DOI: https://doi.org/10.4316/fens.2023.007 

71 

 

Journal homepage: http://fens.usv.ro/index.php/FENS  
Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering,  

Ştefan cel Mare University of Suceava, Romania  

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 -  78 

 

 

 

 

EFFECTS OF SMOKING PROCESSES ON THE NUTRITIONAL VALUE OF 

CULTURED CATFISH (Clarias Gariepinus) 

 
 *Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE1, Henry Eyina DIENYE1,  

Glory Chimburuoma DENSON1, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE1 

 

1Faculty of Agriculture, University of Port Harcourt, Choba, Rivers State, Nigeria 

olaniyi.olopade@uniport.edu.ng 

*Corresponding author 

Received 10th August 2022, accepted 28th March 2023 

 
Abstract: This study was designed to determine and compare the effects of smoking processes on the 

proximal composition, fatty acid profile, minerals, vitamins, total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, 

and sensory characteristics of cultured Clarias gariepinus. Nine fatty acids were identified from the 

muscle of fish samples, with all nine fatty acids recorded for both smoked samples (hot and cold), 

while the raw sample had only eight. Furthermore, the most abundant fatty acids in the smoked 

samples were palmitic acid, oleic acid, stearic acid, and palmitoleic acid. Vitamins A, D, E, and K 

were higher in smoked samples than in raw samples, while vitamins B1, B2, and B3 were higher in 

raw samples than in smoke samples. Raw, cold, and hot smoked samples had significantly different 

mineral profiles (p<0.05). Iron, magnesium, and zinc were found in higher concentrations in the 

smoked samples examined. Cold smoking had the highest value in terms of total polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons, followed by hot smoking. The hot sample performed better in terms of color, flavor, 

tenderness, juiciness, texture, and overall acceptability, according to sensory evaluation results. Based 

on the results of the study, hot-smoked C. gariepinus was nutritionally acceptable. 
 

Keywords: Clarias gariepinus, proximal composition, fatty acids, vitamins, minerals, sensory 

characteristics 

 

1. Introduction 
 

Nigeria is African’s second-largest 

aquaculture producer, with an annual 

output of about 300, 000 tons dominated 

by catfish culture [1]. According to the 
Catfish Association of Nigeria (CAFAN), 

in 2016, Nigeria produced 370,000 metric 

tons of fish from aquaculture systems 

valued at over USD 1.3 billion [2]. The 

tremendous increase in production will 

impose additional challenges in the 

handling, storage, distribution and 

processing of fish. This is because fish is 

extremely perishable food especially in hot 

climates and tropical areas where cold 

preservation techniques are often missing. 

Spoilage begins as soon as the fish dies 

and if fish is not sold fresh, preservation 

methods should be used to prevent or 

significanly slow spoilage (loss of quality, 

edibility or nutritive value) caused or 

accelerated by micro organisms.  

 Currently, smoking is the main method of 

fish preservation in the artisanal sector [3]. 

Basically, smoking process preserve the 

fish, enhances flavor and impart good 

colour to the fish. There are several 

smoking methods such as hot, cold, liquid 

and electrostatic [4]. The two commonly 

used methods in Nigeria are cold and hot 

smoking.  Cold smoking process requires 

that the fish never reach an internal 

cooking temperature. Cold smoking 

mailto:olaniyi.olopade@uniport.edu.ng


Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
72 

smokehouse temperatures range from 20 

and 30 °C (68 to 86 °F) [5]. In this 

temperature range, foods take on a smoked 

flavor but remain relatively moist. Hot 

smoking temperatures range from 52 to 80 

°C (126 to 176 °F) [5]. When food is 

smoked within this temperature range, it is 

fully cooked, moist, and flavorful. 

 Heat effects contribute to changes in the 

chemical composition and, hence, the 

nutritional value of processed foods [6]. 

The degrees of change are related to the 

species of fish as well as the presence or 

absence of activators and inhibitors [7]. 

