ACCRA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

LIQUID SMOKE-MARINATION SMOKING IN AN IMPROVED

METAL DRUM OVEN USING LIQUID PETROLEUM GAS:
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBON, CHEMICAL AND
SENSORY ANALYSIS OF SMOKED SALMON AND TILAPIA, AND
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT OF THE OVEN

BY
LILY OCLOO (01201049D)
AMARTEY EUGENE AMARH (01201567D)
ALALE MUSAH LAMUSAH (01205535D)

A Research Project Report Submitted to the

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
FACULTY OF APPLIED SCIENCES
ACCRA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the award of the
HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA
in
SCIENCE LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY

SEPTEMBER 2023
SEPTEMBER 2023
 ACCRA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

SENSORY ANALYSIS OF SMOKED SALMON AND TILAPIA FROM

COCONUT HUSK LIQUID SMOKE-MARINATION SMOKING IN AN
IMPROVED METAL DRUM OVEN USING LIQUID PETROLEUM
GAS

BY
AMARTEY EUGENE AMARH (01201567D)

A RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE

DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
FACULTY OF APPLIED SCIENCES
in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the
AWARD OF HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA
in
SCIENCE LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY

SEPTEMBER 2023
i
 DECLARATION

Students Declaration

I hereby declare that this report is the result of my own research, except where due references have been

made to other people´s work, and was carried out at Accra Technical University. This work has not been

accepted for any other certificate elsewhere.

Student Name: AMARTEY EUGENE AMARH

Signature: ………………………………………

Date: ………………………………………

Supervisors Declaration

I hereby declare that the preparation and presentation of the Project Work were supervised in accordance

with the Guidelines on Supervision of Thesis and Project Work laid down by Accra Technical University.

Name of Internal Supervisor: PROFESSOR EDMUND AMEKO

Place of work: ACCRA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY

Signature: ………………………………………

Date: ………………………………………

ii
iii
 DEDICATION
I dedicate this book to the Most High God, my lovely parents, my
siblings, my friends and all my lecturers for their support
assistance throughout my training.

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

AMARTEY EUGENE AMARH

I will take this opportunity to show my gratitude to everyone who made this project a success. However, it
will not have been possible without the kind support and help of my classroom colleagues. I would like to
extend my sincere thanks to all of them. I am highly indebted to my Supervisor, Professor Edmund Ameko.
for their guidance and constant supervision providing necessary information regarding the project and also
their support in completion. I will like to express my gratitude towards my mom for her kind cooperation
and encouragement which helped in the completion of this project.

v
 ABSTRACT
Liquid smoked Salmon and Tilapia was prepared by Marination of fresh Salmon and Tilapia in 100% coconut husk
liquid smoke followed by heat processing in a smokeless environment in a portable smoking metal oil oven drum. A
descriptive rating test showed that the sensory properties (aroma, color, taste, texture and overall appearance) of
liquid smoked fish were not significantly different (p>0.05) from those of Traditionally smoked fish. A Triangle test
showed there were not significantly (p>0.05) detectable differences between the sensory properties of Liquid smoked
fish and Traditionally smoked fish. An acceptability test indicated that the Liquid smoked fish and Traditionally
smoked fish were both liked by consumers. The sensory properties of coconut husk liquid smoked fish were therefore
not significantly different from those of Traditionally smoked fish. Liquid smoke production from waste sawdust and
wood waste could be used to produce smoke Salmon and Tilapia acceptable to Ghanaian consumers. The adoption of
the liquid smoke technology for fish smoking would improve on the efficiency of the fish smoking processes in
Ghana and also facilitate the management and utilization of wood waste for useful purposes in Ghana

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGES
DECLARATION i
DECLARATION ii
DECLARATION iii
DEDICATION iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v
ABSTRACT vi
LIST OF FIGURES x
FIGURE TITLE PAGE x
LIST OF TABLES xi
CHAPTER ONE 12
INTRODUCTION 12
1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 12
1.1.1 The Agriculture Sector of Ghana 12
1.1.2 Improved Fish Smoking Methods 13
1.1.3 Liquid-Smoke Smoking Method 13
1.1.4 Advantages of Liquid Smoke for Food Processing 14
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT 15
1.3 AIM 16
1.4 OBJECTIVES 16
1.5 HYPOTHESIS 16
1.6 JUSTIFICATION 17
CHAPTER TWO 18
LITERATURE REVIEW 18
2.1 FISH 18
2.1.1 FISH SMOKING 19
2.1.1.1 Traditional fish smoking ovens 19
2.1.1.2 Uses of Wood for Traditional fish smoking 19
2.1.1.3 Environmental impact of traditional fish smoking 19
2.1.1.4 Health impact of traditional fish smoking 19
CHAPTER THREE 20
METHODOLOGY 20
3.1 SMOKING OF TILAPIA AND SALMON BY LIQUID SMOKE-MARINATION SMOKING IN AN
IMPROVED METAL DRUM OVEN USING LIQUID PETROLEUM GAS 20
3.1.1 An Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven for LPG Use 20
3.1.2 Coconut Shell Liquid Smoke 20

vii
3.1.3 Fish Samples 20
3.1.4 Liquid Smoke-Marination Smoking of Fish Samples 20
3.2 ANALYSIS OF SMOKED FISH SAMPLES FOR PHENOLS, CARBONYLS, ACIDS, AND
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS 21
3.2.1 Analysis for Total Phenol Content 21
3.2.1.1 Preparation of a Standard Graph for Phenol Determination 22
3.2.1.2 Folin-Ciocalteu Test 23
3.2.1.3 Preparation of smoked fish sample test solution and analysis 23
3.2.1.4 Calculation of the Total Phenolic Content (% w/w) in the test material 23
3.2.1.5 Moisture content of smoked fish samples 24
3.2.1.6 Calculation of the Total Phenolic Content in the test material on dry weight basis 24
3.2.2 Analysis for Total Carbonyl Content 24
3.2.2.1 Preparation of Carbonyl-free Ethanol/Methanol 24
3.2.2.2 Preparation of 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine (1 g/L) Reagent 24
3.2.2.3 Preparation of Potassium Hydroxide Solution (100 g/L) 25
3.2.2.4 Preparation of Stock Solutions 25
3.2.2.5 Preparation of a Carbonyl Standard Graph 26
3.2.3 Analysis for Carboxylic Acid Content Expressed as Acetic Acid (JECFA, 2001) 27
3.2.4 Analysis for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 27
3.3 SENSORY ANALYSIS OF THE SMOKED SAMPLES 27
3.3.1 Descriptive Rating Test 27
3.4 ANALYSIS OF THE FISH SMOKING PROCESS 30
3.4.1 Ambient Air Quality 30
3.4.2 Minimum and Maximum Temperatures of the External Walls of the Oven 30
3.4.3 Cooking Performance of the Improved Metal Drum Oven 31
CHAPTER FOUR 32
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 32
4.1. ANALYSIS OF SMOKED FISH SAMPLES FOR PHENOLS, CARBONYLS, ACIDS, AND
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS 32
4.1.1. pH and Carboxylic Acid Content Expressed as Acetic Acid (mg/mL) 32
4.1.2. Total Carbonyl Content 32
4.1.3. Total Phenol Content 33
4.1.4. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 34
4.2. ANALYSIS OF THE FISH SMOKING PROCESS 34
4.1.1. Carbon Dioxide in Ambient Air 34
4.1.2. Total Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC) (ppm) in Ambient Air 35
4.1.3. Formaldehyde (HCOH) (ppm) in Ambient Air 36
o
4.1.4. Ambient Air Temperature ( C) 36
4.1.5. Mean Temperature on the External Walls of the Oven During the Smoking of Tilapia 37

viii
4.1.6. Mean Temperature on the External Walls of the Oven During the Smoking of Salmon 40
4.1.7. Cooking Performances of the Oven 42
4.3. SENSORY ANALYSIS OF THE SMOKED FISH SAMPLES 45
CHAPTER FIVE 49
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 49
5.1. CONCLUSION 49
5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS 49
REFERENCES 50

