Not

Sudak (Sander lucioperca Bogustkaya ve Naseka, 1996) ve Kadife (Tinca tinca L., 1758) Balığından Balık Ezmesi (PATÉ) Yapımı, Bazı Kimyasal Bileşenlerin ve Kalite Kriterlerinin Belirlenmesi.

Cilt: 22 Sayı: 3 1 Eylül 2005
  • Şengül Bilgin
  • Mustafa Ünlüsayın
  • Ali Günlü
  • Levent İzci
PDF İndir
EN TR

Production of fish paté from pike perch (Sander lucioperca Bogustkaya & Naseka, 1996) and Tench (Tinca tinca L., 1758) and determination of food components. and quality parameters.

Abstract

In this study, pike perch and tench have been smoked according to hot smoked method. After hot smoking, filets utilizing as in the shape of fish paté aiming support to the economy. The materials were made fish paté by adding various additive after minced which is belonging to both of unskinned species filet cracks. The chemical compositions and organoleptic analysis of filet cracks and obtained fish paté were made. According to teh study results, chemical composition contents of fresh pike perch and tench were found close to each other. Amount of water content of both species after hot smoking were found decreasing. Protein rates of fish paté which is obtained tench flesh were found significant (P<0,05). It has been determined that, according to organoleptic analysis results, difference between tench fish paté and pike perch fish paté was unimportant (P>0,05). It has been determinated that at the end of the study, quality values didn’t reach that it could be regard as the limit of accestability for refrigerate conditions (+40C±1). It has been concluded that the pike perch and tenchs’ filet cracks could be used as aiming support to the economy by producing fish paté. 

Keywords

Kaynakça

  1. Anonim., 2003. Fishery Statistics. State Institute of Statistics Prime Ministry Republic of Turkey . No:2937, 50s.
  2. AOAC (2002a). Moisture content. 950.46. Official method of analysis (17th ed.). Gaithersburg, Maryland: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
  3. AOAC (2002b). Protein content in meat. 928.08. Official method of analysis (17th ed.). Gaithersburg, Maryland: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
  4. AOAC (2002c). Fat content in meat. 960.39. Official method of analysis (17th ed.). Gaithersburg, Maryland: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
  5. AOAC (2002d). Ashes content. 920.153 Official method of analysis (17th ed.). Gaithersburg, Maryland: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
  6. Aquerrata, Y., I. Astiasaran, A. Mohino, J. Bello, 2002. Composition of pâtés elaborated with mackerel flesh (Scomber scombrus) and tuna liver (Thunnus thynuss): comparison with commercial fish pâtés. Food Chemistry 77:147–153.
  7. Al-Bulushi,I.M., S. Kasapis, H. Al-Oufı, S. Al-Mamarı, 2005. Evaluating the quality and storage stability of fish burgers during frozen storage. Fisheries Science 71; 648–654.
  8. Diler, A., A. Becer, 2001. Chemical composition and meat yield of vimba (Vimba vimba tenella, Nordmann, 1840) in Karacaören I Dam Lake (in Turkish). Turk J.Vet. Anim. Sci 25: 87–92.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

-

Bölüm

Not

Yazarlar

Şengül Bilgin

Mustafa Ünlüsayın

Ali Günlü

Levent İzci

Yayımlanma Tarihi

1 Eylül 2005

Gönderilme Tarihi

7 Aralık 2015

Kabul Tarihi

-

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 1970 Cilt: 22 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA
Bilgin, Ş., Ünlüsayın, M., Günlü, A., & İzci, L. (2005). Sudak (Sander lucioperca Bogustkaya ve Naseka, 1996) ve Kadife (Tinca tinca L., 1758) Balığından Balık Ezmesi (PAT&#201;) Yapımı, Bazı Kimyasal Bileşenlerin ve Kalite Kriterlerinin Belirlenmesi. Ege Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 22(3), 399-402. https://izlik.org/JA74DJ75AD