Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

A nutrient evaluation of selected Nuxalk salmon preparations Kennelly, Anthea Christine 1986

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1986_A6_7 K46_6.pdf [ 7.53MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0096715.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0096715-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0096715-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0096715-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0096715-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0096715-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0096715-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0096715-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0096715.ris

Full Text

A NUTRIENT EVALUATION SELECTED NUXALK SALMON  OF  PREPARATIONS  By ANTHEA CHRISTINE H.E.,  KENNELLY  The U n i v e r s i t y  of B r i t i s h Columbia,  1982  • S c . , The U n i v e r s i t y  of B r i t i s h Columbia,  1975  A THESIS SUBMITTED  IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES D i v i s i o n o f Human N u t r i t i o n S c h o o l o f F a m i l y and N u t r i t i o n a l  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s to the reauifdd  as  Science  conforming  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA A u g u s t 1986 (c) A n t h e a C h r i s t i n e  K e n n e l l y , 1986  In p r e s e n t i n g  this  thesis  requirements  f o r an  B r i t i s h Columbia,  it  freely  agree t h a t for  understood for  that  financial  Library  s h a l l make  for reference  and  study.  I  f o r extensive copying of  h i s or  be  her  g r a n t e d by  s h a l l not  the  be  of  this  The  University  1956 Main M a l l  of  Vancouver,  Canada  Date A ^ C ^ T  xi*  V6T 1Y3  oc  British  fjglo  (4^KAPJ  this  ^urfcino^.  Columbia  thesis my  It is thesis  a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my  permission.  D e p a r t m e n t o f t>iViWo<^  further  head o f  representatives.  copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  gain  University  the  s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may by  the  the  I agree that  permission  department or  f u l f i l m e n t of  advanced degree a t  of  available  in partial  written  ABSTRACT Surveys Indians One  of  the  h a v e shown t h a t t h i s  of the reasons  food  nutritional  patterns  suggested  which  nutritional  foods  forthis  have  of  smoked  finding  occurred  in  Native  nutritionally.  i s the  changing  group  as  S e v e r a l s t u d i e s have found  that  significantly  this  better  in  The p r e s e n t s t u d y was c o n d u c t e d  program i n B e l l a  f i v e Nuxalk  barbequed  Canadian  specific  aspects than the "westernized" foods which  them i n t h e d i e t . nutrition  are  of  i s a group a t r i s k  a c c u l t u r a t i o n has p r o g r e s s e d . traditional  status  Coola,  B.C.  salmon p r e p a r a t i o n s  and canned sockeye  d r i e d product)  The  replace  as p a r t o f a  nutrient  - canned,  content  barbequed,  (Oncorhyncus nerka)  a n d k n u u m (a h a l f - s m o k e d  and  sluq  product)  1  and (a coho  (0. k i u t s c h ) was e x a m i n e d . The A,  nutrient composition  (proximate composition,  v i t a m i n D, v i t a m i n E, t h i a m i n , r i b o f l a v i n ,  total  folate,  manganese, magnesium) using  f r e e and t o t a l p a n t o t h e n a t e , copper,  was  zinc,  determined  s t a n d a r d methods.  iron, f o r the  vitamin  niacin,  sodium,  f r e e and chromium,  phosphorous,  calcium  five  preparations  salmon  and  The n u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n o f e a c h o f  the p r o d u c t s v a r i e d c o n s i d e r a b l y over t h e samples s t u d i e d .  The  greatest  E  and  products  was  variations  occurred i n the vitamins (vitamin  t h i a m i n ) and t h e m i n e r a l s The compared comparison  (sodium  and c o p p e r ) .  