidity (25-35%), and soil acidity (pH in the range of 5.5 - 7). This research was assisted by an independent team spread across the area. Our team has obtained permission from the farmers, and the team did not ask for permission from government agencies. Respondents were involved in the application of the ECF method with team assistance. The team analyzed product age, total plate count (TPC), water activity (aw), and Escherichia coli contaminants. The study was performed from April 2019 to February 2020. Descriptive Statistics Description analysis was made through SPSS software. The composite edible variable and application methods explore how easy it was to apply ECF. In contrast, the product quality variable based on laboratory analysis results included postharvest product age, Escherichia coli, water activity, and total plate count. Sorting indicators on each variable using the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) test with SPSS software. The function of PCA in this study is to reduce several variables into new variables or dimensions, which result from indicator extraction [28–30]. Work procedures 1. Preparation of ECF referred by Rosida et al. [40]: (i) extracts of polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids, as well as solvents/diluents, were weighed to obtain a concentration of 5% (w/v); (ii) Polysaccharide material used water and glycerol as solvent (3:1); (iii) protein ingredients used ethanol (60%), water, and glycerol (2:3:1) as the solvent; (iv) lipids materials used ethanol and glycerol (3:1); (v) heating was employed for materials that were poorly soluble (proteins and lipids); (vi) then cooled and filtered, and finally, the ECF material was ready to be applied. Variable Effect Test The effect of variables was tested using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with Partial Least Square (PLS) approach with Smart PLS software version 6.0. The validity test used a cross-loading value > 0.7 [31]W.W., 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2 and a Square Root of Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value > 0.50 [32]. Reliability test was done with Cronbach’s Alpha value > 0.6, Composite Reliability > 0.7 [33]. Structural model testing accommodates all construct variables formulated in hypothesis testing. All standard parameters refer to Hair et al. [33]. 2. The dipping method (referred by Kowalczewski et al. [18]): (i) Tomatoes were put into the reservoir one by one so that the ECF layer covered the entire surface of the tomatoes; (ii) Tomatoes were soaked in ECF solution for 20-30 seconds (MA7) and 30-60 seconds (iii) Tomatoes coated with ECF were removed and placed in an open, well-lit room (without direct sunlight); (iv) The material was drained at room temperature (25-27oC) for 1-2 hours; (v) Ensuring that the ECF layer was dry evenly by physical observation (prick test) RESULT Descriptive Statistics 3. The spray method used air-assisted airless atomization, pressure atomization, air spray atomization and air spray-air assisted airless. The process steps, referred by Embuscado [24], were: (i) The ECF solution is made with a viscosity of 0.35– Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae The following are the results of descriptive analysis of several polysaccharide, protein, lipid, spray, dipping, and product quality variables. This analysis includes indicators of each variable. 4 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products Table 1. Analysis of the description of the independent variable and the mediating variable: Descriptive Statistics Size Scale 1. Very difficult to apply 2. Difficult to apply Polysaccharide 3, Neutral 4. Easy to apply N Minimum Maximum 5. Very easy to apply Mean Std. Deviation Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Starch (P1) 95 3.00 5.00 3.8500 .10942 .48936 Cellulose (P2) 95 2.00 4.00 3.7000 .12773 .57124 Carrageenan (P3) 95 2.00 4.00 3.4500 .15347 .68633 Pectin (P4) 95 2.00 4.00 3.5500 .13524 .60481 95 2.00 3.00 2.6000 .11239 .50262 Protein Soy Protein (Pr.1) Egg White (Pr.2) 95 2.00 3.00 2.8000 .09177 .41039 Casein (Pr.3) 95 2.00 3.00 2.8500 .08192 .36635 Gluten (Pr.4) 95 3.00 