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE TITLE PAGE

x
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

xi
 CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

1.1.1 The Agriculture Sector of Ghana
Smoking is a traditional method used to preserve and enhance the flavour of various food products,
including fish (Adeyeye and Oyewole, 2016). However, the smoking process can lead to the formation of
potentially harmful compounds, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which can pose risks to
human health. Varlet et al., (2007) stated that it is crucial to understand the effect of smoking methods on
the quality and safety of smoked fish products.
, benzo(a)pyrene, dibenz(a,h)anthracene, carbon monoxide, formaldehyde, organic gases (including
aldehyde gases and other respiratory irritants), nitrogen oxides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs),
and dioxin are some of the harmful substances found in wood Benzene smoke (Timothy V. Larson and Jane
Q. Koenig Depa., 1994)
Although there are many reasons to smoke fish, the practice has proven useful for:
 prolonging shelf life
 enhancing flavour and increasing utilization in soups and sauces
 reducing waste at times of bumper catches
 storing for the lean season
 increasing protein availability to people throughout the year
 making smoked fish easier to pack, transport and market.
 Smoking changes the colour of the food and make food shine and more appealing.

The traditional method of fish smoking is the process whereby fish are placed above a heat source (e.g., a
wood source, such as pine and birch) to generate smoke without controlling for the heat intensity or smoke
exposure. The potential concerns of using this hot smoke process include the combination of high
temperature and the inherent unique lipid compositional properties of the fish that can potentially produce
undesirable by-products, such as polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, raises concerns about adopting this
hot smoke procedure (PAHs). Together, the smoke created by the incomplete combustion of the wood used
to generate heat and the direct pyrolysis of fat melting onto the heat source result in PAHs that primarily
gather mostly on the outside of the fish (Alegbeleye et al., 2017).

12
The health of women fish smokers is also placed at risk as a result of the smoke entering their eyes and
lungs, their fingers being burnt and exposure to direct heat. The smoking procedure is very laborious and
poor - quality smoked fish of low market value is normally produced.
The way fish is arranged for smoking in traditional ovens in layers one on top of the other prevents efficient
circulation of heat and smoke. The smoking has to be interrupted frequently to rearrange the layers to
prevent charring of the fish.
1.1.2 Improved Fish Smoking Methods
Improved fish smoking techniques include brining fish first to enhance flavour, texture, and moisture
retention. It entails soaking the fish in a saltwater solution or marinade for a predetermined amount of time
so that it can absorb flavours and hold onto moisture while being smoked REFERENCE.
To ensure stable and controlled smoking temperatures, contemporary smokers or smokehouses are fitted
with adjustable temperature controls. This avoids over or under-smoking the fish and guarantees consistent
cooking.
Improved fish smoking equipment, including gas or electric smokers, provides greater temperature control,
smoke creation, and airflow management. These characteristics facilitate the creation of more exact
smoking conditions, which improve flavour and texture.
1.1.3 Liquid-Smoke Smoking Method
In the pyrolysis process, smoke condensation produces liquid smoke. Similar to natural smoke, liquid
smoke comprises chemicals with phenol groups, acid groups, and carbonyl groups. The combination of all
three types of chemicals at various levels of concentration impart distinct colour and flavours to smoked
food while also acting as antioxidants and antimicrobials.
Certain phenols, carbonyls, and acids also appear to play a major role in the characteristic aroma of smoked
foods. These substances are also partly responsible for the various flavours in smoked foods (Pigott, n.d.).
The main component of the typical flavour of smoked foods is provided by the smoke phenols. A few
phenolic substances, primarily guaiacol, syringol, and eugenol, are important in the flavouring impact of
smoke. However, when such phenols are added to food products they do not impart a smoky flavour that is
equivalent to that of recently created wood smoke.
Smoking technology and temperature of smoke generation have a significant impact on the quantity and
composition of phenols in curing smoke. Phenols only slightly permeate smoked products from traditional
wood smoking, but when liquid smoke preparations are added to the curing mixture used to treat the food
prior to smoking, the phenols are able to permeate to the centre of the smoked product.
Carbonyls contribute significantly to the smoked fish colour. Surface colouring involves complicated
carbonyl-amino reactions and the more carbonyls there are, the higher the intensity of the colour (Pigott,
13
n.d.). Other factors such as interaction of some specific smoke components with some proteins or amino
acids, exposure to light, heat and oxygen influence the shade and intensity of colour formation.
The preservative and antibacterial actions of smoke solutions are due more to the acids (Pigott, n.d.). The
various techniques for applying liquid smoke on food includes;
Direct addition to meat emulsion, direct dipping of the food item into the solution, spraying of product with
liquid smoke flavoring , atomization into a fog and releasing this fog into the smokehouse ,vaporization by
putting on a hot surface.
The marinating-smoking method is used to give fish smoky flavours and improve preservation. This
technique involves marinating the fish in a liquid smoke solution before smoking it. However, concerns
arise regarding the potential presence of PAHs and other smoke compounds in the final product
(Alegbeleye et al., 2017).
Marinating food before cooking can keep the smoked food moist. The reason is that the salt in the marinade
creates gaps for moisture to seep in. Additionally, the fat ingredient in the marinade helps to transfer the
soluble flavours in the marinade onto the meat causing the food to retain moisture REFERENCE.
Liquid smoke improves the nutritional value of the food by lowering the chance of contamination by
harmful microorganisms like listeria. Bacteria are eliminated by the acidic components of the marinade.
1.1.4 Advantages of Liquid Smoke for Food Processing
The advantages of liquid smoke for food processing includes REFERENCE:
Help in Maintaining Freshness and Antimicrobial Action: liquid smoke help in reducing the chances of
food contamination and proliferation of bacteria. The growth of various food-borne pathogens such as
Staphylococcus, Listeria monocytogenes, and many more can be controlled with the help of liquid smoke.
Enhancing Taste: Mostly, in the case of meat products, liquid smoke is added to bring authenticity and
richness to the meal. Furthermore, liquid smoke is also helpful in maintaining the tenderness of meat during
eating.
Enhancing Food Colour: Liquid smoke is frequently used to give food a nice caramelized golden-brown
hue which is As a result, it is utilized in a vast array of sweet and savoury food products.
Cost-Effective: Using liquid smoke in a variety of culinary products is significantly more cost-effective
than using traditional wood smoke. Liquid smoke eliminates the need for equipment and fewer steps are
involved in the food smoking process, thereby saving time, energy, and labour.
Providing a Clean Label and Environmental Safety. During the process of using liquid smoke to smoke
food, the emission of smoke, greenhouse gases and heat into the environment is greatly reduced.
Food Safety and Health Benefits: PAHs are a group of compounds that are formed during incomplete
combustion of organic matter, including during the smoking process. Some PAHs are carcinogenic and can
14
pose a risk to human health if consumed in high amounts. The level of PAH in purified liquid smoke does
not pose a health risk and ensures that the smoked food complies with regulatory limits.

