| Literature DB >> 33924635 |
Rogério Mendes1, Helena Silva1, Patrícia Oliveira1, Luís Oliveira1, Bárbara Teixeira1.
Abstract
The overall quality of frozen hake fillets in the Portuguese market was evaluated. Physical, biochemical, microbiological, and sensory analysis in 20 brands revealed several non-conformities. Hake was identified in 19 brands, although two mislabeled the species. Lower net weight than labeled was evidenced in ca. one-third of brands. TVB-N in ca. one-third of the samples presented high values, although within legal limit. Almost all brands presented excessive amount of ice glaze, low levels of WHC (raw/cooked), low levels of soluble protein, and undue thaw-drip loss, thus reflecting the poor quality of fillets. Added phosphates were below the legal limit in all samples; however, they were used in glaze ice in three brands, and only labeled in one. Overall microbiological quality of frozen fillets was good, though yeasts and molds detected in six samples indicate poor hygienic conditions in some facilities. Labels comply with legal requisites, however, need improvement, namely the 'best before' periods. In general, packaging was efficient regarding presence of ice crystals and dehydration signs. Concerning sensory analysis of cooked fillets, 63% of the brands had bad to poor quality and 37% fair quality. Merluccius productus revealed the worst quality, namely regarding thaw drip loss, thaw drip loss protein, M/P ratio, pH and sensory evaluation. Overall results show that a significant part of the hake fillets business operators are still failing in relation with best practices.Entities:
Keywords: adulteration; consumer’s evaluation; labeling; market study; seafood quality; sensory analysis
Year: 2021 PMID: 33924635 PMCID: PMC8069286 DOI: 10.3390/foods10040848
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Deep-frozen pre-packaged hake products sampled in the Portuguese retail market.
| Sample | Labeled Net Weight (kg) | Labeled Species | Capture Area | Freezing Date | Best Before | Storage Days * | Labeled Ingredients |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 16 November 2017 | 10.2019 | 315 | - |
| 2 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 06 September 2017 | 12.2019 | 385 | Fillets of Cape hake |
| 3 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 10 July 2018 | 01.2020 | 81 | - |
| 4 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic (FAO 47) | 23 July 2018 | 01.2020 | 68 | Shallow-water Cape hake/Deep-water Cape hake |
| 5 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 02 May 2018 | 05.2020 | 149 | Fillet, water |
| 6 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic (FAO 47) | 01 February 2018 | 02.2020 | 240 | Cape hake |
| 7 | 400 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 08 August 2018 | 02.2020 | 53 | - |
| 8 | 600 |
| Southeast Atlantic (FAO 47) | 28 November 2017 | 01.2020 | 303 | Cape hake |
| 9 | 600 |
| Northeast Pacific | 05 November 2017 | 11.2019 | 326 | - |
| 10 | 600 |
| Southwest Atlantic (FAO 41) | 01 June 2016 | 05.2019 | 840 | Argentine hake, fish |
| 11 | 800 |
| Southwest Atlantic | 20 July 2017 | 07.2019 | 431 | - |
| 12 | 662 |
| Southwest Atlantic | 16 December 2018 ** | 02.2020 | 285 | Hake, water |
| 13 | 400 |
| Southwest Atlantic | 21 September 2017 | 09.2019 | 370 | - |
| 14 | 800 |
| Southwest Atlantic | 03 September 2018 | 09.2020 | 28 | - |
| 15 | 800 |
| Northeast Pacific (FAO 67) | 12 October 2016 | 10.2018 | 709 | Hake, water |
| 16 | 800 |
| Northeast Pacific (FAO 67) | 18 August 2017 | 05.2020 | 403 | Hake, E451, water |
| 17 | 1000 |
| Southwest Atlantic (FAO 41) | 01 July 2017 | 01.2020 | 450 | Fish |
| 18 | 750 |
| Southwest Atlantic (FAO 41) | 02 April 2018 | 05.2019 | 179 | Fish, E330 and sugars |
| 19 | 900 |
| Southwest Atlantic | 06 August 2017 | 08.2019 | 415 | Fish |
| 20 | 700 |
| Southeast Atlantic | 05 February 2018 | 07.2019 | 236 | Fillets, water |
* Until analysis. ** Labeling error, showing freezing date after sampling date.
