Abstract
Taking into account aspects of meat quality and animal welfare, three methods of stunning fish were compared: a manual technique (blow on the head, stab in the neck), one using electricity and one using CO2. The following results were obtained using eel (n=72), carp (n=120) and trout (n=54). From the viewpoint of animal welfare, the effects on the fish were judged. Excitation and mucus secretion as well as the time taken for the fish to be anaesthetized were recorded. With manual and electrical stunning, all fish were anaesthetized almost immediately, while using CO2 it took 3.2 min (trout), 9.2 min (carp) and 109.7 min (eel) on average. After slaughter and after 3 and 8 days of storage on ice, the fish meat quality parameters, i.e. pH value, water-holding capacity and rigor mortis, were measured. CO2 stunning gave rise to the lowest pH values and water-holding capacities. Rigor mortis in carp and eel advanced the most. Testing of raw and prepared fish was performed by a panel assessing organoleptic properties. In many cases, fish anaesthetized manually were ranked to be better than those in the other groups.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Zeitschrift f�r Lebensmitteluntersuchung und -Forschung A
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
