Proximate composition and sensory evaluation of salted pearl mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi Pallas, 1811) produced using different methods

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine the proximate composition and sensory scores of the salted pearl mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi Pallas, 1811) produced using different methods. It was determined that the OS11 group had the highest amounts of dry matter and protein (82.77 ± 0.52% and 44.52 ± 0.28%) (p < 0.05). The OS11 group had the highest value of energy (404.59 ± 1.33 kcal/100g) (p < 0.05). The highest taste score (6.88 ± 0.83) and the highest overall acceptance score (7.25 ± 0.73) in raw samples were obtained by the NS31 group and the NS32 group (p < 0.05), respectively. It was observed that the salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) produced by using different methods had a high nutritional value. While the samples produced in the previous season (last year) were liked less according to the results of the raw sensory analysis, the samples of the new season, except for the samples produced by using dry salting method in bottom perforated plastic can be liked less according to the result of the cooked sensory analysis.

Keywords:
salted pearl mullet; Chalcalburnus tarichi Pallas, 1811; salting method; proximate composition; sensory evaluation

1 Introduction

Being one of the oldest methods used to preserve fish, the salting process has still been used in many countries in the world. In the traditional salting method, people treat the fish with table salt or rock salt and ripen them. The salting process slows down the incidence of spoilage, which is a sign of the deterioration of fish. The process of salting the fish is briefly the covering of the products in the appropriate boxes and barrels using the salt (by placing one layer of fish and then one layer of salt) in order for the salt to penetrate into tissue. The main purpose here is to provide for dehydration. Thus, the water required for the microorganisms and other chemical reactions in the structure is reduced so that the activities which are effective in deterioration are stopped either completely or partially (Akcicek & Canyurt, 1994). However, the salt purity level used in this process, the treatments applied during the preparation of the fish, and the cleaning and storage conditions of the used water affect significantly the quality of the final product.

In the process of conservation with salt; protein denaturation and removing water enable fish to gain firmness, the bacterial activity reduces by causing an antiseptic and bactericidal effects on the microorganisms. Salt gives flavor to the product and protects its fats like antioxidants by drying the flesh to some extent (Food and Agriculture Organization, 1970; Akcicek & Canyurt, 1994). Since salt is also an aroma enhancer, it has the effect of enhancing the appeal of the fish.

Pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) or Van fish (its local name), is an endemic fish species from the family Cyprinids (Cyprinidae) that can survive in the salty and highly alkaline (salinity 0.19%, pH 9.8) waters of the Lake Van (Turkey). Even though its name is mullet, it is actually a member of the Cyprinids (Akyil et al., 2009). Sewage residues of the surrounding settlements of Lake Van, a lake with an enclosed basin, are also poured into the lake without any purification. For this reason, Lake Van, which shows stratification characteristics, gets increasingly polluted every day (Bilgili et al., 1995). The amount of pearl mullet fishing in the lake has started to fall since 2005 due to contamination and was 9945 tons in 2018 according to the fisheries statistics of the Turkiye Istatistik Kurumu (2019).

Pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) is a cheap source of quality protein because it is affordable and has a high meat quality (Ozdemir et al., 1985). Since 65% of Lake Van is located near to Bitlis province, pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) is as popular in Bitlis as in Van and its catching is being realized. Pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811), which is caught on the shores of Lake Van in Bitlis, is consumed salted or freshly. Salted pearl mullet is consumed mostly during fishing ban periods or when it is not caught because of winter conditions.

Salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) is produced usually at home by pressing whole fish into an appropriate container or barrel (wooden box or plastic can) without cleaning internal organs or after cleaning internal organs based on traditional dry salting method.

The objective of this study was to determine the proximate composition and sensory scores of different types of salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) preserved using traditional dry salting method in Bitlis, Turkey.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Material

The samples of salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811), produced by using six different methods, were obtained with wooden boxes, plastic cans or in bottom-perforated plastic cans from three local producers at the end of the catching season of 2016 and 2017 (May-June). The samples stored in cold storage (2 ± 2 °C) were analyzed between August and September 2017. Six fish were used in each sampling day and thus the analyses were completed within 18 days. So, 108 fish samples were analyzed (3 producers x 6 methods x 3 samples for each method x 2 catching seasons).

2.2 Traditional producing methods of salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811)

The salted pearl mullet in Bitlis is produced generally using large rock salts according to the traditional dry salting method. The producers add salt with hand and eyeball estimates. Then, the product is stored at room temperature until it is consumed.