Species identification of deep-frozen pre-packaged hake products sampled in the Portuguese retail market (n = 3).
| Sample | Labeled Species | Sequence (GenBank) | Identified Species ( | Conformity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 2 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 3 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 4 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 5 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 6 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 7 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 8 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
| 9 |
| FJ164843 |
|
|
| 10 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 11 |
| KX119441 |
|
|
| 12 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 13 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 14 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 15 |
| FJ164843 |
|
|
| 16 |
| FJ164843 |
|
|
| 17 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 18 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 19 |
| EU074469 |
|
|
| 20 |
| KP975790 |
|
|
* C—Conform; NC—Non-Conform.
Corrected net weight, net weight difference, glaze ice (n = 10), thaw drip and cook loss and water holding capacity (raw/cook) levels (n = 3) in deep frozen pre-packaged hake products sampled in the Portuguese retail market. Results expressed as mean and standard deviation.
| Sample | Corrected Net Weight (g) * | Net Weight Difference (%) | Glaze Ice (%) * | Thaw Drip Loss (%) | WHC–Raw (%) | Cook Loss (%) | WHC–Cook (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 402.1 ± 5.7 | 0.5 ± 1.4 | 7.6 ± 0.9 | 4.9 ± 3.1 | 68.2 ± 2.4 | 15.3 ± 0.7 | 61.6 ± 0.3 |
| 2 | 409.5 ± 13.1 | 2.4 ± 3.3 | 14.3 ± 1.8 | 1.2 ± 1.1 | 56.0 ± 0.6 | 17.3 ± 3.1 | 58.2 ± 0.1 |
| 3 | 397.5 ± 6.1 | −0.6 ± 1.5 | 13.2 ± 1.0 | 4.6 ± 1.0 | 60.1 ± 1.1 | 17.3 ± 1.3 | 60.0 ± 0.9 |
| 4 | 419.2 ± 6.8 | 4.8 ± 1.7 | 12.5 ± 1.3 | 3.1 ± 1.9 | 54.0 ± 1.5 | 21.5 ± 2.6 | 58.0 ± 1.7 |
| 5 | 418.0 ± 15.2 | 4.5 ± 3.8 | 10.0 ± 0.7 | 2.1 ± 2.0 | 53.0 ± 2.2 | 15.1 ± 3.1 | 55.6 ± 0.2 |