4.00 3.7000 .10513 .47016 Whey Protein (Pr.5) 95 2.00 4.00 3.5500 .13524 .60481 Bee Wax ( L1) 95 3.00 4.00 3.5500 .11413 .88704 Rice Bran Wax (L2) 95 3.00 4.00 3.6000 .11239 .47016 Parafin (L3) 95 3.00 4.00 3.6500 .10942 .47016 95 3.00 4.00 3.5500 .11413 .51042 Lipid Spray Air assisted airless atomization (MA3) Pressure atomization (MA4) 95 3.00 4.00 3.6000 .11239 .50262 Air spray atomization (MA5) 95 3.00 4.00 3.6500 .10942 .48936 Air spray-Air assisted airless (MA6) 95 3.00 4.00 3.5500 .11413 .51042 Duration (20-30) sec. (MA7) 95 3.00 5.00 3.9500 .13524 .60481 Duration (30-60) sec. (MA8) 95 3.00 5.00 3.7500 .12301 .55012 Dipping Table 1: Application process of a method (spray and dipping) using ECF raw materials (polysaccharide, protein, and lipid). The data explored the ease of application of ECF. Based on the average, the order of variables that have the greatest value was dipping, polysaccharide, spray, lipid, and protein. The indicators for each variable are as follows: Dipping (MA7); polysaccharide (P1); spray (MA5); lipids (L3), and proteins (Pr.4). The indicators above are still being screened again through PCA and SEM PLS analysis. Table 2. Analysis of the description of the dependent variable Descriptive Statistics Size Scale Damage Duration (day) : 1 ( 5-10) 2. ( 10-14) 3. ( 14-18) 4. (18-22) 5. ( 22-24) Escherichia coli (MPN/ml) : 1. (80-100) 2. (60 - 80) 3. (40-60) 4. (20-40) 5. (10 – 20) Total Plate Count (10 CFU/ml) : 1. ( 80-100) 2. (60-80) 3. (40-60) 4. ( 20-40) 5. ( 0-20) Aw 2. (0.90-0.95) 3. ( 0.85-0.90) 4.(0.80-0.85) 5. (0.7-0.8) 5 : 1. (0.95-0.1) N Minimum Maximum Statistic Statistic Statistic Mean Statistic Std. Deviation Std. Error Statistic Damage Duration (PQ1) 95 3.00 4.00 3.7500 .09934 .48936 Escherichia coli (PQ2) 95 3.00 4.00 3.8000 .09177 .57124 Total Plate Count (PQ3) 95 2.00 4.00 3.6000 .15218 .68633 Water Activity (PQ4) 95 2.00 4.00 3.5000 .17014 .60481 Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 5 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani Escherichia coli Damage Duration non coating 100 L2 - > Dipping P1->spray 80 60 L2 -> spray P1->dipping 40 20 L1 -> dipping P2- > spray 0 L1->spray L2 - > Dipping L2 -> spray 5. - 10 10.- 15 15. - 20 20.- 25 10-20, P1->spray 30-40 20 P2- > spray 0 50-60 L1->spray P2 - > Dipping Pr.5 -> Dipping Pr.5 -> spray Pr.4 ->dipping 20-30 P1->dipping 40 L1 -> dipping Pr.4 ->spray Pr.5 -> spray non coating 80 60 P2 - > Dipping Pr.5 -> Dipping MPN/ml Day 60-70 Pr.4 ->spray 80-90 Pr.4 ->dipping 90-100 2 1 Water Activity (Aw ) Total Plate Count (MPN/ ml) non coating 80 L2 - > Dipping 60 L2 -> spray P1->spray P1->dipping 40 20 L1 -> dipping (1-2) (2-3) (3-4) (4-5) (5-6) (6-7) (7-8) (8-9) (9-10) P2- > spray 0 L1->spray non coating L2 - > Dipping 100 P1->spray 80 L2 -> spray 60 P1->dipping 40 20 L1 -> dipping P2- > spray 0 L1->spray P2 - > Dipping Pr.5 -> Dipping Pr.5 -> spray Pr.4 ->dipping 0.80 - 0.85 0.85- 0.90 0.90 - 0.95 P2 - > Dipping Pr.5 -> Dipping Pr.5 -> spray Pr.4 ->spray 0.7-0.8 3 0.95 - 1.0 Pr.4 ->spray Pr.4 ->dipping 4 Figure 2. Result of indicator analysis of product quality variable. Polysaccharide coating material: starch (P1), cellulose (P2), carrageenan (P3), and Pectin (P4). Protein coating material: soy protein (Pr.1), egg white (Pr.2), casein (Pr.3), gluten (Pr.4), and whey protein (Pr.5). Lipid coating material: bee wax ( L1), rice bran wax (L2), and parafin (L3). The coating process used the spray method: air assisted airless atomization (MA3), pressure atomization (MA4), air spray atomization (MA5), and air spray-air assisted airless (MA6). Dipping method: duration (20-30) sec. (MA7) and duration (30-60) sec. (MA8). Damage duration (1): tomatoes were damaged between 5-10 days (non-coating); the dipping method avoided the damage between 20-25 days (starch (P1), cellulose (P2)), while the polysaccharide applied by spraying can avoid the damage up to 15-20 days. The dipping and spray methods extended the life span to 15-20 days for protein and lipid materials. Escherichia coli (2): Noncoating has a contaminant range of 80-100 MPN/ml. The dipping method for polysaccharides has a contaminant range of 10-30 MPN/ml, the spray method (10-40 