15
Quality Control: Acetic acid, phenol, and carbonyl compounds are important smoke-related compounds
that contribute to the characteristic flavour, aroma, and colour of smoked fish. Analysing their content helps
evaluate the quality and authenticity of the smoked fish product. It allows manufacturers to monitor and
maintain consistent flavour profiles and ensure that the desired smoke compounds are present at appropriate
levels. The fish species that are usually smoked are catfish, herring, mackerel, anchovy, and tuna.
White fish such as Tilapia, Mudfish and Cod have very low fat content of 1-2% in their flesh because these
fish accumulate the fat in their livers. Oily or fatty fish have 5-20% fat in their flesh. The amount of fat in
the flesh of Oily fish is related to their breeding cycle, increasing during breeding and falling considerably
after breeding. Oily fish include Sardines, Salmon, Pilchards, Mackerel, Herring, Tuna, and Trout.
However, unlike other canned oily fish, canned Tuna is not regarded as oily because canning of Tuna
during processing reduces the fat content of the fish to a low level (SACN, 2004).
PAHs have higher hydrophobicity and low aqueous solubility (Patel et al, 2020) and are generally less
soluble in aqueous salt solutions such as seawater than in pure water (Sterling et al, 2003). Since PAHs
have high solubility in lipids (Guillén, and Sopelana, 2004), and Oily Fish have higher proportions of fat in
their flesh than do White fish, it is very likely that the amount of PAHs absorbed by the flesh during the
smoking process is higher in Oily Fish than in White Fish.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

White fish such as Tilapia, Mudfish and Cod have far lower fat content in their flesh than Oily or fatty fish
such as Sardines, Salmon, Pilchards, Mackerel, Herring, Tuna, and Trout.
The fish smoking process can lead to the formation of potentially harmful compounds, such as polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which can pose risks to human health.
Since PAHs have high solubility in lipids, it is very likely that the amount of PAHs absorbed by the flesh
during the smoking process is higher in Oily Fish than in White Fish.
Improved fish smoking equipment with gas provides better temperature control, smoke creation, and
airflow management resulting in better flavour and texture of the smoked fish than traditional fish smoking
equipment.
Similar to natural wood smoke, liquid smoke comprises chemicals with phenol, acid, and carbonyl groups.
The combination of all three types of chemicals at various levels of concentration impart distinct colour and
flavours to smoked food while also acting as antioxidants and antimicrobials.
Smoking technology has a significant effect on the quantity and composition of phenols, carbonyls and
acids in curing smoke and the extent to which they are able to permeate the smoked product.
It is therefore evident that the smoking method has an effect on the quality and safety of smoked fish products.
16
In a study on the effect of traditional and liquid smoking processes on the quality of Sea Catfish Sausages,
liquid smoking presented better sensory acceptance, easier execution, greater process control, and less
environmental impact. The liquid smoking processes was therefore shown to be a viable alternative to the
traditional smoking of sea catfish sausages (de Araújo, et al., 2020).
Currently, there is no reported study on the effect of the Liquid smoke-marination smoking method in an
improved metal drum oven using liquid petroleum gas on the quality and safety of White and Oily smoked
fish.
1.3 AIM
The aim of this study therefore was to determine the effect of Liquid smoke-marination smoking in an
improved metal drum oven using liquid petroleum gas on the quality and safety of smoked Tilapia and
Salmon.
1.4 OBJECTIVES
The objectives of the study were to:
 Smoke Tilapia and Salmon by Liquid smoke-marination smoking in an improved metal drum oven
using liquid petroleum gas
 Analyse the smoked samples for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Phenols, Carbonyls and Acids
 Perform sensory analysis of the smoked samples
 Determine the quality of the ambient air during the smoking process
 Assess the cooking performance of the improved metal drum oven during the smoking process.

1.5 HYPOTHESIS
The hypothesis was that:
 There is a significant difference in the Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, Phenols, Carbonyls, and

Acids content of the smoked Tilapia and Salmon samples.

 There is no significant difference in the sensory qualities of the smoked Tilapia and Salmon samples.

 There is no significant difference in air quality during the smoking of the Tilapia and Salmon samples.

 There is no significant difference in the cooking performance of the oven during the smoking of the

Tilapia and Salmon samples.

17
1.6 JUSTIFICATION
The fisheries sector of Ghana contributes 4.5 percent of the GDP, 12 percent of the agricultural GDP, 10
percent of the labour force, and supports the livelihoods of 2.6 million Ghanaians, representing 10 percent
of the population.
Fish smoking is the leading technique of fish processing in Ghana and 70–80% of local fish consumption is
in the smoked form. Fish and fish products account for over 50 percent of the non-traditional export
revenue, and for approximately 5 percent of the agricultural GDP. The total earnings from fish and fishery
products accounted for approximately 62 million US Dollars in 2010 (ATLAFCO, 2012). The value of
smoked fish exports to the EU was 80,000 EUR in 2016 (Asiedu et al, 2018).
However, traditional and current improved methods of fish smoking do not satisfy all of the following
criteria: environmental sustainability, process efficiency, product safety, and consumer acceptability of
products.
The Liquid Smoke-Marination Smoking Method in combination in an improved metal drum oven using
liquid petroleum gas is more eco-friendly, fuel efficient, and economically viable than traditional and
current improved fish smoking methods. The method therefore has the potential to promote value addition
in the fisheries sector and improve livelihood in fisheries communities in Ghana.

18
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 FISH
Fish is a vital source of sustenance for hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Fish is an important
source of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), essential minerals, and fat-soluble vitamins including
vitamin A that are all linked to healthy and normal growth (Adeyeye & Oyewole, 2016). STOP USING &
According to estimates from the FAO, 6 percent of all protein consumed worldwide and about 16 percent
of the global population respectively ingest animal protein. With an average per capita consumption of 17
kg in 2008, approximately 81 percent (115 million tonnes) of the estimated global fish production was
consumed as human food (Adeyeye & Oyewole, 2016. Fish production in 2010 cost $17.5 billion and was
consumed by
4.3 billion people worldwide (Fish et al., n.d.).
Fish is the main source of nourishment for hundreds of millions of people globally. Polyunsaturated fatty
acids (PUFA), critical minerals, and fat-soluble vitamins, such as vitamin A, are all found in fish and are all
associated to healthy and normal growth (Adeyeye & Oyewole, 2016). According to estimations from the
FAO, animal protein accounts for 6 percent of all protein ingested globally and around 16 percent of the
world's population. Approximately 81 percent (115 million tonnes) of the estimated global fish production
was used as human food in 2008, with a per capita consumption average of 17 kg (Adeyeye & Oyewole,
2016).
Fish is a key source of food and income for many individuals in underdeveloped nations (Jeffery et al.,
2018). A total of 35 million individuals, or 5% of the population of Africa, make their living totally or
mostly from fishing, primarily artisanal fishing.
Compared to a global average of 16.9 kilos, Africa consumes 7.6 kilograms of fish per person. Africa now
significantly relies on imports and aquaculture for its fish supplies due to the limited potential for
developing fish supplies from its inland and marine capture fisheries (Adeyeye & Oyewole, 2016). The
majority of imported fish is small pelagic fish including anchovies, herrings, mackerels, and sardines.
Additionally, these are the primary species that non-food fisheries target in order to produce goods like fish
meal and fish oil for use in aquaculture and livestock feed (Student et al., 2021). Fish accounts for 20% of
the animal protein consumed in sub-Saharan African countries. Fish products, which make up fifty percent
(50%) of total intake in Equatorial Guinea, Gambia, Ghana, and Sierra Leone (all coastal countries), are the
primary source of animal protein (Jeffery et al., 2018).

19
2.1.1 FISH SMOKING
Smoking is one of the oldest fish preservation methods. It consists in the application of wood smoke on food.
(Varlet al.,2007 and Bilginet al.,2008). Smoking can inhibit the formation of toxins in products (Huong, 2014),
reduce the growth of bacteria, due to lower water activity by smoking in combination with salting and drying
which creates a physical surface barrier (Rorvik, 2000; Swastawati et al., 2000).The spoilage and pathogenic
microflora of smoked products are affected by density of smoke, concentration of active components of the smoke
in combination with the salt content, and the time and temperature of smoking (Kolodziejskaet al., 2002).Smoking
imparts aroma, taste and color on processed fish (Viscianoet al.,2008). Traditionally, fish is smoked in pits or on
raised smoking “tables” where the control of heat is difficult and at times impossible. (Kumolu-Johnson et al.,
2010).Nowadays, shifting for high sensory quality product is the main purpose of smoking. The smoked products
have higher moisture and lower salt content than in the past (Kolodziejska et al.,2002). The smoking process is
characteristically a combination of salting, drying, smoking followed by vacuum, modified or controlled
atmosphere packaging (Huong, 2014).Depending on the way smoke gets into products, smoking can be categorized
accordingly: the traditional technique – where the smoke is formed directly by burning chips or sawdust from firm
wood in the oven (Stołyhwo and Sikorski, 2005; Viscianoet al.,2008); or new technique – by using an electric field
acts on the ionised smoke particles, which quickens the smoke deposition or by using commercial liquid smoke
flavorings (Duffes, 1999; Martinez et al., 2007).The quality of smoked fish is affected by raw material, salting
method, brining concentration, condition processing, and composition of smoke, smoking method, smoke agents
and storage conditions (Huong, 2014).

