Nutritional potential of processed sago grub (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) and smoked tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) products as local protein sources for food diversification in Papua
Abstract
ABSTRAK
Latar Belakang: Kekurangan protein masih menjadi tantangan kesehatan masyarakat di beberapa wilayah Papua, terutama pada kelompok rentan gizi. Pangan hewani lokal seperti ulat sagu (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) dan ikan mujair asap (Oreochromis mossambicus) telah lama dikonsumsi, namun bukti ilmiah mengenai potensi gizi produk olahannya masih terbatas.
Tujuan: Menganalisis komposisi gizi produk olahan berbasis ulat sagu dan mujair asap yang dikembangkan oleh usaha mikro, kecil, dan menengah (UMKM) di Kampung Yoboi, Kabupaten Jayapura.
Metode: Penelitian deskriptif berbasis laboratorium dilakukan pada empat produk olahan, yaitu nugget dan bakso ulat sagu serta nugget dan bakso mujair asap. Analisis meliputi komposisi proksimat, energi total, profil asam lemak (omega-3, omega-6, dan omega-9), serta asam amino esensial. Analisis proksimat dan asam lemak dilakukan tiga kali ulangan menggunakan metode AOAC, sedangkan analisis asam amino dilakukan satu kali. Hasil dinyatakan per 100 g basis basah dan dianalisis secara deskriptif.
Hasil: Produk berbasis mujair asap memiliki kadar protein tertinggi (18,05 ± 0,09%), sedangkan produk berbasis ulat sagu memberikan energi dan lemak lebih tinggi. Semua produk mengandung omega-3, omega-6, dan omega-9 dengan rasio omega-6:omega-3 sebesar 1,37–1,85. Profil asam amino esensial memenuhi atau melampaui standar updated FAO/IAEA, dengan kandungan leusin dan lisin yang relatif tinggi.
Kesimpulan: Produk olahan berbasis ulat sagu dan mujair asap memiliki kualitas gizi yang baik dan berpotensi sebagai sumber protein lokal. Pengembangannya melalui UMKM dapat mendukung diversifikasi pangan, perbaikan gizi masyarakat, dan ketahanan pangan di Papua.
ABSTRACT
Background: Protein deficiency remains a public health challenge in several regions of Papua, particularly among nutritionally vulnerable populations. Local animal-source foods such as sago grub (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus) and smoked tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) have long been consumed; however, scientific evidence regarding the nutritional potential of their processed products remains limited.
Objectives: To analyze the nutritional composition of processed products based on sago grub and smoked tilapia developed by micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in Yoboi Village, Jayapura Regency.
Methods: A laboratory-based descriptive study was conducted on four processed products: sago grub nuggets, sago grub meatballs, smoked tilapia nuggets, and smoked tilapia meatballs. Nutritional analyses included proximate composition, total energy, fatty acid profiles (omega-3, omega-6, and omega-9), and essential amino acids. Proximate and fatty acid analyses were performed in triplicate using AOAC standard methods, while amino acid composition was analyzed once. Results were expressed per 100 g wet basis and analyzed descriptively.
Results: Smoked tilapia-based products had the highest protein content (18.05 ± 0.09%), whereas sago grub-based products provided higher energy and fat contents. All products contained omega-3, omega-6, and omega-9 fatty acids, with omega-6 ratios ranging from 1.37 to 1.85. Essential amino acid profiles met or exceeded updated FAO/IAEA standards, with relatively high levels of leucine and lysine observed across all products.
Conclusions: Processed products based on sago grub and smoked tilapia demonstrated good nutritional quality and strong potential as local protein sources. Their development through MSMEs may support food diversification, improve community nutrition, and strengthen food security in Papua.
