chain of custody of fish marketed in...

http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/index.asp 279 [email protected]

International Journal of Management (IJM)

Volume 7, Issue 3, March-April 2016, pp.279–292, Article ID: IJM_07_03_026

Available online at

http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=3

Journal Impact Factor (2016): 8.1920 (Calculated by GISI) www.jifactor.com

ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510

© IAEME Publication

CHAIN OF CUSTODY OF FISH MARKETED

IN COCHIN CITY: SAFETY AND QUALITY

ISSUES

Sameera Shamsudheen and Alappat Ramachandran

School of Industrial Fisheries,

Cochin University of Science and Technology,

Fine Arts Avenue, Kochi-22, Kerala, India

ABSTRACT

Chain of custody starts with a producer and ends with the ultimate

consumer involving a number of intermediaries in between. The involvement

of these marketing intermediaries provides services like head loading,

processing, preservation, packaging and transportation of fishes which results

in addition of cost. The present study examines the chain of custody of fish

marketed in Cochin City and its associated safety and quality issues. Among

the data isolated, major intermediaries involved in the fish marketing channels

of Cochin were identified and the role of each intermediary in the chain was

covered in detail. Quality concerns associated with the transportation of fish

from the primary stage to consumers were also examined. In addition,

surveyed landing centres, fishing harbours, wholesale and retail markets were

also monitored for assessing the limitations of infrastructure which could

bring up serious issues in terms of safety and quality. The microbiological

(TPC, MPN) studies performed confirmed the progressive increase in

microbial load as the fish travels from one stage to another. The organoleptic

study (Quality Index Method (QIM)) substantiated the loss in freshness and

quality of the fish as the chain prolonged. It could be concluded that the

seafood products available from domestic markets of Cochin City requires a

strict monitoring according to the standards proposed by authorities like

FSSAI (Food Safety Standards Association of India) so that the public health

should not be challenged by health issues.

Key words: Chain of Custody, Intermediaries, Quality, Safety, FSSAI, QIM

Cite this Article: Sameera Shamsudheen and Alappat Ramachandran. Chain

of custody of fish marketed in Cochin City: Safety and Quality issues.

International Journal of Management, 7(2), 2016, pp. 279–292.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJM/issues.asp?JType=IJM&VType=7&IType=3



INTRODUCTION

Fish is an important source of protein and its harvest, handling, processing and

distribution provide livelihood for millions of people as well as providing valuable

foreign exchange earnings to the country (FAO/WHO, 2010). It is a highly perishable

food, which requires proper and hygienic handling throughout the chain by which it is

marketed to the consumers. The “Chain of Custody” of fish and fishery products can

be defined as the set of measures which is intended to guarantee that the fish product

put on the market is really a product of designated origin and produced from the

assured fishery concerned. The measures include both the tracking/traceability of the

product throughout the processing, distribution and marketing chain, as well as the

proper tracking of the documentation and control of associated quantity (FAO,2012).

The chain of custody starts with a producer and ends with the ultimate consumer

involving a number of intermediaries in between. The involvement of these marketing

intermediaries provides services of head loading, processing, preservation, packaging

and transporting of fishes and these activities results in cost addition at every stage of

marketing (Bishnoi, 2005).

Present study concentrates on the chain of custody of fresh fish marketed in

Cochin City and the associated safety and quality issues. Major intermediaries

involved in fish marketing channels of Cochin were identified as fish traders,

wholesalers, commission agents and retailers. Due to the unhygienic and disordered

transferring of fishes between these intermediaries, there exists possibility for the

occurrence of safety and quality issues to the final product delivered to the consumers

which may result in serious health problems. This study also investigates the role of

concerned authorities in monitoring and rectifying the possible issues correlated to the

chain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Primary data regarding the chain of custody of fish marketed in Cochin City

(Ernakulam district, Kerala state, India) was collected through a questionnaire based

survey (Survey questionnaire design, 2012) conducted from August 2014 to November

2014. For gathering data, several survey techniques were adopted (Table 1).

Table 1 Details of preferred study areas in Cochin City

Si no Sites covered Categories of people interviewed

1.

a.

b

c.

Harbors

Fishing boat owners

Boat crew members

Traders

Intermediaries

Transportation truck drivers

Cochin Fisheries Harbor, Thopumpady

MunambamHarbor

VypinHarbor

2.

I.