Method 1: The fish is gutted, cleaned with tap water, placed in a wooden box (one layer of salt and one layer of fish by turns), and kept at room temperature.

Method 2: The procedure applied in method 1 is performed without gutting.

Method 3: The fish is gutted, cleaned with tap water, and placed in a plastic can (one layer of salt and one layer of fish by turns). The bottom of the can isn’t perforated. It is a kind of juicy brine.

Method 4: The procedure applied in method 3 is performed without gutting.

Method 5: The fish is gutted, cleaned with tap water, and placed in a plastic can (one layer of salt and one layer of fish by turns). The top is covered with salt. Holes are drilled at the bottom of the can to remove water leaking from the fish. Such salted fish is stored at room temperature.

Method 6: The procedure applied in method 5 is performed without gutting.

Table 1 shows the sample codes of salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811). The OS (old sample) code indicated the samples obtained at the end of the 2016 catching season and stored for averagely 15 months before the analysis. The NS (new sample) code indicated the samples obtained at the end of the 2017 catching season and stored for averagely 3 months before the analysis.

Table 1
Sample codes.

Sample Code	Explanation
NS11	Salted fish produced in the wooden box according to method 1 with gutting
OS11
NS12	Salted fish produced in the wooden box according to method 2 without gutting
OS12
NS21	Salted fish produced in plastic can according to method 3 with gutting
OS21
NS22	Salted fish produced in plastic can according to method 4 without gutting
OS22
NS31	Salted fish produced in bottom perforated plastic can according to method 5 with gutting
OS31
NS32	Salted fish produced in bottom perforated plastic can according to method 6 without gutting
OS32
NS	New sample (at the end of 2017 catching season, stored average 3 months until analyzed)
OS	Old sample (at the end of 2016 catching season, stored average 15 months until analyzed)

2.3 Proximate composition analysis

The moisture content was determined by drying an accurately weighed sample of minced fish in an oven at 103 ± 2 °C for 3 h (Mattissek et al., 1992). The ash content was obtained by heating the residue at 550 °C for 3 h of Association of Analytical Chemists (AOAC) 938.08 (Association of Analytical Chemists, 2003a). The protein contents were assayed by using the method of AOAC 928.08 (Association of Analytical Chemists, 2003b). Total lipids were determined on a 1 g sample of the minced fillets using the acid hydrolysis method of Weilmeier and Regenstein (Weilmeier & Regenstein, 2004). The carbohydrate content of the fish was determined by the Merril and Watt’s method (Merrill & Watt, 1973). The estimated energy value is calculated by using the following formula ((protein X 4) + (fat X 9) + carbohydrate X 4)). All the analyses were performed in duplicate.

2.4 Sensory analysis

A panel of eight experienced judges carried out the sensory analysis on both raw and cooked samples. The sensory evaluation was conducted in individual booths under controlled conditions of light, temperature, and humidity. The sensory analysis was performed using the method of Mohan et al. (2012). The salted fish was assessed using a nine-point descriptive scale in terms of appearance, odor, taste and texture characteristics. A score of 9.0-7.0 points indicated “very good quality”, a score of 6.9-5.0 points indicated “good or acceptable quality”, and a score of 4.9-1.0 points indicated “bad or unacceptable quality”.

2.5 Statistical analysis

The resulting analysis data were evaluated by using an IBM SPSS Statistics 21® program. Analysis results were calculated as mean ± standard deviation. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied. Parametric assumptions were formed for multiple comparisons. In order to determine the sources of the differences found within different groups, Tukey’s test was used if there was homogeneity of variance and the Tamhane test was used if there was no homogeneity of variance. The value of p < 0.05 was accepted as a significant difference between the groups (Sumbuloglu & Sumbuloglu, 2002).

3 Results and discussion

3.1 Proximate composition of salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811)

Table 2 shows the proximate composition of the salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) groups.

Table 2
Proximate Composition of the Salted Pearl Mullet.