MPN/ml). Protein and lipid materials by spray and dipping methods ranged from 60-80 MPN/ml. Total Plate Count (3): non coating (8-10 x 105 CFU/ml), polysaccharide dipping and spray method (1-3 x 105 CFU/ml), protein (5-7 x 105 CFU/ml), and lipid (3-5 x 105 CFU/ml). Water activity (4): non-coating (0.95-1.0). Dipping and spray methods for polysaccharides (0.80-0.85), proteins, and lipids had the same Aw (0.85-0.90). Table 3. Determination of variable indicators with Principal Component Analysis Indicator Code Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization VARIABLE (* significant p=0.05) Polysaccharide Protein Lipid Spray Dipping Product Quality Starch (P1) P1 .658* .432 .346 .497 .276 .345 Cellulose (P2) P2 .745* .375 .368 .248 .366 .335 Carrageenan (P3) P3 .749* .398 .475 .399 .375 .445 Pectin (P4) P4 .763* .365 .472 .332 .487 .467 Soy Protein (Pr.1) Pr.1 .347 .793* .389 .337 .309 .375 Egg White (Pr.2) Pr.2 .452 .668* .396 .371 .364 .385 Casein (Pr.3) Pr.3 .257 .676* .385 .351 .354 .374 Gluten (Pr.4) Pr.4 .367 .756 .298 .383 .378 .348 Whey Protein (Pr.5) Pr.5 .392 .665* .389 .374 .441 .347 Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 6 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products Indicator Code Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization VARIABLE (* significant p=0.05) Polysaccharide Protein Lipid Spray Dipping Product Quality Bee Wax ( L1) L1 .298 .349 .749* .382 .342 .345 Rice Brand Wax (L2) L2 .438 .483 .783* .364 .341 .355 Paraffin (L3) L3 .472 .342 .658* .298 .362 .385 Air assisted airless atomization (MA3) MA3 .435 .352 .367 .745* .324 .395 Pressure atomization (MA4) MA4 .389 .267 .476 .749* .268 .375 Air spray atomization (MA5) MA5 .482 .367 .487 .763* .337 .345 Air spray-Air assisted airless (MA6) MA6 .473 .392 .387 .684* .452 .358 Duration (20-30) sec. (MA7) MA7 .378 .372 .443 .365 .783* .348 Duration ( 30-60) sec. (MA8) MA8 .238 .435 .344 .428 .682* .345 Damage Duration (PQ1) PQ1 .349 .389 .364 .378 .391 .794* Escherichia coli (PQ2) PQ2 .487 .482 .361 .456 .386 .765* Total Plate Count (PQ3) PQ3 .298 .473 .358 .386 ,364 .773* Water Activity (PQ4) PQ4 .389 .481 .374 .354 .347 .765* Determination of variable indicators using loading > 0.6 and p = 0.05. The blue color shows the indicator of the variable. Polysaccharides (P1,P2,P3,P4); Proteins (Pr1,Pr2,Pr3,Pr4,Pr5); Lipids (L1,L2,L3); Spray (MA3,MA4,MA5,MA6); Dipping (MA7,MA8); Product quality (PQ1,PQ2,PQ3,PQ4). Determination of variable indicators using the PCA method is used to test the effect of the relationship between variables. Variable Effect Analysis The effect of variables was tested using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) with Partial Least Square (PLS) approach with Smart PLS software. The variable indicators in table 3 will be re-evaluated based on the loading factor > 0.7 so that some indicators were omitted because the value is < 0.7. Figure 3. Analyzes of the relationship between variables using the SEM PLS method to test the model’s validity and reliability before testing between variables. If the validity and reliability tests have not been met, then the variable influence test cannot be carried out in this analysis. Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 7 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani Table 4. Test the Validity and Reliability of the Model Test Parameter Convergent Validity Discriminant Validity Reliability Standard Results Factor loading (outer loading) >0.6 0.726-0.938 AVE (Average Variance Extracted) >0.5 0.581– 0.684 Communality >0.5 0.581 – 0.684 Root Square AVE > Discriminant validity Root Square AVE> Discriminant Validity Cross Loading >0.6 0.726 – 0.906 Cronbach’s Alpha >0.6 0.614 – 0.827 Composite Reliability >0.7 0.807 – 0.878 Root Square AVE and Corelation variabel latent Referring to table 4, all parameters are included in the standard validity and reliability test of the instrument so that it can be used for analysis of variable relationships in a model. Table 5. Test the effect between variables hypothesis Paths Coeficient T statistics p Value (β) >1.65 < 0.05 f2 Remark 1 Polysaccharide => Spray 0.584 2.727 0.007 0.141 (+) significant 