RESEARCH ARTICLE | APRIL 21 2020

Analysis of peroxide value, free fatty acid, and water content

changes in used cooking oil from street vendors in Malang

Rina Rifqie Mariana  ; Evi Susanti; Laili Hidayati; Roswanira Abdul Wahab
AIP Conf. Proc. 2231, 040057 (2020)
https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0002656


View Export
Online Citation

Articles You May Be Interested In

Blood glucose profile in healthy adults with Nasi jagung consumption habit
AIP Conf. Proc. (April 2020)

Shelf-life prediction of canned “nasi uduk” using accelerated shelf-life test (ASLT) - Arrhenius model
AIP Conference Proceedings (January 2017)

Biodiversity of the Gaga’ chicken (ayam ketawa) from Sidenreng-Rappang based on the bioacoustic
analysis and the morphometric study
AIP Conference Proceedings (April 2016)

27 October 2024 23:44:25

 Analysis of Peroxide Value, Free Fatty Acid, and Water
Content Changes in Used Cooking Oil from Street Vendors
in Malang
Rina Rifqie Mariana1,*, Evi Susanti2, Laili Hidayati3, Roswanira Abdul Wahab4
1
Culinary Education Study Program, Universitas Negeri Malang. Semarang 5 Malang, East Java, Indonesia
2
Department of Chemistry, Universitas Negeri Malang. Malang, Semarang 5, East Java, Indonesia
3
Culinary Education Study Program, Universitas Negeri Malang. Semarang 5 Malang, East Java, Indonesia
4
Department of Chemistry, University Technologi Malaysia, Malaysia

*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract. This research aimed to identify the changes of peroxide value, free fatty acid, and water content before the frying
(0, as the control point), in the 5th, 10th, 15th, and 15th frying from five vendors that sold ‘nasi lalapan’ in Malang. This
experiment tested the peroxide value using AOAC (Association of Analytical Communities) titration method, the free fatty

27 October 2024 23:44:25

acid using acidic base titration, and water content using the gravimetric method. The results showed that from five ‘nasi
ayam lalapan’ vendors, there were 1) the increases in peroxide value in each frying frequency, with an average of 1.62
mgO2 in the 0 fryings to 12.78 mgO2 in the 20th frying (max allowed value: 1.00), 2) the increases in free fatty acid content
in each frying frequency, with the average of 0.86%b/b from the 0 frying to 7.88%b/b in the 20 th frying (max allowed value
0.30), and 3) the increases in water content, with the initial average value was 0.86 %b/b became 0.74 %b/b in the 10 th
frying, however the average value declined in the 15th and the 20th frying with the average value of 0.55 %b/b (max allowed
value 0.01–0.03).

INTRODUCTION

‘Nasi lalapan’ is a universally liked food from all generations, old and young, and various social level. Sellers of
this food in Indonesia, particularly in Malang, East Java, are a lot, and consist of restaurants and street vendors. Based
on the research Mariana et al.[1], there are 22 restaurants with ‘nasi lalapan’ as their featured menu and 717 street
vendors that named their cart as ‘nasi lalapan.’ In this research, the term of ‘nasi lalapan’ meant rice with side dish
choice of fried chicken, fried catfish, fried tempeh, fried tofu, and fried eel complemented by chili sauce and raw
vegetables, such as cucumbers, cabbages, long beans, and basil leaves. There is no doubt that Malang society loves
‘nasi lalapan’ as proven by the high demand for this food, especially at night. Moreover, there are packed places that
require the consumers to wait for a few hours to order. However, the research results of Mariana et al. [2] stated that
there was an indication that the ‘nasi lalapan’ street vendors used cooking oils that did not meet the health standard.
Sellers of ‘nasi lalapan’ have been conducted bad habits in their activities. The first one was using repeated cooking
oil since the first frying batch due to their limited purchasing power and selling price. Second, although some used
new cooking oil, they did not replace the cooking oil once the volume decreased; instead, they poured new cooking
oil on the pan and combined with the used cooking oil up to 20–30 batch. The research Saadah et al. [3] declared that
65.7% of ‘ayam penyetan’ sellers in Tambalang, Semarang, did not change their cooking oil from the opening hours
to closing time, with more than 50 batches frying intensity of large volume. Third, sellers fried various side dishes,
such as chicken, tofu, tempeh, and catfish in one pan. Based on the researcher’s survey, there were no changes in these
activities from the previous years and there was no evidence that those sellers planned to leave to habit. Moreover,
restaurants also used cooking oil to reduce cost.