Sample Code	DM (%)	Moisture (%)	Ash (%)	Protein (%)	Fat (%)	Carbohydrate (%)	Energy (kcal/100 g)
NS11	61.47 ± 0.34a*	38.53 ± 0.34a	17.08 ± 0.11a	30.69 ± 0.09ad	9.54 ± 0.44ac	4.16 ± 0.87a	280.24 ± 2.22ad
OS11	82.77 ± 0.52b	17.23 ± 0.52b	21.12 ± 0.43b	44.52 ± 0.28b	15.40 ± 0.18b	1.73 ± 0.64bc	404.59 ± 1.33b
NS12	59.53 ± 0.22ae	40.47 ± 0.22cd	17.24 ± 0.16a	30.54 ± 0.25a	8.09 ± 0.11a	3.66 ± 0.03ab	263.67 ± 0.75adg
OS12	80.54 ± 0.64b	19.45 ± 0.64e	19.55 ± 0.61cd	43.66 ± 0.26b	14.72 ± 0.20b	2.62 ± 0.21abc	396.72 ± 3.16b
NS21	54.76 ± 0.21cdı	45.24 ± 0.21f	20.49 ± 0.22bc	25.97 ± 0.07cf	6.90 ± 0.88abc	1.39 ± 1.10c	217.76 ± 4.68ceg
OS21	53.42 ± 0.86cfh	46.58 ± 0.08g	20.34 ± 0.26bc	24.50 ± 0.56dcg	7.17 ± 0.08cd	1.42 ± 0.70c	212.06 ± 0.55cef
NS22	53.26 ± 0.28cd	46.74 ± 0.28g	17.44 ± 0.31a	27.38 ± 0.22cgh	5.57 ± 0.58ad	2.86 ± 0.52abc	218.79 ± 4.96cegf
OS22	52.64 ± 0.96dg	47.36 ± 0.96g	19.78 ± 0.10ce	24.79 ± 0.05eg	6.31 ± 0.86abde	1.75 ± 0.78bc	206.89 ± 5.54ceg
NS31	60.51 ± 0.46eah	39.49 ± 0.46ac	17.91 ± 0.18af	30.40 ± 0.50afhe	8.90 ± 0.05a	3.29 ± 0.61abc	269.14 ± 2.99ad
OS31	57.76 ± 0.10eaj	42.24 ± 0.10h	18.67 ± 0.61def	30.23 ± 0.03adh	7.26 ± 0.67abc	1.59 ± 0.25c	246.02 ± 5.63adfg
NS32	58.24 ± 0.38efg	40.76 ± 0.38d	18.96 ± 0.73def	30.85 ± 0.36aef	7.72 ± 0.42ac	1.72 ± 0.43bc	254.32 ± 4.69df
OS32	56.43 ± 0.35fgıj	43.51 ± 0.31ı	19.46 ± 0.42ce	29.21 ± 0.20ad	6.34 ± 0.43ac	1.48 ± 1.01c	231.06 ± 1.74ef

• ^*
  Lower case letters indicate the difference between the lines in the same column;
• The difference between the mean values indicated by the same letter is insignificant (p > 0.05).

The highest dry matter content (82.77 ± 0.52%) was determined in the OS11 group. The minimum and maximum moisture contents of the samples were 17.23 ± 0.52% and 46.74 ± 0.28%. When Bilgin et al. (2007) produced salted mountain trout (Salmo trutta macrostigma Dumeril, 1858) using both dry salting and brine methods by adding 20% salt solution, and storing them for 180 days in the refrigerator (4 °C ± 1), they found moisture amount as 57.000 ± 1.105% in dry salted samples and 63.005 ± 0.002% in brine samples on the 90^th day of storage, as well as 53.068 ± 0.252% in dry salted samples and as 55.040 ± 0.80% in brine samples on the 180^th day of storage. Sardine fish (Sardine pilchardus) stored at different rates for 10 months had an increase in dry matter (Urkut & Yurdagel, 1985). This signified that the moisture content reduced. Kolsarici & Candogan (1997) found a decrease in the moisture content of 18% and 22% salt-containing samples of anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus) during 29-week storage. Turan & Erkoyuncu (1997) and Tomek & Yapar (1990) found similar results regarding the moisture content of the salted fish. Koral (2016) reported that the dry matter content of anchovy stored at room temperature and refrigerator conditions for 180 days and salted with different salting methods was between 38.55-38.02% in brine groups and 50.14-53.27% in dry salted groups. The moisture content in the samples of the salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811), other than the OS11 and OS12 groups, was higher than the water rate of 30.5% in dry salted fish reported by Lu et al. (1979). Inat et al. (2013) found the average moisture ratio as 21.99% in ready-to-eat salted anchovy samples. The moisture contents in C. tarichi were determined between 13.65-49.40% (Kucukoner & Akyuz, 1992), 42.96 ± 7.241% (Patir et al., 2006) and 44.70 ± 0.30% (Kucukoner & Kilincceker, 2009). The experimental related studies revealed that the minimum and maximum moisture contents were 62.61% and 72.68%, respectively in salted fish during the storage period (Patir et al., 2001; Tomek & Yapar, 1990; Yapar, 1989). The results of the present study (except for the OS11 and OS12 groups) are similar to results of Kucukoner & Akyuz (1992) and Kucukoner & Kilincceker (2009), and lower than results of Yapar (1989), Tomek & Yapar (1990), Patir et al. (2001), and Kilincceker & Kucukoner (2003). This difference may be attributed to different fish species and different technological procedures.