Domestic markets

Super markets

Chain of custody of fish marketed in Cochin City: Safety and Quality issues


Si no Sites covered Categories of people interviewed

a.

b.

c.

d.

Mitra Mega Mart- DH Road

Lulu HyperMarket- Edapally

Well Mart- KaloorKathrikadav

AshisSuperMercato- Shanmugam Road

Super market/ retail outlet

owners

Staffs

Intermediaries

Staff appointed in the fish

display counter

II. Fish retail Outlets

a.

b.

c.

Fresh Fish Point , Matsyafed – High Court Road

Kadaloram – Kaloor, Kathrikadav

Cheenavala, Fresh Fish Outlet – Vypin

Fish sellers

Intermediaries

III. Wholesale market

Ernakulam Fish Market

In order to study the safety and quality issues associated with the chain of custody

of fish, microbiological and organoleptic analyses were performed for preferred

samples from harbor, wholesale market and retail outlet. Total plate count (TPC) and

E.coli identification were carried out as per Bacteriological Analytical Methods

proposed by USFDA (2001). Ice samples collected from harbor were tested for the

presence of total faecal coliforms using MPN (Most probable Number) method and

the test was done as per CIFT Laboratory Manual (2006). Quality Index Method

(QIM) was employed for organoleptic analysis of fish (Larsen, Heldbo, Jespersen and

Nielsen, 1992). Data collected from different sources like national/international

reports, academic journals, books, E-Journals, NGO publications and government

records on chain of custody were used as secondary data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The chain of custody of fishes marketed in Cochin City was examined. The results

obtained from the study were discussed with reference to Lakshmanan et al., (1984),

Bishnoi (2005), Rasmussen (2012), and Das et al., (2013) and the results are as

follows (Table 2):



Table 2 Details about different markets surveyed along with available fish products and their

source

Name of the

outlet Category Fish species available Source

Well Mart,

Kaloor

Kathrikadavu

road

Super

Market

with fish

products

Mackerel,Pomfret,GoldSpotMullet,Anchovies,

RedSnapper,Cobia,Sardines,Seefish, Jew Fish

Munambam,

Thopumpady,

Varapuzha

Lulu Hyper

market,

Edapally toll

junction

Hyper

Market

with fish

products

Chilled

White squid Whole, Anchovies, Glass Perch ,

Lizard Fish, sole, Sardine, Mackerel,

Threadfin (b&s), Pearl Spot(b&s), Tilapia,

Silver Belly, Bull Eye, Sea Catla, Reef Cod,

Rohu, Emperor Fish, Pirhana, Butter Fish,

Yellow Emperor, Boal Fish, Little Tuna,

Pomfret, Tarpon Fish, Seer Fish, Barracuda,

Ribbon Fish, Blue Scampi, Tiger Prawn,

White Prawn, Flower Tail Prawn, Oysters and

Mussels.

Steak

King Fish , Tuna, Cobia, Marlin,

Frozen

Fish Fillets, Breaded Products, Crab Stick,

Crab Claw, Fish Fingers, Fish Popcorn,

Lobster Bits

Vypin,

Varapuzha,

Munambam,

Abad Frozen

Food

products,

Amalgam

Seafood

Enterprises

Kadaloram,

Kaloor

Private

Fish Retail

Outlet

Jew Fish, Prawn, Seer Fish, RedSnapper,

Marl Sea Bass, Gold Spot Mullet, Brown

Sweet Lip, Pomfret, Blue Fin Trevally, White

Tailed Silver Bidy, Tilopia, Catla, Pearl Spot,

Mackerel, Sardines, Anchovies, Squid, Crab,

Oysters, Mussels

Munambam,

Poothota

Ashis

Supermercato,

Shanmugham

road, Cochin

Super

Market

with fish

products

Pearl Spot, Blue Fin Trevally, Sardines,

Mackerel, Anchovies, Prawns, (fresh)

All of the above whole cleaned

Thopumpady

Fresh Fish

Point, High

court junction

Govt.

(Matsyfed)

Fish Retail

Outlet

Seer Fish, Pearl Spot, White Tuna, Blue Fin

Trevally, Mackerel, Brown Sweet Lip, Cobia,

Milk Fish, Black Pomfret, White Snapper,

Sardine

Munambam,

Thopumpady

Mitra Mega

Mart, DH road

Super

Market

with

Frozen

Fish

Products

Sardine Cleaned, Seer Fish steak, Jumbo

Shrimp, Pomfret, Coco Shrimp, Curry Shrimp,

Squid Portion, Fish Portion, Fish Fillets,

Breaded Fish Products, Ready to Fry Products,

Anchovies Frozen.