International Conference on Life Sciences and Technology (ICoLiST)

AIP Conf. Proc. 2231, 040057-1–040057-6; https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0002656
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1990-2/$30.00

040057-1
 The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) recommended frying chicken piece and other fried foods at
maximum 190 ℃ for 13–20 min. Meanwhile, most sellers fried their food at 200–300 ℃. Yustinah et al.[4] explained
that a continuous and repeated usage of cooking oil in high temperature (above 180 ℃) and contact with air and water
during frying resulted in a complex degradation reaction in the oil and produced various reaction compounds.
Degradation reduces food quality and badly affect health. As disclosed by Ghobadi et al.[5], the repeated use of
cooking oil made the oil quick to smoke, foamy, increased the brown color, and added unsavory flavor in the fried
food. The damage that occurred to the oil during frying also decreased the nutritional value and influenced the food
quality. Using damaged oil could affect the food’s structure and presentation, and create a less interesting food with
bad taste and smell. The frequent usage of cooking oil means higher damage, which also means it cannot be used and
should be thrown out.
Several studies observed the connection between repeated cooking oil and health risk. The research of Taqiuddin
et al.[6] mentioned that there is a dangerous material (peroxide compound), such as carcinoma, in using cooking oil
that increases the risk to several diseases. Carcinoma is a large compound that contributes significantly to food
contamination, and the development of gastrointestinal cancer [7], intestine damage, function damage, glucose
absorption[8], kidney disorder, increase in blood pressure [9] that contributes to the development of an intestinal tumor
and increase in free radical that causes cellular and molecular damages [10]. Other researches on the risk of consuming
food from repeated cooking oil were the research of Srivastava et al. [11] that demonstrated that after giving repeated
cooking oil diet orally to Wistar mouse for twelve weeks, there were changes of genes and precancerous lesions in
liver cells of experimental animals. That result is supported by research of Sutejo et al. [12] reporting that giving
cooking oil on experimental animal (mice) for 27 times in 14 days resulted in the increases in liver cells damage and
cholesterol level. Moreover, Farag et al. [13] confirmed that organ damage that occurred was also proportional to
heating duration. The longer and more often the cooking oil was heated, the damage to the liver, kidneys, and heart in
the experimental mice would also get worse.
Chemical analysis of oil quality used the peroxide value, acid number, and free fatty acid level tests. Several studies
stated that the tests above were enough to describe the oil quality [14]. However, it would be better to conduct a
physical experiment by determining the water content [15,16]. Indonesia uses SNI (Standar Nasional Indonesia, or

27 October 2024 23:44:25

Indonesia National Standard) but exports cooking oil by using SPB (Special Prime Bleach) standard. Further, [17]
explained that the indicator of bad quality in cooking oil is the increase in Free Fatty Acid, low smoke point, change
of color, low iodine level, increasing peroxide value, total polar material, high foam properties, and increasing
viscosity. The best test to determine the oxidative rancidity is by determining the peroxide value [18,19].
Food safety is the responsibility of not only seller/producer but also the government who has the regulation and
authority police and supervises the issue. Consumers should also be aware and intelligent to choose safe and healthy
local food. An academic/researcher with concrete data and adequate knowledge could act as a mediator between
producer, consumer, seller, and government that aimed to save the society through safe and healthy food.
There are several factors that influence food culture in a country. Other than the social factor, the economic factor
also determines their food intake. For example, in India, groups with low income often choose foods from street
vendors. Research also showed that 48% of Indians consume fried food 1–6 times per week [20]. The low social and
economic status resulted in a low purchasing power and, thus, created this condition.