The minimum and maximum ash contents of the samples were 17.08 ± 0.11% and 21.12 ± 0.43%. The ash amount of S. trutta macrostigma was found as 20.949 ± 0.050% in dry salted samples and 19.043 ± 0.026% in brine samples on the 90^th day of storage and as 21.470 ± 0.009% in dry salted samples and 19.791 ± 0.086% in brine samples on the 180^th day of storage (Bilgin et al., 2007). It has been reported that the amount of inorganic matter in salted fish increases depending on the duration of conservation and the salt content. Inorganic matter and salt rates increased in anchovy fish stored in intensive salt curing during storage for 29 weeks and this condition affected other components (Kolsarici & Candogan, 1997). The inorganic matter amount reached from 1.45% to 20.80% (KT) and 19.00% (S) in egrez (Vimba vimba tenella) and stored for 118 days by applying dry salting (KT) and brine (S) (Isikli, 2000). Koral (2016) reported that the ash content of anchovy stored for 180 days at room temperature and refrigerator conditions and salted with different salting methods was between 10.44-11.39% in brine groups and 17.65-17.97% in dry salted groups. Egrez (V. vimba tenella) fishes were salted by dry and brine salting methods and stored for 118 days and the amount of inorganic matter increased to 20.80% in dry salted group and to 19.00% in the brine salted group (Isikli, 2000). Ash amounts of the samples were higher than 5.4% reported by Lu et al. (1979) for dry salted products and higher than 13.19 ± 0.22% reported by Kucukoner & Kilincceker (2009) for salted C. tarichi. But it is compatible with the average moisture content of 15.01-29.12% determined in brine fish made of pearl mullet in the study by Kucukoner (1990) as well as the average moisture content of 16.49-19.79% determined in salted pearl mullet in the study by Kilincceker & Kucukoner (2003).

While the minimum protein amount (24.50 ± 0.56%) was determined in the OS21 group, the maximum protein amount (44.52 ± 0.28%) was observed in the OS11 group. The amount of protein was also increased in the samples with high dry matter content. Koral (2016) reported that the protein content of anchovy stored at room temperature and refrigerator conditions for 180 days and salted with different salting methods was 12.30-12.36% in brine groups and 16.20-16.47% in dry salted groups. The protein values (except for the OS11 and OS12 groups) were much lower than the protein value of 35.5% reported by Lu et al. (1979) for salted fish in the literature. The protein contents in salted pearl mullet were determined to be between 19.23-27.13% (Kucukoner & Akyuz, 1992). The protein amount of the samples was higher than 26.10 ± 0.24% reported by Kilincceker & Kucukoner (2003) for salted C. tarichi. Inat et al. (2013) found the average protein amount as 21.12% in ready-to-eat salted anchovy samples.

While the OS11 group had the highest fat amount (15.40 ± 0.18%), the NS22 group had the least fat amount (5.57 ± 0.58%). The amount of fat in the samples with high dry matter content also increased. Fat amount of S. trutta macrostigma was found as 2.155 ± 0.010% in dry salted samples and 2.468 ± 0.268% in brine samples on the 90^th day of storage, and as 1.332 ± 0.119% in dry salted samples and 1.039 ± 0.030% in brine samples on the 180^th day of storage. The difference between dry salting and brine was insignificant (p > 0.05) for all-day storage in terms of total lipid content (Bilgin et al., 2007). Kolsarici & Candogan (1997), Yapar (1989), and Isikli (2000) reported decreased fat content during the storage of salted fish products. Koral (2016) reported that the fat content of anchovy stored at room temperature and refrigerator conditions for 180 days and salted with different salting methods was between 13.25-13.64% in brine groups and 16.12-17.62% in dry salted groups. The fat values (except for the OS11 group and the OS12 group) were much lower than the fat value of 11.59% by Kucukoner & Kilincceker (2009) for salted C. tarichi.Inat et al. (2013) found the average fat amount as 17.24% in ready-to-eat salted anchovy samples.

