Journal of
Applied Ichthyology
J. Appl. Ichthyol. 28 (2012), 95101
 2011 Blackwell Verlag, Berlin
ISSN 01758659
Dierences in chemical, physical and sensory properties during shelf life assessment
of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata, L.)
By V. Simat1, T. Bogdanovic2, M. Krzelj1, A. Soldo1 and J. Marsic-Lucic3
1
Center of Marine studies, University of Split, Split, Croatia; 2Regional Veterinary Laboratory, Split, Croatia; 3Institute of
Oceanography and Fisheries, Split, Croatia
Summary
The aim of this study was to determine and compare
dierences in physical, chemical and sensory post-mortem
changes between wild (W) and farmed (F) gilthead sea bream
(Sparus aurata). Ungutted sh were stored in ice from
harvesting up to 20 days and freshness indicators were
analyzed at regular intervals. Proximate composition of the
samples diered in lipid (W = 0.86 0.12; F = 4.18 0.16)
and moisture content (W = 79.12 0.48; F = 74.50
0.82). Data from sensory evaluation were described using
linear regression models. Sensory schemes for cooked and raw
sh were found to be suitable in establishing specic attribute
deterioration and shelf life duration (W = 14 days;
F = 17 days). Changes in pH and dielectric properties were
inuenced by dierences in lipid content, while changes in total
volatile base nitrogen and trimethylamine showed high corre-
lation with sensory assessment and storage time, but stayed
below the acceptance limit for human consumption
(W : 24.47 mg TVB-N 100 g and 4.14 mg TMA-N 100 g;
F : 26.18 mg TVB-N 100 g and 3.84 mg TMA-N 100 g),
and thus were not reliable indicators of quality changes during
storage in ice. Deterioration of esh lipids, assessed by
thiobarbituric acid index, diered between the samples, but
presented no serious problem during storage time. In order to
determine the importance of individual results, all obtained
data were submitted to principal component analysis. Varia-
tions in sensory, physical and chemical assessment were
described by PC1 (storage time); variations in lipid and
moisture content were described by PC2 (capture grounds). A
clear separation of the investigated samples, according to the
storage time and capture grounds, was observed.
Introduction
Freshness and spoilage are the most important criteria to
determine the overall quality of food products. Considerable
eort has been invested in the search for suitable methods to
assess freshness while the product is still edible by setting
quantitative standards on spoilage processes (Sykes et al.,
2009). Factors such as feed access and composition, as well as
environmental history dierences, aect sensory attributes and
quality of wild and farmed sh. As one of the main species
farmed in Mediterranean countries, the demand for fresh
gilthead sea bream has increased signicantly over the past
decade; the investigation of quality changes during storage
continues to be of major interest to industries, retailers and
consumers; however, most studies have been conducted on
farmed sea bream (Alasalvar et al., 2001; Cakli et al., 2007;
U.S. Copyright Clearance Centre Code Statement: 01758659/2012/28010095$15.00/0
Received: February 10, 2011
Accepted: July 27, 2011
doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0426.2011.01883.x
Ozogul et al., 2007). Although limited, the literature indicates
signicant dierences in organoleptic characteristics of wild
and farmed samples of the same species. Farmed specimens
have a softer texture and less robust avour, thus consumers
prefer farmed sh from the wild (Alasalvar et al., 2002;
Grigorakis et al., 2003). Of interest is to compare other quality
indicators, such as volatile amines, dielectric properties or
deterioration of esh lipids during ice storage.
Sensory evaluation is the most commonly used method for
quality assessment of raw sh; the Quality Index Method
(QIM) has been suggested as being a precise, objective, non-
destructive, rapid, simple to apply and species-specic sensory
method for an independent description of outer appearance
attributes of raw sh using a scoring system of 03 demerit
index points for each characteristic (Olafsdottir et al., 1997;
Huidobro et al., 2000; Martinsdottir et al., 2009). The total
sum of all points gives an overall sensory score, a so-called
quality index (QI). Freshness parameters such as texture,
odour and avour are used in the Torry freshness scoring to
determine the sensory response of cooked sh samples (Mar-
tinsdottir et al., 2001). Post-mortem quality changes in sh
vary with season, species, shing method, handling, and
holding temperature; therefore physical and chemical muscle
changes should be correlated with sensory assessment results
(Huss, 1988; Sikorski et al., 1990; Olafsdottir et al., 1997). The
post-mortem muscle content of volatile amines provides
information on the progression of spoilage and is suitable
for conrming sensory data (Venugopal, 2002), while changes
in dielectric properties of sh skin are closely related to
spoilage rates.
The objective of this study was to identify specic post-
mortem changes and shelf life oftwo sheries products of the
same commercially important species: wild and farmed
gilthead sea bream. To achieve this we determined and
compared their physical, chemical and sensory changes while
preserving the sh on ice.