METHOD AND MATERIAL

This research used initial cooking oil to fry ‘nasi lalapan’ for the first time (point 0) as the control, then used
cooking oil on the 5th batch, the 10th batch, the 15th batch, and the 20th batch from five ‘nasi lalapan’ street vendors in
Malang City as the samples. There was no observation as to which food was fried from each frying due to different
consumers’ orders. To illustrate, on the first frying, the seller only fried two pieces of chicken and on the 5th frying,
seller fried catfish, tempeh, and chicken at the same time; on the 10th frying, seller fried two tofu, tempeh, chicken and
so on. This research conducted three times measurements from each batch as stated above and calculated the average
values. This research also conducted survey and interview on the sellers to support the data on the type of cooking oil,
daily frying frequency, product type in each batch, initial cooking oil, temperature, and frying duration, and the ratio
of cooking oil and food.
Meanwhile, to test the experiment, this research used 1) AOAC (Association of Analytical Communities) method
to test the peroxide value, 2) acid-base titration method to test the fatty acid content, and 3) gravimetric method to test
the water content.

040057-2
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Changes in Peroxide Values

Figure 1 displays the changes in peroxide values from the used cooking oil in ‘nasi lalapan’ street vendors in
Malang. Figure 1 shows that the initial peroxide value in cooking oil is already high (between 0.8–3.2 mgO 2/100g).
The value showed that there were sellers that used repeated cooking oil from the start. Only two out of five sellers
used new bulk oil. However, bulk cooking oil had a higher exposure to oxygen, light, and high temperatures compared
to packaged oil. These things influenced oxidation.
Based on the field observation, in general, the seller never threw away the leftover oil. In one day, they opened the
cart for averaging eight hours and did not replace the cooking oil. They poured a lot of volume from the beginning
(6.5l per day on average). The leftover oil was then stored for a night and used in the next day with additional new oil.

Peroxide Value in Each Batch

16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 th 5 th 10 th 15 th 20 th

27 October 2024 23:44:25

SFV 1 SFV 2 SFV 3 SFV 4 SFV 5

FIGURE 1. Changes/Increases in Peroxide Value in Each Batch

According to Oktaviani et al.[21], the peroxide level increased with each cooling phase. When the oil was heated
repeatedly, there was quick destruction. Oil undergo decomposition when it was reheated [15,22]. Therefore, heating
the oil then cooling it for the next use is dangerous due to the peroxide compound. This statement is supported by
Khomsan et al. [23] affirming that oil damage also occurred during storage. Storing repeated cooking oil in large amount
for a certain period of time break the triglyceride bonds in the oil that then formed glycerol and free fatty acid. Several
arguments stated that using repeated cooking oil should be limited to four times in one day in medium heat.
Figure 1 also explains that the higher batch means higher peroxide compound in the oil, exceeding the standardized
threshold. In the 5th batch, the peroxide value from five street vendors was between 2.2–4.5 mgO2/100g, the 10th batch
contained 6.1–7.4 mgO2/100g, the 15th contained 9.3–12.22 mgO2/100g, and the 20th contained 11.4–14.9 mgO2/100g,
all exceeding the standard BSN [24] of maximum 1.00 mgO2/100g. The high peroxide value indicated an oxidized oil
signed by rancid smell and taste. Triglycerides that had an unsaturated chain (double) experienced autoxidation to
form free radicals.
There were several types of research related to the peroxide value caused by repeated cooking oil, such as [25] The
result showed that there was an increase in peroxide value up to 60.79% in repeated frying at high temperature (above
200 ℃). The heating caused oxidation, hydrolysis, and oil decomposition Peroxide decomposed into the carbonyl
compound [26] . The repeated heating in cooking oil also resulted in an oil that prone to lipid [26]. Aminah et al.
explained that the increase in peroxide value was caused by the repeated frying and in turn caused poison [27]. The
peroxide formation in unsaturated fatty acid, then aldehyde and free radical component, affect the development of cancer
cell. Meanwhile, peroxide and carbonyl compounds cause chronic poison in biological activity [28]. Furthermore,
Budiyanto et al. explained that peroxide in blood circulation required additional Vitamin E [29]. Vitamin E deficit causes
encephalomalacia (softening or degeneration of nerve tissue) and affects the damage of the fat and protein cell tissue
DNA when consumed [28].