Abad frozen

food

products,

Amalgam

seafood

Enterprises

Cheenavala ,

Kalamukk

,Vypin

Private

Fish Retail

Outlet

Black and white Pomfret, Mackerel, Tuna,

Red Snapper, Pearl Spot, Sardines, Blue Fin

Trevally Horse Mackerel, Silver Belly,

Prawns, Crab, Barracuda, MahiMahi, Ribbon

Fish

Vypin



In this case study, sardines and mackerels were found to have higher consumer

preference with respect to other marketed fishes, since they are cheaper in cost and

easily available irrespective to seasonal occurrence. Hence, more emphasis was given

to the chain of custody of these fishes (Figure 1) rather than the rest.

Figure 1 Chain of Custody of sardine and mackerel

The most employed Chains for transfer of fishes in Cochin City are the following

(Fig 2)

Figure 2 The most employed Chains for transfer of fishes in Cochin City

Table 3, provides details about the role and activities carried out by the major

intermediaries involved in the fish transfer chain.



Table 3 Roles of the Actors involved in the Chain (Kulkarni, 2005)

Fisherman Commission agent Supplier Seller

Input acquirement,

diesel, ice, food, nets,

boat, 6-12 helpers

Receive fish from boat Receive fish from

agent

Receive fish from

supplier

Undertake1-30days

fishing trip

Weigh fish Stock fishes in

crates filled with ice

Washes the fish

Classify fish as per

category

Grade fish as per

defective and non

defective

Sort fishes in 4

grades

Grades and weighs

the fish

Stove the fish in ice Negotiate price with

fishermen and

suppliers

Transfer fish to the

seller

Displays the fish

after icing

Unload the fish on

docks after

preliminary washing

--------------------

Clean the fish

Sells the fish to the

buyers

Negotiate price with

the agent and receive

money

----------------------


agent and the seller


the buyer and

supplier

Major safety issues related to chain of custody of fishes in Cochin City

Fish Handling was not found to be hygienic and disinfected.

Workers not aware of keeping cleanliness and its importance in the quality of the

final product.

The landing site where fish is kept for a long time during auctioning was highly

contaminated and unsanitary.

There was no scheduled cleaning or disinfection of the landing site or fish handling

area.

Ice used for fish storage was very dirty in condition with accumulation of sediment

particles.

Water used for washing fish was filthy and untreated.

Figure 3 Contaminated working deck



Figure 4 Unhygienic premises

Figure 5 Inadequate icing



Figure 6 Filth content in ice used for fish storage

QUALITY ISSUES

The major transfer points in the chain of custody of fresh fishes were identified. The

bacterial load present in the fishes was recognised by carrying out Total Plate Count

(TPC) analysis. Test for presence of specific bacteria entering the fishes through

direct contacts with faecal contents (E.g.Escherichia coli) were accomplished using

T7 agar (Costa, 2013). Ice used for storage of fishes during transfer, was also

subjected to MPN analysis for identifying the microbiological quality (faecal

coliforms) of water used in ice making. Finally organoleptic analysis of 10 separate

samples of fresh fishes collected from harbor and fish market were performed to

substantiate the deterioration in quality of fresh fish before it reaches the consumer.

Microbiological assessment of the samples taken from different transfer

points of the chain

Table no.4 shows the Total plate count (TPC) result of the random samples

collected from harbour, wholesale market and retail outlet respectively.

Microbiological analysis was carried out in Mackerel (Rastrallinger kanagurta) in

order to find out the bacterial load present within. As per the regulation provided by

FSSAI, the bacterial load is not supposed to increase more than 1 X 103cfu/g (FSSAI,

2009) for fresh Mackerel species. But in this case, the samples were found to have

more TPC value than the fixed standard value. Lakshmanan et al., (1984) stated that

the bacterial load increases in fishes due to improper and unhygienic handling as it is

transferred from one point of the chain to another. Out of 3 samples collected, most

amount of bacterial load was found to be in retail outlets (11 x 103cfu/g) in which the

chain of custody was much lengthier including more number of chain actors and

transfer points. From the harbor, fishes were transferred immediately by the

wholesalers where it was kept in custody of the wholesalers without proper icing for

more than 2 hours which is a major issue for bacterial load. Transfer of fishes from

wholesalers to retailers was also subjected to time consumption. Absence of hygienic

handling also accounted as a major factor for the increase in bacterial load.



