A COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT OF THE POST-HARVEST HANDLING

PRACTICES IN THE LOCAL FISH MARKET: A CASE STUDY IN

BAROBO, SURIGAO DEL SUR PROVINCE, PHILIPPINES

An Undegraduate Thesis
Presented to the Faculty
Member of the
DAVAO DEL NORTE STATE COLLEGE
Panabo City, Davao del Norte

In partial Fulfilment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
of
MASTER IN FISHERIES
MANAGEMENT

JANETH F. BARRIOS

September 2023
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Barobo is a coastal municipality with booming tourist industry, growing

population and commerce (Inocente and Bacosa, 2022). It is abundant of fishery

products and catches from the adjacent coastal communities are sold in the local

market while older people tend to eat more seafood (De Perlinghi, 2018).

According to FAO (2015), Caraga and Westen Visayas recorded the highest fish

consumption of which both stood at 46.7kg per capita per year. Since seafood is

a nutrient rich food containing high quality protein, long chain polyunsaturated

fatty acids, vitamins and minerals (Kris-Etherton et al., 2002), it is highly

perishable and freshness is considered an important indicator of fish quality

(Garavand et al., 2020). The effect of handling fish products from harvesting to

storing must be considered because contamination may exist (Chintagari, 2017;

Li et al., 2017). FAO define spoiled fish as "food waste" because it is discarded

and become unsafe for human consumption.

According to Keerthana et al. (2022), the Post-Harvest Fisheries Losses

(PHFL) is 35% of the total annual production both from aquaculture and capture

fisheries. To reduce the loss, Rumape et al. (2022) stated that in order to

preserve the textural, sensory and nutritional value of fish products is through

optimal chilling and freezing. Because the temperature conditions determine the

risk potential, shelf life and quality under Good Manufacturing Practices and

Good Hygiene Practices (GMPs and GHPs) (Koutsoumanis et al., 2005; Codex

Alimentarius, 2009; Ninan, 2018). There are factors that affect the frozen storage
shelf life such as condition of fish at time of catch, handling, processing and

product development, packaging and glazing and transportation techniques

(Ninan, 2018; Gram and Huss, 1996). If not handled properly, the microbes grow

and produces many off-odors and off-flavor compounds including

hydroxylamine, biogenic amines (BA), ketones, aldehydes, alcohols, and organic

acids (Ghaly et al., 2010; Jay, 1986).

To produce safe to eat seafoods and post-harvest losses, handlers and

consumers should focus on limiting exposure to bacteria through proper handling

to minimize the risks from pathogens because poor handling practices, cross‐

contamination, and lack of proper temperature control can lead to foodborne

illness (Gall, 1992). Speeding up the rate of thermal transfer in chilling and

freezing of fish immediately after catching suppresses biochemical processes,

slows or stops the development of microorganisms, reduces mass exchange and

wastage, preserves the natural properties of the cellular tissue of the fish (Fikiin,

1992) and post-harvest losses in fisheries can be avoided.

The consumer plays a vital role in mitigating PHFL and in satisfying the

expectations through setting standards in buying fishery products by simply using

the sensory characteristics for food acceptance and preferences (Siret &

Issanchou, 2000). However, it is observed that most of the local market in the

Philippines are not applying “the food code” for fresh fishery products set by

Codex Alimentarius (2022) and Philippine National Standards (BFS, 2021). On

the other hand, it is observed that the fish vendors in the local fish market of

Barobo, Surigao del Sur does not follow the said standards. Thus, it is necessary
to find out the local practices of the fish handlers, vendors and consumers

perception on the quality of the product compared to its price. The degradation of

the product quality which result to post-harvest losses and measure the efforts of

Municipal Local Government Unit (MLGU) of Barobo in strengthening the

policies related to post-harvest practices.

Objectives of the Study

Generally, the study aims to comprehensively assess the post-harvest

handling practices in the local fish market of Barobo, Surigao del Sur. Specifically

it aims to:

1. Investigate the local practices in post-harvest handling of fish and fishery

products in the local fish market of Barobo, Surigao del Sur.

2. Determine the average monthly value of fish losses due to poor post-harvest

handling practices.

3. Evaluate the perceptions of the consumers on the prize of the fishery

products compared to its quality.

