MALUNGGAY (MORINGA

OLEIFERA) LEAVES USE AS

FLAVOR ENHANCER
IN SIOMAI WRAPPER
Proponents:
Marj Paula Rochelle G. Labtic
Mark John S. Palomo
Charls S. Pineda
Jiesel A. Rodriguez
Sheen Mae P. Salva
 WHY WOULD YOU CONDUCT
THE STUDY?
•To discover which among the Treatments is
highly acceptable in terms of Aroma, Flavor,
Appearance and General Acceptability.
Treatments A, B and C represents the
Siomai wrapper flavored with malunggay
and Treatment D without Malunggay.
•To determine if there is a significant
difference in the acceptability of Malunggay
(Moringa Oleifera) Leaves Use as Flavor
Enhancer in Siomai Wrapper in terms of
aroma, flavor, appearance, and general
acceptabilty prepared as to the following
malunggay leaves proportion.
PARADIGM OF THE STUDY
 
Preparation of Making Siomai
Wrapper made up with
Malunggay (Moringa Oleifera)
A. 240 grams Flour & 10 Acceptability of the
Utensils, grams Powdered
Malunggay (Moringa of aroma, flavor
Tools and Oleifera) appearance and
Equipment B. 240 grams Flour & 15 general
  grams Powdered
Malunggay (Moringa acceptability.
Ingredients Oleifera)
C.240 grams Flour & 20 Target Market
grams Powdered Marketing Plan
Malunggay (Moringa
Oleifera)
D. 240 grams Flour

FEEDBACK
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

This study seeks to find out the acceptability of Malunggay

(Moringa Oleifera) Leaves Use as Flavor Enhancer in
Siomai Wrapper.
Specifically, it sought to answer your following questions.

1. What is the level of acceptability of Malunggay (Moringa

Oleifera) Leaves use as Flavor Enhancer in Siomai
Wrapper in terms of aroma, flavor, appearance, and
general acceptability prepared as to the following
malunggay leaves proportions:
A. 240 grams Flour & 10 grams Powdered
Malunggay
B. 240 grams Flour & 15 grams Powdered
Malunggay
C. 240 grams Flour & 20 grams Powdered
Malunggay
D. 240 grams Flour
As evaluated by Faculty, Consumers and
Students.
2. Is there a significant difference in the acceptability of
Malunggay (Moringa Oleifera) Leaves Use as Flavor
Enhancer in Siomai Wrapper in terms of aroma, flavor,
appearance, and general acceptability prepared as to the
following malunggay leaves proportions:
A. 240 grams Flour & 10 grams Powdered Malunggay
B. 240 grams Flour & 15 grams Powdered Malunggay
C. 240 grams Flour & 20 grams Powdered Malunggay
D. 240 grams Flour
As evaluated by Faculty, Consumers and Students.
3. Who would be the target market for
this product?
4. What marketing plan can be
developed as an off shoot of the study?
 METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH DESIGN
Experimental Research Design
RESEARCH METHOD
Survey Method
RESPONDENTS OF THE STUDY
30 respondents composed of 10
(students), 10 (instructors), 10
(consumers)
 RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
Sensory Evaluation Score Sheet
DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE
Standard Deviation, Mean, and
One-way ANOVA
 RESULTS, CONCLUSION,
RECOMMENDATION
STATEMENT OF THE FINDINGS CONCLUSION RECOMMENDA-
PROBLEM
TION
1. What is the level In terms of The Malunggay
of acceptability of Regardless of the (Moringa Oleifera)
Aroma, out of the
Malunggay (Moringa treatment, it was Leaves Use as Fla-
four treatments
Oleifera) Leaves use found that all vor Enhancer in
Treatment B with
as Flavor Enhancer products were ex- Making Siomai
in Siomai Wrapper
the mean of 4.52 Wrapper was “Ex-
tremely liked by the
in terms of aroma, and was “Ex- tremely Liked” by
evaluators in terms
flavor, appearance, tremely Liked” by the evaluators, its
of Aroma (mean
and general accept- the evaluators preparation is en-
ability prepared as 4.06), Flavor (mean couraged for fam-
since the product
to the following 4.07) , Appearance ily consumption
was very much
malunggay leaves (4.11) and General and as a means of
likely and odor-
proportions: Acceptability (mean livelihood to aug-
less.
4.02). ment family in-
come.
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TIONS
A. 240 grams Perhaps Siomai
Flour & 10 grams Wrapper with
Powdered malunggay
Malunggay (moringa oleifera)
B. 240 grams is most favored
Flour & 15 grams maybe the flavor
Powdered enhancer is odor-
Malunggay less than the
C. 240 grams siomai wrapper
Flour & 20 grams without malung-
Powdered gay.
Malunggay
D. 240 grams
Flour
As evaluated by
Faculty, Con-
sumers and Stu-
dents
 STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSION RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TION