Materials and methods
Sampling of the sh and storage conditions
A total of 400 commercial-sized sh (380420 g) were used in
the study: 200 farmed gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata) were
obtained directly from the local farm (F) and 200 sh were
caught by shermen in the coastal part of the Central Adriatic
(W). Samples were taken in April 2010. Fish were killed by
immersion in ice-cold water and placed in self-draining
polystyrene boxes, packed in aked ice and delivered to the
laboratory within 34 h of harvesting. Temperature of the sh
96 V. Simat et al.

upon arrival was 2 1C. First samples for chemical and Table 1
sensory analysis were taken on the same day, while the Quality Index Method scheme used for sensory assessment of wild and
farmed sea bream samples (according to Huidobro et al., 2000)
remainder of the sh were repacked for 20 days in cold storage
at 0 2C. Fresh ice was added daily in a 2 : 1 sh-to-ice Parameters Attributes Demerit points
ratio. To avoid direct contact of ice with the sh skin, very thin
plastic sheeting was used to cover the sh. Appearance
Skin Very bright 0
Bright 1
Blurred, faded 2
Proximate composition analysis
Slime Clear-transparent 0
Proximate composition analyses of wild and farmed gilthead Slightly cloudy cloudy 1
sea bream were conducted upon arrival of the sh (day 0). Flesh
Firmness Elastic 0
Randomly chosen sh (four wild and four farmed) were lleted Marked by pressure 1
(with skin on) and homogenized in a cutting mill (GM 200; Odour
GRINDOMIX, Retsch, Germany). The homogenates were Fresh 0
used for all chemical analyses. Moisture, protein, total lipid Neutral 1
and ash content were determined according to AOAC (2000) Strongly shy 2
O odours 3
procedures. All analyses were done in triplicate for each sh. Eyes
Colour Clear-translucent 0
Slightly opaque 1
Sensory evaluation of cooked and raw sh Opaque bloody 2
Shape Convex 0
During the shelf life study, six trained and experienced sensory Flat 1
panel members made sensory evaluations of the cooked llets Concave 2
and raw sh. Maximum storage shelf life of wild and farmed Gills
gilthead sea bream was determined by sensory evaluation of 16 Colour Bright dark red 0
(eight wild and eight farmed) cooked samples, using a Torry Brownish red discoloured 1
Odour Fresh seaweed 0
scheme adapted to raw gilthead sea bream using a descriptive Neutral 1
scale from 10 to 3, with 10 being absolutely fresh sh and 3 Fishy 2
being completely putrid or spoiled sh (Alasalvar et al., 2001). Off odours 3
The dorsal halves of the sh llets were placed in a plastic bag Quality index (QI) 015
with water added, then sealed and heated in a microwave oven
(600 W) for 3 min. After 5 min the llets were served to
panelists and assessed for odour, avour and texture. An eight farmed) sh by applying the meter probe above and
average score 5.5 was used as the sensory rejection point parallel to the lateral line, just behind the gill cover. Instrument
(Lougovois et al., 2003; Goncalves et al., 2007). readings were read on a digital display, with 17 being the
Raw sh were evaluated using the Quality Index Method highest value and zero the lowest.
(QIM) for gilthead sea bream earlier described by Huidobro Thiobarbituric acid index (TBA) was determined in
et al. (2000). The QIM scheme consists of eight parameters, trichloracetic acid-sh extracts as previously described by
using a total of 15 demerit points (Table 1). Each panelist Vyncke (1970) and Lemon (1975), using a spectrophotometer
assessed 16 (eight wild and eight farmed) whole sh from day 0 (PRIM Advanced, Secomam, France). Results were expressed
until spoiled. A score of 03 demerit points was given for every as mg malondialdehyde kg muscle (mg MA per kg).
change in evaluated parameter (0 representing the highest level Total volatile base nitrogen (TVB-N) and trimethylamine
of freshness). The panelists were requested to evaluate and nitrogen (TMA-N) content of wild and farmed gilthead sea
score quality on evaluation sheets by feeling, smelling and bream samples were determined by direct distillation of sh
examining the samples, describing whether there were dier- extracts as previously described in Simat et al. (2009a) and
ences between samples, commenting on sample characteristics, expressed as mg TVB-N TMA-N 100 g sh muscle (mg per
and rating intensity of specic sensory attributes (Table 1). 100g).