Thus, the present study attempted to 

determine the nutritional values of the 

cultured Clarias gariepinus following hot 

and cold smoking treatments. 

 

2. Matherials and methods 

 

Samples of Clarias gariepinus with the 

average weight and length of sampled fish 

881±20.00 g and 47.00±3.56 cm, 

respectively, were purchased from a fish 

farm. The fish samples were transported 

live to the laboratory and divided into three 

batches: two batches were prepared 

separately for cold and hot smoking, while 

the third was sacrificed immediately and 

analyzed for proximate, fatty acid, mineral, 

and vitamin compositions. The fish were 

then gutted, rewashed, and then separated 

into three groups: (i) the first group 

consisted of raw samples kept at -40 °C 

until analysis; (ii) the second group 

consisted of cold smoked samples partially 

dried for 2 hours in the industrial smoking 

chamber [8] with the temperature 

fluctuating between 30 and 35 °C and kept 

at -40 °C until analysis; and (iii) the third 

group consisted of a hot smoked sample 

using an industrial smoking chamber with 

a peripheral smoke generator [9]. 

Proximate composition, moisture content, 

crude protein, fat and ash were determined 

for wet samples according to standard 

methods of the Association of Official 

Agricultural Chemists [10] as follows: 

(a). The moisture content was determined 

by oven drying samples at about 105ºC for 

about 8 to 10 hours until a constant weight 

was reached, then cooled in a desiccator 

and weighed again. The percentage of 

moisture content was calculated by the 

following equation: Moisture percentage 

(%) = (weight lost/original weight of 

sample) x 100. 

(b) The ash content was determined by 

incineration of the samples for 6 h at 500–

600 °C in a muffle furnace. 

(c) The ash percentage (%) was calculated 

using the following equation: Ash 

percentage (%) = (weight of ash/weight of 

sample) x 100. 

(d) Crude protein was detected by the 

Kjeldahl method [11]  

(e) Crude lipid content was determined by 

the method presented in [12]. 

The samples (body tissue) were 

homogenized with a chloroform: methanol 

(2:1 v/v) mixture before being extracted 

using the method [12]. After the fat was 

extracted, it was esterified with 1% H2SO4 

and fatty acid methyl esters were prepared 

by following the procedure of [13]. 

Identification and quantification of fatty 

acids were done using gas chromatography 

(Hewlett Packard 5890, USA). 

(f) The preparation of samples for mineral 

elements analysis followed a method 

described by [10]. Approximately 5 g of 

each sample (wet weight) were placed in a 

Teflon digestion vessel and double acid 

digested with nitric acid (HNO3) and 

perchloric acid (HCLO4). Samples were 

then analysed for mineral contents of iron 

(Fe), manganese (Mn), zinc (Zn), 

potassium (K), calcium (Ca) magnesium 

(Mg) and manganese (Mn) using the 

Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer 

(Shimadzu AAS, AA-6300). 

(g) The sample preparation for vitamin 

analysis was done as per the method of 



Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
73 

[14] were estimated the soluble fat 

vitamins A, D, E and K and the water 

soluble vitamins B1, B2, B6, B12 and C by 

using the high performance liquid 

chromatography (Merk Hitachi L-74000, 

USA) following the method [15]. 

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) 

in the muscle ware quantified according to 

[16]. Only solvents with a high degree of 

purity (98% HPLC) were used; the glass 

material was washed with ExtranVR, then 

it was dried for 4 h at 100 C and rinsed 

with acetone and hexane. The PAHs 

analysis was performed according to the 

method described by [17].   

After the smoking operation, sensory 

analyses were performed by using the 

methods of [18]. Sensory evaluations of 

the samples from the cold and hot 

processess were carried out with twenty 

trained individuals. The panelists evaluated 

each of the smoked fish for colour, flavour, 

tenderness, juiciness, texture and overall 

acceptability. A five-point hedonic scale 

[19] describing the score of attributes of 

the smoked fish samples as: very bad (1 

point), bad (2 points), satisfactory (3 

points), good (4 points), very good (5 

points), excellent (6 points) was used. 