040057-3
 Changes of Free Fatty Acid

Figure 2 presents the changes in free fatty acid content in repeated cooking oil in each batch. Figure 2 shows that
from five contents in new cooking oil used by sellers, only two met the standard (0.2 and 0.3%) of less than 0.3%.
The average free fatty acid in packed cooking oil above was 0.026%, exceeding the standardized threshold [24]. Based
on the field observation, five sellers had the habit of adding new cooking oil into the leftover oil. The activity slowed
the hydrolysis reaction. Oil and fat hydrolysate created free fatty acid that influenced the taste and smell of the
ingredient. Water in the fat or oil and enzyme activity could cause hydrolysate [30].
Figure 2 also explains that in each batch, there is a drastic increase in free fatty acid. The 5th batch contained 1.73–
2.7% free fatty acid, the 10th contained 2.56–3.45%, the 15th contained 5.9–7.2%, the 20th contained 6.4–9.6%,
exceeding the threshold of allowed free fatty acid[24] that was less than 0.30%. [31] stated that the free fatty acid in
repeated cooking oil increased along with the frying duration, the same applies to the peroxide value. [32] also
affirmed that free fatty acid increases along with the frying duration. The research results of Yuliasari et al. showed
that free fatty acid (FFA) content increased by up to 50% with repeated frying [25]. Oxidation process and enzyme
hydrolysis formed free fatty acid during processing and storing. Then, the component produced trans-fatty acid and
free radical. [31] asserted that high free fatty acid in oil means it has a lower quality. Hydrolysis reaction in the oil
damaged the oil due to water inside and could form free fatty acid and glycerol.

Changes of Free Fatty Acid in Each Batch

10

27 October 2024 23:44:25

4

0
0 th 5 th 10 th 15 th 20 th

SFV 1 SFV 2 SFV 3 SFV 4 SFV 5

FIGURE 2. Changes of Free Fatty Acid Content in Each Batch

Several types of research related with the increase in free fatty acid in cooking oil and its effect on health are the
research of Sartika stated that the increase in free fatty acid in blood worsened the insulin work in the body [33]. Free
fatty acid causes insulin resistance in muscle and liver that support diabetes mellitus. Aminah et al. and Yu-poth et al.
explained that d if we consume food with a high free fatty acid, it increases LDL level and decreases HDL level in the
blood, reducing our body’s ability to control blood sugar because it reduces the response in insulin hormone [27,34]. A
consumption of 5g trans fatty acid per day increases risk of cardiac decrease up to 25% in a couple of years. Free radical
also caused liver disease, coronary heart disease, cholesterol, and others [35]. That stating trans-fat creates more danger
than saturated fat because saturated fat only increases the LDL but does not affect HDL. Epidemiology study found that
high-fat food is closely related to cancer. Furthermore, Aminah et al. [27] explained that fatty acid in cooking oil became
an indication of intestines disease and breast cancer, whereas low fat and high fiber food, such as vegetarian dietary habit
reduced the number of cancer patients. As stated by Almeida et al. [36] trans fat is, arguably, more dangerous than
saturated fat because saturated fat only increases LDL but does not influence HDL.