2 Polysaccharide => Dipping 0.460 2.290 0.022 0.097 (+) significant 3 Protein => Spray -0.114 0.411 0.681 0.004 (-) not significant 4 Protein =>Dipping 0.006 0.405 0.686 0.005 (+) not significant 5 Lipid => Spray 0.032 0.078 0.937 0.000 (+) not significant 6 Lipid =>Dipping 0.144 0.862 0.389 0.017 (+) not significant 7 Spray => Product Quality 0.352 3.267 0.001 0.253 (+) significant 8 Dipping => Product Quality 0.534 5.489 0.000 0.489 (+) significant 9 Polysaccharide => Spray => Product Quality 0.135 2.189 0.029 (+) significant 10 Protein => Spray => Product Quality 0.025 0.385 0.701 (+) not significant 11 Lipid => Spray => Product Quality -0.007 0.077 0.938 (-) not significant 12 Polysaccharide => Dipping => Product Quality 0.155 2.143 0.033 (+) significant 13 Protein => Dipping => Product Quality 0.038 0.403 0.687 (+) not significant 14 Lipid => Dipping => Product Quality 0.071 0.858 0.391 (+) not significant f : 0.02- 0.15 Weak Effect; f : 0.15-0.35 Sufficient Effect ; f : ≥ 0.35 Strong Effect 2 2 2 R2: Spray 0.319; Dipping 0.267; Product quality 0.613 The effect of the (+) significant variable indicates that the ECF raw material is easy to apply with the dipping and spray methods to maintain the quality of the tomatoes. Polysaccharides can prove this condition as raw material for ECF. The significant (-) effect describes the less than optimal application so that it has not given maximum results to the quality of tomatoes. This is indicated by the fact that obstacles in applying for proteins, and lipids are still found. The dipping method gave the greatest protective effect on tomatoes (48.9%) compared to the spray method (25.3%) using polysaccharides. Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae DISCUSSION This study aims to compare the effect of composite edible on product quality with the mediation of application methods. Referring to the composite edible, the raw material with the biggest effect is polysaccharide, and the weakest effect is protein. The effect test is seen from the direct effect (composite edible on application methods) and indirect effect (composite edible on product quality with the mediation of application methods). Based on the relationship between variables, the 8 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products most significant effect is shown by the relationship between the dipping variable on product quality, and the lowest effect is lipid on spray. method. However, in the spray method, there are cases of nozzle blockage. This condition is not as severe as proteins and lipids materials. Those tend to be hygroscopic, favoring the growth of contaminant microorganisms; besides, the selection of raw materials must pay attention to tensile strength (not easily broken on pull) and puncture strength. Types of starch and cellulose were included in the selection of raw materials. No cracks occurred in layers with a thickness of 30µm (dipping = 20-30 seconds) and 40µm (dipping = 30-40 seconds). This finding strengthens the results of previous studies [6,34]. Polysaccharide has the greatest influence on both direct relationship (Polysaccharide Spray) and indirect relationship/mediation (Polysaccharide  Dipping  Product Quality). Polysaccharides are easily soluble in water, so farmers in Indonesia widely use them. Polysaccharides are abundant and relatively inexpensive raw materials. This raw material tends to be stable in the spray and dipping Figure 4. Composite Edible Relationship Model on Product Quality with the Mediation of Application Methods. The spray variable reflected 31.9% of the polysaccharide, protein, and lipid variables. The Dipping variable reflected 26.7% of the polysaccharide, protein, and lipid variables. Product quality was reflected by the variable spray and dipping of 61.3%. insoluble. This condition is supported by the findings of Dhaka & Upadhyay [37]. Although gluten has good solubility in low and high pH, it is not soluble in water. Protein has the slightest effect on direct (Protein  spray) and indirect (Protein  Spray  Product quality) relationships. Protein did not affect the spray method. The field observations showed frequent blockages in the spray