 

Statistical Analysis The descriptive 

statistics (mean and standard deviation) 

were conducted while statistical 

significance of differences (P < 0.05) was 

determined by analysis of variance 

(ANOVA) with SPSS version 10.0 [20]. 

 

3. Results and discussion 
 

The proximate composition of fresh and 

smoked C. gariepinus is given in Table 1. 

Hot smoked samples had significantly 

higher percentages of crude protein 

content, crude fat content, ash content, and 

dry matter than cold smoked and raw 

samples (p < 0.05). Results showed that 

hot smoked sample had higher protein 

content (67.84±0.06 %) than the cold 

smoked sample (53.13±0.06 %), while the 

raw sample had 17.03±0.06 %. The lipid 

contents of hot and cold smoked samples 

were 8.96±0.02 % and 4.41±0.02 %, 

respectively, while the raw sample was 

0.77±0.02 %. The same observation was 

made on the ash content of the hot smoked 

samples, which had 7.88±0.02 followed by 

cold smoked samples (4.01±0.0) and raw 

samples (1.40±0.02). The lipid contents of 

hot and cold smoked samples were 

8.96±0.02 % and 4.41±0.02 %, 

respectively, while the raw sample was 

0.77±0.02%. The low nutritional quality in 

raw samples is a result of an inverse 

relationship between the water content and 

the content of fatty acids and protein; when 

the water content increases, the content of 

other nutrients decreases [21]. The 

proximate composition of raw and smoked 

fish analyzed in this study is similar to 

those obtained for the same species by 

[22]. In the raw stage, C. gariepinus had 

the highest moisture content (78.07±0.02) 

followed by cold (21.04±0.02) and hot 

(4.05±0.02) samples respectively. The 

main constituent of fish flesh is water, 

which usually accounts for about 80% of 

the weight of a fresh white fish fillet [23]. 

The decrease in moisture content occurring 

during smoking is the consequence of 

water loss during this process. 

Furthermore, nitrogen free extract was 

significantly higher in cold smoked 

samples than in hot smoked samples and 

raw samples (p < 0.05). 

 

 

 

 

 



Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
74 

Table 1 

Promximate composition of raw, cold, and hot smoked samples of C. gariepinus 

 

Promximate  composition Cold Smoking Hot Smoking  Raw 

Crude Protein (%)       53.13±0.06 b 67.84±0.06 a 17.03±0.06 c 

Crude Fat (%) 4.41±0.02 b 8.96±0.02 a 0.77±0.02 c 

Ash  (%) 4.01±0.04 b 7.88±0.02 a 1.40±0.02 c 

Moisture (%) 21.04±0.02 b 4.05±0.02 c 78.07±0.02 a 

Dry matter (%) 78.97±0.02 b 95.95±0.02 a 21.93±0.02 c 

Nitrogen free extract (%) 

 
17.42±0.10 a 11.29±0.05 b 2.74±0.04 c 

Means (±SE) with different superscripts along same rows are significantly different (p<0.05). 

 

The fatty acid profile of raw, cold, and hot 

smoked C. gariepinus is shown in Table 2. 

The number of fatty acids present in any 

fish species is quite high, but in this study, 

nine fatty acids were identified from the 

muscle of fish samples, with all nine fatty 

acids recorded for both smoked samples 

(hot and cold), while raw samples had 

eight fatty acids. The smoking method 

used showed a significant change in fatty 

acid composition, and this is in agreement 

with the results reported by [24]. Five 

saturated fatty acids (SFA), two 

monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) and 

two polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) 

were identified. This fatty acid pattern was 

significantly different compared to our 

earlier study of Danube catfish 

composition (MUFA>SFA>PUFA) [25]. 