Conceptual Framework

VARIABLES

Independent Variables Dependent

Variables

 Post-Harvest handling  Fish Spoilage

practices

Figure 1. The schematic presentation of the study.

Significance of the Study

The fundamental of conducting this study is to provide valuable insights in

post-harvest handling practices that other practitioners can learn. This is an eye

opener to the local policy makers to solve the undiscussed issues related to

proper post-harvest handling of fishery products in order to provide adequate

knowledge and awareness to the handlers to provide safe and quality products

which are free from contaminations and pathogenic microbes. It encourages the

new local fish handlers, fishermen, and fish farmers to follow the set standards in

handling perishable goods and learn the risk from traditional practice to provide

high quality fishery products and to the consumers to be keen and evaluate the

fishery products before buying. The result of the study can also be used by the

local government to review their regulations and policies to manage the fishery

resources and rights of the consumers for a sustainable utilization of the

resources.

Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study will be conducted in the local fish market of Barobo Surigao del

Sur to investigate the post-harvest handling of fish and fishery products and

perception of the customers on practices of the fish handlers and the satisfaction

of consuming fishery products from the local market. The survey will be

conducted using a semi-structured questionnaire to the supplier of fish, fish

vendors and customers from October to November 2023. All of the fish handlers

in the local market and random customers age 18 and above will be the

respondents. The collection of qualitative data will be carried out through focus
group discussions using semi-structured interviews while collection of

quantitative data involve the number of kilos and price drop of low-quality fish

and fishery products.

Definition of Terms

Assessment – investigate the usual practices of fish handlers in Barobo fish

market.

Comprehensive – deep and careful analysis of the practices and standard for

post-harvest handling of fish.

Customers – a person that purchase fish and fishery products for food business

or family consumptions.

Fish market – a place in Barobo where fish and fishery products are sold from

the municipal and small-scale commercial fishers.

Fish traders – any person engage in selling fish in barter or for profit.

Fisherman – the one that catch and supplies fish and other fishery products in

the local market.

Fishery products – other aquatic resources such as crabs, prawn, sea

cucumber, blue crab and others rather than fish.

Fresh fish – a newly caught fish with its characteristic like fresh odor, bright

color, clear eyes, intact scales etc.

Post-harvest losses - the loss of value of fish and fishery products due to loss

of freshness means.
Post-Harvest handling – is the treatment applied to the fish after being catch or

harvested through chilling, icing or freezing.

 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Small scale Fisheries

According to Campbell & Ward (2004), Small scale fisheries were listed as

one of the world's poorest classes by the International Fund for Agricultural

Development (IFAD) in 1992. This was obviously a large generalization that

failed to account for the substantial difference in poverty in the sector across the

world. It did, However, shine a spotlight on the often-overlooked people who work

in small-scale fisheries and contribute significantly to local food security. Since in

1992, however, the profile of the poor in fisheries has risen and poverty in the

sector has become better understood, especially on the capture side. Poverty in

the most harvest market, on the other hand, is often overlooked.

Small scale fisheries produced more than half of the world's total fish.

Many millions of people, particularly in the developing countries, rely on the

sector for food, income and jobs. Despite their value for poverty reduction and

food security. Small scale fisheries face several challenges, including overfishing

illicit, unreported and illegal (IUU) fishing, conflict with industrial fisheries and

high levels of post-harvest fisheries loss. Due to the diversity of species. Fishing

gear and methods, as well as the numerous scattered inaccessible landing sites

including post-harvest, fish loses and small-scale fisheries is not easy. A variety

of goods, lengthy of fragment fish distribution chains, and the presence of several

different types of stakeholders, social economic factors such as poverty,

expertise and information, access to resources, culture, and traditions add to the

complexity (Diei-Ouadi & Mngawe, 2011).

Moreover, as cited by the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center

in Southeast Asia, small-scale fisheries are the primary sources of fish

accounting for more than 75% of all fish eaten. For millions of poor people, this is

their last chance at earning a living. Traditionally, the traditional fish products

industry has been dominated by small and medium enterprises, which are family-

owned businesses with limited mechanization.