| 6 | 413.3 ± 15.0 | 3.3 ± 3.7 | 13.4 ± 1.5 | 5.2 ± 1.6 | 50.5 ± 2.2 | 17.3 ± 3.5 | 56.9 ± 1.6 |
| 7 | 411.4 ± 11.5 | 2.9 ± 2.9 | 14.9 ± 1.8 | 8.9 ± 2.3 | 54.0 ± 0.4 | 20.8 ± 3.1 | 58.8 ± 0.1 |
| 8 | 643.8 ± 7.3 | 7.3 ± 1.2 | 5.8 ± 0.6 | 4.7 ± 2.5 | 56.2 ± 2.2 | 16.9 ± 1.4 | 59.9 ± 0.2 |
| 9 | 601.1 ± 11.0 | 0.2 ± 1.8 | 19.3 ± 1.5 | 25.1 ± 0.9 | 51.5 ± 1.0 | 17.2 ± 2.2 | 52.4 ± 2.1 |
| 10 | 629.6 ± 25.4 | 4.9 ± 4.2 | 7.7 ± 1.6 | 7.5 ± 4.0 | 49.0 ± 0.7 | 14.9 ± 1.2 | 55.3 ± 0.7 |
| 12 | 559.8 ± 14.6 | −15.4 ± 2.2 | 25.2 ± 1.9 | 5.4 ± 3.7 | 54.0 ± 1.6 | 13.3 ± 4.1 | 56.5 ± 0.0 |
| 13 | 381.7 ± 13.3 | −4.6 ± 3.3 | 18.3 ± 3.0 | 2.4 ± 1.0 | 48.5 ± 1.2 | 14.8 ± 4.1 | 61.6 ± 1.1 |
| 14 | 793.6 ± 29.2 | −0.8 ± 3.6 | 17.0 ± 2.0 | 2.4 ± 3.2 | 50.3 ± 1.9 | 19.6 ± 1.3 | 60.2 ± 0.9 |
| 15 | 723.5 ± 26.6 | −9.6 ± 3.3 | 23.0 ± 3.2 | 16.8 ± 4.2 | 51.0 ± 0.6 | 19.3 ± 3.9 | 55.5 ± 1.0 |
| 16 | 756.9 ± 20.5 | −5.4 ± 2.6 | 28.3 ± 1.8 | 22.6 ± 2.2 | 54.0 ± 1.5 | 15.8 ± 2.0 | 58.0 ± 0.4 |
| 17 | 1034.3 ± 32.8 | 3.4 ± 3.3 | 12.1 ± 0.6 | 3.0 ± 1.3 | 50.5 ± 1.1 | 15.0 ± 1.0 | 54.4 ± 0.0 |
| 18 | 714.1 ± 49.3 | −4.8 ± 6.6 | 32.9 ± 3.8 | 4.9 ± 5.1 | 50.5 ± 1.2 | 17.6 ± 0.6 | 59.6 ± 0.7 |
| 19 | 916.3 ± 20.6 | 1.8 ± 2.3 | 12.1 ± 1.9 | 6.3 ± 2.4 | 49.1 ± 0.4 | 20.2 ± 2.1 | 59.2 ± 1.2 |
| 20 | 746.6 ± 26.2 | 6.7 ± 3.7 | 27.8 ± 2.2 | 7.5 ± 3.2 | 54.5 ± 1.0 | 22.9 ± 2.3 | 60.0 ± 0.6 |
* According to Portuguese Regulation Decreto-Lei no. 37/2004 [37].
Moisture and protein content, M/P ratio, TVB-N, soluble protein, soluble/total protein percentage, and thaw drip loss protein levels in deep frozen pre-packaged hake products sampled in the Portuguese retail market. Results expressed as mean and standard deviation (n = 3).
| Sample | Moisture (%) | Protein (%) | M/P Ratio | pH | TVB-N (mg/100 g) | Soluble Protein (g/100 g) | Soluble/Total Protein (%) | Thaw Drip Loss Protein (g/100 mL) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 79.7 ± 0.0 | 19.5 ± 0.7 | 4.1 | 6.73 ± 0.03 | 9.3 ± 1.1 | 13.2 ± 0.0 | 67.5 ± 0.1 | 12.7 ± 0.2 |
| 2 | 80.7 ± 0.3 | 17.3 ± 0.7 | 4.7 | 6.73 ± 0.02 | 11.7 ± 1.4 | 12.4 ± 0.3 | 71.5 ± 1.5 | 46.2 ± 0.5 |