Generally, palmitic acid, oleic acid, stearic 

acid, and palmitoleic acid were the most  

 

abundant fatty acids in all the three 

samples. The differences observed 

between samples of hot, cold, and raw 

samples were statistically significant (p < 

0.05). In all the samples (raw, cold, and 

hot), palmitic acid had the highest 

percentage composition followed by oleic 

acid, while lauric acid was the lowest 

(0.02±0.01 g/100g) in the raw sample, and 

capric acid was the lowest (0.02±0.01 

g/100g) in the smoked fish sample. The 

high level of palmitic acid in this study 

could be attributed to the fish diet and the 

general rearing conditions.  

However, smoked C. gariepinus had a 

significantly higher palmitic acid (27.26 ± 

5.48 g/100g) than that of the raw sample 

(1.08±0.01 g/100g). A comparative study 

by [26] revealed that smoked Clairas 

gariepinus has higher fatty acids than raw 

Clairas gariepinus.   

 
Table 2  

Fatty acids profile in Clarias gariepinus fillets on raw, cold and hot smoking processes 

 
Fatty acid  Hot Smoking Cold Smoking Raw 

Capric acid C8:0 (SFA) (g/100g) 0.06±0.01 a 0.02±0.01 b 0.00±0.00 b 

Lauric acid C12:0 SFA (g/100g) 0.09±0.02 a 0.12±0.01 a 0.02±0.01 b 

Myristic acid C14:0 SFA (g/100g) 3.94±1.91 ab 5.82±0.03 a 0.30±0.02 b 

Palmitic acid C16:0 SFA (g/100g) 27.26±5.48 a 32.70±0.03 a 1.08±0.01 b 

Stearic acid C18:0 SFA (g/100g) 8.24±2.10 a 10.31±0.02 a 0.70±0.02 b 

Palmitoleic acid C16:1 MUFA (g/100g) 10.75±2.86 a 13.59±0.03 a 0.78±0.01 b 

Oleic acid C18:1MUFA (g/100g) 13.42±3.77 a 17.17±0.02 a 0.85±0.01 b 

Linoleic acid C18:2 PUFA (g/100g) 1.22±0.35 ab 1.55±0.02 a 0.35±0.01 b 

Linolenic acid (ω3) C18:3 PUFA(g/100g) 0.91±0.12 a 1.05±0.02 a 0.15±0.02 b 

Means (±SE) with different superscripts along same row are significantly different (p<0.05) 

 



Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
75 

 

 

The vitamin compositions of smoked and 

raw samples of C. gariepinus are presented  

in Table 3. The smoked samples (cold and 

hot) were statistically significantly higher 

(p < 0.05) than in the raw sample. In this 

study, vitamin A displayed high content in 

both raw and smoked study samples. Hot 

smoked samples had higher levels of 

vitamins A (45.32±0.03), D (0.63±0.01), E 

(0.88±0.01), and K (0.35±0.01) than cold 

smoked samples. Vitamins A 

(27.22±0.04), D(0.38±0.01), E (0.64±0.01) 

and K (0.23±0.02), while raw samples had 

the lowest levels of vitamins A 

(12.70±0.03), D (0.16±0.01) E (0.31±0.02) 

and K (0.14±0.01). 
 

Table 3 

Vitamin content in Raw  and smoked  C. gariepinus 

Vitamins  Hot Cold Raw 

Vitamins B1 (mg/100g)  0.04±0.01 b 0.08±0.01 b 0.12±0.01 a 

Vitamins B2 

(mg/100g)    
0.01±0.00 c 0.02±0.00 b 0.03±0.00 a 

Vitamins B3   (mg/100g) 0.91±0.02 c 1.35±0.01 b 1.70±0.01 a 

Vitamine A(ug/100g) 45.32±0.03 a   27.22±0.04 b 12.70±0.03 c 

Vitamins D(ug/100g) 0.63±0.01 a 0.38±0.01 b 0.16±0.01 c 

Vitamins.E(ug/100g) 0.88±0.01 a 0.64±0.01 b 0.31±0.02 c 

VitaminsK(ug/100g) 0.35±0.01 a 0.23±0.02 b 0.14±0.01 c 
Means (±SE) with different superscripts along same rows are significantly different (p<0.05) 

