జర్నల్ ఆఫ్ ఫిషరీస్ సైన్సెస్.కామ్

  • జర్నల్ హెచ్-ఇండెక్స్: 30
  • జర్నల్ సిట్ స్కోర్: 25.50
  • జర్నల్ ఇంపాక్ట్ ఫ్యాక్టర్: 21.90
ఇండెక్స్ చేయబడింది
  • అకడమిక్ జర్నల్స్ డేటాబేస్
  • జెనామిక్స్ జర్నల్‌సీక్
  • గ్లోబల్ ఇంపాక్ట్ ఫ్యాక్టర్ (GIF)
  • చైనా నేషనల్ నాలెడ్జ్ ఇన్‌ఫ్రాస్ట్రక్చర్ (CNKI)
  • CiteFactor
  • ఎలక్ట్రానిక్ జర్నల్స్ లైబ్రరీ
  • సెంటర్ ఫర్ అగ్రికల్చర్ అండ్ బయోసైన్సెస్ ఇంటర్నేషనల్ (CABI)
  • రీసెర్చ్ జర్నల్ ఇండెక్సింగ్ డైరెక్టరీ (DRJI)
  • OCLC- వరల్డ్ క్యాట్
  • ప్రాక్వెస్ట్ సమన్లు
  • పబ్లోన్స్
  • మియార్
  • అధునాతన సైన్స్ ఇండెక్స్
  • గూగుల్ స్కాలర్
  • రసాయన సారాంశం
  • షెర్పా రోమియో
  • రహస్య శోధన ఇంజిన్ ల్యాబ్‌లు
  • రీసెర్చ్ గేట్
  • బార్సిలోనా విశ్వవిద్యాలయం
ఈ పేజీని భాగస్వామ్యం చేయండి

నైరూప్య

Post-harvest handling and microbial quality of fish along the value chain in Lake Hawassa

Deribe G, Abdela E, Admneh Dagne, Tsedey A

The objective of the current study was to investigate post-harvest handling and microbial quality of raw fish meat along fish value chain actors. A survey was conducted on 45 fishermen, 45 fish retailers and 45 fish consumers. Apart from observation, raw fish meat samples were collected from the actors that participated during the survey. About 30 samples were collected from fish actors (10 samples from each actor). The results showed that out of the total responses by the fishermen, about 56% have only gillnet while 31% have owned both gillnet and boat. Only 44% of interviewed fishermen had full gutting equipment. On retailers’ side, about 82% of them sell fish directly to consumers in the surrounding of the lake and through door to door service. Plastic containers (58%) and “plastic bag” (26%) were also reported as storage materials. The top two ranked problems mentioned by the fishermen are entry of unlicensed fishermen to the lake (1st) and gillnet stealing (2nd) whereas low supply of fish (1st) mainly by retailors side. The fish consumers buy fish from the lakeside (96%), hotel and restaurant (36%) and door to door sellers (24%). There was non-significant difference (p>0.05) in the total count of coli-form and Ecoli in raw fish samples between fishermen, fish retailers and fish consumers. Total bacterial count of raw fish meat sampled from fishermen, fish retailers and fish consumers was 2.55cfu/ml, 2.34cfu/ml and 1.88cfu/ml, respectively. So, the result indicated that there was no significant difference between fisherman and fish retailers but both have shown statistically significant difference with the fish consumers. Similarly, significance difference was observed for salmonella count between fishermen (1.97cfu/ml) and fish consumers (1.27cfu/ml). The count of salmonella along all actors are below the recommended standard (per 25ml dilution) though higher count was found in samples collected from consumers than fishermen. Generally, the fishermen and fish retailers used inappropriate fishing, processing and storage materials that have contributed to the increased bacterial load and resulted in deterioration of the quality of fish. Thus awareness creation on hygienic handling of fish, introduction of improved handling and processing equipment are required.

నిరాకరణ: ఈ సారాంశం ఆర్టిఫిషియల్ ఇంటెలిజెన్స్ టూల్స్ ఉపయోగించి అనువదించబడింది మరియు ఇంకా సమీక్షించబడలేదు లేదా నిర్ధారించబడలేదు