Research Article

Effect of Cooking Methods on Nutritional and Quality Characteristics of Fish

Salman Ali1*, Ayaz Ali2, Riaz Ali Rind2, Majid Ali3, Zulfiqar Ali Mastoi2, Shagufta Naz3, Muhammad Shakir3, Rashid Ahmed Qaim Khani1

1Sindh Agriculture University, Tando Jam, Pakistan; 2Agriculture Research Institute, Balochistan, Pakistan; 3Agriculture Officers Agriculture Extension, Balochistan, Pakistan.

Received | November 04, 2020; Accepted | January 28, 2021; Published | April 27, 2021

*Correspondence | Salman Ali, Sindh Agriculture University Tando Jam, Pakistan; Email: ghulamnabigola@gmail.com

Citation | Ali, S., A. Ali, R.A. Rind, M. Ali, Z.A. Mastoi, S. Naz, M. Shakir, R.A.Q. Khani. 2021. Effect of cooking methods on nutritional and quality characteristics of fish. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Research, 34(2): 325-328.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjar/2021/34.2.325.328

Keywords | Cooking, Method, Nutritional, Charaterstics, Fish

Introduction

Fish is one of the major animal protein foods available in the tropics. This has made fishery an important aspect of study. According to (Aberoumand, 2014; El-Lahamy et al., 2019) fish constitutes 40% of animal protein intake. fish is one of the most perishable and in the tropical climate of most developing countries it wascome unfit for human consumption within about one day of capture, unless it is subjected to some form of processing (Gladyshev et al., 1999).

The principal of fish components are water, protein, lipids and carbohydrates (Ames, 1991), while the followings minerals are commonly found in fish sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, sulphur, iron, chlorine, silicon, manganese, zinc, copper, arsenic and iodine (Latimer, 2019). the environment and season (Silva and Chamul, 2000; Głuchowski et al., 2019). Processors have direct intrest in the proximate composition of fish in order to know the nature of the raw material before chilling, freezing, smoking or canning can be correctly applied.

Fish is one of the most complete foods, nutrient quality and quantity an average 100g portion provides more than 50% of the recommended daily protein intake, between 10% and 20% of minerals, vitamins A, D, and E (Perea et al., 2008; Bastías et al., 2017).

Materials and Methods

Experimental design = Completely Randomized Design (CRD)

Treatments = 03 (T1= Grilled fish, T2= fried fish, T3 = microwave)

Replication = 03

Results and Discussion

the study was carried out during of 2018-19 at laboratory of Institute of Food Sciences and Technology, Sindh Agriculture University, Tandojam. Treatments included: T1= Grilled fish, T2= fried fish, T3 = microwave. Some parameters of economic importance were studied which included: Moisture (%), Titratable acidity (%), pH value, protein (%), fat (%), color, flavor, texture, taste, aroma and overall acceptability. The data on the above parameters are presented in Tables 1-11.

 

Table 1: Moisture (%) of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	60.12	60.25	60.20	60.19 C
T2= Fried fish	62.80	62.75	62.90	62.81 B
T3 = Microwave	64.80	65.20	65.10	65.03 A
S.E.±	0.0964
LSD 0.05	0.2676

 

Table 2: Titratable acidity (%) of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	1.30	1.35	1.33	1.32 C
T2= Fried fish	1.36	1.39	1.42	1.39 B
T3 = Microwave	1.75	1.82	1.79	1.78 A
S.E.±	0.0136
LSD 0.05	0.0378

 

Table 3: pH value of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	5.91	5.87	5.89	5.89 C
T2= Fried fish	5.94	5.96	5.98	5.96 B
T3 = Microwave	6.28	6.24	6.26	6.26 A
S.E.±	0.0163
LSD 0.05	0.0453

 

Table 4: Protein (%) of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	20.20	20.35	20.30	20.28 C
T2= Fried fish	24.05	24.08	24.10	21.11 B
T3 = Microwave	21.08	21.10	21.15	24.07 A
S.E.±	0.0307
LSD 0.05	0.0853