There were significant differences (p < 

0.05) in vitamin B2 and B3 contents 

between hot, cold, and raw samples, with 

the raw values having the highest values 

followed by the cold and hot samples, 

respectively. The Vitamin B1 content of 

the raw was higher than that of the smoked 

samples (hot and cold) (P<0.05). [27] 

reported that the smoking method had a 

significant reduction in the vitamin content 

of some smoked fish samples. This could 

be due to the temperature of smoking, as 

some vitamins are heat unstable. Smoke 

particles can react with nutrients in fish 

meat and may lead to loss of important 

nutrients and antioxidants [28]. 

The mineral compositions of raw, cold and 

hot smoked C. gariepinus are given in 

Table 4. There was generally a significant 

difference (p<0.005) in the mineral profile 

between the raw, cold, and hot smoked fish 

samples, with the cold smoked fish 

samples having the highest mineral values 

than the hot and raw samples. Similar 

changes in the content of essential 

nutrients in thermally treated fish were 

reported by [29]. Iron, magnesium, and 

zinc were more abundant in the fish 

samples analysed than calcium, potassium, 

phosphorus, sodium, magnesium, and iron. 

The mineral content in this study followed 

the same pattern with the records for the 

cold smoked samples followed by the hot 

and raw samples, respectively. Fresh fish 

contains a significant amount of minerals 

in general, but processed fish, such as 

dried fish, have higher values [30].  

The total polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon 

of the raw, cold, and hot smoked 

C.gariepinus is presented in Table 5. The 

result shows that there are significantly 

different (p<0.05) across the various 

samples. It was observed that cold 

smoking had the highest value, followed 

by hot smoking. The results of this study 

revealed that cold smoking had a higher 

mean value than hot smoking, while no 

value was recorded for the raw sample. 

The direct contact of the product with 

combustion gases is definitely an 

important source of PAH contamination 

[31].  



Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
76 

Fish samples with a shorter smoking time 

generated unexpectedly higher PAH 

concentrations than those with a longer 

smoking time [32]. 
 

Table 4   
Raw and smoked mineral compositions of C.  gariepinus 

 

  Minerals   Hot Cold Raw 

Manganese   

(mg/kg) 
     125.91±0.02 b 268.36±0.02 a 101.55±0.02 c  

Calcium% 0.46±0.00 b 0.79±0.00 a 0.13±0.00 c 

Phosphorus % 0.26±0.00 b 0.42±0.00 a 0.09±0.00 c 

Magnesium% 0.19±0.00 b 0.24±0.00 a 0.09±0.00 c 

Potassium % 0.22±0.00 b 0.41±0.00 a 0.10±0.00 c 

Sodium % 0.18±0.00 b 0.31±0.00 a 0.09±0.00 c 

Iron(mg/kg) 137.83±0.02 b 235.65±0.01 a 112.70±0.02 c 

Zinc(mg/kg) 23.48±0.02 b 37.91±0.02 a 12.07±0.02 c 

Means (±SE) with different superscripts along same rows are significantly different (p<0.05) 

 
Table 5   

Total polyaromatic hydrocarbon concentrations 

in the raw, cold, and hot smoked C. gariepinus 

 

Sample Total polyaromatic 

hydrocarbon (mg/kg) 

Cold smoking 0.03±0.00 a 

Hot smoking 0.01±0.00 b 

Raw 0.00±0.00 c 
Means (±SE) with different superscripts along same 

column are significantly different (p<0.05)  

 

The organoleptic characteristics of hot and 

cold smoked samples of C. gariepinus are 

presented in Tables 6 and 7.  

The result shows that there is no 

significant difference (p>0.05) across the 

various samples. 