nozzles for several types of protein, although the viscosity was the same as that of polysaccharides and lipids. The findings of this constraint support the research conducted by [35]. Physical properties, including tensile and puncture strength, were shallow compared to polysaccharide and lipid materials. This has been experienced by [36], causing less than maximum protection against water vapor. Gluten contains gliadins and glutenins. Gliadin is soluble in 70% ethanol, but glutenin is Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae Lipids had no significant positive effect on the spray and dipping methods. The observations in the field showed that the gloss of tomato coated with lipids spoiled the appearance. This finding was supported by previous researchers [36, 37]. Rotten due to the oxidation process is an obstacle for lipid-based raw materials, so the thickness of the layer needs to be increased (>30 µm). Additionally, increased ECF thickness will affect the sensory properties of 9 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani The thickness of the ECF will interfere with the respiration process of tomatoes. The spray method can be used by always paying attention to: 1) uniform spray thickness on each side of the surface; 2) nozzle clogging is anticipated by adjusting the viscosity of the ECF 5% solution (0.35–0.60 x10-3 Pa.s) and At low pressure (>10kPa), the protein concentration was more effective at 3% (w/v) while the lipid was 3-4% (w/v); 3) Multi-layer applications pay more attention to the first layer to avoid cracks. This will affect the cracks in the next layer. tomatoes. The lipid layer is very effective in keeping the tomato fruit moist because of its low polarity. The rice bran wax coating layer was cracked by dipping and spraying methods. A multi-layer layer will give an uneven surface to tomatoes. The spray method has a 25.3% effect on product quality. Only polysaccharides had a significant positive effect (58.3%; p<0.05) on the spray method. Therefore, there are no obstacles to applying polysaccharides in the spray method. Proteins and lipids did not affect the spray application. The obstacles found in the field were: a) there was a blockage in the nozzle (material from lipids and proteins) so it had to be diluted to a viscosity of 0.35-0.60 x10 -3 Pa.s. This finding supports the results of Berkland et al. [38]. b) The use of high pressure ranges from 10-50 kPa, while the polysaccharide only ranges from 1-2 kPa. c) A special nozzle is required for these materials, and post-use care is required. d) Spraying efficiency includes pressure, viscosity, surface temperature and tension of the coating solution, along with the shape and design of the spray nozzle. The limitation of this study relates to farmer respondents who are not familiar with the technology (spray method) so that the method is not optimal in its application. The raw materials used are polysaccharides, which have abundant resources, so that the use of protein and lipid-based raw materials has received less attention. CONCLUSION The three edible coating film materials can improve the quality of tomatoes and extend the shelf life of tomatoes. Polysaccharides have the greatest effectiveness compared to proteins and lipids with the dipping and spray application methods. This cannot be separated from the habit of using polysaccharides as raw material for edible coating films due to their abundant availability. The dipping method has a 48.9% effect on product quality. Polysaccharides can significantly affect dipping applications. There were no cracks in the coating layer on immersion for 20-30 seconds (30µm) and 30-60 seconds (40µm). The opposite condition occurred in protein and lipid materials. Prolonged immersion will provide a thick layer that interferes with the respiration process of tomatoes, this finding strengthens the research of Khare et al. [39], and Menezes & Athmaselvi [6]. Disadvantages of the dipping method are the accumulation of dirt and the development of microbes in the container. The dipping method is better than the spray method based on the effect test (f2), coefficient (β) with p value <0.05 even though the dipping