2. Is there a significant In terms of Flavor The product may

difference in the ac- In terms of aroma treatment B got be disseminated
ceptability of Malung-
gay (Moringa Oleifera)
treatment B (mean the highest mean to the public
Leaves Use as Flavor 4.52) was highly rating and was through semi-
Enhancer in Siomai
acceptable to the Extremely Liked nars, trainings,
Wrapper in terms of
aroma, flavor, appear- evaluators.In flavor by the evaluators demonstrations
ance, and general ac- treatment B (mean since it flavors to ensurethe uti-
ceptability prepared as savory with high lization of
to the following 4.68) and treat-
quality and in- Malunggay
malunggay leaves ment C (mean
proportions: creases one's ap- (Moringa
4.42) was most petite, they liked Oleifera) Leaves
acceptable to the the combination Use as Flavor
evaluators. of flavor malung- Enhancer in
gay (moringa Siomai Wrapper.
oleifera) leaves.
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TIONS

A. 240 grams In appearance In addition, re-

Flour & 10 treatment B (mean spondents liked
grams Pow- 4.70) and treat- the taste ex-
dered Malung- ment C (mean 4.49) tremely maybe
gay was most accept- due to its nutrient
B. 240 grams able to the evalua- content of these
Flour & 15 tors. And in terms flavor enhancer.
grams Pow- of general accept-
dered Malung- ability treatment B
gay (mean 4.70) and
C. 240 grams treatment C (mean
Flour & 20 4.49) was most ac-
grams Pow- ceptable to the
dered Malung- evaluators.
gay
D. 240 grams
Flour
As evaluated by
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TIONS

3. Who would There was no signif- In terms of Ap- Further studies on

be the target icant difference on pearance treat- Malunggay
market for this the Malunggay ment B (mean (Moringa Oleifera)
(Moringa Oleifera) 4.70) got the Leaves Use as Fla-
product?
Leaves Use as Fla- highest mean rat- vor Enhancer in
vor Enhancer in ing and was Ex- Siomai Wrapper
Siomai Wrapper in tremely Liked by specifically on
terms of Aroma as the evaluators cost analysis of
evaluated by the looks pleasing the product may
evaluators. that very much be considered.
captures interest.
In addition, re-
spondents liked
the appearance
maybe due to the
powdered
malunggay com-
pliments to the
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TIONS

4. What market- The result showed In terms of Gen- Follow up studies

ing plan can be that there is signifi- eral Acceptability may be con-
developed as an cant difference on Treatment B ducted to ascer-
off shoot of the the Malunggay (mean 4.70) got tain the validity of
study? (Moringa Oleifera) the highest mean the result of
Leaves Use as Fla- rating and was Ex- Malunggay
vor Enhancer in tremely liked by (Moringa Oleifera)
Siomai Wrapper in the evaluators Leaves Use as Fla-
terms of Flavor, Ap- their general im- vor Enhancer in
pearance and Gen- pression is very Siomai Wrapper.
eral Acceptability. much likely and
perfect.Therefore,
we conclude that
Treatment B is the
Extremely Liked
by the evaluators
and it is Signifi-
cant.
STATEMENT OF FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDA-
THE PROBLEM TIONS

Patent/ license
from BFAD may
be secured for the
purpose of oper-
ating business on
Malunggay
(Moringa Oleifera)
Leaves Use as Fla-
vor Enhancer in
Siomai Wrapper.