Table 4 Total plate count of analysed samples

Sample No. Source TPC/gmcfu/g Mean Standard

Deviation

1 Harbor 8.1 x 103 8.1 8.1 ± 0.1

2.5 x 103 2.4 2.4 ± 0.1

1.4 x 103 1.3 1.4 ± 0.05

2 Wholesale market 3 x 103 3.1 3 ± 0.1

1.3 x 103 1.2 1.3 ± 0.1

1 x 103 1.1 1 ± 0.1

3 Retail outlet 11 x 103 11.1 11 ± 0.1

5 x 103 5.1 5 ± 0.1

3 x 103 3.1 3 ± 0.05

Table 5, shows the results of identification of E. coli from the analysed samples

(Rastrallinger kanagurta, sample used for TPC analysis). The results illustrated that

the fishes landed in harbour were found to have E. coli, which might have got in the

fish either due to careless and unhygienic handling or from direct contact with faecal

matters. Costa (2013) evidently indicates that this specific bacterium enters the raw

fish from the surroundings which were found to be contaminated with faecal matter.

Since the fishes after auctioning was immediately iced by the agents, E. coli was

found to be absent in samples from both the markets (as per Costa (2013) E. coli

shows 95% reduction in iced condition).

Table 5 Identification of E. coli

Sample

number Date of sampling Source of sample Result

1 20/11/14 Fishing harbour Positive (dark yellow

centered colonies present)

2 24/11/14 Fish wholesale market Negative

3 27/11/14 Fish retail outlet Negative

Table 6, gives the results of analysis (MPN) of ice sample collected from harbour.

The analysis was carried out with reference to Surendran et al., (2006). The result

provided above positively demonstrates the presence of faecal coliforms in the ice

used frequently for fish storage in harbor. This can be quality issue related to the

fishes sold in markets. If the ice used for fish storage is not clean, there is a high

chance of fish getting contaminated and it also will affect the safety of the people

consuming it. The results were compared with Sudhanadh et al., (2011).



Table 6 Results of analysis of ice sample collected from harbour

Organism

cultural response

Inoculum

(CFU) Growth Acid Gas

Enterobacteraerogenes

ATCC 13048

50-100 luxuriant Positive reaction Positive

reaction

Esterichia coli

ATCC 25922


reaction

Klesbsiella pneumonia

ATCC 12011


reaction

Proteus mirabilis

ATCC 25933

50-100 luxuriant Negative reaction Negative

reaction

Salmonella choleraesuis ATCC

12011

50-100 Fair to good Negative reaction Negative

reaction

Staphylococcus aureus >= 103 Inhibited ------------------------ -----------

Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 29212

50-100 None-poor Positive reaction Negative reaction

Organoleptic assessment

Table 7 Quality assessment scheme used to identify the quality index demerit score (Larsen

et al., 1992)

Quality parameter Character Score

Skin Bright, shining 0

Bright 1

Dull 2

Bloodspot on gill cover None 0

Small 1

Big 2

Very big 3

Stiffness Stiff in rigor mortis 0

General appearance Elastic 1

Firm 2

Soft 3

Belly Firm 0

Soft 1

Belly burst 2

Smell Fresh, seaweed/metallic 0

Neutral 1

Musty/sour 2

Stale meat/rancid 3

Clarity Clear 0

Cloudy 1

Eyes Shape Normal 0

Plain 1

Sunken 3



Quality parameter Character Score

Gills Color Characteristic red 0

Faded discolored 1

Smell Fresh, seaweed/metallic 0

Neutral 1

Sweaty/slightly rancid 2

Sour stink/stale, rancid 3

Sum of scores (min. 0 and max. 20)

Table 8 Results of organoleptic assessment of random samples observed from harbor

SAMPLE NUMBER QUALITY

PARAMETER CHARACTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

GENERAL

APPEARANCE SKIN 0 1 0 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

BLOOD SPOT ON

GILL COVER 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1

STIFFNESS 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1

BELLY 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1

SMELL 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0

EYES CLARITY 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1

SHAPE 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1

GILLS COLOUR 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0

SMELL 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 SUM OF SCORES 9 9 4 8 6 5 10 9 7 6