The panel evaluated both cooked and raw samples, coded with
random three-digit numbers on days 0, 3, 5, 8, 11, 14 and 17 of
storage. Statistical analyses
Results of repeated analyses were reported as average stan-
dard deviation. Dierences between wild and farmed samples
Physical and chemical analysis were analysed statistically by Students t-test. For comparison
The pH value, thiobarbituric acid index, and volatile amines of means, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by
(TVB-N and TMA-N) of both wild and farmed samples were Fishers least signicant dierence (LSD) test at the 95%
investigated on days 0, 7 and 15 of ice storage. The pH was condence level was used. Data from sensory evaluation
measured using a digital pH meter (Iskra pH-Meter MA 5705, (cooked and raw sh) and Torrymeter measurements were
Slovenia) equipped with a glass electrode, calibrated at four described using linear regression models and the equations for
and seven. The electrode was dipped into the sh and distilled regression lines calculated from all individual data. Pearsons
water (1 : 1) mixture at ambient temperature (Kyrana and correlation coecients were used to determine the relation
Lougovious, 2002). between the physical and chemical measurements to sensory
Changes in the dielectric properties of both wild and farmed panel results. The principal component analysis (PCA) was
samples were determined using the GR Torrymeter (Distell used to determine the importance of individual parameters and
Industries Ltd., Scotland, UK) over 20 days. A single mea- the relationship among them. Prior to PCA the variables were
surement was obtained from each of the 16 (eight wild and standardized to a mean of zero and variance of one. All
Shelf life parameters of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
Table 2
Proximate analysis (means standard deviation; n = 12; % on wet
weight basis), wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
Sample Moisture (%) Protein (%) Lipid (%) Ash (%)
Wild 79.12 0.48a 19.87 0.36a 0.86 0.12a 1.12 0.06a
Farmed 74.50 0.82b 19.55 0.30a 4.18 0.16b 1.05 0.03a
ab
Means in the same column and with same letter do not dier
signicantly, P < 0.05.
statistical analyses were performed using the Statistica 8
(StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA) software package.
Results
Proximate analysis of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
Proximate composition analyses of wild and farmed gilthead
sea bream are shown in Table 2. As expected, signicantly
higher lipid content and correspondingly lower moisture
content were found in farmed samples. A statistically signif-
icant dierence was observed between the means of moisture
and lipid content, but not between crude protein and ash
content of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream. Additional
lipid analyses, taken on days 7 and 15 of ice storage, showed
no signicant dierences in lipid content at the dierent stages
of storage. Average lipid content during the entire storage time
was 0.92 0.14% for wild and 4.29 0.16% for farmed
samples.
Sensory assessment
Results from the sensory evaluation of cooked llets from raw
wild and farmed gilthead sea bream are shown in Fig. 1.
Sensory quality of both wild and farmed sh decreased with
storage time. A statistically signicant dierence (P < 0.05)
was observed between the means of Torry scores (odour,
avour and texture) of wild and farmed sh. Wild samples
received lower scores throughout the storage, especially after
day 11 when boiled dish cloth odour, intensive sour o-
avour, akiness of the llet and dry and brous texture
developed. After 14 days in ice the farmed samples were
characterized by a boiled potato or cheesy sour milk odour,
Fig. 1. Changes in cooked sensory scores (Torry score), wild and
farmed gilthead sea bream samples against storage time on ice. Each
point = mean of eight sh; vertical bars = standard deviation
97
Fig. 2. Changes in QI scores, wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
samples against storage time on ice. Each point = mean of eight sh;
vertical bars = standard deviation
slightly o umami-like avour and a rubber but brous
texture. Colour was not taken into the calculation of the Torry
score, but panelists were asked to observe and comment on the
colour of cooked llets. Five panelists found the greyish colour
of wild samples llets less appealing. The higher lipid content
did not seem to contribute signicantly to the development of
rancidity. Only two panelists reported a slightly rancid avour
in cooked farmed sh samples at the end of storage. Shelf lives
of farmed and wild samples were calculated from the regres-
sion line equations, taking a score of 5.5 as the rejection point,
and were found to be 17 and 14 days, respectively (Fig. 1).
Sensory attributes were described by means of the quality
index score (QI) over storage time on ice (Fig. 2). QI score
increases evolved linearly, showing high positive correlation
with storage time for both wild (r = 0.989, P < 0.01) and
farmed (r = 0.968, P < 0.01) samples. Farmed samples
received lower QI scores throughout storage. Main dierences
between the two sh groups were in skin appearance, esh
rmness, odour and gill colour. During storage of farmed
samples the general fading of colours, with yellowish slime on
the skin, slow loss of esh rmness and evolution of milky
mucus on gills were observed. In wild sh a blurred greyish
colour, rapid loss of rmness and scales, and brown-clotted
mucus on the gills developed with increased storage time.
Maximum QI score was reached on day 14 for wild and day 17
for farmed samples. These results suggest that the QIM scheme
was suitable for freshness assessment of both wild and farmed
raw gilthead sea bream stored on ice.