nutrient  composition  of the prepared  to  of  similar  raw  to  determine  that  t-test  samples  the  effect  using of  a  paired  traditional  processing techniques.  Few  Moisture  i n the barbequed/canned  sluq  was  decreased  (p<0.001) and  increased  in  in  the  sluq  increased pantothenate  Free  Riboflavin while  in  and  Both  barbequed in  folate  total  the s l u q decreased  and  i n c r e a s e i n m i n e r a l s and processing  probably  the  while  the  result  (0.02)  icreases  to  women  24-49  o f age  (R.N.I.)  On  provided  of the percentage of the products, higher  for iron  (p<0.01)  the  samples. was  commercially  in  the b a s i s of  the  by  Canadian  a  standard  products.  p r o v i d e d by  the commercial  in  salmon p r o d u c t s were  basis  o f t h e R.N.I.  was  salmon p r o d u c t s  equal t o or h i g h e r than the commercial  significantly  to additions  t h e Reccommended N u t r i e n t I n t a k e s f o r years  k'nuum  (p<0.05).  nutrients  ranked  each  the  nutrients  samples compared t o p r e p a r e d  s e r v i n g of each of the p r o d u c t s the Nuxalk  of  (p<0.01)  barbequed  t h a t of p r o t e i n foods a v a i l a b l e  of  k'nuum  (p<0.001).  canned  other  free  the  sluq  p r o b a b l y due in  the  while  (p<0.05) and  B e l l a C o o l a u s i n g t h e Mann-Whitney U-Test. percentage  and  and  the  i n the  a s h was  sodium  pantothenate  samples  n u t r i e n t composition of the Nuxalk  compared  free  of g r e a t e r l o s s e s of  f r o z e n s t r o r a g e o f raw The  and  in  the  Manganese i n c r e a s e d  n i a c i n both i n c r e a s e d i n the  v i t a m i n E decreased  and  p<0.01)  (p<0.02)  v i t a m i n D increased i n the sluq  (p<0.01) The  the  increased  (p<0.01).  (p<0.01,  (p<0.05, p<0.01) s a m p l e s .  (p<0.01).  in  Ash  1  canned  found.  (p<0.01),  t h e k n u u m (p<0.01) s a m p l e s .  the  barbequed/canned  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were  $1.00  p r o d u c t s were and  zinc  On  the  worth ranked  (p<0.002).  Meat  (p<o.002) and  Nuxalk  c u r e d meats  (p<0.001) r a n k e d h i g h e r t h a n  the  p r o d u c t s i n p r o v i d i n g i r o n w h i l e c u r e d meats p<0.01)  and  dairy products  (p<0.001) r a n k e d  in  zinc.  providing  Quality  (I.N.Q.)  products  ranked  (p<0.005). ranked  the b a s i s of the  (Sorenson higher  and  for  than  the  Hansen, calcium  A l l the commercial  higher  p<0.001),  On  higher than the Nuxalk Index 1975)  products  of  Nutrient  the  commercial  (p<0.001)  and  iron  p r o d u c t s e x c e p t meat a l t e r n a t e s  Nuxalk  products  for  calcium  c u r e d meats p < 0 . 0 0 5 ) , f i s h p<0.05 and  p<0.001) w h i l e meat ( p < 0 . 0 0 0 1 ) ,  c u r e d meat  dairy  (Meat  products  (p<0.0001) and  fish  (p<0.05) r a n k e d h i g h e r f o r i r o n . Further  s t u d i e s are r e q u i r e d to determine  the  nutrient  c o n t e n t o f t h e s a l m o n p r o d u c t s o v e r a number o f s e a s o n s  and  effect  samples  of  processing  studied  i t  was  compare  favourably  on n u t r i e n t s .  concluded  t h a t the  Based Nuxalk  w i t h the commercial  sources of m i n e r a l s , i n c l u d i n g t r a d i t i o n a l bones  and  nutrition  root  f o o d s , s h o u l d be  on  the  salmon  products.  products Low  s o u r c e s s u c h as  i d e n t i f i e d and  the  cost fish  included  e d u c a t i o n programs a l o n g w i t h the salmon p r o d u c t s .  iv  in  TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract  i  L i s t of Tables  v i i  L i s t of Figures  I II  IV  ix  Acknowledgements  x  Introduction  1  L i t e r a t u r e Review  4  Nutritional Patterns of Nutritional Composition Description the Study III  i  S t a t u s a n d Food C o n s u m p t i o n Canadian Native Indians Value of T r a d i t i o n a l Diets o f N a t i v e Salmon P r o d u c t s o f Group and A r e a I n v o l v e d i n  4 12 16 .  