Post-harvest losses

The study of Medes et al. (2016) revealed that to fraud the consumers

expectations such as buying an octopus is to allow it to absorb water so that the

consumer will tend to buy the product even at a high price. The unprocessed

octopus will absorb water which increases its weight from 32-49%. Increasing of

water content will also increase the microbial activity if not chilled or freeze

properly. This malpractice of the fish traders will deceive the consumers while

increasing their income. It is important is to determine and provide information

and education campaign to increase the knowledge of the costumers of fishery

products and other deceptive practices of the seafood business operators.

According Alam (2010), low quality seafood and fish products are a major

source of concern for food security and Environmental health as well as a

significant source of financial loss for small scale processors and fish dealers

year after year. Coastal barangay communities, ethnic groups, and mainly inland
communities depends solely in fishing, fish trading and manufacturing for their

livelihoods. As a result, it was thought that assessing post-harvest losses of fish

and judging the adequacy of conventional fish handling and processing methods

was essential in order to establish appropriate lost control interventions and close

the gap between supply and demand for fish and fish products.

Biochemical and microbiological spoilage changes that occur in fish after

deaths are frequently the cause of post-harvest fish losses. A live fish has built in

defense mechanisms that help keep it from spoiling. When a fish dies, however,

it defense mechanisms are disabled and enzymatic, oxidative and

microbiological spoilage begin to degrade the quality of the fish. Thus, several

factors influence the rate of the fish spoilage, which includes: time, temperature,

abuse and poor handling practices (Diei-Ouadi & Mgawe, 2010).

According to Getu et al. (2015), because of the quality degradation, post-

harvest fish loss (PHFL) refers to fish that are either discarded or sold at a low

price. Fish operators (fishers, producers, retailers, and other players involved in

fisheries) lose future revenue as a result of this. It also means that customers

have less access to fish or are provided with low-quality fish and fish products. In

addition, since fish is such a perishable product, it is prone to high post-harvest

losses. In the fishing industry, both physical (material) and quality losses are

common. And this translates to a decrease in the nutritional value of fish in the

overall diet as well as population health.

Types of PHL

Physical, nutritional, and economic losses make a food commodity

unavailable or nutritionally deficient for human consumption (Cheka and Ward,

1998; Obodai et al., 2009; Entee, 2015). Material losses of caught fish due to

spoilage, grading, scale breakage, by-catch discards, and operating losses are

all examples of these losses in fisheries and aquaculture (Tesfay and Teferi,

2017) as cited by Maulu et.al (2020).

Physical losses can be quantified in terms of weight and/or monetary

value. To put it another way, a physical loss translates into a financial loss. Fish

quality degradation prior to landing has a detrimental impact on market value;

therefore, declines in post-harvest fisheries are considered (Montojo et al., 2020).

It’s the sum of money that the owner would have got if the fish hadn’t been

thrown away. Quality losses, is the difference between the possible value of a

fish or fish commodity if there had been no deterioration (best quality) and the

real value of the fish after it had changed due to spoilage (lower quality) and

been sold at a low price. And the market force losses, is the most difficult to

reliably quantify because it can be characterized as a loss due to price drop

below an optimal price or a loss due to marketing and manufacturing costs above

revenue gained. Any of these types of losses can be occur at any point in a fish

marketing or distribution chain, which starts from capture to consumer. Nutritional

loss, which refers to complex biochemical modifications within fish flesh as a

result of spoilage or production, is another from loss. Nutritional losses were not
considered significant during the analysis for this manual, and are not the subject

of the approaches described in the manual (Ward & Jeffries, 2000).

Related Studies

One study found in Five Sub-Saharan African countries entitled “post-

harvest losses in small-scale fisheries”, all of their three methodologies have

been put to the test and have shown positive outcomes. Because of its rapidity

and willingness for group members to participate in key roles during the use

period, Informal Fish Loss Assessment Method (IFLAM) has sparked the most

enthusiasm of the three methodologies. Since they can be used to validate

IFLAM results, Load Tracking (LT) and Questionnaire Loss Assessment Method

(QLAM) have proven to be effective tools in Post-harvest Fisheries Loss

Assessment (PHFLA). According to the results from the study, there are

significant annual losses in fish landings. Among the populations along the same

waterbody and with the same fish species, losses differ as well.