Table 9 Results of organoleptic assessment of random samples observed from fish markets

SAMPLE NUMBER

QUALITY

PARAMETER

CHARACTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

GENERAL

APPEARANCE

SKIN 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2

BLOOD SPOT ON

GILL COVER 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1

STIFFNESS 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1

BELLY 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

SMELL 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1

EYES CLARITY 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1

SHAPE 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

GILLS COLOUR 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

SMELL 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

SUM OF SCORES 11 12 8 10 8 8 9 9 8 10

Table 8 and 9 shows the results obtained from the organoleptic assessment of

random samples collected from harbor and retail outlets respectively. Jonsdottir

(1992) substantiates that evident deterioration in fresh fish quality can be noticeably

revealed using QIM. Out of the maximum score taken as 20, the harbour results were

found to be more acceptable than the retail outlet samples. In the harbour the samples,

maximum score came as 10 and least as 6. But in the case of retail outlets the

maximum came as 12 and minimum as 8. This variation clearly shows the

deterioration of quality of fish as it passes through different transfer point before it

reaches the outlet.



CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Fresh fishes which appear to be in good and healthy condition in the market display

are not healthy and safe as it seems. The stated factor was confirmed and proved

through surveys in specific sites and microbiological, organoleptic analysis done from

selected samples. Even though proper cooking of fish and addition of natural

preservatives before consumption reduces the risk of causing related diseases to a

certain level, carelessness shown by the people associated with fish catching,

marketing and handling may result in serious health issues. The quality and safety

problem arises right from the beginning step that is fish catching. Fish caught will be

already having bacterial load due to the highly polluted water bodies which is further

increased by the unhygienic handling done by the fishermen as well as the

contaminated surface to which fish comes in contact after catching. The

contamination is well increased as it passes through a long chain of custody before it

reaches finally to the consumer. Correction should be done for the prevention of

hazards in the following steps of the chain as recommended below.

Role of FSSAI in ensuring Safety of fresh fish/fish products available in

domestic markets

The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has been established

under Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 for ensuring the safety of the consumers.

All the eatables like fruits, vegetables, meat products including fish, dairy products,

processed products, semi processed and ready to eat products comes under the

consideration of FSSAI. All the eatable products available in Indian market meant for

sale should have FSSAI registration. They are found to take action against almost all

the food products both exporting and importing, but they give least importance to the

domestic fish products available in local fish markets. In Cochin City the FSSAI

district office is located at Thripunithura (Ernakulam, Kerala, India). As per the

information provided by the officials in the office, the safety and quality issues

concerned with the fresh and chilled seafood products available in the domestic

markets in the City are not coming under the concern of FSSAI. They are not taking

any initiative in monitoring the conditions prevailing in the harbors and in other

specific parts of the distribution chain. They do not adopt any initiative in preventing

the possibility of occurrence of safety and quality issues associated with the

consumption of fresh and chilled seafood products. From the study conducted, it

could be analysed that the seafood products available in domestic markets of Cochin

City is not safe for consumption as it may cause serious health issues in future to the

consumers. The authority under which the fresh fishes come under is FSSAI so the

authority should try to bring under consideration the problems associated with the

distribution chain of fresh fishery products so that any possibility for occurrence of

any disease outbreaks or any other health issues can be prevented before it occurs.

The authority should also try to train the people associated with the distribution chain

on importance of keeping personnel cleanliness and about the possible hazards which

may arise due to careless handling, delay in icing or due to use of untidy ice for fish

and shell fish storage. The Local Self Government also has the responsibility to

properly maintain the infrastructure required for marketing fish with good quality for

domestic consumption. This fact must be seriously considered and proper action

should be taken to ensure the safety of the consumers.



Table10 The fish passes through different transfer points before it finally reaches the

consumer. Here we have a summary of what can go wrong at each of handling steps:

Handling step Potential danger Source of danger

Water body to landing site Growth of bacteria

Contamination

Bruises

Expose to sun and wind

Leaking of boat

Rough handling

Prolonged stay of fish in nets

At landing site Growth of bacteria

Contamination

Delayed icing

Landing site water

Insulated container Contamination

Growth of bacteria

Fish crushing

Poor drainage

Transportation with cargo

Improper drainage

Poor insulation of containers

High mechanical load

Standing on fish

Insulated truck Growth of bacteria

Fish crushing

Delayed re-icing

Poor insulation of truck

Improper icing

Mechanical load

At market Substandard quality fishes Delayed off loading

Poor inspection

Table 11 Suggestions for improvement of operations in the chain which relates to quality and

safety and their supposed effects

Supposed effects

Suggestions Maintain

freshness

Match

buyers

need

Contributes to

assessment of

quality

Fewer complaints Saves time

Excess ice in all

boxes at auction *

Use of slush ice for

chilling onboard,

more chilling

*

Low temperature in

auction hall *

Shorter fishing trips *

Improvement of

catch handling at sea *

No mixing of fish of

different freshness

categories during

auction

* *

More careful quality

assessment by

collectors

* * * *

QIM at auction *

Division of freshness

category A into

subcategories

*



REFERENCES

[1] Bishnoi and Tanuj Kumar. (2005). Marketing of Marine Fisheries, Sonali

Publications, NewDelhi, 74-76.

[2] Costa,R (2013) Escherichia coli in seafood: A brief overview. Advances in

Bioscience and Biotechnology, 4, 450-454.

[3] Das, A., Upadhyay, A., Kumar, N., Prakash, S., Debnath, B., Datta, M .(2013).

Marketing Profile of Selected Fish Markets of Tripura. Agricultural Economics

Research Review. 26, 115-120.

[4] FAO Committee on Fisheries. (2012). Traceability best practice guidelines, Sub

Committee of Fish Trade. Thirteenth Session, Hyderabad. India. COFI: FT. XIII,

5-13.

[5] FAO/WHO. (2010). Assuring Food Safety and Quality: Guidelines For

Strengthening National Food Control System, 13-25.

[6] Food Safety Standards and Regulations (2009).Food Safety Standards Authority

of India. http://www.fssai.gov.in//

[7] Jonsdottir.S. (1992). Quality index method and TQM system. In: Olafsson R,

Ingthorsson AH, editors. Quality issues in the fish industry. Reykjavik: The

Research Liaison Office, Univ. of Iceland, 81-94.

[8] Kulkarni,P. (2005). The Marine Seafood Export Supply Chain in India: Current

State and Influence of Import Requirements. Consumer Unity and Trust Society

(CUTS), IISD, http://www.iisd.org//

[9] Lakshamanan,P., Mathen,C., Varma,P., Iyer,T. (1984) Assessment of Quality of

Fish Landed at the Cochin Fisheries Harbour. Fishery Technology, 45-54.

[10] Larsen,E., Heldbo,J., Jespersen, C.M and Nielsen, J. (1992) Development of a

method for quality assessment of fish for human consumption based on sensory

evaluation. Elsvier Science Publishers, 351-358.

[11] Rasmussen, M (2012) A study of traceability and quality assurance in fish supply

chains. DTU National Food Institute. PhD Thesis, 48-62.

[12] Sudhanandh,V., Shibu,R ., Ajimon,V., Babu,N (2011)Water quality effects of

harbour activities assessed with integrated ecotoxicological parameters in Kerala,

India. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology.11 :924-932

[13] Surendran,P., Thampuran,V., Nambiar,N and Lalitha,K .(2006). Laboratory

Manual on Microbilogical Examination of Seafood.Central Institute of Fisheries

Technology, IInd

Edition, 38-49.

[14] Survey questionnaire design (2012) Fair fax county department of neighborhood

and community services, 4-54.

[15] Jasbin Bino.P and Dr.R.Radhika. Impact of Fishing Harbour on The Living

Conditions of Fishermen In Muttom Kanyakumari District. International Journal

of Management, 6(3), 2015, pp. 96–105.

[16] K. R. Chidambaram and T. Mohan. A Review Strategy on Tropical Coast Marine

Fishes for Its Reproduction. International Journal of Advanced Research in

Management, 6(3), 2015, pp. 63–67.

[17] Ramasamy Kumaresan, Ramasamy Ezhilrani, Krishnan Vinitha, Periyakarupan

Sivaraman, Ramanujam Jayaraman. Research Trends In Fish Stock Assessment

During 1999 - 2013: A Scientometrics Study. International Journal of Library

and Information Science, 3(2), 2014, pp. 24–36

[18] U.S. Food & Drug Administration (2001).Bacteriological analytical manual.

Center for Food Safety & Applied Nutrition, 136- 141.

http://www.fssai.gov.in/

chain of custody of fish marketed in...

Documents