2.1.1.1 Traditional fish smoking ovens

Joint treatments of drying, smoking, and heat. For instance, fresh anchovies are spread out on smoking trays after
washing but no salting or gutting and surface dried on the ground in the open air (Anon, 2007). Also, the loaded
plates (Figure 3) are then stacked on the smoking ovens fired with fuel woods and smoked at temperatures that give
a minimum temperature of 55°C-60°C but should not exceed a temperature of 120°C (Anon, 2007). After two to
five hours, smoking period results in a dry smoked product with the moisture content of approximately ten percent
(10%).

For instance, the more prominent Sardinella spp are cleaned with water (fresh water which may or may not be
portable, or sea water) and displayed on the smoking trays with surface dried in the sun (Anon, 2007). Moreover,
loaded plates are fixed on the smoking oven and hot smoking commenced at a temperature of about 80°C for 2-5

20
hours before the second stage of processing at lower temperature less than 60°C, and lasting for as long as two
days. The resulting smoked fish is dried up to a moisture content of between 10% and 15% (Anon, 2007).

2.1.1.2 Uses of Wood for Traditional fish smoking

2.1.1.3 Environmental impact of traditional fish smoking

2.1.1.4 Health impact of traditional fish smoking

21
 CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY

3.1 SMOKING OF TILAPIA AND SALMON BY LIQUID SMOKE-MARINATION SMOKING IN

AN IMPROVED METAL DRUM OVEN USING LIQUID PETROLEUM GAS

3.1.1 An Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven for LPG Use
The Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven was developed by (Ameko, 2023) with some modifications
by Mahmoud (2023) and constructed at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of Accra Technical
University. The oven is designed to use Liquid smoke as the only source of wood smoke components and
Liquid Petroleum Gas as the only source of fuel.
3.1.2 Coconut husk Liquid Smoke
The source of smoke components was Coconut Shell liquid smoke produced at the Laboratories of the
Department of Science Laboratory Technology of Accra Technical University.

3.1.3 Fish Samples

Raw Tilapia and Salmon samples were purchased frozen from a coldstore at the Makola Market in Accra.

22
Figure 1 Fresh Salmon Fresh Tilapia
3.1.4 Liquid Smoke-Marination Smoking of Fish Samples
Fish samples were smoked by the Liquid smoke marination method (Ameko et al, 2015) in an Improved
Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven using Liquid Petroleum Gas as the source of fuel.
The frozen fish samples were thawed, and then washed in clean tap water. The samples were then placed on
a wire rack for the water to drain off.

23
Fish samples were weighed and then marinated for 30 minutes in Coconut Shell liquid smoke solution in a
bowl. The marinated samples were then air-dried on a wire mesh tray over a bowl. The fish samples were
then arranged on trays in the oven and hot smoked at ≥ 80°C until they were done. The smoked fish were
allowed to cool to room temperature.

24
3.2 ANALYSIS OF SMOKED FISH SAMPLES FOR PHENOLS, CARBONYLS, ACIDS, AND
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
3.2.1 Analysis for Total Phenol Content
This was done according to the method of Kupina et al (2018).

25
3.2.1.1 Preparation of a Standard Graph for Phenol Determination
Stock Solution A was prepared as 1.0 g Gallic acid/100 mL Distilled Water (DW). This is equivalent to
10,000 µg Gallic acid/1 mL distilled water.
Two 1/10 serial dilutions were performed on Stock Solution A to obtain a 100.0 µg Gallic acid/1 mL
solution which was labelled Stock Solution B.
In the same way three 1/10 serial dilutions were performed perform on Stock Solution A to obtain a 10.0
µg Gallic acid/100 mL solution and label it Stock Solution C.
Similarly, Stock Solutions D, E and F containing 1.0 µg Gallic acid/1 mL, 0.1 µg Gallic acid/1 mL and
0.01 µg Gallic acid/1 mL respectively were prepared.

Add this amount of

To prepare (µg/mL) Take this amount
of stock solution Distilled Water (mL) to
Standard Solution (mL)
top up to 10 mL
0.0 0 None 10
0.01 10 F 0
0.02 2 E 8
0.04 4 E 6
0.06 6 E 4
0.08 8 E 2
0.1 10 E 0
0.2 2 D 8
0.4 4 D 6
0.6 6 D 4
0.8 8 D 2
1.0 10 D 0
2.0 2 C 8
4.0 4 C 6
6.0 6 C 4
8.0 8 C 2
10.0 10 C 0
20.0 2 B 8
40.0 4 B 6
60.0 6 B 4
80.0 8 B 2
100.0 10 B 0

26
3.2.1.2 Folin-Ciocalteu Test
10 mL of test solution or Blank Solution was mixed with 10 μL of Folin-Ciocalteu 0.25 N reagent, allowed
to stand for 15 minutes. After that, 20 µL of 7.5% Na 2CO3 was added which caused the color to change to
blue. The mixture was incubated for 30 minutes in a dark place before the Absorbance was measured at a
wavelength of 750 nm.
A standard graph was obtained by plotting the Absorbances on the y-axis against the standard
concentrations on the x-axis. The Regression Equation of the Standard Graph was then determined.

3.2.1.3 Preparation of smoked fish sample test solution and analysis

Smoked fish sample (skin, flesh and bones) was completely homogenised in a blender without adding any
water to the sample. The homogenate was mixed very well.
About 100 mg of the test material (homogenate) was weighed and transferred into a 100 mL volumetric
flask. Water was added to the volumetric flask to the 100 mL mark and the contents of the flask mixed very
well. Quantitatively 5.0 mL of the solution in the volumetric flask was pipetted into a fresh 100 mL
volumetric flask and then diluted to the 100 mL mark with water and mixed well. A 10 mL aliquot of this
solution was taken to perform the Folin Ciocalteu test and to determine the absorbance at 750 nm.
The results were judged to be okay whenever the absorbance values fell within the minimum and maximum
absorbance values used on the Standard graph. If not, then the weight of the test material was adjusted in
order to get an absorbance within the Standard graph range.
Phenolic levels were calculated by entering the results of the Absorbances into the Regression Equation of
the Standard Curve that had been plotted.

3.2.1.4 Calculation of the Total Phenolic Content (% w/w) in the test material
The Total Phenolic Content of the test material was calculated, in % w/w as follows:
𝑉𝑥
Total phenols (% w/w) = 𝐴−𝑏 𝑥
𝐷 𝑥 100
𝑚 𝑊 𝑥 1000

Where,
A = the absorbance of the sample test solution at 765 nm;
b = the y-intercept of the calibration curve;
m = the slope of the calibration curve;
W = the weight of the test material (mg);
V = the volume of the sample test solution (100 mL);
D = the dilution factor (20); and
27
1000 = the conversion from mL to L.

28
The values are expressed as Gallic Acid Equivalents (GAE).

3.2.1.5 Moisture content of smoked fish samples

About 10 g of the test material (homogenate) was weighed and transferred into a crucible. The weight of
the crucible and sample was determined. The sample was dried in a hot air oven at 100 oC, weighed after 4
hours and then every 20 minutes until the sample was completely dry (no change in weight after three
consecutive weighing at 20-minute intervals).
% moisture was calculated as:
% moisture = (Initial weight of crucible + sample) - (Final weight of crucible + sample)
(Initial weight of crucible + sample)

3.2.1.6 Calculation of the Total Phenolic Content in the test material on dry weight basis
The total phenolic content of the test material was calculated in % w/w on a dry weight basis, as follows:
Total phenols
Total phenols (% w/w, dry) =
M

=
Total phenols 𝑥 100
100 – % moisture

Where,
M = the dry weight fraction of the test material, expressed as (100 – % moisture)/100.
The values are expressed as Gallic Acid Equivalents (GAE).