Physical and chemical analysis
Levels of pH, TBA (mg MA per kg), TVB-N (mg per 100 g)
and TMA-N (mg per 100 g) at three dierent stages of ice
storage for wild and farmed gilthead sea bream are shown in
Table 3. First pH measurements of the samples were taken 6 h
after death, thus low initial pH could be a result of muscle
glycogen being metabolized into lactic acid. The pH of the
muscle increased during storage in both wild and farmed
samples. Fish were similar in size thus the statistically
signicant dierence (P < 0.05) observed between the samples
could result from dierent feed (not analysed in the study) or
harvesting methods. At the end of storage the pH values of
both groups grew to levels that indicate the production of
some alkaline metabolites correlated with spoilage.
98 V. Simat et al.

Table 3 The initial values of TBA were low for both wild and farmed
Changes in muscle pH, thiobarbituric acid index (TBA) and volatile samples (Table 3). The t-test showed no statistically signicant
amines (TVB-N and TMA-N), wild and farmed gilthead sea bream at
three stages of ice storage (means standard deviation; n = 12)
dierence (P > 0.05) between the means of TBA in the fresh
muscles, however, the increase over time was found to be
Storage Fish samples signicant, thus the dierence between wild and farmed sh at
Measured parameters time (days) Wild Farmed the end of the storage. On day 14 of sensory analysis two
panellists reported slight rancidity in avour of cooked farmed
pH 0 6.02 0.03a 6.15 0.02a sh samples, therefore additional analysis of TBA were done
7 6.14 0.02b 6.10 0.02b
15 6.71 0.02c 6.37 0.03c on days 16 and 17 of the ice storage. Corresponding values of
TBA (mg MA per kg) 0 0.24 0.09a 0.28 0.22a TBA on those days were 0.89 0.24 and 1.12 0.18 mg MA
7 0.31 0.12a 0.79 0.28b per kg. Higher correlation coecients were observed between
15 0.84 0.12b 0.93 0.22b TBA and sensory scores (QI and Torry scores) of farmed
TVB-N (mg per 100 g) 0 17.23 0.36a 18.14 0.38a
(r > 0.974) than of wild samples (r > 0.747).
7 19.26 0.32b 20.93 0.24b
15 24.47 0.42c 26.18 0.28c Levels around 18 mg TVB-N per 100 g were found at the
TMA-N (mg per 100 g) 0 0.62 0.16a 0.81 0.18a beginning of storage in both wild and farmed gilthead sea
7 1.97 0.12b 0.97 0.14a bream samples (Table 3). The increase of TVB-N levels with
15 4.14 0.12c 3.84 0.18b storage time was small, <10 mg per 100 g over 15 days.
ac
Means of each parameter in same row column with same letter do Despite the initial levels close to the limit established for
not dier signicantly; P < 0.05. freshly caught sh (20 mg per 100 g), values at the end of
storage remained below the recommended limit for accept-
ability of 3035 mg TVB-N 100 g. Similar results were
Changes in dielectric properties between wild and farmed obtained for TMA-N analysis (Table 3), and levels found
gilthead sea bream showed statistically signicant dierences after 15 days of storage were <5 mg per 100 g. At the sensory
(P < 0.05) during storage (Fig. 3). Due to their higher lipid rejection point of the samples (F = 17 days, W = 14 days),
content, farmed samples showed faster decline in Torrymeter the content of volatile amines did not indicate spoiled sh, thus
readings throughout the storage and a higher variability these should not be taken as reliable indicators of freshness for
between individual readings, especially after day 11 of storage. wild and farmed gilthead sea bream.
Values determined at the end of shelf life of wild and farmed The qualitative characteristics of studied parameters
sh samples (days 14 and 17) were around 10 and 6; according described by PCA are shown in Fig 4. Distinct separation of
to manufacturers these values would indicated perfectly fresh wild and farmed samples was observed, placing the two sets of
and good quality sh. High negative correlation coecients data opposite to each other and separating them according to
were found between Torrymeter readings and QI scores for the storage time and catching grounds (Fig. 4a). The propor-
both wild (r = )0.979, P < 0.05) and farmed (r = )0.993, tion of variance accounted for by the rst two principal
P < 0.05) samples; however, the values of dielectric properties components (PC1 and PC2) was 93.32%, while the remaining
during shelf life suggested that the range of Torrymeter PCs each accounted for less than 3% of the total variance.
readings were dierent between wild and farmed gilthead sea High correlations were observed among all parameters stud-
bream stored in ice. Over the rst 3 days farmed samples ied. The most important parameters were quality index (0.941)
showed readings higher than those suggested by the manufac- and Torry scores (0.966), while the remainder of the studied
turer (>16), thus the measuring scales should be set dier- parameters showed correlations >0.877 (Fig. 4b). Parameters
ently. Values 12 (wild) or 13 (farmed) would indicate very with the highest variable contributions (between 0.13 and 0.16)
fresh sh (45 days on ice), while the values <9 (wild) or <6 to PC1 were storage time, sensory assessment (QI and Torry
(farmed) would indicate sh unt for human consumption. score), TVB-N content, TBA and pH value. The lipid content
of the sh had the highest contribution (0.74) to PC2.