variable can only be understood/understood by polysaccharides, proteins, and lipids by 26.7% (R2) while the spray is 31.9%. The biggest obstacles in the application that are often found with the spray method are in the form of a spray flow that is not smooth (clogged nozzle), viscosity, pressure, cracks after the drying process. The use of the spray method is more complicated than the dipping method, so technical matters must be considered to obtain optimal results. The ineffectiveness of proteins and lipids is due to many obstacles in the spray process; the farmers are not familiar with spray and prefer the dipping method because it is more practical and easier to apply. Only 23% of the 95 respondents used the spray method. This study illustrates that many investigations related to ECF with the spray method have not been able to be applied optimally. The ineffectiveness of proteins and lipids in the spray method with a concentration of 5% (w/v) can be anticipated with a dilution of 0.35–0.60 (10-3 Pa.s), a spray pressure of 10-50 kPa, and a special anti-clogging nozzle. At low pressure (>10kPa), the protein concentration was more effective at 3% (w/v) while the lipid was 3-4% (w/v). In the dipping method, cracking can be anticipated with a shorter immersion time (maximum 20 seconds) compared to immersion in polysaccharides (20-40 second). Referring to the discussion above, an effective, efficient and inexpensive raw material for ECF is a polysaccharide that has strong characteristics on tensile and puncture tests. The method that can be used is the dipping method which always pays attention to: 1) the contamination factor of microorganisms and sanitation due to the accumulation of solvents. 2) pay attention to the immersion time on the thickness of the ECF layer. Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 10 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Effectiveness Comparison of Polysaccharides, Proteins, and Lipids as Composite Edible Coatings on the Quality of Food Products [15] JOUNG, Ki Youeng, et al. Effects of gum on quality characteristics of gluten-free noodles prepared with Eragrostis tef flour. The Korean Journal of Food And Nutrition. 2017; 30 (5): 1025-1034. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2017.30.5.1025 REFERENCE [1] DADZIE, Rosemond G., et al. Physicochemical properties of eggplant (Solanum aethiopicum L.) fruits as affected by cassava starch coating during low temperature storage: optimisation of coating conditions. International Journal of Postharvest Technology and Innovation. 2019; 6 (4): 276-300. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1504/IJPTI.2019.106461. [2] Ojeda, G. A., Arias Gorman, A. M., Sgroppo, S. C., & Zaritzky, N. E. Application of composite cassava starch/chitosan edible coating to extend the shelf life of black mulberries. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2021; 45 (1): e15073. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.15073 [3] Suhag, R., Kumar, N., Petkoska, A. T., & Upadhyay, A. Film formation and deposition methods of edible coating on food products: A review. Food Research International. 2020; 136: 109582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2020.109582. [4] Patrícia S. Tanada-Palmu, Carlos R.F. Grosso. Effect of edible wheat gluten-based films and coatings on refrigerated strawberry (Fragaria ananassa) quality. Postharvest Biology and Technology. 2005; 36 (2): 199-208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. postharvbio.2004.12.003. [16] RHIM, Jong Whan; SHELLHAMMER, Thomas H. Lipid-based edible films and coatings. Innovations in food packaging. Academic Press, 2005; 362-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0123116321/50053-X [17] B. Salinas-Roca, R. Soliva-Fortuny, J. Welti-Chanes, and O. Martín-Belloso. Combined effect of pulsed light, edible coating and malic acid dipping to improve fresh-cut mango safety and quality. Food Control, 2016; 66: 190–197. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.02.005. [18] Kowalczewski P, Różańska M, Makowska A, Jeżowski P, Kubiak P. Production of wheat bread with spray-dried potato juice: Influence on dough and bread characteristics. Food Science and Technology International. 