3.2.2 Analysis for Total Carbonyl Content

3.2.2.1 Preparation of Carbonyl-free Ethanol/Methanol
Add 20g of 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine and 2 mL of hydrochloric acid (HCl, sp gr 1.19) to 4L of
ethanol/methanol. Reflux for 2 h and then distil using a 2 to a 3-ft column. Discard the first 200 mL of
distillate. Continue the distillation until approximately 75 % of the ethanol/methanol has distilled over.
Properly prepared ethanol/methanol will have an absorbance of 0.08 or less when used as a blank.

3.2.2.2 Preparation of 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine (1 g/L) Reagent

Take 46 mL of carbonyl-free ethanol/methanol, add 4 mL of hydrochloric acid (HCl, sp. gr. 1.19), dilute to
100 mL with water, and add 0.10 g of 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine to dissolve. This solution is unstable and
must be discarded after two weeks.

29
3.2.2.3 Preparation of Potassium Hydroxide Solution (100 g/L)
Dissolve 100 g of potassium hydroxide (KOH) in 200 mL of water. Cool and dilute to 1L with
ethanol/methanol.

3.2.2.4 Preparation of Stock Solutions

Stock Solution A was prepared as 1.0 g Acetone /100 mL Ethanol. This is equivalent to 10 mg Acetone /1.0
mL Ethanol. Stock Solutions B, C, D and E were prepared as shown in the table below by performing serial
dilutions on Stock Solution A.
Original Equivalent Stock solution
1.0 g/100 mL 10 mg/1 mL A
1.0 mg/1 mL B
0.1 mg/1 mL C
0.01 mg/1 mL D
0.001 mg/1 mL E

The various Stock Solutions were used to prepare the standard concentrations in the table below and read
the Absorbances.
Conc. (mg/mL) Abs 1 Abs 2 Abs 3 Mean Abs
Reagent blank
0.01 mg/1 mL
0.02 mg/1 mL
0.04 mg/1 mL
0.06 mg/1 mL
0.08 mg/1 mL
0.1 mg/1 mL
0.2 mg/1 mL
0.4 mg/1 mL
0.6 mg/1 mL
0.8 mg/1 mL
1.0 mg/1 mL
2.0 mg/1 mL
4.0 mg/1 mL
6.0 mg/1 mL
8.0 mg/1 mL
10.0 mg/1 mL
0.01 mg/1 mL
0.02 mg/1 mL
0.04 mg/1 mL
0.06 mg/1 mL

30
 Conc. (mg/mL) Abs 1 Abs 2 Abs 3 Mean Abs
0.08 mg/1 mL
0.1 mg/1 mL
0.2 mg/1 mL
0.4 mg/1 mL
0.6 mg/1 mL
0.8 mg/1 mL
1.0 mg/1 mL
2.0 mg/1 mL
4.0 mg/1 mL
6.0 mg/1 mL
8.0 mg/1 mL
10.0 mg/1 mL

3.2.2.5 Preparation of a Carbonyl Standard Graph

The test was done according to ASTME 411–12 which is the Standard Test Method for determining Trace
Quantities of Carbonyl Compounds with 2, 4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine.
Using a suitable pipette, 2mL of the Liquid smoke sample was transferred to a 25-mL dry glass stoppered
volumetric flask. 2mL of ethanol was transferred to a second 25-mL glass-stoppered volumetric flask and
used as reagent blank. To each flask, 2mL of the 2, 4-dinitrophenylhydrazine solution was transferred by
means of a pipette. Each flask was stoppered and allowed to set at room temperature for 30±2min. the
contents was then diluted to the mark with the potassium hydroxide solution, stoppered and inverted a few
times to mix well and left for 12±1min.
The absorbance of each solution was read at 480nm in a 1-cm cell using a spectrophotometer. A 1-cm cell
filled with distilled water was used to set the instrument at zero absorbance. The net absorbance due to
Carbonyl compounds in the sample was calculated by subtracting the absorbance of the reagent blank from
that of the samples.
A standard graph was obtained by plotting the Absorbances on the y-axis against the standard
concentrations on the x-axis. The Regression Equation of the Standard Graph was then determined.

Carbonyl levels in the test samples were calculated by entering the results of the Absorbances into the
Regression Equation of the Standard Curve that had been plotted.

31
3.2.3 Analysis for Carboxylic Acid Content Expressed as Acetic Acid (JECFA, 2001)
Accurately 1ml of the samples was put into a 250 mL beaker and diluted with 100 mL of water. Titration
was performed with 0.1N sodium hydroxide solution to an equivalence point of pH 8.15, as determined
using a pH meter, and the volume (V mL) of NaOH used was recorded. The Acetic acid content was
determined by using:
1ml of 0.1 N NaOH = 60.05 mg acetic acid
Acetic acid (mg) = (V mL/1.0 mL) x 60.05 mg

3.2.4 Analysis for Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

The various smoked fish samples were analyzed at the Ghana Standard Authority Laboratory by Gas
Chromatography Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS) method.
The concentrations of key PAHs in the samples were presented according to the table below.
Compound Unit Tilapia Salmon
PAHs
Benzo(a)anthracene µg/L
Chrysene µg/L
Benzo(a)pyrene µg/L
Benzo(b)fluoranthene µg/L
PAH4 µg/L

Acetic Acid µg/L

Carbonyls µg/L
Phenols µg/L

The levels for individual PAHs should not exceed the EU maximum permissible level of 2µg/L and the
total for the four PAHs should be less than the EU maximum permissible level of 12µg/L.

3.3 SENSORY ANALYSIS OF THE SMOKED SAMPLES

3.3.1 Descriptive Rating Test
A sensory panel of 16 males and 16 females was used for the test. Samples were coded in no particular

order. Each tester used a score sheet to independently evaluate and rank each smoked product in order of

liking of colour, aroma, taste, texture, and overall appearance using a Score Sheet with a nine-point scale.

32
Each tester was first served with three samples of smoked Tilapia, which consisted of two samples from
this study and one sample purchased from a vendor.
Each tester was then served with three samples of smoked Salmon, which consisted of two samples from
this study and one sample purchased from a vendor.
Each product sample was given a random 3-character alphanumeric code.

SCORE SHEET
CONSUMER SENSORY TEST (PRODUCT CODE)
Tray number …… NameGender ……
You are presented with coded smoked fish samples.
Please evaluate each sample and rate the sensory attributes from 0 - 9 using the ratings below.
Complete one sample before going on to the next.

9 Like Extremely, 8 Like Very Much, 7 Like Moderately,

6 Like Slightly, 5 Neither Like nor Dislike, 4 Dislike Slightly,
3 Dislike Moderately, 2 Dislike Very Much, 1 Dislike Extremely.

Sample Code

Attributes

Overall Appearance

Colour

Aroma

Taste

Texture

Figure 1. Score sheets for sensory analysis

The serving arrangement used for each member of the sensory panel is shown in Figure ???.

33
Figure ??? Serving Arrangement per Product per Sensory Panel Member

The items needed to conduct the sensory test for the smoked Tilapia and smoked Salmon products on the
panel of 16 Males and 16 Females were:
Item Panel size No of item per member Total
Disposable plates 32 6 192
Disposable cups 32 2 64
Packet of Cream Cracker Biscuit 32 1 32
Bottle of Drinking Water 32 1 32
Packet of Disposable Wipes 32 1 32
Sensory Score Sheet 32 2 64

The results for the sensory attribute for each type of smoked fish was collated separately using the template
below.
Sensory Attribute: Colour
Sample Code
Panel Member
Panellist 1
Panellist 2
Panellist 3
Panellist 4

Panellist 32
Mean score

The mean scores for each sensory attribute of smoked fish type was represented in the form of a column

graph.

A two factor analysis of variance was used to test for differences (α = 0.05) among the scores for samples
and among the scores for panel members.