Fig. 3. Changes in Torrymeter readings against storage time on ice,
whole gilthead sea bream samples (wild and farmed). Each point =
mean of eight sh; vertical bars = standard deviation
Discussion
The chemical composition varies greatly between species and
individuals of the same species, mostly due to age, sex,
migration, environment and seasonal variations (Hyldig et al.,
2007), but also due to feed composition and activity of the sh
(Alasalvar et al., 2002). Using the 5% total lipid level as a cut-
o point between low and medium fat sh (Ashton, 2002), the
muscle lipid content denes both sh groups analysed in this
study as low fat sh.Total body lipids are known to increase
with size, and in all cases wild sh were found to have much
lower lipid content than their farmed counterparts (Grigorakis
et al., 2002). The protein content is considered a stable
component in sh proximate composition, with some changes
related to sh weight. Fish analysed in this study had similar
weights, thus the protein and ash content of the samples did
not dier signicantly. Previous studies also reported similar
proximate composition of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
(Kyrana et al., 1997; Alasalvar et al., 2002; Grigorakis et al.,
2003).
Shelf life parameters of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
(a)
(b)
Fig. 4. Score plot (a) and correlation loading plot (b) from PCA
describing quality index score (QI), Torry score (Torry), Torrymeter
measurements (TM), pH value (pH), thiobarbituric acid index (TBA),
lipid content (FAT), moisture content (MOIST), TVB-N and TMA-N
content, wild (W) and farmed (F) gilthead sea bream samples during
dierent storage times (ST) in days on ice (017)
Dierences in sensory assessment of farmed and wild
gilthead sea bream were observed in both the cooked and
raw sensory scores. The evolution of spoilage given as the sum
of demerit points was more pronounced in wild samples.
Farmed sh had a less intensively shy taste, but were milkier
and whiter in appearance, which could be related to higher
lipid content; the texture was also rmer compared to the wild
sh, which could be related to lower water content. Grigorakis
et al. (2003) found wild gilthead sea bream to have greater
acceptance than farmed sh and that this preference seemed to
be related to taste and avour of the sh rather than to textural
properties; however, they found much higher lipid contents-
compared to samples analysed in our study. Alasalvar et al.
(2002) found no dierence over time between sensory scores of
cooked farmed and wild sea bream. These dierences can be
explained by the fact that cooking the sh may mask or
remove undesirable changes observed, providing these changes
are not extreme.With rmer texture and milder odours and
99
lower demerit points of eight quality parameters, the farmed
sh in our study resulted in better acceptance and longer shelf-
life compared to wild samples. The storage life of farmed
gilthead sea bream determined in other studies was similar to
our results and ranged between 920 days depending on the
packing method (Kyrana et al., 1997; Huidobro et al., 2000;
Alasalvar et al., 2001; Lougovois et al., 2003; Chouliara et al.,
2004; Ozogul et al., 2007). The maximum shelf life of wild
gilthead sea bream determined by sensory evaluation was not
previously reported in the literature; however, Alasalvar et al.
(2002) found the limit of acceptability of wild gilthead sea
bream to be 1618 days based on concentration of ATP
breakdown compounds during ice storage.
Typical pH of the live sh is around seven, thus the initial
low pH of the samples could reect good quality and freshness
of the sh or that sh underwent some stress before capture
(Kristoersen et al., 2006). Tejada and Huidobro (2002)
reported rapid decrease from 7.2 to 6.4 in the initial pH of
gilthead sea bream muscle in the rst 5 h after death, and the
increase in muscle pH to 6.8 during storage regardless of the
slaughter method. In a shelf-life study of ice stored gilthead sea
bream Kyrana et al. (1997) recorded low initial pH (6.106.20)
in the muscle. After 1 week the pH began to increase to the
nal value of 6.60.
Although some failures had been reported for the Torry-
meter application in the shelf life study (Kent and Oehlenschla-
ger, 2009), the Torrymeter was found to be a suitable
instrument for freshness assessment of whole sh in the
present and in various studies over the years (Pivarnik et al.,
1990; Sakaguchi and Koike, 2002; Lougovois et al., 2003;
Oehlenschlager, 2003; Simat et al., 2009b). The operational
value range of the Torrymeter is governed by the dielectric
range of the sh and may be used to indicate the spoilage
process and remaining shelf-life in whole fresh sh (Vaz-Pires
et al., 1995). Each sh species would have a dierent range of
dielectric properties. Lougovois et al. (2003) suggested that
values than 11 would indicate very fresh farmed gilthead sea
bream sh (4 days on ice) and that a value of six would be
marginal; however, the lipid content, which could explain the
dierences between the data, was not reported in the Lougo-
vois et al. (2003) paper.