20  Rationale  24  Methods  26  D e s c r i p t i o n of the Study Sampling P r e p a r a t i o n o f Samples Canning B a r b e q u e d a n d K'nuum Barbequed/Canned Sluq Shipment o f Samples Treatment o f Samples i n L a b o r a t o r y Analysis of Nutrient Composition Moisture Ash Protein Lipid F o l a c i n and P a n t o t h e n i c A c i d V i t a m i n A and V i t a m i n D Vitamin E T h i a m i n , R i b o f l a v i n and N i a c i n Minerals C a r b o h y d r a t e and E n e r g y Food P r i c i n g Salmon Samples Commercial Products E v a l u a t i o n o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y .. S t a t i s t i c a l A n a l y s i s o f t h e Data  v  26 27 28 29 30 31 32 32 33 34 34 35 35 36 37 43 43 44 44 44 45 45 46 46 47  V Results I  II III IV VI  VII  49 V a l i d a t i o n of Methods A: Lipids B: Moisture i n Stored Freeze-Dried C: E f f e c t o f L i p i d s on F o l a t e and Pantothenate Determinations Nutrient Composition E f f e c t o f P r o c e s s i n g on N u t r i e n t s E v a l u a t i o n of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y  Samples.  49 49' 50 51 56 68 81  Discussion  95  I II III  95 104 108  Nutrient Composition E f f e c t of P r o c e s s i n g E v a l u a t i o n of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y  Conclusion  114  Bibliography  116  vi  L I S T OF  TABLES  1.  Summary o f P u b l i s h e d N u t r i e n t V a l u e s f o r S a l m o n P r o d u c t s p e r 100 g. Wet W e i g h t  19  2.  P e r c e n t Recovery o f L i p i d s from t h e Method o f B l i g h and D y e r (1959)  49  P e r c e n t M o i s t u r e i n F r e e z e - D r i e d Samples 9 Months and 11 M o n t h s S t o r a g e  50  3. 4.  5.  6. 7.  8. 9.  10.  11.  12.  After  P e a r s o n C o r r e l a t i o n ( t w o - t a i l e d ) Between t h e L i p i d C o n t e n t o f t h e S a m p l e s and t h e F o l a t e and P a n t o t h e n a t e C o n t e n t o f t h e S a m p l e s  56  D e s c r i p t i o n o f Samples A n a l y z e d - S e c t i o n Sampled, P r e p a r a t i o n M e t h o d , L o c a t i o n C a u g h t , and D a t e Sampled  57  N u t r i e n t Composition of Sockeye P r e p a r a t i o n s per 100 g. a s P r o c e s s e d ( R e p o r t e d a s Mean and Range) ...  59  P u b l i s h e d N u t r i e n t V a l u e s f o r Sockeye Salmon w i t h Values f o r S i m i l a r Nuxalk P r e p a r a t i o n s f o r C o m p a r i s o n (Based on 100 g. p o r t i o n s )  61  N u t r i e n t C o m p o s i t i o n o f Coho P r e p a r a t i o n s p e r 100 g. a s P r o c e s s e d ( R e p o r t e d a s Mean and Range) ...  64  P u b l i s h e d N u t r i e n t V a l u e s f o r Coho w i t h V a l u e s f o r S i m i l a r Nuxalk P r e p a r a t i o n s f o r Comparison (based on 100 g. p o r t i o n s )  67  M o i s t u r e , P r o t e i n , L i p i d , A s h , F o l a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) and P a n t o t h e n a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) i n S o c k e y e A: Raw v e r s u s Canned B: Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d C: Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d / C a n n e d  69 70 71  M o i s t u r e , P r o t e i n , L i p i d , A s h , F o l a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) and P a n t o t h e n a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) i n Coho A: Raw v e r s u s S l u q B: Raw v e r s u s K'nuum  72 73  V i t a m i n A, V i t a m i n D, V i t a m i n E, T h i a m i n , and N i a c i n i n Sockeye A: Raw v e r s u s Canned B: Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d C: Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d / C a n n e d  75 75 76  vii  Riboflavin,  13.  V i t a m i n A, V i t a m i n D, V i t a m i n E, T h i a m i n , and N i a c i n i n Coho A: Raw v e r s u s S l u q B: Raw v e r s u s K' nuum  Riboflavin, 77 77  14.  Mineral A: B: C:  15.  M i n e r a l C o m p o s i t i o n o f Coho P r e p a r a t i o n s A: Raw v e r s u s S l u q B: Raw v e r s u s K' nuum  80 80  16.  