34
3.4 ANALYSIS OF THE FISH SMOKING PROCESS
3.4.1 Ambient Air Quality
Ambient air quality was monitored every 5 minutes during the smoking process for CO2 (ppm), Total
Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC) (ppm) and Formaldehyde (HCOH) (ppm) emissions using an Indoor
Air Pollution (IAP) meter positioned one foot away from the oven.
Ambient air temperature was recorded every 5 minutes with the aid of a thermometer held one foot away
from the external walls of the oven.

3.4.2 Minimum and Maximum Temperatures of the External Walls of the Oven
The minimum and maximum temperatures at various heights on the external walls of the oven (Figure ???)
were monitored every 5 minutes with an Infrared Thermometer Gun (Version 1150-EN-00) from a distance
of 6 feet (1880 mm) from the oven.
To use the Thermometer Gun for average temperature readings, the STO-CAL and MODE buttons were
pressed together to calibrate the instrument to AVG to read average temperatures. The trigger was
depressed for 10 seconds and the laser pointed at the point of interest. The trigger was released and the
average value displayed on the screen was recorded.

Figure ??? Points for Measuring the Temperature on the External Walls of the Oven

35
3.4.3 Cooking Performance of the Improved Metal Drum Oven
The Cooking Performances of the oven was assessed by measuring the parameters shown in Table ???.
Table ??? Cooking Performance of the Oven
Salmon Salmon Tilapia Tilapia
Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 1 Batch 2
Weight of fresh fish
Weight of smoked fish
Percent moisture loss from smoked fish
Volume of Coconut Shell Liquid Smoke
used for marination
Volume of Coconut Shell Liquid Smoke
left over from marination
Total smoking time
Weight of charred smoked fish
Percentage weight of charred smoked fish

36
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1. ANALYSIS OF SMOKED FISH SAMPLES FOR PHENOLS, CARBONYLS, ACIDS, AND
POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS
4.1.1. pH and Carboxylic Acid Content Expressed as Acetic Acid (mg/mL)

Figure ?? pH and Carboxylic Acid Content of Fish Samples Smoked with Coconut Husk Liquid
Smoke by the Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an Improved Metal Drum Fish
Smoking Oven with Liquid Petroleum Gas

4.1.2. Total Carbonyl Content

Standard Carbonyl Calibration Curve

6
y= 0.5422x + 0.09
82
5
4 R² = 0.9948
Absorban

3
2
1
0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Concentration (mg/ml)

Figure ?? Carbonyl Calibration Curve

37
Y=0.542X +0.0982
X= (Y - 0.0982)/0.542

Figure ?? Total Carbonyl Content of Fish Samples Smoked with Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke by the
Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven with
Liquid Petroleum Gas

4.1.3. Total Phenol Content

12
y=
0.102x + 0.0783
10
R² = 0.9979

8
ABSORBAN

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
CONCENTRATION(ug/ml)

Figure ?? Total Phenol Standard Graph

38
Y= 0.0102X +0.0783
X= (Y- 0.0783)/0.0102

Figure ?? Total Phenol Content of Fish Samples Smoked with Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke by the
Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven with
Liquid Petroleum Gas

4.1.4. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

4.2. ANALYSIS OF THE FISH SMOKING PROCESS

4.1.1. Carbon Dioxide in Ambient Air
CO2 (ppm)
Process Time (Minutes)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
TILAPIA BATCH 1 16 531 235 611 513 507 529 873 731 609 587
TILAPIA BATCH 2 26 530 236 612 513 505 529 873 729 609 578
SALMON BATCH 1 18 599 619 627 705 731 769 837 847 593 655
SALMON BATCH 2 27 578 618 626 704 731 769 837 846 592 654

39
4.1.2. Total Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC) (ppm) in Ambient Air
Process Time (Minutes)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
TILAPIA BATCH 1 0.189 0.189 0.56 0.277 0.123 0.102 0.181 0.158 0.729 0.211 0.16
TILAPIA BATCH 2 0.187 0.187 0.564 0.275 0.123 0.103 0.181 0.158 0.729 0.212 0.17
SALMON BATCH 1 0.286 0.286 0.364 0.453 0.531 0.547 0.59 0.736 0.741 0.848 0.778
SALMON BATCH 2 0.276 0.276 0.363 0.455 0.531 0.548 0.59 0.735 0.731 0.487 0.776

40
4.1.3. Formaldehyde (HCOH) (ppm) in Ambient Air

Process Time (Minutes)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
TILAPIA BATCH 1 0.026 0.026 0.0342 0.038 0.017 0.014 0.025 0.0158 0.096 0.029 0.022
TILAPIA BATCH 2 0.027 0.027 0.0343 0.036 0.019 0.014 0.023 0.0158 0.096 0.029 0.022
SALMON BATCH 1 0.036 0.036 0.058 0.0651 0.073 0.076 0.0812 0.101 0.17 0.134 0.143
SALMON BATCH 2 0.036 0.036 0.058 0.0651 0.072 0.074 0.0813 0.101 0.18 0.135 0.143

4.1.4. Ambient Air Temperature (oC)

Process Time (Minutes)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
TILAPIA BATCH 1 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31
TILAPIA BATCH 2 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31
SALMON BATCH 1 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31
SALMON BATCH 2 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31

41
4.1.5. Mean Temperature on the External Walls of the Oven During the Smoking of Tilapia
Process Time (Minutes)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
Base Unit (Bottom) 16.6 26.1 30.1 33.3 36.8 43 48 39.6 42.9 41.2 47.7
Base Unit (Top) 18 60.9 68.6 80.8 88.9 95.2 93.1 97.5 98 98.1 98.1
Liquid Holding and
71.6 89 111.7 113.9 117 118.6 123.5 132.5 136.4 126.9 128
Draining Pan (Bottom)
Liquid Holding and
20.7 135.4 147.7 153.3 153.7 162 175.5 180.2 173.9 172.1 173.6
Draining Pan (Top)
Smoking Pan 1 (Bottom) 21.4 71.1 129.1 156.4 152.1 163.2 184.5 198.4 199 186.1 205.4
Smoking Pan 1 (Top) 19.4 84.7 125.3 154 144 171.7 194.7 179 171.9 184.5 210.8
Smoking Pan 2 (Bottom) 19.5 56.8 76.6 110 119.4 128 136.5 152.1 162.1 154.7 158.4
Smoking Pan 2 (Top) 20.8 41 64.9 84.9 96.3 106.3 122.9 121.4 127.9 147 124.4
Smoking Pan 3 (Bottom) 21.5 35.4 54.8 88.2 89 115.5 121.6 111.3 123.7 124.2 117.2
Smoking Pan 3 (Top) 21.9 40.1 70.8 83.2 94.6 108.1 110.3 115.9 132.6 105.9 123.6
Lid 19.5 49.3 69.7 83.5 104.7 109.7 140.7 107.8 134.6 118.5 159.9
Heat Outlet Tube
15.2 19 20 21.2 21.9 22.4 23.9 23.6 24.9 25.2 25
(Bottom)
Heat Outlet Tube (Top) 18.2 23.8 29.1 32.8 38.7 45.6 38.1 40.6 36.8 40.2 41.3