2019; 25 (3):223-232. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1177/2F1082013218814605 [19] A. Valdés, N. Burgos, A. Jiménez, and M. C. Garrigós, Natural pectin polysaccharides as edible coatings. Coatings, 2015; 5 (4): 865–886. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings5040865. [20] ANDRADE, Ricardo D.; SKURTYS, Olivier; OSORIO, Fernando A. Atomizing spray systems for application of edible coatings. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. 2012; 11 (3): 323-337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.15414337.2012.00186.x. [5] SILVA, Danielle Fabíola Pereira da, et al. Influence of the use of acids and films in post-harvest lychee conservation. Revista Ceres. 2012; 59: 745-750. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034737X2012000600002 [6] MENEZES, Joslin; ATHMASELVI, K. A. Polysaccharide based edible coating on sapota fruit. International agrophysics. 2016; 30 (4): 531-557. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/intag-2016-0019. [7] ISNAINI, R.; NURMINAH, M.; LUBIS, Z. The effect of edible coating application based on cassava starch and calcium chloride concentration on the quality of orange sweet potatoes french fries. Earth and Environmental Science. IOP Publishing. 2020; 454 (1): 012110. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1088/1755-1315/454/1/012110 [8] [9] [21] SALEHI, Fakhreddin. Edible coating of fruits and vegetables using natural gums: A review. International Journal of Fruit Science. 2020; 20 (sup2): S570-S589. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15538 362.2020.1746730 [22] ROJAS-GRAÜ, María Alejandra; SOLIVA-FORTUNY, Robert; MARTÍN-BELLOSO, Olga. Edible coatings to incorporate active ingredients to fresh-cut fruits: a review. Trends in food science & technology. 2009; 20 (10): 438-447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tifs.2009.05.002. MISIR, Jawadul, BRISHTI, Fatema H. HOQUE, M. M. Aloe vera gel as a novel edible coating for fresh fruits: A review. American Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2014; 2 (3): 93-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12691/ajfst-2-3-3. [23] G. Peretto, W.-X. Du, R. J. Avena-Bustillos, J. De J. Berrios, P. Sambo, and T. H. McHugh.Electrostatic and Conventional Spraying of Alginate-Based Edible Coating with Natural Antimicrobials for Preserving Fresh Strawberry Quality. Food Bioprocess Technology. 2017; 10 (1): 165–174. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1007/s11947-016-1808-9. LACROIX, Monique, VU, Khanh Dang. Edible coating and film materials: proteins. In: Innovations in food packaging. Academic Press. 2014; 277-304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12394601-0.00011-4. [24] EMBUSCADO, Milda E., HUBER, Kerry C. Edible films and coatings for food applications. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2009. 367p [10] SOA ZO, Marina, et al. Prefreezing application of whey protein‐based edible coating to maintain quality attributes of strawberries. International Journal of Food Science & Technology. 2015; 50 (3): 605-611. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12667. [25] C. N. Cut ter, “Oppor tunities for bio - based packaging technologies to improve the quality and safety of fresh and further processed muscle foods,” Meat Science. 2006; 74 (1):131–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2006.04.023 [11] Z. Feng, G. Wu, C. Liu, D. Li, B. Jiang, and X. Zhang. Edible coating based on whey protein isolate nanofibrils for antioxidation and inhibition of product browning. Food Hydrocoll. 2018; 79: 179–188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODHYD.2017.12.028 [26] MARTHA, L. Ascencio; RICARDO, D. Andrade; JAIRO, G. Salcedo. Effect of Edible Coatings Based on Oxidized Cassava Starch on Color and Textural Properties of Minimally Processed Yam. Advance Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2018; 15 (S): 42-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19026/ajfst.15.5871 [12] A. A. Motalebi, A. Hasanzati Rostami, A. A. Khanipour, and M. Soltani. Impacts of whey protein edible coating on chemical and microbial factors of gutted kilka during frozen storage. Iranian Journal of Fisheries Science. 