The carbohydrate contents of the samples were determined between 1.39 ± 1.10-4.16 ± 0.87% (Table 2). As shown in Figure 1, minimum and maximum energy content was 212.06 ± 0.55 kcal/100 g in the OS21 group and 404.5 9 ± 1.33 kcal/100 g in the OS11 group, respectively (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Energy Value of the Salted Pearl Mullet.

The energy value of the OS11 group was the highest because of its high protein and high-fat content. It is known that variations in the chemical composition of fish are closely related to nutrition, living area, fish size, catching season, seasonal and sexual variations as well as other environmental and processing conditions (Schormuller, 1968; Ludorff & Meyer, 1973).

The dry matter, moisture, ash, protein, fat, carbohydrate, and energy contents of the salted pearl mullets (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) were significantly different (Table 2) (p < 0.05).

3.2 Sensory scores of the raw salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811)

Table 3 shows the sensory scores of the raw salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) and Figure 2 shows the overall acceptance scores of the raw salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811). The general view score of the raw samples was at least 5.00 ± 1.41 in the OS11 group. The NS32 group had the highest scores according to the general view, texture, odor and overall acceptance scores. On the other hand, the highest taste score (6.88 ± 0.83) was observed in the NS31 group. The OS21 group had the lowest scores according to texture, odor, taste, and overall acceptance scores. The general view, texture, taste, and overall acceptance scores of the raw salted pearl mullets (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) were significantly different (p < 0.05), but the differences between odor scores of the samples were insignificant (p > 0.05) (Table 3).

Table 3
Sensory Scores of the Raw Salted Pearl Mullet.

Sample Code	General View Score	Texture Score	Odor Score	Taste Score	Overall Acceptance Score
NS11	6.13 ± 1.45ab*	7.25 ± 1.28ac	6.38 ± 1.41a	5.88 ± 1.64ab	6.41 ± 1.15ab
OS11	5.00 ± 1.41b	6.50 ± 1.93abc	5.88 ± 1.89a	4.63 ± 1.77ac	5.50 ± 1.43ab
NS12	6.75 ± 1.58abc	6.88 ± 1.46ac	6.25 ± 1.58a	5.25 ± 1.58ab	6.25 ± 1.22ab
OS12	6.50 ± 1.07abc	5.38 ± 1.19abc	5.75 ± 1.75a	4.26 ± 1.91a	5.47 ± 1.26ab
NS21	7.12 ± 0.83ac	5.75 ± 1.89abc	6.38 ± 1.06a	5.50 ± 0.76ab	6.19 ± 0.46ab
OS21	6.38 ± 1.69abc	4.75 ± 1.04b	5.13 ± 1.46a	4.25 ± 1.04a	5.13 ± 0.76a
NS22	7.25 ± 0.89ac	6.00 ± 0.76abc	5.75 ± 1.16a	5.63 ± 0.92ab	6.16 ± 0.60ab
OS22	6.88 ± 1.13abc	5.25 ± 1.39ab	5.25 ± 1.39a	4.88 ± 1.13ab	5.53 ± 0.90ab
NS31	7.63 ± 0.74ac	7.13 ± 1.25ac	5.88 ± 1.36a	6.88 ± 0.83b	6.90 ± 0.61b
OS31	7.13 ± 1.36ac	6.75 ± 0.70abc	5.50 ± 1.60a	4.88 ± 1.36ab	6.06 ± 0.88ab
NS32	8.25 ± 0.70c	7.38 ± 1.06c	6.88 ± 1.25a	6.50 ± 0.93bc	7.25 ± 0.73b
OS32	7.00 ± 1.07abc	7.00 ± 1.07ac	6.50 ± 1.20a	5.50 ± 1.31ab	6.50 ± 0.68ab

• ^*
  Lower case letters indicate the difference between the lines in the same column;
• The difference between the mean values indicated by the same letter is insignificant (p > 0.05).

Figure 2
Overall Acceptance Score of the Raw Salted Pearl Mullet.

The NS32 group had an overall acceptance score over 7 and so it was accepted as “very good quality” by judges. But the other groups were accepted as “good or acceptable quality” since they had an overall acceptance score between 5.0 and 6.9 (Figure 2).