 

Table 5: Fat (%) of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	4.05	4.15	4.20	4.13 B
T2= Fried fish	5.80	5.90	6.10	5.93 A
T3 = Microwave	3.66	3.76	3.87	3.76 C
S.E.±	0.0356
LSD 0.05	0.0988

 

Table 6: Color of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	6.00	6.00	6.00	6.00 C
T2= Fried fish	6.00	7.00	7.00	6.66 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	7.00	7.00	7.33 A
S.E.±	0.0707
LSD 0.05	0.1730

 

Table 7: Flavor of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	6.00	6.00	5.00	5.66C
T2= Fried fish	7.00	6.00	5.00	6.00 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	8.00	7.00	7.66 A
S.E.±	0.0408
LSD 0.05	0.0999

 

Table 8: Texture of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	5.00	6.00	6.00	5.66C
T2= Fried fish	6.00	6.00	7.00	6.33 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00 A
S.E.±	0.0408
LSD 0.05	0.0999

 

Table 9: Taste of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	5.00	5.00	6.00	5.33 C
T2= Fried fish	6.00	7.00	7.00	6.66 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	8.00	7.00	7.66 A
S.E.±	0.0408
LSD 0.05	0.0999

 

Table 10: Aroma of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	5.00	5.00	6.00	5.00 C
T2= Fried fish	6.00	6.00	7.00	6.33 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	7.00	7.00	7.33 A
S.E.±	0.0491
LSD 0.05	0.1201

 

Table 11: Overall acceptability of fish under different cooking methods.

Treatments	RI	RII	RIII	Mean
T1= Grilled fish	6.00	6.00	7.00	6.33 C
T2= Fried fish	7.00	7.00	6.00	6.66 B
T3 = Microwave	8.00	8.00	8.00	8.00 A
S.E.±	0.0816
LSD 0.05	0.1998

 

Moisture (%)

Moisture is the major constituent of the fish. It is evident from the results that the maximum fish moisture 65.03% was found in the fish cooked under microwave, followed by fried fish with 62.81% moisture. However, the minimum moisture (60.19%) was observed with grilled fish. It was recorded that microwave cooked fish has high moisture (65.03%) content other then fried and grilled fish. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in moisture (%) different cooked methods were found significant (P<0.05).

Titratable acidity (%)

maximum fish titratable acidity (1.78%) under microwave, fried 1.39%, (1.32%) grilled fish. The result was found in microwave fish of titratable acidity (1.78%) is higher then fried and grilled fish. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in titratable acidity (%) different cooked methods were significant (P<0.05).

pH value

maximum fish pH value (6.26) under microwave, fried fish with (5.96) pH value. However, the minimum pH value (5.89) grilled fish. In this treatment of cooking methods microwave fish pH value (6.26) was observed. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in pH value different cooked methods were significant (P<0.05).

Protein (%)

The protein (%) under following tables Grilled fish, fried fish and microwave and the results are reported in Table 4 and their ANOVA protein was significantly (P<0.05) influenced by cooked methods.

Fat (%)

Maximum fish fat (5.93%) under fried, grilled fish with 4.13% fat. However, the minimum fat (3.76%) was observed with microwave fish. In this research of different cooking methods for fat determination the high fat (5.93%) was noted in fried fish then grilled and microwave fish. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in fat (%) different cooked methods were significant (P<0.05).

Color

maximum fish color (8.25) under microwave, fried fish with 7.40 color. However, the minimum color (6.60) grilled fish. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in color different cooked methods were significant (P<0.05).

Flavor

maximum fish flavor (8.45) when the fish cooked under microwave, followed by fried fish with 7.25 flavor. However, the minimum flavor (6.50) grilled fish. It was found in microwave was better method for fish cooked flavor. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in flavor different cooked methods were non-significant (P>0.05).

