| Literature DB >> 36230013 |
Nursyah Fitri1, Sharon Xi Ying Chan1, Noor Hanini Che Lah2, Faidruz Azura Jam3, Norazlan Mohmad Misnan4, Nurkhalida Kamal2, Murni Nazira Sarian2, Mohd Aizuddin Mohd Lazaldin1, Chen Fei Low2, Hamizah Shahirah Hamezah2, Emelda Rosseleena Rohani2, Ahmed Mediani2, Faridah Abas5.
Abstract
Fish is a good source of nutrients, although it is easily spoiled. As such, drying is a common method of preserving fish to compensate for its perishability. Dried fish exists in different cultures with varying types of fish used and drying methods. These delicacies are not only consumed for their convenience and for their health benefits, as discussed in this review. Most commonly, salt and spices are added to dried fish to enhance the flavours and to decrease the water activity (aw) of the fish, which further aids the drying process. For fish to be dried effectively, the temperature, drying environment, and time need to be considered along with the butchering method used on the raw fish prior to drying. Considering the various contributing factors, several physicochemical and biochemical changes will certainly occur in the fish. In this review, the pH, water activity (aw), lipid oxidation, and colour changes in fish drying are discussed as well as the proximate composition of dried fish. With these characteristic changes in dried fish, the sensory, microbial and safety aspects of dried fish are also affected, revolving around the preferences of consumers and their health concerns, especially based on how drying is efficient in eliminating/reducing harmful microbes from the fish. Interestingly, several studies have focused on upscaling the efficiency of dried fish production to generate a safer line of dried fish products with less effort and time. An exploratory approach of the published literature was conducted to achieve the purpose of this review. This evaluation gathers important information from all available library databases from 1990 to 2022. In general, this review will benefit the fishery and food industry by enabling them to enhance the efficiency and safety of fish drying, hence minimising food waste without compromising the quality and nutritional values of dried fish.Entities:
Keywords: drying; fish; microorganisms; nutritional compositions; omics; safety; sensory attributes
Year: 2022 PMID: 36230013 PMCID: PMC9562176 DOI: 10.3390/foods11192938
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Summary of the types of dried fish, ingredients used and drying methods in a general process of fish drying.
Figure 2Summary of health benefits of dried fish constituents such as lysine [28], methionine [27], EPA and DHA [29], selenium [30,31], and cysteine [26,28].
Figure 3Ingredients in dried fish products and their effects on dried fish.
Proximate composition of various fish species and its respective drying technique.
| Type of Fish | Drying Technique | Moisture (%) | Lipids (%) | Protein (%) | Ash (%) | Carbohydrates (%) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Catfish | Electric oven | 15.62 | 29.60 | 67.21 | 3.62 | 3.84 | [ |
| Smoking kiln | 28.92 | 21.20 | 53.10 | 3.92 | 2.78 | ||
| Smoking kiln | 7.30 | 12.50 | 68.4 | 6.40 | 1.80 | [ | |
| Indian Mackerel | Hot air | 31.11 | 5.28 | 43.38 | 17.90 | N/A | [ |
| Microwave vacuum | 32.45 | 4.02 | 44.53 | 21.61 | N/A | ||
| Shoal/shol | Sun dry, salting as pre-treatment | 29.77 | 5.10 | 41.48 | 22.80 | N/A | [ |
| Dry salting | 48.84 | 3.99 | 28.21 | 18.89 | N/A | [ | |
| Yellow Croaker ( | Hot air | 47.08 | 14.67 | 31.32 | 3.74 | N/A | [ |
| Low temperature vacuum | 38.56 | 12.56 | 41.48 | 6.26 | N/A | ||
| Freeze dry | 47.38 | 13.43 | 33.54 | 4.02 | N/A | ||
| Iridescent shark catfish | Mechanical (kiln) at 60 °C | 13.50 | 15.31 | 65.16 | 4.38 | N/A | [ |
| Sun dry (unsalted) | 14.59 | 15.17 | 63.39 | 5.22 | N/A | ||
| Sun dry (salted) | 15.36 | 9.32 | 55.53 | 18.72 | N/A | ||
| Nile Tilapia | Smoke dry at 60 °C (15 h) | 15.30 | 12.35 | 49.40 | 21.61 | N/A | [ |
| Smoke dry at 70 °C (10 h) | 17.95 | 7.85 | 56.70 | 18.52 | N/A |
Figure 4The changes of physicochemical and biochemical properties of various dried fish.