Weak management of assets has been cited as a recurring source of

losses. Inadequate icing of seafood, packaging processes, and transportation

conditions are all factors to consider. However, losses are often related to

upstream post-harvest activities, the social backdrop, and a number of other

sources of physical damages. Restricted capital, vessel encroachment,

overcapacity of fish effort, and inadequate water management are all indicators

of net loss.
 The seasonality of fish landings has a significant impact on deaths. Peak

fishing seasons are often associated with large casualties, but this is not

necessarily the case. The production capability is overburdened during peak

season, when the availability of fish outnumbers demand, causing fishermen to

sell their catch at low prices, resulting in market force losses. With the exception

of business force losses, which occur during the peak season, the majority of

losses occur all year round.

About the fact that fishermen, manufacturers, and merchants lose money,

the programme discovered that the people use a variety of coping mechanisms

to attempt to control or mitigate their losses. Fishermen believe that the losing

fish results in a loss of revenue, accompanied by a loss of food. Insecurity and

debt, followed by hunger and domestic strife due to lack of money to property

feed the family. Because of the interplay of prices determined by fishermen and

what buyers are willing to buy from them, fresh fish traders conclude that quality

losses are more significant than market force and physical losses (Akande &

Diel-Quadi,2010).

Key Issues Associated with PHL

As cited by Diel-Quadi & Mgawe (2011), post-harvest losses in fisheries

are a major source of concern because they result in a loss of essential animal

protein for customers as well as lost revenue for fishermen, processors, and

traders. As a result, reducing losses is a critical development target in the fishing

industry. In accordance with the issues, it mainly points that reducing the PHL is

a must in order to improve the food security, secure greater PH benefits, and to
ensure a sustainable livelihood. This also conclude; Reduced pressure on

declining fisheries resources is needed. Limited supply vs. the demand for fish to

feed and ever-increasing population. Technology advancements have made PHL

interference more feasible. Traditional barriers are being removed as rural areas,

and fish markets become more available. Implementation of a Code of Conduct

for Responsible Fisheries is required. Increase wages, poverty alleviation, and

decreased vulnerabilities are all needed. Aware decision-making on PH policy

and action is needed. And the need for effective use of production capital. Due to

the diversity of species, fishing gear, and techniques, as well as various

scattered and inaccessible landing sites, reducing PHFLs in SSFs is not easy. A

variety of goods, lengthy or fractured fish delivery chains, and the presence of

several different forms of stakeholder socio-economic variables such as poverty,

expertise and information, access to resources, culture, and customs add to the

challenge.

Post-harvest losses confine fisherfolk’s opportunity to branch-out their

income in such a manner that, the change of gaining additional earnings is

eradicated as a result of situation (Montojo et al.,2020). According to Castro

(2015), if we could reduce PH losses by 10%, we will have more food than if we

increased yield by 10% without reducing post-harvest losses. Given the fact that

many farmers in developed countries are food insecure, a reduced food losses

many have a major, and immediate effect on their livelihoods (Gustavsson et al.,

2011).
 CHAPTER III
MATERIALS AND METHODS

Description of the Study Area

Surigao del Sur is the 56th Philippine province located in the Northeastern

coast of Mindanao facing the Pacific Ocean between 125°40ʹ to 126°20ʹ East

Longitudes and 7°55ʹ and 9°20ʹ North latitude (Quevedo et al., 2020).

Municipality of Barobo is a third-class municipality with over 53,146 people

according to 2020 PSA census. Additionally, the municipality is known for

beautiful beaches, other tourist spots and abundant of seafood from marine

fishing, aquaculture and seaweeds farming which are the major sources of

income of the locals (Maliberan, 2019).

Figure 2. Map of Barobo, Surigao del Sur Philippines, and Study Location
Source: Google Map

Research Instruments

This study formulated questionnaires (QLAM) and to get the total quality

loss and its percentage from the study of Montojo et al. (2020).