2010; 9 (2): 255–264. Available at: URI http://hdl.handle.net/1834/11275 [27] OJEDA, Gonzalo A.; SGROPPO, Sonia C.; ZARITZKY, Noemí E. Application of edible coatings in minimally processed sweet potatoes (I pomoea batatas L.) to prevent enzymatic browning. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 2014; 49 (3): 876-883. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12381 [13] GHIDELLI, Christian, et al. Extending the shelf life of fresh-cut eggplant with a soy protein–cysteine based edible coating and modified atmosphere packaging. Postharvest biology and technology, 2014; 95: 81-87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. postharvbio.2014.04.007. [28] H. Abdi and L. J. Williams. Principal component analysis. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics. 2010; 2 (4): 433-459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.101. [14] MIRANDA-LINARES, V., et al. Solid lipid nanoparticles based edible coating for saladet te tomato preser vation. Ac ta horticulturae, 2018; 1194: 305-312. DOI: https://doi.org/:10.17660/ actahortic.2018.1194.44 Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae [29] BHATTI, M. Ishaq, et al. Employees’ perspective of organizational service quality orientation: Evidence from Islamic banking industry. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern 11 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111 Budianto, Anik Suparmi, Muh Jaenal Arifin, Ratna Haryani Finance and Management, 2011; 4 (4): 280-294. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1108/17538391111186537. [35] HASSAN, Bilal, et al. Recent advances on polysaccharides, lipids and protein based edible films and coatings: A review. International journal of biological macromolecules. 2018; 109: 1095-1107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.11.097. [30] JOLIFFE, Ian T.; MORGAN, B. J. T. Principal component analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Statistical methods in medical research, 1992; 1 (1): 69-95. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1177/096228029200100105. [36] BOURTOOM, T. Edible protein films: properties enhancement. International Food Research Journal. 2009; 16 (1): 1-9. [37] R. K. Dhaka and A. Upadhyay. Edible films and coatings : a brief overview. Pharma Innovation Jounal. 2018; 7 (7):331–333. [31] CHIN, Wynne W., et al. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modern methods for business research, Pscychology Press, london; 1998. 295-336p. [38] C. Berkland, D. W. Pack, and K. Kim. Controlling surface nano-structure using flow-limited field-injection electrostatic spraying (FFESS) of poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide). Biomaterials. 20 0 4; 25: 56 49 – 5658. D OI: ht t p s: //d oi.or g /10.1016/ j. biomaterials.2004.01.018. [32] FORNELL, Claes; LARCKER, David F. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 1981; 18 (1): 39-50. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104 [33] M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, D. Smith, R. Reams, and J. F. Hair, “Par tial least squares structural equation modeling (PLSSEM): A useful tool for family business researchers. Journal Family Business Strategy. 2014; 5 (1): 105-115. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2014.01.002. [39] KHARE, Anshul Kumar, et al. Effect of Chitosan and Cinnamon oil edible coating on shelf life of chicken fillets under refrigeration conditions. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 2017; 51 (3) 603–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18805/ijar.v0iOF.7834. [40] D. F. Rosida, N. Hapsari, and R. Dewati, Edible Coating dan Film dari Biopolimer Bahan Alami Terbarukan. UPN Jatim, Surabaya; 2018. 10-82 p. [34] KUMAR, Nishant, et al. Polysaccharide-based component and their relevance in edible film/coating: A review. Nutrition & Food Science. 2019; 49 (5): 793–823. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ NFS-10-2018-0294. Journal Vitae | https://revistas.udea.edu.co/index.php/vitae 12 Volume 29 | Number 03 | Article 348111