42
43
44
4.1.6. Mean Temperature on the External Walls of the Oven During the Smoking of Salmon
Process Time (Minutes)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70
Base Unit (Bottom) 31 41.6 51.5 50.6 47.8 41.9 42.6 41 41.1 39.2 41
Base Unit (Top) 25.6 62.4 77.1 88.8 92.4 76.3 81.1 82.9 90.6 85.2 81.3
Liquid Holding and
Draining Pan (Bottom) 27 94.4 105.5 118.2 134.4 106.3 96 102 109.3 106.3 105.2
Liquid Holding and
Draining Pan (Top) 26.3 150.4 168.8 184.9 210.1 163.3 149.7 192.4 178.4 185.2 187.1
Smoking Pan 1 (Bottom) 27.8 129.1 152.4 184.4 220 196.3 171.1 191.3 204.4 196 192
Smoking Pan 1 (Top) 27.9 88.6 111.3 127 147 138.3 134.5 170 165.1 177.2 176.5
Smoking Pan 2 (Bottom) 29.2 60.3 88.9 109.5 131.2 122.7 113.7 120.8 126.7 127.7 125.2
Smoking Pan 2 (Top) 29.3 59.2 84.3 92.5 111.8 102.7 108.6 102.2 111.6 115.6 114.5
Smoking Pan 3 (Bottom) 28.4 62.4 86.2 106.7 124.3 113.3 116.5 129.5 132.5 137.5 136.5
Smoking Pan 3 (Top) 28.5 66.3 83.8 82 106.9 85.9 95.6 110.7 116 122.5 121.8
Lid 27.3 52 110.4 141.8 140.9 119.3 117.9 100.9 113.5 130.8 129.6
Heat Outlet Tube
(Bottom) 29.7 42.3 43.4 41.6 43.2 43.2 36.7 40.5 40.3 45.3 44.2
Heat Outlet Tube (Top) 24.5 32.1 37.8 31.5 42.7 38.6 35.1 34.9 30.6 40.9 39.5

45
46
4.1.7. Cooking Performances of the Oven
Fish Samples
Salmon Salmon Tilapia Tilapia
Parameters Batch 1 Batch 2 Batch 1 Batch 2
Weight of fresh fish (g) 344.3 416.0 283.7 311.5
Weight of smoked fish (g) 238.9 284.2 190.4 189.1
Percent moisture loss from smoked fish 30.6 31.7 32.9 39.3
Volume of Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke used for
641.5 641.5 600.0 600.0
marination (mL)
Volume of Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke left after
600.0 600.0 570.0 570.0
marination (mL)
Volume of Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke uptake by
41.5 41.5 30.0 30.0
the fish from marination (mL)
Liquid Smoke Uptake Capacity from Marination
8.3 10.0 9.5 10.4
(g/mL)
Percent Liquid Smoke Marination Capacity (mL/g) 12.05 9.98 10.57 9.63
Total Smoking Time (minutes) 65 65 70 70
Weight of Charred smoked fish (g) 0 0 0 0
Percent weight of Charred smoked fish 0 0 0 0

47
Liquid Smoke Uptake Capacity (g Fresh Fish Marinated/mL Liquid Smoke Absorbed)

48
Percent Liquid Smoke Marination Capacity (mL Liquid Smoke Absorbed / Fresh Fish Marinated)

The lower the Percent Liquid Smoke Marination Capacity the more effective is the Liquid smoke in
marinating the fish. In this study, the amount of Liquid smoke absorbed by the fish through marination was
9.63 – 12.05 % the weight of the fish. This shows how economical it was to use the Liquid-smoke
marination method to smoke the Salmon and Tilapia.

Unlike in the FTT and other systems used for fish smoking, in the system used in this study, the
consumption of harvested fuelwood is non-existent, resulting in no pressure on forest resources
(Mindjimba, 2020).

49
In the system used in this study, waste plant biomass is used for the production of smoke which then

50
undergoes processing, purification and standardisation. This is completely separate from the fish smoking
process.
The wood species and the type of fuel used greatly influence the chemical composition of the smoke during
combustion. For example, softwoods such as rubber wood although relatively abundant, produce smoke
which has very high PAH contents. Softwoods are therefore not suitable for fish smoking and are to be
avoided (Mindjimba, 2020).
The system used in this study can make use of the abundant supply of softwoods to produce liquid smoke,
because in the Liquid smoke production system, PAHs are removed to make the Liquid smoke solution safe
for food processing.

4.3. SENSORY ANALYSIS OF THE SMOKED FISH SAMPLES

Figure ??? Mean Scores (Males and Females) for the Sensory Attributes of Salmon Samples Smoked
with Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke by the Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an
Improved Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven with Liquid Petroleum Gas

51
Figure ??? Mean Scores (Males) for the Sensory Attributes of Salmon Samples Smoked with
Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke by the Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an Improved
Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven with Liquid Petroleum Gas

Figure ??? Mean Scores (Females) for the Sensory Attributes of Salmon Samples Smoked with
Coconut Husk Liquid Smoke by the Liquid Smoke Marination Smoking Method in an Improved
Metal Drum Fish Smoking Oven with Liquid Petroleum Gas

52
53
1

54
 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

4.3.1 The mean scores of smoked Salmon and Tilapia and the
results of Analysis Variance (ANOVA) on their sensory
characteristics was discussed in the succeeding pages:

4.3.2 Mean scores of Smoked Salmon

Table 1 showed the preference test of total mean scores of

smoked Salmon. It was revealed that in terms of taste and texture,
Salmon 1 and Salmon 2 were more acceptable than market
sample. In terms of color, aroma, and overall appearance there
was no significant difference. This meant that color, aroma and
overall appearance were not affected by the liquid smoke used for
Salmon 1 and 2 or the type of wood used for the market sample.

The mean scores of taste and texture for Salmon 1 and Salmon 2
was higher than the mean scores market sample as well as was
the highest peak of all the sensory attributes (Figure 13)

Hence, the graph showed that the most preferred smoked Salmon
were Salmon 1 and 2 in terms of taste and texture.

55
4.3.3 Analysis of Variance on the different sensory attributes
of smoked Salmon

Analysis of Variance was used to differentiate the actual sensory

attributes of smoked Salmon. T-test and Post-hoc analysis were
used to determine which of the samples were more acceptable.

Table 4 – Table 8 showed the results of ANOVA to determine the

significant difference among treatments. As revealed in the data,
P> 0.05 for color, aroma, taste and overall appearance were of no
significant difference in means between the three samples.
Texture was significantly different (P<0.05) . This result
indicated that, texture of smoked Salmon 1(8.10) and Salmon 2
(8.03) were significantly higher as compared to market
sample(7.47) in Table 1.

Market sample was the least acceptable and preferred choice in

terms of texture for the panelists due to the type of wood used and
conditions under which fish was smoked.

4.3.4 Mean scores of Smoked Tilapia

Table 9 showed the total mean scores of smoked Tilapia. The

data showed that overall appearance and texture of market sample
56
was not acceptable by panelists. It was revealed that, the type of
wood used might have affected the appearance and texture. The
mean scores also showed that the texture and overall appearance
was rated like moderately with the rating 7.13 and 7.23
respectively for market sample.

Generally, the results showed that the use of liquid smoke or

wood was accepted by the sensory panelists as good smoked
enhancers. Furthermore, at a glance on Table 9, Salmon 1 and
Salmon 2 were the most acceptable as compared to the control
(market sample).

Figure 16 showed that the mean scores of Tilapia 2 (7.80) were

relatively higher for taste and overall appearance as compared to
the other sensory attributes. This may be due to smoked Tilapia 2
with more concentrated amount of liquid smoke as compared to
Tilapia 1 and market sample, hence affected the taste and
appearance which made it to be more of acceptable and preferred
smoked Tilapia among the samples.

4.3.5 Analysis of Variance on the different sensory attributes

of smoked Tilapia

Analysis of Variance was used to differentiate the actual sensory

57
 attributes of smoked Salmon. T-test and Post-hoc analysis were
used to determine which of the samples were more acceptable.

As reflected in Table 12, 13 and 14 respectively, the general

acceptability indicated that color, aroma and taste recorded higher
values P>0.05 respectively. Therefore there was no significant
difference among the three samples. It showed that, sample mean
scores were of no difference. This implied that smoking Tilapia
with liquid smoke were similar to the use of wood for market
sample which indicates the quality of smoked Tilapia.

Texture and appearance in Table 15 and Table 16 showed that

samples were of significant difference. Sensory panels rated
market sample like moderately (7.13 and 7.23) as compared to
Tilapia (7.77 and 7.73) and Tilapia 2 (7.70 and 7.80) respectively.

4.3.6 Effect of the type of smoking kiln on sensory attributes

of the sensory attributes of smoked fish .