| 3 | 79.1 ± 0.0 | 18.2 ± 0.3 | 4.4 | 6.58 ± 0.00 | 11.6 ± 1.4 | 12.4 ± 0.0 | 68.5 ± 0.2 | 16.9 ± 0.3 |
| 4 | 80.0 ± 0.6 | 17.2 ± 0.4 | 4.6 | 6.74 ± 0.04 | 16.2 ± 1.9 | 12.4 ± 0.1 | 72.2 ± 0.5 | 21.7 ± 0.1 |
| 5 | 80.8 ± 0.4 | 17.7 ± 0.7 | 4.6 | 6.84 ± 0.05 | 12.5 ± 1.5 | 12.0 ± 0.0 | 67.8 ± 0.2 | 21.9 ± 0.2 |
| 6 | 80.6 ± 0.0 | 17.9 ± 0.2 | 4.5 | 6.70 ± 0.03 | 14.3 ± 1.7 | 11.8 ± 0.1 | 65.9 ± 0.6 | 13.0 ± 0.3 |
| 7 | 78.9 ± 0.4 | 18.2 ± 0.4 | 4.3 | 6.57 ± 0.00 | 10.7 ± 1.3 | 11.8 ± 0.0 | 64.7 ± 0.2 | 10.2 ± 0.2 |
| 8 | 80.7 ± 0.0 | 17.8 ± 0.2 | 4.5 | 6.74 ± 0.04 | 11.3 ± 1.4 | 12.6 ± 0.3 | 70.7 ± 1.6 | 9.1 ± 0.3 |
| 9 | 83.0 ± 0.3 | 15.5 ± 0.3 | 5.4 | 7.02 ± 0.02 | 11.6 ± 1.4 | 9.8 ± 0.0 | 63.4 ± 0.1 | 3.9 ± 0.1 |
| 10 | 79.4 ± 0.9 | 17.0 ± 0.2 | 4.7 | 6.77 ± 0.02 | 11.9 ± 1.4 | 11.7 ± 0.2 | 68.8 ± 0.9 | 7.2 ± 0.0 |
| 12 | 79.6 ± 0.4 | 17.4 ± 0.3 | 4.6 | 6.85 ± 0.00 | 14.9 ± 1.8 | 11.6 ± 0.3 | 66.3 ± 1.6 | 14.5 ± 0.0 |
| 13 | 81.3 ± 0.1 | 17.9 ± 0.4 | 4.6 | 6.94 ± 0.00 | 23.5 ± 2.8 | 11.0 ± 0.1 | 61.4 ± 0.8 | 31.7 ± 0.2 |
| 14 | 78.7 ± 0.1 | 18.1 ± 0.0 | 4.4 | 6.85 ± 0.01 | 17.0 ± 2.0 | 11.7 ± 0.3 | 64.7 ± 1.5 | 24.6 ± 0.3 |
| 15 | 82.5 ± 0.4 | 15.5 ± 0.1 | 5.3 | 7.00 ± 0.01 | 7.1 ± 0.9 | 9.7 ± 0.3 | 62.9 ± 2.2 | 4.5 ± 0.1 |
| 16 | 84.1 ± 0.5 | 14.6 ± 0.2 | 5.8 | 7.15 ± 0.03 | 5.3 ± 0.6 | 9.9 ± 0.3 | 67.7 ± 1.9 | 4.6 ± 0.0 |
| 17 | 78.6 ± 0.1 | 17.2 ± 0.3 | 4.6 | 6.86 ± 0.07 | 11.9 ± 1.4 | 12.0 ±0.5 | 69.5 ± 2.7 | 14.2 ± 0.3 |
| 18 | 78.7 ± 1.4 | 17.1 ± 0.0 | 4.6 | 6.95 ± 0.05 | 15.4 ± 1.8 | 10.9 ±0.4 | 63.7 ± 2.5 | 15.1 ± 0.2 |
| 19 | 78.6 ± 0.7 | 18.0 ± 0.6 | 4.4 | 6.88 ± 0.01 | 17.0 ± 2.0 | 11.2 ± 0.2 | 62.6 ± 1.2 | 9.7 ± 0.2 |
| 20 | 78.4 ± 0.4 | 18.6 ± 0.2 | 4.2 | 6.58 ± 0.03 | 18.8 ± 2.3 | 11.1 ± 0.3 | 59.7 ± 1.8 | 13.8 ± 0.2 |
Total phosphates, free orthophosphate (PO4), pyrophosphate (P2O7), triphosphates (P3O9 and P3O10) in deep frozen pre-packaged hake fillets and thaw water sampled in the Portuguese retail market. Results expressed as mean and standard deviation (n = 3). Total phosphates were measured with a spectrophotometric method and free phosphates with an ion exchange chromatographic method.