Computation of Losses

n
(Equation 1) VTQL = ∑ ( BPri−RPri ) X SQLi
i=1

( )
TQL = ∑ BPri−RPri X SQL i
i=1 BPri

where:

VTQL is the total value of quality loss (PHP);

𝑖 is the number of respondents;

BPr is the best price of commodity per kg (PHP);

RPr is the reduced price of the commodity per kg (PHP);

SQL is the volume subjected to quality loss of each respondent (kg); and

TQL is the total quality loss (kg)

Percentage Loss

% Loss = TQL / TSL X 100

where:
TQL is the total quality loss (kg);

TSA is the total sell assessed (kg)

Post-harvest Fish Loss Formula and ROI

Post-harvest fish loss includes the decrease of weight of fish, and quality

index by assessing its quality through color, texture, odor and taste. To get the

value of PHFL, the following formula can be used.

PHFL = (Initial Catch Weight - Losses due to handling/ storage) x 100

Initial Catch Weight

To measure the profitability of post-harvest of fresh fish activities, the

formula of return of investment is,

ROI = (Net Profit / Investment) x 100

Research Ethics

Before gathering of data, a communication letter will be sent and courtesy

call to the Municipal Mayor and Barangay Captain of Poblacion, Barobo, Surigao

del Sur. This will serve as a permission request to allow the conduct of study in

the area.

Research design

The study will employ a mix-method approach which uses qualitative and

quantitative methods of data collection. The data will be collected through focus

group discussions, using semi-structured questionnaire to the fish traders such

as in the local fish market (Mavuru et al., 2022) and 100 random customers age
18 and above. In collecting the data, the Questionnaire Loss Assessment Method

(QLAM) by FAO 2010 (Diei-Ouadi & Mgawe, 2010) will be used. The data to be

collected will be concerning on the types of losses, reasons of losses, species,

contributing factors to a significant loss, and the percentage of loss. The quality

loss and financial loss will be also computed.

This case study methodology, will be able to comprehensively assess the

complex dynamics of post-harvest handling practices and challenges in the local

market of Barobo, Surigao del Sur. The demographic information will also be

collected such as name, age, sex and educational attainment.

Analysis of data

In analyzing the data, the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS16)

software will be used. The Qualitative and quantitative losses will be presented

using mean values, frequency and distribution and percentages.

 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
I. Respondent’s Profile
Name: _______________________________________________________________
Address: _____________________________________________________________
Occupation: __________________________________________________________
Sex: ( ) Male ( ) Female ( ) LGBTQ+
Age: _____ ( ) 18-20 ( ) 20-30 ( ) 31-40 ( ) 41-50 ( ) 51-above
Educational attainment: ________________________________________________
Type of respondent: ( ) Fisherman ( ) Fish vendor ( ) Consumer/Customer

II. Questions for Fisherman and Fish vendor

Source of fish and fishery products:
( ) Barobo ( ) Hinatuan ( ) Lianga
( ) Marihatag ( ) Cagwait ( ) Others (specify):
_____________________
Species subjected to losses:
( ) Tuna ( ) Siganids ( ) Seabass ( ) Others
(specify):______________________________________________
Types of Gears used to catch fish:
( ) Hook and line ( ) Gill net ( ) Speargun ( ) Others (specify):
______________________________________________

Post-harvest handling practices:

( ) Chilling (specify the
process):_________________________________________________________________________
_

_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
( ) Freezing (specify the process):
________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
( ) Ice Slurry (specify the process):
_______________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
( ) Others (specify the process):
_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________
______________________
Types and causes of fish losses:
( ) Physical ( ) Quality ( ) Market
___ Insect bites ___ Poor transport ___ Market
demand and supply
___ Animal predation ___ Signs of spoilage ___ Bargain
___ Loss during capture ___ Lacking sufficient ice ___ Others
 ( ) For low quality:
___ 500g – 5.9 kg ___ 11 – 20.9kg
___ 6 to 10.9 kg ___ 21 kg – above
(specify):_____________________________________
Total Sales (kg):
___ 500g – 5.9 kg ___ 11 – 20.9kg
___ 6 to 10.9 kg ___ 21 kg – above (specify):
_____________________________________
Impact of fish loss:
( ) Fish discards ( ) Loss of income ( ) Others (specify):
___________________________________
What are your interventions to reduce fish loss and or during storage?
( ) Continue chilling ( ) Freezing ( ) Others (specify):
___________________________________________