References
2. Van Huis A, Rumpold B, Maya C, Roos N. Nutritional Qualities and Enhancement of Edible Insects. Annu Rev Nutr. 2021;41:551–576. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nutr-041520-010856
3. Orkusz A. Edible insects versus meat—Nutritional comparison: Knowledge of their composition is the key to good health. Nutrients. 2021;13(4):1207. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13041207
4. Hasselberg AE, Aakre I, Scholtens J, Overå R, Kolding J, Bank MS, Atter A, Kjellevold M. Fish for food and nutrition security in Ghana: Challenges and opportunities. Glob Food Secur. 2020;26:100380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2020.100380
5. FAO. Looking at edible insects from a food safety perspective: Challenges and opportunities for the sector. Rome: FAO; 2021.
6. AOAC INTERNATIONAL. Official methods of analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL. 22nd ed. Rockville (MD): AOAC INTERNATIONAL; 2019.
7. Mukherjee KD, Weber N. CRC handbook of chromatography: Analysis of lipids. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press; 2024.
8. Jarukas L, Kuraite G, Baranauskaite J, Marksa M, Bezruk I, Ivanauskas L. Optimization and validation of the GC/FID method for the quantification of fatty acids in bee products. Appl Sci. 2021;11(1):83. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11010083
9. Xiao C, Xiao J, Wu Y, Pang J, Chen F, Zhang W, Xu D. Determination of amino acids of novel food by HPLC coupled with pre-column derivatization. Foods. 2024;13(24):4012.
10. Xu X, Feng M, Wei T, Pan F, Zhao L, Zhao L. Edible insects as future proteins: Nutritional value, functional properties, bioactivities, and safety perspectives. Nutrients. 2025;17(19):3165. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu17193165
11. Erdem ÖA, Dinçer MT. Effects of different cooking methods on the proximate and fatty acid composition of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Ege J Fish Aquat Sci. 2023;40(4):251–258. https://doi.org/10.12714/egejfas.40.4.03
12. WHO. Guideline: Saturated fatty acid and trans-fat intake for adults and children. Geneva: WHO; 2023.
13. Simopoulos AP. An increase in the omega-6/omega-3 fatty acid ratio increases the risk for obesity. Nutrients. 2016;12(10):2959. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu8030128
14. Calder PC. Omega-3 fatty acids and inflammatory processes: From molecules to man. Biochem Soc Trans. 2017;45(5):1105–1115. https://doi.org/10.1042/BST20160474
15. Ma Q, Xu H. Fishmeal and fish oil replacement in aquaculture: Insights and advances in current research. Fishes. 2026;11(4):240. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes11040240
16. Salgado D, Fedriani JM. The nutritional quality and safety of edible insects: Ten years on. Food Chem. 2026;430:137152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2026.149170
17. Kouřimská L, Adámková A. Nutritional and sensory quality of edible insects. NFS J. 2016;4:22–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nfs.2016.07.001
18. Musa S, Aura CM. Wild-caught vs cage-cultured Nile tilapia from Lake Victoria: Nutritional quality and policy implications. J Food Qual. 2026;2026:9527143. https://doi.org/10.1155/jfg/9527143
19. Tukijan T, Tambunan AA, Iman AN, Bahri MI. Food security strategies in remote highland communities: Evidence from Wouma Village, Papua Pegunungan. Int J Community Serv. 2026;6(1):964. https://doi.org/10.51601/ijcs.v6i1.964
20. Sawir MS, Younus M, Meiyani E, Kosasi RK. Understanding the governance and accountability in food estate policies through challenges of public administration in food sector development. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2026;10:1788073. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2026.1788073
21. Irianto AD, Fadilah R, Gricylla VSA. Food security or reconfiguration of indigenous living space? A multi-level perspective on the food estate project in South Papua. MORFAI J. 2026;6(2):223–240.
22. FAO, IAEA. Development of a protein database and the way forward for reviewing protein requirements. Rome: FAO; 2024.
23. Xipsiti M, Paswan VK, Tomé D, Turrini A. Protein quality evaluation: FAO perspective. Front Nutr. 2024;11:1446879. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2024.1446879
24. FAO. Improving knowledge and data access about proteins to inform better diets. Rome: FAO; 2025.
25. FAO. Food systems and nutrition: Opportunities for strengthening nutrition actions. Rome: FAO; 2022.
Authors
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.