‘Eating Quality’ of Fish—A Review

Abstract

The quality of fish is a very complex concept. Quality is frequently described using terms related to nutritional, microbiological, biochemical and physiochemical characteristics alone, but none of these terms serve as adequate indices of quality-sensory perception and consumer acceptability must be included. This paper discusses some of the sensory methods that can be used for fish as objective markers of quality in the chain from catch to consumer with focus on methods used for evaluation of whole raw fish and suggest methods and systems that can build a bridge between research and development, industry, marketing and consumer.

Quality Index Method (QIM) to assess the freshness and shelf life of fish

“…The QIMevaluation of raw material kept on ice could provide accurate and precise information concerning the freshness and a prediction of the freshness of fillets later to be inspected by the buyers. Sensory evaluation might also contribute to a 'processing index' (Nielsen et al 2002;Hyldig and Nielsen 2004). Given the usefulness of this method, it is expected that the QIM will become the leading reference method for the assessment of fresh fishes in Europe in the future (Hylgig and Green-Petersen 2004).…”

“…In this scheme, only the intrinsic quality parameters are considered such as the appearance, odor and texture . C-QIM is a tool for decision making for the consumer buying the fish in a market, or at the fishmonger (Nielsen et al 2002) and its introduction may help the consumer to get a good sensory quality product and learn more about the quality and its variation (Hyldig et al 2007). Further work in this area is ongoing as new tools are being investigated for the delivery of the QIM with new species and wider use by the industry and consumer groups (Green 2011).…”

“…Further work in this area is ongoing as new tools are being investigated for the delivery of the QIM with new species and wider use by the industry and consumer groups (Green 2011). According to Nielsen et al (2002), further attempt to combine the QIM for the raw fishes, profiling for the cooked fillet and C-QIM might, therefore, prove to be a successful in 'translating' the values for sensory quality through the chain. Fish trade via e-commerce is growing and information on the freshness and quality of the fishes traded unseen must be as inevitable as information on the price given (Martinsdóttir et al 2003).…”

“…The unique negative point found in the literature about the QIM would be a challenge for the future studies. Although QIM concept could be applied in many part of the chain from catch to consumer, Nielsen et al (2002) pointed its limitation that only the intrinsic quality cues were considered in the QIM (or other descriptive and discriminative sensory methods). Thus, there was need of a more global approach that also involves the extrinsic quality cues, and suggested the creation of a Total Food Model for the fish, which should contain both objective and subjective quality cues.…”

An Exploratory Study into the Role and Interplay of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Cues in Australian Consumers’ Evaluations of Fish

“…Consumers' perceptions of seafood quality are also influenced by extrinsic cues such as price, outlets, country of origin, packaging, labelling, branding, and nutritional information (Brunsø et al, 2009;Nielsen et al, 2002;Trondsen et al, 2003). Aqueveque (2006, p. 238) explains that "extrinsic cues are lower level cues that can be changed without changing the product, ...while intrinsic cues are higher level cues directly related to the product."…”