| Total Phosphates | PO4 | P2O7 * | P3O9 * | P3O10 * | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample | Fillets | Thaw Water | Fillets | Thaw Water | Fillets | Thaw Water | Fillets | Thaw Water | Fillets | Thaw Water |
| 1 | 4.3 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 2 | 4.3 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 3.3 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 3 | 4.2 ± 0.0 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | 3.2 ± 0.0 | 3.1 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 4 | 4.2 ± 0.1 | 3.5 ± 0.1 | 3.2 ± 0.0 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 5 | 4.7 ± 0.1 | 3.7 ± 0.1 | 3.4 ± 0.1 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 6 | 4.2 ± 0.0 | 3.3 ± 0.0 | 3.1 ± 0.0 | 2.9 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 7 | 4.2 ± 0.0 | 3.2 ± 0.0 | 3.2 ± 0.0 | 2.7 ± 0.2 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 8 | 4.3 ± 0.0 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | 3.5 ± 0.0 | 3.1 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 9 | 4.8 ± 0.0 | 5.1 ± 0.0 | 3.9 ± 0.3 | 3.3 ± 0.3 | <LOD | <LOQ | <LOD | 1.1 ± 0.0 | <LOD | 0.3 ± 0.1 |
| 10 | 4.3 ± 0.0 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | 3.1 ± 0.2 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 12 | 4.0 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.0 | 3.0 ± 0.0 | 2.3 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 13 | 3.8 ± 0.1 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 2.9 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 14 | 4.1 ± 0.0 | 3.0 ± 0.0 | 3.0 ± 0.2 | 2.7 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 15 | 5.2 ± 0.0 | 4.9 ± 0.0 | 4.6 ± 0.1 | 3.8 ± 0.0 | < LOQ | <LOQ | <LOD | 1.0 ± 0.1 | <LOD | 0.7 ± 0.0 |
| 16 | 4.4 ± 0.0 | 4.6 ± 0.0 | 3.9 ± 0.0 | 3.0 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | 1.1 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <0.04 |
| 17 | 4.3 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.2 | 3.2 ± 0.0 | 2.6 ± 0.2 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 18 | 3.6 ± 0.0 | 2.1 ± 0.0 | 2.6 ± 0.1 | 1.9 ± 0.1 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 19 | 4.2 ± 0.1 | 3.4 ± 0.0 | 2.9 ± 0.1 | 3.0 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
| 20 | 3.6 ± 0.0 | 2.5 ± 0.0 | 2.3 ± 0.0 | 2.2 ± 0.0 | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD | <LOD |
* P2O7: LOQ = 0.054 g P2O5/kg; LOD = 0.016 g P2O5/kg; P3O9: LOQ = 0.014 g P2O5/kg; LOD = 0.004 g P2O5/kg; P3O10: LOQ = 0.043 g P2O5/kg; LOD = 0.013 g P2O5/kg. LOQ—limit of quantification; LOD—limit of detection.
Counts (cfu/g) and presence (Salmonella) of microorganisms in frozen pre-packaged hake fillets sampled in the Portuguese retail market (n = 3).
| Sample | Aerobic | Sulphite Producers | Total Coliforms | Yeast and | Salmonella (25 g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1.2 × 103 | <1.0 ×10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 5.3 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 2 | 6.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 3 | 5.8 × 103 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 4 | 8.6 × 103 | 2.5 × 102 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 5 | 6.5 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 6 | 1.2 × 103 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 7 | 3.0 × 103 | 1.1 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 8 | 6.2 × 102 | 1.5 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 9 | 4.0 × 10 | <1.0 ×10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 1.6 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 10 | 3.6 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 12 | 2.8 × 103 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 4.4 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 13 | 6.1 × 103 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 14 | 6.2 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 3.6 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 15 | 1.6 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 16 | 4.7 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 17 | 1.4 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 18 | 6.5 × 103 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 19 | 5.0 × 104 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 1.7 × 102 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
| 20 | 3.5 × 103 | <4.0 × 10 | <4.0 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | 5.7 × 10 | <1.0 × 10 | Negative |
Sensory analysis of raw hake fillets. Frequency distribution (%) of attributes and overall quality scores of 19 commercial hake fillet products (n = 10).
| SENSORY SCALE | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATTRIBUTES | Absent (1) | Slight (2) | Moderate (3) | Intense (4) | Very Intense (5) |
| Packaging defects | 89 | 11 | |||
| Size variation * | 21 | 74 | 5 | ||
| Presence of ice | 69 | 26 | 5 | ||
| Dehydration | 69 | 26 | 5 | ||
| Muscle gaps | 42 | 37 | 16 | 5 | |
| Blood stains | 5 | 53 | 31 | 11 | |
| Color (yellow) | 15 | 58 | 11 | 11 | 5 |
| Odor (rancid) | 21 | 37 | 11 | 26 | 5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 | 74 | 16 | 5 | ||
* Five-point scale: 1—all fillets of the same size; 2—25% of fillets with different size; 3—50% of fillets with different size; 4—75% of fillets with different size; 5—all fillets of different size.