Texture

It is evident maximum fish texture (8.35) when the fish cooked under microwave, followed by fried fish with 7.45 texture. However, the minimum texture (6.45) was observed with grilled fish. It was found that microwave was optimum for fish cooked so far the texture. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in texture different cooked methods were non-significant (P>0.05).

Taste

It is evident maximum fish taste (8.40) when the fish cooked under microwave, followed by fried fish with 7.30 taste. However, the minimum taste (6.55) was observed with grilled fish. It was observed that microwave was cooking method on fish is better taste. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in taste different cooked methods were non-significant (P>0.05).

Aroma

It is evident maximum fish aroma (8.25) when the fish cooked under microwave, followed by fried fish with 7.31 aroma. However, the minimum aroma (6.55) was observed with grilled fish. It was found in that microwave fish cooked was good aroma. The LSD test demonstrated that the differences in aroma different cooked methods were non-significant (P>0.05).

Conclusions and Recommendations

Microwave cooking method in comparison of fried and grilled cooking methods. While comparing the fried and grilled cooked fish, the results indicated that microwave cooked fish had considerable affect on the proximate composition and microwave cooking were found to be the best cooking methods for healthy eating. While grilled sample was healthier than those fried sample baked fish can be recommended for healthy eating because of harder texture and lower sensorial acceptability of grilled samples. Microwave cooked fish is one of the most effective methods of preparing fish to minimize nutrient losses.

Novelty Statement

This is baseline study and information about method, nutritional, quality and characteristics of fish.

Author’s Contribution

Salman Ali, Riaz Ali Rind and Majid Ali: Conceived the idea, data collection, data entry in SPSS and analysis.

Ayaz Ali and Shagufta Naz: Wrote the manuscript. Zulfiqar Ali Mastoi: Did SPSS analysis and concluded the study.

Muhammad Shakir and Rashid Ahmed Qaim Khani: Provided technical input at every step and did overall management.

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

Reffernces

Aberoumand, A., 2014. Preliminary studies on nutritive and organoleptic properties in processed fish fillets obtained from Iran. J. Food Sci. Technol., 55(2): 368-376. https://doi.org/10.1590/fst.2014.0042

Ames, G., I. Clucas and S.S. Paul. 1991. Post-harvest losses of fish in the tropics. Natural Resources Institute (Great Britain), Overseas Development Administration.

Bastías, J.M., P. Balladares, S. Acuña, R. Quevedo and O. Muñoz. 2017. Determining the effect of different cooking methods on the nutritional composition of salmon (Salmo salar) and chilean jack mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) fillets. PLoS One, 12(7): 0180993. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180993

El-Lahamy, A.A., K.I. Khalil, S.A. El-Sherif, H.R. Ibrahim and A.A. Mahmud. 2019. Changes in fish during cooking methods (frying and grilling): A review. J. Pub. Heath Catalog, 2(2): 1-4.

Gladyshev, M.I., N.N. Sushchik, G.A. Gubanenko, S.M. Demirchieva and G.S. Kalachova. 1999. Effect of boiling and frying on the content of essential polyunsatured fatty acids in muscle tissue of four fish species. Food Chem. 2007;101: 1694–1700.

Głuchowski, A., E. Czarniecka-Skubina, G. Wasiak-Zys and A.D. Nowak, 2019. Effect of various cooking methods on technological and sensory quality of atlantic salmon. Foods, 8(8):323. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods8080323

Latimer, G.W. 2019. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. AOAC International, Gaithersburg, Maryland. https://www.aoac.org/official-methods-of-analysis-21st-edition-2019/

Perea, A., E. Gómez, Y. Mayorga and C. Triana. 2008. Caracterizacio´n nutricional de pescados de produccio´n y consumo regional en Bucaramanga, Colombia. Arch. Latinoam. Nutri., 58(1): 91–97.

Silva, J.J. and R.S. Chamul. 2000. Composition of marine and freshwater finfish and shellfish species and their products. In: Marine and freshwater products handbook. Technomic Publishing Company, Inc., pp. 31-46.