 

 

The panelists' assessment rated the hot 

smoking higher than the cold smoking in 

terms of colour (1.75±0.50 vs.1.40±0.55), 

flavour (1.75±0.96 vs.1.40±0.55), 

tenderness (1.75±1.50 vs. 1.40±0.89), 

texture (1.75±1.50 vs. 1.40±0.55). Also, in 

terms of overall acceptability and juiceness 

scores, hot smoking was also rated higher 

(1.75±0.96) than cold smoking 

(1.40±1.14). Therefore, the hot smoking 

process presented better results for 

organoleptic traits. Food colour helps to 

determine quality, degree of processing or 

spoilage level [33].  

Table 6  

Sensory evaluation of smoked C. gariepinus by sensory panelist 

 

Variables Cold  Hot  t-value p-value 

Colour 1.40±0.55 1.75±0.50 -0.99 0.36 

Flavour 1.40±0.55 1.75±0.96 -0.70 0.51 

Tenderness 1.40±0.89 1.75±1.50 -0.44 0.68 

Juiciness 1.40±1.14 1.75±0.96 -0.49 0.64 

Texture 1.40±0.55 1.75±1.50 -0.49 0.64 

Overall acceptability 1.40±0.55 1.75±1.71 -0.44 0.68 

Not significantly different (p>0.05) 

 

The result of the T test in Table 7 showed that there was no significant difference in cold and 

hot smoking samples as determined by the sensory panelists. However, the hot smoked fish 

was more appreciated than cold smoked. 
 



Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 

77 

Table 7 

Differences between cold and hot smoked C. gariepinus by sensory panelist 

 

Variables Mean Std. Deviation t-value p-value 

Cold smoking 3.91 0.15 -1.63 0.14 

Hot smoking 4.07 0.20 
  

Not significantly different (p>0.05) 

 

4. Conclusion 

 

In conclusion, both hot and cold smoking 

processes had significant effects on 

proximal composition, fatty acids, 

vitamins, and mineral contents, in line with 

the findings of this study.  

The nutritional value of catfish was also 

highly improved by hot smoking as 

compared to cold smoking, and a 

comparison of the hot and cold smoking 

methods of C. gariepinus demonstrates that 

the hot method is preferable due to its 

superior organoleptic characteristics. 

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were 

found to be less than 0.01 ppb for both 

cold and hot smoking, indicating that they 

are safe to consume. 

 

5. References 
 

[1]. FAO The State of World Fisheries and 
Aquaculture 2018‐Meeting the sustainable 

development goals. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 

IGO (2018). 

 http://www.fao.org/3/i9540en/i9540en.pdf.  

[2]. BUSINESSDAY, N175bn worth of fish 
produced in 2016.  

http://www.businessdayonline.com/n175bn-worth-

fish-produced-2016/. [Google Scholar] (2017).  

[3]. OLOPADE, O. A., TAIWO, I. O. & 
AGBATO, D.A., Effect of Traditional smoking 

Method on Nutritive Values and Organoleptic 

Properties of Sarotherodon galilaeus and 

Oreochromis niloticus International Journal of 

Applied Agricultural and Apicultural Research 

IJAAAR 9 (1&2): 91-97. (2013). 

[4]. NUNES, M.L., Defumação. In: OGAWA, 
M.; MAIA, E.L. (Eds.) Manual de Pesca - ciência e 

tecnologia do pescado. São Paulo: Varela, 1999. p. 

300-306. (1999). 

[5]. MYRVOLD, N., Modernist Cuisine. The 
Cooking Lab. p. 143. ISBN 978-0-9827610-0-7 

(2011). 

[6]. GARCÍA-ARIAS M.T., ALVAREZ-
PONTES E., GARCÍA-LINARES M.C., GARCÍA-

FERNÁNDEZ M.C. & SÁNCHEZ-MUNIZ F.J. 