Changes in Water Content

Water content is a determining factor in oil quality. Even though free fatty acid and peroxide value content is low.
When the oil has a high content, it means that the oil contains a lot of water with high hydrolysis level that makes the
oil easy to break down. Figure 3 explains the changes in water content in repeated cooking oil from ‘nasi lalapan’ in
each batch. Figure 3 shows the water content on new cooking oil from five street vendors is around 0.10–0.70% b/b.

040057-4
There were three sellers who used new cooking oil with water content below the SNI standard (0.10–0.30% b/b). They
were Street Vendor (SV) 1 (0.10% b/b), SV 2 (0.13% b/b), SV 3 (0.18% b/b) whereas the other two had 0.62% b/b
(SV 4) and 0.70% b/b (SV 5), exceeded the threshold.
Water content in the cooking oil had a small level. However, after repeated the use of oil, the water content
increased. This occurrence was caused by the hydrolysis process during frying that formed glycerol and free fatty
acid. The increasing water content caused rancid smell and taste. The water content influenced oil quality because
more water decreases the oil quality[37].
The 5th and 10th batch showed a significant increase in water content. The 5th batch contained 0.38–0.76% b/b,
whereas the 10th batch contained 0.42–0.86% b/b, way above the standard. One of several factors that affect this
increase is the water content in the oil as a result of water content in food material. For example, during the frying of
catfish and eel, the oil was contaminated with air and water. The water content was also the result of evaporation
during numerous frying. A vital factor that affected evaporation was the high temperature in frying. Other than that,
there were several factors, such as frying duration, rate differences during frying, various water contents in the raw
food, cooking oil composition [15] that influenced the end result of water content. Additionally, during frying, due to
storage humidity, water content inside the food came out and the oil took place, thus, increasing the water content in
the oil. Oil with high water content reflected the decrease in quality because it affectsthe taste and storing storability
of the oil [21].

Changes of Water Content in Each Batch

1

27 October 2024 23:44:25

0,5

0
0 th 5 th 10 th 15 th 20 th

SFV 1 SFV 2 SFV 3 SFV 4 SFV 5

FIGURE 3. Changes of Water Content in Each Batch

However, the 15th and 20th batches showed different results. Water content percentage in those batches were
relatively low compared to the previous batches. In plain view, the oil appeared darker or blacker as the result of
Maillard reaction because of the fried protein (chicken, catfish) [8]. Moreover, the side dish in ‘nasi lalapan’ used a
lot of seasoning that contributed to the darker color of the oil. Other substances might cause a decrease in water content
in the 15th and 20th batches.
Water content inside the frying oil is one of several parameters to determine oil purity and quality. It is related to
its storage, frying properties, smell, and taste. The water content plays a role in the oxidation process and oil hydrolysis
that causes rancidity. The higher water content means the oil is quick to be rancid [38].

SUMMARY

There were increases in peroxide value, free fatty acid content, and water content in repeated cooking oil in frying
‘nasi lalapan’ within each batch. The values exceeded the SNI standard, meaning the cooking oil used by ‘nasi lalapan’
street vendors in Malang city was unsafe to consume because it risked the consumers’ health. If the community was
still allowed to consume these foods, without improvement or government supervision, then those foods would
endanger the public health.