II. Questions for customers / fish consumers

1. How often do you eat seafood?
____ Daily ____ Once or twice a week ____ Once a month ___
Others (specify): ___________

2. How it is important to buy fresh fish and fishery products?

( ) Very important ( ) Slightly important ( ) Not
important
( ) Others
(specify):_____________________________________________________________
_____

3. What species of fish do you usually buy or eat?

( ) Tuna ( ) Grouper ( ) Siganids ( ) Others (specify):
___________________________

4. What source of fish do you prefer?

( ) Caught from the wild (freshwater) ( ) Farmed (brackish) ( )
Farmed (marine)
( ) Caught from the wild (marine water) ( ) Farmed (freshwater)

5. Who usually buy the fish?

( ) Mother ( ) Father ( ) Children ( ) Others (specify):
___________________________

6. Where do you prefer to buy the fish?

( ) Public fish market ( ) From a fisherman
( ) From the seafood shop ( ) Others
(specify):__________________________________

7. Do you sensory evaluate the fish and other fishery products before buying? If yes.
How?
( ) No ( ) Never ( ) Yes (specify):
 REFERENCES

Abbas, K. A., Mohamed, B., Jamila and Ebrahimnian, M. (2008). A review on

correlations between fish freshness and pH during cold storage.
American Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology 4 (4). 416-421.
Akande GR, Diei-Ouadi Y. Post-harvest losses in small-scale fisheries. Case
studies in five sub-Saharan African countries. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Technical Paper No. 550. Rome: FAO; 2010.
Campbell J, Ward A. (2004). Fisheries post-harvest overview manual. An output
of the DFID-funded Post-Harvest Fisheries Research Programme produced by
IMM Ltd, Exeter.
Chintagari, S., Hazard, N., Edwards, G., Jadeja, R., Janes, M. (2017) Risks
Associated with fish and seafood. Microbiol Spectr 5(1)

Codex Alimentarius Volume 9A (2001). Codex Alimentarius Commission /

Guidelines 31 – 1999. Guidelines for sensory evaluation of fish and shellfish in
Laboratories. Pg. 115 – 130.

De Perlinghi, M.G. (2018). Seafood report a new era for seafood in France 2018
seafood report: a new era for seafood in France. Norwegian seafood
council.

FAO (2015). Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. RAP
Publication 12. 87pp

Fikiin A. G. 1992. New method and fluidized water system for intensive chilling
and freezing of fish. 0956-7135/92/030153-08 0 1992 Butterworth-Heinemann
Ltd, Food Control - Vol3 No 3 1992.

Flores, E., Dela Cruz, R., Antolin, M. & Antolin, R. (2018). Postharvest handling
systems and losses of eggplant in major producing areas of the Philippines.
10.13140/RG.2.2.13543.09128.
Gall, K. (1992). Seafood Savvy: A consumer’s guide to seafood nutrition, safety,
handling, and preparation. Information Bulletin 104IB226.

George, Ninan., (2018). ICAR-Central Institute of Fisheries Technology. Training

Manual on Seafood Value Addition.

G`haly, A. E., Dave, D., Budge, S., & Brooks, M. S. (2010). Fish spoilage
mechanisms and preservation techniques. American Journal of Applied
Sciences, 7, 859–877.
Gram, L., Huss, H.H., (1996). Microbiological spoilage of fish and fish products.
International Journal of Food Microbiology 33, 121-137.

Inocente, S. & Bacosa, H. (2022). Assessment of Macroplastic Pollution on

Selected Tourism Beaches of Barobo, Surigao Del Sur, Philippines. Journal
of Marine and Island Cultures. 11. 10.21463/jmic.2022.11.1.14.
Kris-Etherton, P.M., Harris, W.S., Appel, L. J. (2002). Fish consumption, fish oil,
omega-3 fatty acids, and cardiovascular disease. Circulation; 106:2747-
2757.

Koutsoumanis, K., Taoukis, P. S., & Nychas, G. (2005). Development of a Safety

Monitoring and Assurance System (SMAS) for chilled food products.
International Journal of Food Microbiology, 100, 253–260.).