Cooking–freezing–reheating (CFR) of sardine 

(Sardina pilchardus) fillets. Effect of different 

cooking and reheating procedures on the proximate 

and fatty acid compositions. Food Chem, 83:349–

356. doi: 10.1016/S0308-8146(03)00095-5. (2003). 

[7]. GOULAS A.E. & KONTOMINAS M.C., 
Effects of salting and smoking method on the 

keeping quality of chub mackerel (Scomber 

japonicas): biochemical and sensory attributes. 

Food Chem., 93: 511- 520. (2005).    

[8]. MACHADO,  Z.L. Tecnologia de recursos 
pesqueiros. Recife: Minter e Sudene. 277p. (1984).  

[9]. GONÇALVES A.A. & PRENTICE-
HERNÁNDEZ C., Fumaça líquida: uma tecnologia 

para de fumar pescado. Boletim SBCTA, 32 (2), 

189–199. (1998). 

[10]. AOAC, Association of Official Analytical 
Chemists Official Methods of Analysis. 17th 

Edition. W. Hortuntzed (Ed.), Washington, USA. 

21- 447. (2000). 

[11]. MATISSEK, R., SCHNEPEL, F.M., 
STEINER, G., Lebensmittelanaliytik Springer 

Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, p 440. (1989). 

[12]. BLIGH, E. G. & DYER, W. J., A rapid 
method of total lipid extraction and purification. 

Can J Biochem Physiol, 37: 911-917. (1959). 

[13]. AOAC, Official Methods of Analysis. 
13th Edn. Vol. 15, AOAC, Arlington, VA., pp: 

132-320(1995). 

[14]. SANKAR, T.V., SUSHEELA, M., 
ANANDAN, R., ASHA, K.K. & MOHANTY, 

B.P., Nutrient Profiling of Fish. ICARCentral 

Institute of Fisheries Technology, Cochin, Kerala, 

India. pp 1-61. (2010). 

[15]. SADASIVAM, S., & MANICKAM, A, 
Biochemical methods. 2nd Ed. New Delhi, India: 

New Age International (P) Ltd.; p. 179-186(1996). 

(1996). 

[16]. VALLARINO, A. & RENDON-VON 
OSTEN, J., “Comparison of Organochlorine and 

PAHs Residues in Terns Eggs from Two Natural 

Protected Areas in the Gulf of Mexico,” Marine 

Pollution Bulletin 116, no. 1-2: 48–55. (2017) 

 

http://www.fao.org/3/i9540en/i9540en.pdf
http://www.businessdayonline.com/n175bn-worth-fish-produced-2016/
http://www.businessdayonline.com/n175bn-worth-fish-produced-2016/
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_lookup?hl=en&publication_year=2017&author=BusinessDay&title=N175bn+worth+of+fish+produced+in+2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISBN_(identifier)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/978-0-9827610-0-7


Food and Environment Safety - Journal of Faculty of Food Engineering, Ştefan cel Mare University - Suceava 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 – 2023 

Olaniyi Alaba OLOPADE, Henry Eyina DIENYE, Glory Chimburuoma DENSON, Vivian Chiemela ONYEKWERE, 

Effects of smoking processes on the nutritional value of cultured catfish (Clarias Gariepinus), Food and Environment Safety, 

Volume XXII, Issue 1 - 2023, pag. 71 - 78 

 

 
78 

[17]. ZHANG Y., WANG F., WEI H., WU Z., 
ZHAO Q. & JIANG X., Enhanced biodegradation 

of poorly available polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons by easily available one, International 

Biodeterioration & Biodegradation, 84:72-78. 

(2013). 

[18]. AMERINA, M.A., PANGBORN, R.V. & 
ROESSLER, E.B., Principles of sensory evalution 

of food. New York: Academic Prees. 602 pp. 

(1965). 

[19]. CLUCAS, I. J. & SUTCLIFFE P. J., An 
Introduction to fish Handling and Processing; 

Tropical Products Institute ISBN: O85954-124-X 

(1981). 