040057-5
 REFERENCES

1. R.R. Mariana and K.A. Muhrofi-G, (2017).

2. R.R. Mariana and S. Subandi, Teknol. Dan Kejuru. 33, (2012).
3. A. Saadah, M. Martini, and S. Yuliawati, J. Kesehat. Masy. E-J. 4, 311 (2016).
4. H. Yustinah, in Pros. Semin. Nas. Tek. Kim. Kejuangan Yogyak. H (2011), pp. 1–5.
5. S. Ghobadi, M. Akhlaghi, S. Shams, and S.M. Mazloomi, Int. J. Nutr. Sci. 3, 25 (2018).
6. R. Taqiuddin and N.Y. Aliah, APEC Youth Sci J 4, 62 (2014).
7. D.L. Diggs, A.C. Huderson, K.L. Harris, J.N. Myers, L.D. Banks, P.V. Rekhadevi, M.S. Niaz, and A. Ramesh,
J. Environ. Sci. Health Part C 29, 324 (2011).
8. A.O. Obembe, D.U. Owu, O.O. Okwari, A.B. Antai, and E.E. Osim, ISRN Gastroenterol. 2011, (2010).
9. E.E. Osim, D.U. Owu, and K.M. Etta, Afr. J. Med. Med. Sci. 25, 335 (1996).
10. N.M. Bayraktar, A.A. Karagözler, M. Bayraktar, S. Titretir, and E.M. Gözükara, Toxicol. Env. Chem. 88, 587
(2006).
11. S. Srivastava, M. Singh, J. George, K. Bhui, and Y. Shukla, J. Agric. Food Chem. 58, 11179 (2010).
12. I.R. Sutejo, IKESMA 8, (2012).
13. R.S. Farag, M.S. Abdel-Latif, A.M.M. Basuny, and B. Hakeem, Agric Biol JN Am 1, 501 (2010).
14. A.S. Suroso, Indones. Pharm. J. 3, 77 (2013).
15. S.L. Zahra, B. Dwiloka, and S. Mulyani, Anim. Agric. J. 2, 253 (2013).
16. R. Febriansyah, Skripsi Fak. Teknol. Pertan. Inst. Pertan. Bogor (2007).
17. L.S. Kheang, C.Y. May, C.S. Foon, and M.A. Ngan, J. Oil Palm Res. 18, 247 (2006).
18. J. Rana and J. Paul, J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 38, 157 (2017).
19. A. Kaleem, S. Aziz, M. Iqtedar, R. Abdullah, M. Aftab, F. Rashid, F.R. Shakoori, and S. Naz, FUUAST J. Biol.
5, 191 (2015).
20. R. Chakraborty, K. Bose, and S.J. Ulijaszek, Malays. J. Nutr. 15, (2009).

27 October 2024 23:44:25

21. N. Dwi Oktaviani, (2009).
22. M. Mahboubifar, S. Yousefinejad, M. Alizadeh, and B. Hemmateenejad, J. Iran. Chem. Soc. 13, 2291 (2016).
23. A. Khomsan, PT Raja Graf. Persada Jkt. (2003).
24. B.S. Nasional, Jkt. BSN (2002).
25. N. Yuliasari and F. Fachriah, J. Penelit. Sains (2017).
26. K. Jaarin, M.R. Mustafa, and X.-F. Leong, Clinics 66, 2125 (2011).
27. S. Aminah, J. Pangan Dan Gizi 1, (2010).
28. R.P. Venkata and R. Subramanyam, Toxicol. Rep. 3, 636 (2016).
29. B. Budiyanto, D. Silsia, Z. Efendi, and R. Janika, AGRITECH 30, 75 (2014).
30. R. Das, D.P. Pawar, and V.K. Modi, J. Food Sci. Technol. 50, 284 (2013).
31. D. Muchtadi, Bdg. Alf. 90 (2009).
32. R.W. Anwar, Makasssar Fak. Pertan. Univ. Hasanuddin (2012).
33. R.A.D. Sartika, Makara J. Sci. (2010).
34. S. Yu-Poth, T.D. Etherton, C.C. Reddy, T.A. Pearson, R. Reed, G. Zhao, S. Jonnalagadda, Y. Wan, and P.M.
Kris-Etherton, J. Nutr. 130, 2228 (2000).
35. S. Aisyah, E. Yulianti, and A.G. Fasya, Alchemy (2012).
36. J.C. de Almeida, M.S. Perassolo, J.L. Camargo, N. Bragagnolo, and J.L. Gross, Rev. Bras. Ciênc. Farm. 42, 109
(2006).
37. I.R. Lempang, PHARMACON 5, (2016).
38. S. Mualifah, Univ. Islam Negeri Malang (2009).

040057-6