Sensory score of frozen (-18 °C) pearl mullet (C. tarichi, Pallas 1811) was found as 6.0 ± 1.0 in whole samples and 6.6 ± 1.14 in cleaned samples on the 90^th day of storage and as 6.0 ± 0.71 in whole samples and 6.8 ± 0.84 in cleaned samples on the 120^th day of storage. The difference between the whole samples and the cleaned ones was insignificant (p > 0.05). Sensory scores revealed that all samples had a “very good” quality till the 30^th day and the “medium” quality on the 60^th and the 120^th days (Ekici et al., 2011). Turan & Erkoyuncu (1997) determined the sensorial quality of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss W. 1758) and salmon (Salmo salar L. 1758) salted with dry salting methods (25% salt, w/w) and brine salting method (26.4% salt solution). According to test results, both rainbow trout and salmon salted with both salting methods had very good quality in terms of consumability during the trial (six months). When Erdem et al. (2005) evaluated sensory evaluation of the horse mackerel (Trachurus mediterraneus, Steindachner, 1868) produced by adding 10% salt solution and stored in the refrigerator (4 °C ± 1), they indicated that the sensorial value of 4.75 at the beginning of the study decreased to 1.75 at the end of the 60^th day and exceeded the consumption limit.

3.3 Sensory scores of the cooked salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811)

Table 4 shows the sensory scores of the cooked salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) and Figure 3 shows the overall acceptance scores of the cooked salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811).

Table 4
Sensory Scores of the Cooked Salted Pearl Mullet.

Sample Code	General View Score	Texture Score	Odor Score	Taste Score	Overall Acceptance Score
NS11	3.63 ± 1.30acd*	3.38 ± 1.77ac	5.13 ± 1.73a	3.25 ± 1.67ab	3.84 ± 1.42ac
OS11	5.63 ± 1.69ab	5.50 ± 1.77ab	6.25 ± 1.75a	5.38 ± 1.51a	5.69 ± 1.56ab
NS12	3.75 ± 0.89ace	3.38 ± 1.19ac	4.50 ± 1.70a	4.00 ± 1.07ab	3.90 ± 0.96ac
OS12	5.13 ± 1.25ab	5.25 ± 1.83ab	4.75 ± 1.67a	4.63 ± 1.06ab	4.94 ± 1.32ab
NS21	6.13 ± 1.46bf	6.63 ± 0.92b	5.50 ± 1.31a	5.37 ± 1.41a	5.91 ± 0.93b
OS21	5.38 ± 1.30bc	5.38 ± 1.77ab	5.25 ± 1.49a	4.25 ± 1.39ab	5.06 ± 1.16ab
NS22	5.00 ± 1.60bc	5.63 ± 0.92ab	4.13 ± 1.25a	4.50 ± 1.20ab	4.81 ± 0.92ab
OS22	1.38 ± 0.52d	1.75 ± 0.89c	4.63 ± 1.77a	2.63 ± 1.92b	2.60 ± 1.03c
NS31	6.00 ± 1.51be	5.50 ± 0.76ab	5.38 ± 1.30a	5.00 ± 1.41ab	5.47 ± 0.93ab
OS31	6.88 ± 1.13b	6.13 ± 1.25b	5.50 ± 1.41a	4.50 ± 1.60ab	5.75 ± 1.11ab
NS32	5.63 ± 1.41bc	5.00 ± 1.20ab	5.63 ± 1.85a	4.88 ± 1.13ab	5.28 ± 1.17ab
OS32	4.50 ± 1.60acf	6.38 ± 1.19b	5.75 ± 1.39a	5.13 ± 1.46a	5.44 ± 1.13ab

• ^*
  Lower case letters indicate the difference between the lines in the same column;
• The difference between the mean values indicated by the same letter is insignificant (p > 0.05).

Figure 3
Overall Acceptance Score of the Cooked Salted Pearl Mullet.

The highest mean score for the general view of the cooked samples was 6.88 ± 1.13 in the OS31 group. The NS21 group had the highest scores of texture and overall acceptance. On the other hand, the highest odor score (6.25 ± 1.75) and the highest taste score (5.38 ± 1.51) were observed in the OS11 group. The OS22 group had the lowest scores in terms of the general view, texture, taste and overall acceptance scores. The general view, texture, taste, and overall acceptance scores of the cooked salted pearl mullets (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) were significantly different (p < 0.05), but the differences between odor scores of the samples were insignificant (p > 0.05) (Table 4).