The values of TBA did not reach the quantity generally
considered the limit of acceptability for sh (58 mg MA per
kg) (Nunes et al., 1992) and were in range of the previously
reported TBA levels of farmed Sparidae species 0.37
1.42 mg MA per kg (Tejada and Huidobro, 2002; Cakli et al.,
2007; Abbas et al., 2008). The dierence in rancidity between
wild and farmed sea bream was expected, due to the dierence
in lipid content; however, oxidation spoilage did not occur in
either wild or farmed samples during storage.
Fresh sh contain 520 mg TVB-N 100 g and 24 mg
TMA-N 100 g (Shakila et al., 2003) while levels of 3035 mg
TVB-N 100 g and 510 mg TMA-N 100 g are considered
the limit of acceptability for most marine sh species
(Ababouch et al., 1991; Connel, 1995). Higher initial concen-
trations of TVB-N could be a result of high levels of non-
protein nitrogen previously reported in the esh of gilthead sea
bream (Kyrana et al., 1997). Most studies reported the
increase of TVB-N with storage time, regardless of storage
conditions and the later increase in volatile amines in Sparidae
species over the limit of acceptance after 20 days of storage in
ice (Kyrana et al., 1997; Tejada and Huidobro, 2002; Cakli
et al., 2007; Ozogul et al., 2007). Some authors suggested that
existing regulations should be adopted in the way the gilthead
100
sea bream is included in the group of sh for which the TVB-N
level of acceptance for human consumption is set at 25 mg per
100 g (Kyrana et al., 1997; Tejada and Huidobro, 2002;
Grigorakis et al., 2003; Ozogul et al., 2007). TMA-N comes
from the reduction of trimethylamine oxide (TMAO) by
bacterial activity (Dalgaard, 2003), and levels found in the
aerobically stored fresh sh rejected by the sensory panel vary
between 10 and 15 mg per 100 g (Dalgaard et al., 1993). The
low concentrations and slow increase of TMA-N observed in
our study could be explained by low TMAO concentrations
found in gilthead sea bream (Kyrana et al., 1997). Low
increase of TMA-N with storage was observed in other
Sparidae species, 1.84.3 mg TMA-N 100 g was found at
sensory rejection points (Kyrana et al., 1997; Kilinc et al.,
2007). Low levels of volatile amines at the end of shelf life did
not reect the spoilage evolution over storage time. The
dierences observed between farmed and wild samples could
be related to feed dierences or to initial microbial ora;
however, these were not studied to support such a thesis.
PCA of sea bream samples was performed on mean values
of nine quality parameters to identify their similarities and
dierences, plus identication of the most eective variables
(sensory assessment, lipid content) and noting the relationship
among the variables themselves. This arms the use of QIM
and Torry schemes as necessary in describing dierent fresh-
ness levels of gilthead sea bream in shelf-life studies. The PCA
analysis was found very useful in determining importance of
the individual parameters, clearly separating the investigated
samples according to storage time and capture grounds.
In conclusion, most dierences in the two shery products of
the same species could be related to lipid content, and thus the
feed intake and reduced activity of the farmed samples. All
studied parameters showed high correlation with sensory
assessment and storage time, and thus are good indicators of
changes in quality during storage in ice. However, the late
response of TVB-N and TMA-N in post-mortem muscle
makes them less useful as indicators by themselves. Fishery
products from gilthead sea bream are widely marketed, thus
the dierences in physical, chemical and sensory post-mortem
changes between wild and farmed samples should be taken
into consideration during marketing and production.
References
Ababouch, L. H.; Alal, M. E.; Benabdeljelil, H.; Busta, F. F., 1991:
Quantitative changes in bacteria, amino-acids and biogenic
amines in sardines (Sardina pilchardus) stored at ambient
temperature (1228C) and in ice. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 26,
97306.
Abbas, K. A.; Mohamed, A.; Jamilah, B.; Ebrahimian, M., 2008: A
review of correlations between sh freshness and pH during cold
storage. Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol. 4(4), 416421.
Alasalvar, C.; Taylor, K. D. A.; Oksuz, A.; Garthwaite, T.; Alexis, M.
N.; Grigorakis, K., 2001: Freshness assessment of cultured sea
bream (Sparus aurata) by chemical, physical and sensory methods.
Food Chem. 72, 3340.