Keerthana P. S., Gopan, S., Rajabudeen, R., Fathima, R., Shibu, K., Nisha. R.,
Udayan, P., Elvis, T., Gifty, T., Das, A., Kaippilly, D., Safeena, M.P., &
Sreekanth, G.B. (2022). Post-harvest losses in the fisheries sector-facts,
figures, challenges and strategies. International Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Studies. 10. 10.22271/fish.2022.v10.i4b.2691. References
Kuuliala, L., Al Hage, Y., Ioannidis, A.-G., Sader, M., Kerckhof, F.M.,
Vanderroost, M., Boon, N., De Baets, B., De Meulenaer, B., Ragaert,
P., Devlieghere, F. (2017). Microbiological, chemical and sensory spoilage
analysis of raw Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) stored under modified
atmospheres. Food Microbiology doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2017.10.011.

Li, X., Chen, Y., Cai, L., Xu, Y., Yi, S., Zhu, W., Mi, H., Li, J. and Lin, H., (2017).
Freshness assessment of turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) by Quality
Index Method (QIM), biochemical, and proteomic methods. LWT-Food Sci.
Technol. 78, 172-180.)

Macagnano, A., Careche, M., Herrero, A., Paolesse, R., Martinelli, E., Pennazza,
G., Carmonae, P., D'Amico, A., Di Natale, C., (2005). A model to
predict fish quality from instrumental features. Sens. Actuators B
111e112, 293e298.

Macusi, E. & Sabino, Lizel & Macusi, Erna. (2022). Closed Season Policy Is Only
Partly Practiced in Surigao del Sur, Philippines. 3. 1067-1079.
10.3390/world3040061.
Marshall, D. L. (2014). Seafood. Spoilage of animal products. Encyclopedia of
Food Microbiology, Volume 3, 453-458.
Quevedo, B. & Ruaza, F. Jr. (2020). Supply Chain of Seaweeds in Surigao Del
Sur, Philippines. International Peer Reviewed Journal.
Rocculi, P., Cevoli, C., Tappi, S., Genovese, J., Urbinati, E., Picone, G., Fabbri,
A., Francesco, C., Dalla Rosa, M. (2018). Freshness assessment of
European hake (Merluccius merluccius) through the evaluation of eye
chromatic and morphological characteristics. Food Research
International, doi:10.1016/ j. foodres.2018.08.091

Rumape, O., Elveny, M., Suksatan, W., Hatmi, R., Voronkota, O., Bokov, D.,
Wanita, Y. & Opirlesc, A. D. (2022). Study on the quality of fish products based
on different preservation techniques: a review. Food Science and Technology.
42. 10.1590/fst.78521.

Sun, W., Li, H., Wang, H., Xian, S., Wang, J., & Feng, L. (2015). Sensitivity
enhancement of pH indicator and its application in the evaluation of
fish freshness. Talanta 143, 127- 131.
Siret, F., & Issanchou, S. (2000). Traditional process: Influence on sensory
properties on consumer's expectation and liking - Application to ‘pate
de campagne’. Food Quality and Preference, 11, 217–228.

Taheri-Garavand, A., Nasiri, A., Banan, A., Zhang, Y.D. (2020). Smart Deep
Learning- Based Approach for Non-Destructive Freshness Diagnosis
of Common Carp Fish.

Mavuru, A., Mhlanga, L., & Nhiwatiwa, T. (2022). An assessment of Post-Harvest

Fish Losses (PHFLs) in the artisanal fishery of Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe.
Scientific South African, Vol. 16.

Maliberan, R.M.E. (2019). Forecasting tourist arrival in the province of Surigao

del sur, Philippines using time series analysis. Int. J. Inform. Vis., 3, 255–
261.
Medes, R., Teixeira, B., Goncalves, S., Lourenco, H., Martins, F., Camacho, C.,
Oliveria, R., & Silva, H. (2016). The quality of deep-frozen octopus in the
Portuguese retail market: Results from a case study of abusive water addition
practices. LWT-Food Science and Technology,
doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2016.11.062.

World Health Organization Food And Agriculture Organization Of The United

Nations Rome. (2009). Code of Practice for fish and fishery products 1st
edition.

Zakaria, Aini & Mohd. Noor, Mohamad roff. (2005). Chapter 8. Harvesting and
Postharvest Handling.