The NS11, NS12, OS12, NS22, and OS22 groups were accepted as “bad or unacceptable quality” since their overall acceptance scores varied between 4.9 and 1.0. The other groups (OS11, NS21, OS21, NS31, NS32, OS31, OS32) were accepted as “good or acceptable quality” since they had an overall acceptance score between 6.9 and 5.0 (Figure 3).

4 Conclusion

It was observed that the salted pearl mullet (C. tarichi Pallas, 1811) produced by using different methods had a high nutritional value and the OS11 group and the OS12 group had the highest nutritional value. The samples produced in the previous season (last year) were liked less and the NS32 was the most liked group according to the results of the raw sensory analysis. The samples of the new season, except for the samples produced by using dry salting method in bottom perforated plastic can be liked less than other sample groups and the NS21 group was the most liked group according to the results of the cooked sensory analysis.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the Scientific Research Projects Coordinator Office of Bitlis Eren University for supporting this project with the project number BEBAP 2017.01.

• Practical Application: Determine the proximate composition and sensory scores of the salted pearl mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi Pallas, 1811) produced using different methods.

References

• Akcicek, E., & Canyurt, A. (1994). Effects of salted and smoked fish consumption on human health. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Egirdir Fisheries Faculty, 4, 241-243.
• Akyil, S., Aytas, S., Yusan, S., Alkim Turkozu, D., Aslani, M. A. A., Isik, M. A., Olgen, M. K., Aycan, H. A., Tolluoglu, U., & Eral, M. (2009, October 6-9). Evaluation of Van Lake in terms of radiological and hydrogeochemical risk In Proceedings of the 10th National Nuclear Sciences and Technologies Congress (pp. 328-335). Vienna: IAEA.
• Association of Analytical Chemists –AOAC. (2003a). Official methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (Method 938.08). Arlington: AOAC.
• Association of Analytical Chemists –AOAC. (2003b). Official methods of analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (17th ed., Method 928.08). Arlington: AOAC.
• Bilgili, A., Sagmanligil, H., Cetinkaya, N., Yarsan, E., & Turel, I. (1995). The natural quality of lake Van water and some heavy metal levels in pearl mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi, Pallas 1811) samples from here. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, 42, 445-450.
• Bilgin, S., Ertan, O. O., & Gunlu, A. (2007). The effects on chemical composition of Salmo trutta macrostigma Dumeril, 1858 of different salting techniques. Ege University Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, 24(3-4), 225-232.
• Ekici, K., Sagun, E., Sancak, Y. C., Sancak, H., Yoruk, I. H., & Isleyici, O. (2011). The determination of biogenic amines formation and microbiological features in frozen stored in pearle mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi, Pallas 1811). The Journal of The Faculty of Veterinary Medicine University of Yuzuncu Yil, 22(2), 93-99.
• Erdem, M. E., Bilgin, S., & Caglak, E. (2005). Quality changes of processed with marinade, brine and spice horse mackerel (Trachurus Mediterraneus, Steindachner, 1868) during storage. Journal of Agriculture Faculty Ondokuz Mayis University, 20(3), 1-6.
• Food and Agriculture Organization – FAO. (1970). Smoke curing of fish (FAO Fisheries Reports, No. 88). Geneva: FAO.
• Inat, G., Pamuk, S., Siriken, B., & Demirel, Y. N. (2013). Determination of microbiological and chemical quality of ready to eat salted anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus). Journal of Turkish Veterinary Medical Society, 84(1), 26-35.
• Isikli, B. I. (2000). The effects of different salting techniques to chemical & microbiological quality of Vimba vimba tenella, Nordman 1840 (Master thesis). Department of Aquaculture, Institute of Science and Technology, Suleyman Demirel University, Isparta.
• Kilincceker, O., & Kucukoner, E. (2003). Determination of some physical, chemical and biochemical changes on salted pearl mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichi). Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 13(1), 55-59.
• Kolsarici, N., & Candogan, K. (1997, April 9-11). Chemical changes of dried-salted anchovy (Engraulis engrasicholus). In Proceedings of the Mediterranean Fisheries Congress (pp. 199-207). Izmir, Turkey: Ege University Faculty of Fisheries.