The differences I’m texture and appearance of the two fish

samples could be as a result of the different treatment method
used. The modified drum kiln is covered all round and there was
no room for un-uniform fire control while the traditional mud kiln
is open on one side was affected by the wind and there was the
58
effect of the wind on the fire from all sides. Color formation in
smoke fish involve a reaction of carbonyls in the smoke vapor
phase with the amino groups on the fish surface (Foster et al.,
1991).

The texture impacted on the fish was as a result of the heat

generated from the wood which dehydrates the fish (Eyo, 2001).
The intense smoke production during the smoking from different
smoking kilns produced different effects on the texture and
appearance of smoked Salmon and Tilapia and these differences
could easily be appreciated by the consumer whose assessment
inevitably determines the marketability of the smoked fish.

59
 CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1. CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that the sensory properties of coconut husk liquid smoked Salmon and Tilapia are not
significantly different (p>0.05) from those of traditionally smoked Salmon and Tilapia. Smoked fish
samples were therefore accepted

5.2. RECOMMENDATIONS

5.2.1 Policy

1. The Ministry of Fisheries and Aquaculture Development (MOFAD), National Fish Processors and Traders
Association (NAFPTA) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should adopt and popularize the metal
oil oven drum smoker. The cost of construction of the kiln could be subsidized to make them more affordable
and attractive to fishmongers.
60
 2. Fishmongers should be trained in healthy fish handling, processing and storage and also on the use and
maintenance of the kilns.

5.2.2 Research

1. To ascertain if the differences between the metal oil oven drum and traditional drum smoker samples would
be acceptable, a consumer study should be undertaken. The results would help in the education (where
necessary) and commercialization of the products.

2. There should be further PAH studies of liquid smoke and smoked fish using other sources of fuel in oven
smoker. There should also be regular data collection and testing of the samples from the oven smoker to
ensure that they adhere to good manufacturing practices.

3. The potential of liquid smoke on smoked fish using different packaging materials and longer shelf life study
should be explored for fresh, and other smoked fish in Ghana. Consumer education on the benefits of liquid
smoke should also be carried out.

61
 REFERENCES

Ambroise, Ossehin & Gnamba, Corneil & Lydie, Koukougnon & Idriss, Soussou & Yapo, Ossey. (2022).
Clinical Manifestations and Environmental Impact of Fish Smoking Based on Traditional and Improved
Ovens in Marcory Anoumabo (Ivory Coast). Advances in Research. 5-14.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364035777_Clinical_Manifestations_and_Environmental_Impact
_of_Fish_Smoking_Based_on_Traditional_and_Improved_Ovens_in_Marcory_Anoumabo_Ivory_Coast

Isabelly Barbosa de Araújo, Lito Jorge Raúl, Maria Inês Sucupira Maciel, Neide Kazue Sakugawa
Shinohara & Paulo Roberto Campagnoli de Oliveira Filho. (2020). Effect of Traditional and Liquid Smoke
on the Quality of Sea Catfish Sausages (Sciades herzbergii, Bloch, 1794). Journal of Aquatic Food Product
Technology, 29:6, 553-566. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10498850.2020.1774021

Mindjimba, K. (2020). Study on the Profitability of Fish Smoking with FTT-Thiaroye Kilns in Côte
D’ivoire. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome.
https://www.fao.org/3/ca8220en/CA8220EN.pdf

62
APPENDIX: SENSORY ANALYSIS

TOTAL
MARKET
SALMON 1 SALMON 2 SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.67 7.80 7.43
AROMA 7.47 7.50 7.17
TASTE 8.07 7.97 7.53
TEXTURE 8.10 8.03 7.47
OVERALL
7.70 7.60 7.63
APPEARANCE

MALE
MARKET
SALMON 1 SALMON 2 SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.53 7.80 7.53
AROMA 7.27 7.27 6.87
TASTE 8.27 8.07 7.27
TEXTURE 8.13 8.07 7.73
OVERALL
7.40 7.60 7.40
APPEARANCE

FEMALE
MARKET
SALMON 1 SALMON 2 SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.80 7.80 7.33
AROMA 7.67 7.73 7.47
TASTE 7.87 7.87 7.80
TEXTURE 8.07 8.00 7.20
OVERALL
8.00 7.60 7.87
APPEARANCE

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR SALMON

ANOVA: Two-
Factor Without
Replication COLOUR
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 90.9 29 3.1344 5.6931 9.87E-09 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 2.0666 2 1.0333 1.8768 0.162254 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 31.9333 58 0.5505

Total 124.9 89

63
ANOVA: Two-
Factor Without
Replication AROMA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 113.8222 29 3.924904 2.607279 0.000952 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 2.022222 2 1.011111 0.671672 0.514782 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 87.31111 58 1.505364

Total 203.1556 89

ANOVA: Two-
Factor Without
Replication TASTE
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 52.45556 29 1.808812 2.288415 0.00368 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 4.822222 2 2.411111 3.050412 0.055001 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 45.84444 58 0.790421

Total 103.1222 89

ANOVA: Two-
Factor Without
Replication TEXTURE
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 59.06667 29 2.036782 2.680787 0.000698 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 7.266667 2 3.633333 4.782148 0.011957 3.155932 SD Salmon samples
Error 44.06667 58 0.75977

Total 110.4 89

ANOVA: Two-
Factor Without OVERALL
Replication APPEARANCE
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 81.95556 29 2.826054 3.378836 3.95E-05 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 0.155556 2 0.077778 0.092991 0.911337 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 48.51111 58 0.836398

Total 130.6222 89

64
TOTAL
MARKET
TILAPIA 1 TILAPIA 2 SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.33 7.43 7.37
AROMA 7.33 7.43 7.37
TASTE 7.53 7.80 7.57
TEXTURE 7.77 7.73 7.13
OVERALL
7.70 7.80 7.23
APPEARANCE

MALE
MARKET
TILAPIA 1 TILAPIA 2
SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.13 7.20 7.27
AROMA 7.13 7.20 7.27
TASTE 7.40 8.13 7.40
TEXTURE 7.53 7.73 7.40
OVERALL
7.73 7.73 7.20
APPEARANCE

FEMALE
MARKET
TILAPIA 1 TILAPIA 2
SAMPLE
COLOUR 7.53 7.67 7.47
AROMA 7.53 7.67 7.47
TASTE 7.67 7.47 7.73
TEXTURE 8.00 7.73 6.87
OVERALL
7.67 7.87 7.27
APPEARANCE

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS FOR TILAPIA

ANOVA: Two-Factor Without
Replication COLOUR
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 161.8222 29 5.58007 5.8654 5.72E-09 1.6629 SD Panellists
Columns 0.1555 2 0.07777 0.08175 0.9216 3.1559 NSD Salmon samples
Error 55.1777 58 0.95134

Total 217.1555 89

65
ANOVA: Two-Factor Without
Replication AROMA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 161.8222 29 5.580077 5.865485 5.72E-09 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 0.155556 2 0.077778 0.081756 0.921603 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 55.17778 58 0.951341

Total 217.1556 89

ANOVA: Two-Factor Without Replication TASTE

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 82.23333 29 2.835632 1.88177 0.020455 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 1.266667 2 0.633333 0.42029 0.658841 3.155932 NSD Salmon samples
Error 87.4 58 1.506897

Total 170.9 89

ANOVA: Two-Factor Without Replication TEXTURE

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 89.65556 29 3.091571 3.143358 0.000102 1.662901 SD Panellists
Columns 7.622222 2 3.811111 3.874951 0.02633 3.155932 SD Salmon samples
Error 57.04444 58 0.983525

Total 154.3222 89

ANOVA: Two-Factor Without OVERALL

Replication APPEARANCE
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
5.72E- 1.66290 S
Rows 78.62222 29 2.711111 3.286577 05 1 D Panellists
3.15593 S Salmon
Columns 5.488889 2 2.744444 3.326986 0.04287 2 D samples
Error 47.84444 58 0.824904

Total 131.9556 89

66
67