Alasalvar, C.; Taylor, K. D. A.; Shahidi, F., 2002: Comparative
quality assessment of cultured and wild sea bream (Sparus aurata)
stored in ice. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 50, 20392045.
AOAC, 2000: Ofcial methods of analysis, 17th edn. Association of
Ocial Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC, USA.
Ashton, I. P., 2002: Understanding lipid oxidation in sh. In: Safety
and quality issues in sh processing. H. A. Bremner (Ed.).
Woodhead Publisher, Cambridge, pp. 254276.
Cakli, S.; Kilinc, B.; Cadun, A.; Dincer, T.; Tolasa, S., 2007: Quality
dierences of whole ungutted sea bream (Sparus aurata) and sea
bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) while stored in ice. Food Contr. 18,
391397.
V. Simat et al.
Chouliara, I.; Savvaidis, I. N.; Panagiotaki, N.; Kontominas, M. G.,
2004: Preservation of salted, vacuum-packed, refrigerated sea
bream (Sparus aurata) llets by irridation: microbiological,
chemical and sensory attributes. Food Microbiol. 21, 351359.
Connel, J. J., 1995: Methods of assessing and selecting for quality. In:
Control of sh quality, 4th edn. J. J. Connell (Ed.). Fishing News
Books Limited, London, pp. 135164.
Dalgaard, P., 2003: FISH spoilage of seafood. In: Encyclopedia of
food sciences and nutrition, 6th edn. L. Trugo and P. M. Finglas
(Eds). Academic Press, Oxford, pp. 24622471.
Dalgaard, P.; Gram, L.; Huss, H. H., 1993: Spoilage and shelf-life of
cod llets packed in vacuum or modied atmospheres. Int. J.
Food Microbiol. 19, 8394.
Goncalves, A. C.; Antas, S. E.; Nunes, M. L., 2007: Freshness and
quality criteria of iced farmed Senegalese sole (Solea senegalensis).
J. Agr. Food Chem. 55, 34523461.
Grigorakis, K.; Alexis, M. N.; Taylor, K. D. A.; Hole, M., 2002:
Comparison of wild and cultured gilthead sea bream (Sparus
aurata): composition, appearance and seasonal variations. Int. J.
Food Sci. Technol. 37, 477484.
Grigorakis, K.; Taylor, K. D. A.; Alexis, M. N., 2003: Seasonal
patterns of spoilage of ice-stored cultured gilthead sea bream
(Sparus aurata). Food Chem. 81, 263268.
Huidobro, A.; Pastor, A.; Tejada, M., 2000: Quality Index Method
developed for raw gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata). J. Food Sci.
65, 12021205.
Huss, H., 1988: Fresh sh-quality and quality changes. Training
programme on sh Technology and quality control. Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy, pp. 54.
Hyldig, G.; Bremer, A.; Martinsdottir, E.; Schelvis, R., 2007: Quality
index method. In: Handbook of meat, poultry & seafood quality.
L. M. L. Nollet (Ed.). Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK, pp.
529549.
Kent, M.; Oehlenschlager, J., 2009: Measuring electrical properties. In:
Fishery products: quality, safety and authenticity. H. Rehbein and
J. Oehlenschlager (Eds). Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Chichester,
UK, pp. 286300.
Kilinc, B.; Cakli, S.; Cadun, A.; Dinces, T.; Tolasa, S., 2007:
Comparison of eects of slurry ice and ake ice pretreatments
on the quality of aquacultured sea bream (Sparus aurata) and sea
bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) stored at 4C. Food Chem. 104, 1611
1617.
Kristoersen, S.; Tobiassen, T.; Steinsund, V.; Olsen, R. L., 2006:
Slaughter stress, postmortem muscle pH and rigor development in
farmed Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.). Int. J. Food Sci. Technol.
41, 861864.
Kyrana, V. R.; Lougovious, V. P., 2002: Sensory, chemical and
microbiological assessment of farm raised European sea bass
(Dicentrarchus labrax) stored in melting ice. Int. J. Food Sci.
Technol. 37, 319328.
Kyrana, V. R.; Lougovois, V. P.; Valsamis, D. S., 1997: Assessment of
shelf-life of maricultured gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata)
stored in ice. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 32, 339347.
Lemon, D.W., 1975: An improved TBA test for rancidity. New series
circular No. 51, environment Canada sheries and marine service.
Halifax Laboratory, Canada, pp. 14.
Lougovois, V. P.; Kyranas, E. R.; Kyrana, V. R., 2003: Comparison of
selected methods of assessing freshness quality and remaining
storage life of iced gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata). Food Res.
Int. 36, 551560.
Martinsdottir, E.; Sveinsdottir, K.; Luten, J. B.; Schelvis-Smit, R.;
Hyldig, G., 2001: Sensory evaluation of sh freshness. Reference
manual for the sh sector. QIM-Eurosh, Ijmuiden, Holland, pp.