• Koral, S. (2016). The effects of different salting and storage methods on the nutritional quality of anchovy (Engraulis encrasicolus). Research Journal of Agricultural Science, 9(1), 29-36.
• Kucukoner, E. (1990). Determination of microbiological, physical, chemical properties and sensory properties of pearl mullet fish prepared with different brine methods in Van-Ercis region (Master thesis). Institute of Science and Technology, Yuzuncu Yil University, Van, Turkey.
• Kucukoner, E., & Akyuz, N. (1992). Determination of microbiological, physical, chemical properties and sensory properties of pearl mullet fish prepared with different brine methods in Van-Ercis region. Yuzuncu Yil University Journal of Institute of Natural & Applied Sciences, 1(1), 39-50.
• Kucukoner, E., & Kilincceker, O. (2009). Chemical and microbiological properties of salted fish. The Indian Veterinary Journal, 86(11), 1199-1200.
• Lu, J. Y., Ma, Y. M., Williams, C., & Chung, R. A. (1979). Fatty and amino acid composition of salted mullet roe. Journal of Food Science, 44(3), 676-677. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1979.tb08473.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1979.tb08473.x
• Ludorff, W., & Meyer, V. (1973). Fische und fischerzeugnisse Berlin: Verlag Paul Parey.
• Mattissek, R., Schepel, M. F., & Stainer, G. (1992). Lebensmittel analytik grundzüge, methoden, anwedungen, zweite, korrigierte auflage New York: Springer.
• Merrill, A. L., & Watt, B. K. (1973). Energy value of foods: basis and derivation (No. 74, Agriculture Handbook, pp. 2). USA: Agriculture research service, United States Department of Agriculture.
• Mohan, C. O., Ravishankar, C. N., Lalitha, K. V., & Srinivasa Gopal, T. K. (2012). Effect of chitosan edible coating on the quality of double filleted Indian oil sardine (Sardinella longiceps) during chilled storage. Food Hydrocolloids, 26(1), 167-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.05.005
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.05.005
• Ozdemir, N., Sen, D., & Polat, N. (1985). Meat yield of Chalcalburnus tarichi on Van Lake and its importance for local people. Journal of Elazig Region Veterinarians Chamber, 1(3), 38-43.
• Patir, B., Gurel, A., Ates, G., & Dincoglu, A. H. (2001). A study on microbiological and chemical changes during the production and storage of potassium sorbate treated and salted carp fillets. Journal of Veterinary Science (Suwon-si, Korea), 17(2), 31-44.
• Patir, B., Gurel, I. A., Oksuztepe, G., & Ilhak, O. I. (2006). Microbiological and chemical qualities of salted grey mullet (Chalcalburnus tarichii Pallas, 1811). International Journal of Science & Technology, 1(2), 91-98.
• Schormuller, J. (1968). Handbuch der lebensmittelchemie (Band III/2) New York: Springer Verlag.
• Sumbuloglu, K., & Sumbuloglu, V. (2002). Biostatistics Ankara, Turkey: Hatipoglu Printing and Publishing.
• Tomek, S. O., & Yapar, A. (1990). The effect of some quality preserving additives on the production of salted trout. Ege University Journal of Engineering Faculty: Food Engineering, 8(1), 59-68.
• Turan, H., & Erkoyuncu, I. (1997, April 9-11). The effects of different salting methods on quality and shelf life of different fishes In Proceedings of the Mediterranean Fisheries Congress (pp. 191-197). Izmir, Turkey: Ege University Faculty of Fisheries.
• Turkiye Istatistik Kurumu – TSI. (2019). Amount of catching fishery products Turkey: Turkish Statistical Institute. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1005
  » http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo.do?alt_id=1005
• Urkut, Y. Z., & Yurdagel, U. (1985). The comperition of Sardina pilchardus with different salt concentrations. Su Urunleri Dergisi, 2(7-8), 77-90.
• Weilmeier, D. M., & Regenstein, J. M. (2004). Cooking enhances the antioxidant properties of polyphosphates. Journal of Food Science, 69(1), FCT16-FCT23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2004.tb17850.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2004.tb17850.x
• Yapar, A. (1989). Investigation of some physical and chemical changes in trout applied different salting techniques (Master thesis). Department of Food Engineering, Institute of Science and Technology, Ege University, Bornova.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  08 May 2020
• Date of issue
  Oct-Dec 2020

History

• Received
  11 Sept 2019
• Accepted
  04 Nov 2019