Sensory analysis of cooked hake fillets. Frequency distribution (%) of negative attributes (discoloration, dehydration, rancid odor, and rancid/bitter flavor), positive attributes (typical color/appearance, typical odor, typical flavor, firmness, and succulence), and overall quality scores of 19 commercial hake fillet products.
| SENSORY SCALE | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NEGATIVE ATTRIBUTES | Very Intense | Intense | Moderate | Slight | Absent |
| Discoloration | 16 | 53 | 31 | ||
| Dehydration | 5 | 21 | 74 | ||
| Rancid odor | 5 | 11 | 63 | 21 | |
| Rancid/bitter flavor | 16 | 32 | 53 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Typical color/appearance | 69 | 31 | |||
| Typical odor | 21 | 69 | 10 | ||
| Typical flavor | 16 | 69 | 15 | ||
| Firmness | 5 | 47 | 48 | ||
| Succulence | 10 | 64 | 26 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 | 47 | 37 | |||
Figure 1Principal components analysis (PCA) of quality control parameters of commercial hake fillets samples. PC 1, PC 2, and PC 3 explained 44.5%, 19.2%, and 9.8%, respectively, of the variation of the original variables. Numbers next to ‘#’ correspond to the sample number.
Loadings of principal component analysis of quality control parameters of commercial hake fillet samples.
| Parameters | PC 1 | PC 2 | PC 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Storage length | 0.57 | −0.02 | −0.05 |
| Glaze ice | 0.24 |
| 0.14 |
| Moisture |
| 0.17 | −0.21 |
| Protein |
| 0.10 | −0.25 |
| M/P ratio |
| −0.03 | 0.12 |
| Soluble protein |
| 0.58 | −0.03 |
| Soluble/total protein | −0.14 |
| 0.26 |
| Thaw drip loss |
| −0.04 | 0.09 |
| Thaw drip loss protein | −0.47 | −0.00 | −0.22 |
| WHCraw | −0.33 | 0.66 | −0.25 |
| WHCcook | −0.63 | −0.14 |
|
| WHCtotal | −0.40 | −0.08 |
|
| TVB-N | −0.53 | −0.62 | −0.16 |
| pH |
| −0.27 | −0.03 |
| Total phosphates in fillets |
| 0.55 | −0.02 |
| Total phosphates in thawing waters |
| 0.43 | −0.26 |
| Orthophosphates in fillets |
| 0.53 | −0.10 |
| Orthophosphates in thawing waters | 0.49 | 0.66 | −0.47 |
| Overall score of negative descriptors of raw fillets | 0.56 | −0.48 | −0.46 |
| Overall score of negative descriptors of cooked fillets |
| −0.31 | −0.32 |
| Overall score of positive descriptors of cooked fillets |
| 0.35 | 0.19 |
Linear correlation between objective (M/P ratio, protein, soluble protein, pH, thaw drip loss, WHCraw, WHCcook, and storage length) and subjective (overall quality of cooked fillets) determinations. R, regression coefficient; p-value, significance level.
| Variables | R | Estimated Limits * | 95% Confidence Limits | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M/P ratio vs. overall quality | −0.810 | <0.01 |
| ± 0.2 |
| Protein vs. overall quality | 0.808 | <0.01 |
| ± 0.5 |
| Soluble protein vs. overall quality | 0.805 | <0.01 |
| ± 0.4 |
| pH vs. overall quality | −0.691 | <0.05 |
| ± 0.1 |
| Thaw drip loss vs. overall quality | −0.657 | <0.05 |
| ± 3.4 |
| WHCraw vs. overall quality | 0.563 | <0.05 |
| ± 2.6 |
| WHCcook vs. overall quality | 0.563 | <0.05 |
| ± 1.5 |
| Storage length vs. overall quality | −0.556 | <0.05 |
| ± 3.9 |
* Estimated values calculated for an overall sensory quality of cooked products ≥ 3.