58.
Martinsdottir, E.; Schelvis-Smit, R.; Hyldig, G.; Sveinsdottir, K.,
2009: Measuring sensory evaluation of seafood: methods. In:
Fishery products: quality, safety and authenticity. H. Rehbein
and J. Oehlenschlager (Eds). Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, pp.
425443.
Nunes, M. L.; Cardinal, M.; Mendes, R.; Morao-Campos, R.;
Bandarra, N. M.; Lourenco, H., 1992: Eect of season and
storage on proteins and lipids of sardine (Sardina pilchardus)
minces and Surimi. In: Quality assurance in the sh industry. H.
H. Huss, M. Jakobsen and J. Liston (Eds). Elsevier, Amsterdam,
pp. 7381.
Oehlenschlager, J., 2003: Measurement of freshness of sh based on
electrical properties. In: Quality of sh from catch to consumer:
labelling, monitoring and traceability. J. B. Luten, J. Oehlensch-
Shelf life parameters of wild and farmed gilthead sea bream
lager and G. Olafsdottir (Eds). Wageningen Academic Publishers,
NL, pp. 237249.
Olafsdottir, G.; Martinsdottir, E.; Oehlenschlager, J.; Dalgaard, P.; Simat, V.; Soldo, A.; MarsicLucic, J.; Tudor, M.; Bogdanovic, T.,
Jensen, B.; Underland, I.; Mackie, I. M.; Henehan, G.; Nielsen, J.;
Nielsen, H., 1997: Methods to determine the freshness of sh in
research and industry. Trends Food. Sci. Tech. 8, 258265.
Ozogul, F.; Kuley, E.; Ozogul, Y., 2007: Sensory, chemical and
microbiological quality parameters in sea bream (Sparus aurata)
stored in ice or wrapped in cling lm or in aluminium foil at
2 1C. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 42, 903909.
Pivarnik, L. F.; Kazantzis, D.; Karakoltsidis, P. A.; Constantinides, S.;
Jhaveri, S. N.; Rand, A. G., 1990: Freshness assessment of six
New England sh species using the Torrymeter. J. Food Sci. 55(1),
7982.
Sakaguchi, M.; Koike, A., 2002: Freshness assessment of sh llets
using Torrymeter and K-value. In: Quality assurance in the sh
industry. H. H. Huss, M. Jakobsen and J. Liston (Eds). Elsevier,
Amsterdam, pp. 333338.
Shakila, R. J.; Vijayalakshmi, K.; Jeyasekaran, G., 2003: Changes in
histamine and voilate amines in six commercially important
species of sh of the Thoothukkudi coast of Tamil Nadu, India
stored at ambient temperature. Food Chem. 82, 347352.
Sikorski, Z. E.; Kolakowska, A.; Burt, J. R., 1990: Postharvest
biochemical and microbiological changes. In: Seafood resources,
nutritional composition, and preservation. Z. E. Sikorski (Ed.).
CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL, pp. 5575.
Simat, V.; Marsic Lucic, J.; Tudor, M.; Mladineo, I., 2009a: Long-
term storage inuence on volatile amines (TVB-N and TMA-N) in
101
sardine and herring utilized as food for tuna fattening. J. Appl.
Ichthyol. 25, 766770.
2009b: Eect of dierent storage conditions on dielectric prop-
erties of the sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax, L.). Acta Adriat. 50
(1), 510.
Sykes, A. V.; Oliveira, A. R.; Domingues, P. M.; Cardoso, C. M.;
Andrade, J. P.; Nunes, M. L., 2009: Assessment of European
cuttlesh (Sepia ocinalis, L.) nutritional value and freshness under
ice storage using a developed Quality Index Method (QIM) and
biochemical methods. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 42, 424432.
Tejada, M.; Huidobro, A., 2002: Quality of farmed gilthead sea bream
(Sparus aurata) during ice storage related to the slaughter method
and gutting. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 215, 17.
Vaz-Pires, P.; Araujo, I.; Kirby, R. M., 1995: Physical measurement of
the quality of fresh scad (Trachurus trachurus) and rainbow trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) during ice storage using the RT Freshme-
ter. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 30, 799805.
Venugopal, V., 2002: Biosensors in sh production and quality
control. Biosens. Bioelectron. 17, 147157.
Vyncke, W., 1970: Direct determination of the thiobarbituric acid
value in trichloroacetic acid extracts of sh as a measure of
oxidative rancidity. Fette Seifen Anstrichmittel., 72, 10841087.
Authors address: V. Simat, Center of Marine studies, University of
Split, Livanjska 5 III, 21000 Split, Croatia.
E-mail: vida@unist.hr