The effect of drying methods to the sensory characteristics of dried fish.
| Sample | Drying Methods | Parameters |
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Colour | Appearance | Odour/ | Flavour | Texture | Overall Acceptability | |||
| Glassy perchlet ( | Solar tray dryer | 6.1 | 5.2 | 5.4 | 4.4 | 7.2 | 6.0 | [ |
| Solar cabinet dryer | 5.0 | 5.9 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 8.1 | 7.3 | ||
| Solar tunnel dryer | 3.6 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.0 | 4.1 | 3.1 | ||
| Electrical dryer | 6.3 | 7.8 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 6.0 | 8.9 | ||
| Oven | Light brown | Moderately attractive | Good | Good | Moderately hard | High | [ | |
| Sun | Ash colour | Attractive | Moderate | Poor | Very hard | Moderate | ||
| Smoke | Fairly black | Very attractive | Very good | Very good | Soft | Very high | ||
| Oven | Dark brown | Very attractive | Good | Good | Very hard | High | ||
| Sun | Brown | Attractive | Moderate | Moderate | Moderately hard | Low | ||
| Smoke | Dark brown | Very attractive | Very good | Very good | Soft | High | ||
|
| Oven | Light brown | Attractive | Good | Good | Very hard | Moderate | |
| Sun | Grey | Moderately attractive | Moderate | Poor | Hard | Moderate | ||
| Smoke | Brown | Very attractive | Very good | Good | Soft | High | ||
| Traditional sun drying | 2.81 | - | 2.38 | - | 3.27 | 13.42 | Rasul, Majumdar, Afrin, Bapary and Shah [ | |
|
| Improved sun drying | 1.93 | - | 1.56 | - | 2.18 | 6.87 | |
| Solar tunnel drying | 1.69 | - | 1.22 | - | 1.93 | 5.87 | ||
Figure 5Sensory characteristics of dried fish with preferable parameters.
Microbes found in dried fish along with their quantities according to their drying methods.
| Drying Method | Type of Microbe Found in Dried Fish | Microbes Found in Dried Fish | TPC/TVC/TFC | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open-air drying Sun-drying Air-drying | Bacteria |
| 1.84 × 104/g to 5.3 × 106/g | [ |
| Fungi |
Fusarium spp. Penicillium spp. Aspergillus spp. |
1.00 × 102 to 2.11 × 104 cfu/g 1.23 × 103 cfu/g to 3.67 × 103 cfu/g 1.25 × 102 to 2.40 × 104 cfu/g | [ | |
| Smoke-drying | Bacteria |
Bacillus spp. Klebsiella spp. Staphylococcus spp. Pseudomonas spp. Streptococcus spp. Proteus spp. | 4.0 × 108 to 2.30 × 1010 cfu/g | [ |
| Fungi |
Aspergillus spp. Rhizopus spp. Penicillium spp. Saccharomyces spp. Fusarium spp. | 1.0 × 104 to 4.0 × 105 cfu/g | ||
| Salt-drying | Bacteria |
Bacillus spp. Micrococcus spp. Coryneform bacteria | 6.5 × 104 to 1.4 × 108 cfu/g | [ |
| Fungi |
Aspergillus spp. Rhizopus spp. Penicillium spp. Absidia spp. Mucor spp. | 0.72 × 101 to 1.8 × 101 cfu/g | [ | |
| Hot-air drying | Bacteria | Bacteria Salmonella spp. Escherichia spp. Shigella spp. | 2.87 × 105 cfu/g | [ |
| Fungi | 1.9 × 105 cfu/g | |||
| Freeze-drying | Bacteria | 1.90 × 105 cfu/g | ||
| Fungi | 0.63 × 105 cfu/g | |||
| Solar Convection Drying | Bacteria | 1.60 × 105 cfu/g | ||
| Fungi | 0.53 × 105 cfu/g |
Figure 6Significant safety aspects of dried fish along with their effects on human health and the prevention recommendations.
Processing methods for preserving the quality of fish products.
| Sample | Method | Technology | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cod (Gardus morhua) | High pressure processing | Non-thermal process with vessel pressure | Matser, Stegeman, Kals and Bartels [ |
| Fish products | Pulse light technology | Non-thermal process with high peak pulses | Lasagabaster and De Marañón [ |
| Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) | Pressure shift freezing | High freezing rate | Zhu, Bail and Ramaswamy [ |
| Sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) | Pressure assisted thawing | Non-thermal process with thawing conditions | Tironi, De Lamballerie and Le-Bail [ |
| Sea bass | Pulsed electric field | Non-thermal process with electric pulses | Cropotova, Tappi, Genovese, Rocculi, Laghi, Dalla Rosa and Rustad [ |
Figure 7Emerging technologies in enhancing the quality of dried fish products.