[20]. Duncan, D. B., Multiple range and 
multiple F test. Biometrics.11:1-42(1955). 

[21]. EFSA. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on 
contaminants in the food chain [CONTAM] related 

to the safety assessment of wild and farmed fish. 

EFSA J. 3. (2005). 

[22]. FAPOHUNDA, O. O., & OGUNKOYA, 
M., Effect of smoke-drying on the proximate 

composition of Tilapia zillii, Parachanna obscura 

and Clarias gariepinus obtained from Akure, 

Ondo-State, Nigeria. Animal Research 

International, 3(2), 478-480. (2006). 

[23]. MURRAY, J. & BURT, J.R., The 
composition of fish. Torry Advisory. Note 38, 

Torry Research Station, Aberdeen. Accessed on 31 

August 2014. http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/ 

tan/x5916e/x5916e00.htm (1969). 

[24]. DJOPNANG, D.J., 
TCHOUMBOUGNANT, F., TOMEDI TEM, 

WOMENI, H.M., TONFACK D.F., PRABHAKAR 

I. N.S., KARUNA, M. S. L., PRASAD, R. B. N., 

KEMMO, S.S. & GOUADO, I., Effects of boiling 

and smoking on proximate composition and oil 

quality of commercially important freshwater fish 

(Chrysichthys nigrodigitatus) from Nkam river in 

Cameroon. J. Food Res., 7(6): 59- 69. DOI: 

10.5539/jfr.v7n6p59. (2018). 

[25]. STANCHEVA, M., MERDZHANOVA, 
A,, DOBREVA, D. & MAKEDONSKI, L., 

Common Carp (Cyprinus caprio) and European 

Catfish (Sillurus glanis) from the Danube River as 

Sources of Fat Soluble Vitamins and Fatty Acids. 

Czech J. of Food Sci., 32 (1): 16–24. (2014). 

[26]. Saliu, L.M., Akpabio C. J. & Ogunsola M. 
O.  (2013). Comparative nutritional Studies on 

Fresh and Smoked Clarias gariepinus (Cafish) and 

Tilapia niloticus Fish. European Journal of 

Experimental Biology, 3(5):183-185. 

[27]. Adeyeye, S.A.O, Fayemi, O. E. & 
Oyetoro, A. O. A. (2018). Amino acid, vitain and 

mineral profiles of smoked fish as affected by 

smoking methods and fish types. Journal of 

Cullinary Science and Technology. 1-14. 

[28]. Abraha B., Admassu H., Mahmud A., 
Tsighe N., Shui X.W. & Fang Y.  (2018). Effect of 

processing methods on nutritional and 

physicochemical composition of fish: A 

review. MOJ Food Process Technol. 6:376–382. 

doi: 10.15406/mojfpt.2018.06.00191. 

[29]. Bastías, J.M., Balladares, P., Acuña, S., 
Quevedo, R. & Muñoz, O. (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, e0180993. 

[30]. Kinsella, J.E. (1986). Food Components 
with Potential Therapeutic Benefits: The n-3 Poly 

unsaturated Fatty acids of Fish Oils. Food 

Technology 40(2): 89-97. 

[31]. Purcaro, G., Moret, S. & L. S. Conte, 
(2013) “Overview on polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons: occurrence, legislation and 

innovative determination in foods,” Talanta, 105: 

292–305. 

[32]. Hokkanen, M., Luhtasela, U, Kostamo, P., 
Ritvanen, T., Peltonen, K. & Jestoi, M. (2018). 

Critical Effects of Smoking Parameters on the 

Levels of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in 

Traditionally Smoked Fish and Meat Products in 

Finland. Hindawi Journal of Chemistry, Article ID 

2160958, 14pp. 

[33]. Clifford, M. N., Tang, S. L. and Eyo, A. 
A. (1980). Smoking of food. Proc. Biochem., 8-11. 

 

 


	1. Introduction
	4. Conclusion