L i s t o f C o m m e r c i a l P r o t e i n P r o d u c t s Used i n C o m p a r i s o n of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y , w i t h Cost i n B e l l a Coola i n J u l y 1 9 8 3 , E d i b l e P o r t i o n i n G i v e n P u r c h a s e U n i t and E d i b l e P o r t i o n i n $1.00 V a l u e o f t h e P r o d u c t  83  N u t r i e n t C o m p o s i t i o n of Commercial P r o t e i n P r o d u c t s Used i n C o m p a r i s o n o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y  84  C o s t o f N u x a l k S a l m o n p e r K i l o g r a m D r e s s e d W e i g h t and p e r K i l o g r a m P r e p a r e d W e i g h t w i t h Mean P e r c e n t a g e D i s c a r d and Mean P e r c e n t a g e L o s s i n P r o c e s s i n g  85  P e r c e n t a g e o f t h e Recommended N u t r i e n t I n t a k e f o r C a n a d i a n s P r o v i d e d p e r P o r t i o n o f N u x a l k S a l m o n and C o m m e r c i a l P r o d u c t s ( b a s e d on t h e R.N.I, f o r f e m a l e s 24-49 y e a r s o f age)  87  P e r c e n t a g e o f t h e Recommended N u t r i e n t I n t a k e f o r C a n a d i a n s P r o v i d e d p e r D o l l a r V a l u e o f N u x a l k Salmon and C o m m e r c i a l P r o d u c t s ( b a s e d on t h e R . N . I , f o r f e m a l e s 24-49 y e a r s o f age)  88  21.  I n d i c e s o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y f o r N u x a l k Salmon Commercial P r o d u c t s  90  22.  Comparison o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y Between N u x a l k Salmon P r o d u c t s and C o m m e r c i a l l y A v a i l a b l e P r o t e i n P r o d u c t s U s i n g t h e Mann-Whitney U-Test ( t w o - t a i l e d )  91  C o m p a r i s o n o f I n d e x o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y and P e r c e n t Recommended N u t r i e n t I n t a k e p e r $1.00 V a l u e f o r C a l c i u m , I r o n and Z i n c , B e t w e e n N u x a l k S a l m o n P r o d u c t s and C o m m e r c i a l l y A v a i l a b l e M e a t s , C u r e d M e a t s , F i s h , Meat A l t e r n a t e s and D a i r y P r o d u c t s U s i n g t h e Mann-Whitney U-Test ( t w o - t a i l e d )  93  17. 18.  19.  20.  23.  C o m p o s i t i o n of Sockeye P r e p a r a t i o n s Raw v e r s u s Canned Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d Raw v e r s u s B a r b e q u e d / C a n n e d  viii  78 78 79  and  L I S T OF 1.  FIGURES  Map o f t h e B e l l a C o o l a V a l l e y S h o w i n g t h e L o c a t i o n o f t h e R e s e r v e i n t h e V a l l e y and t h e L o c a t i o n o f the V a l l e y i n the P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia (inset)  23  2.  P l o t o f L i p i d C o n t e n t (mg/g d r y w e i g h t ) V e r s u s F r e e F o l a t e C o n t e n t (ng/g d r y w e i g h t )  52  3.  P l o t o f L i p i d C o n t e n t (mg/g d r y w e i g h t ) V e r s u s F o l a t e C o n t e n t (ng/g d r y w e i g h t )  Total  53  4.  P l o t o f L i p i d C o n t e n t (mg/g d r y w e i g h t ) V e r s u s P a n t o t h e n a t e C o n t e n t (ug/g d r y w e i g h t )  Free  5.  P l o t o f L i p i d C o n t e n t (mg/g d r y w e i g h t ) V e r s u s P a n t o t h e n a t e C o n t e n t (ug/g d r y w e i g h t )  Total  ix  54 55  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I w i s h t o e x p r e s s my s i n c e r e a p p r e c i a t i o n t o a l l t h o s e made t h i s p r o j e c t p o s s i b l e :  who  The members o f my g u i d i n g c o m m i t t e e - D r . H a r r i e t V. K u h n l e i n , Dr. M e l v i n Lee, and D r . John V a n d e r s t o e p f o r t h e i r a d v i c e and support throughout the p r o j e c t ; Mrs. Virginia Green f o r h e r a s s i s t a n c e w i t h analyses of the data;  the  statistical  Mr. Frank F l y n n f o r h i s a s s i s t a n c e w i t h t h e computer of t h e data; Sandy Moody (Community H e a l t h N u r s e ) , Rosie Hans Health R e p r e s e n t a t i v e ) and Debbie T a l l i o f o r t h e i r in B e l l a Coola;  analyses  (Community assistance  Members o f t h e N u x a l k N u t r i t i o n P r o j e c t s t a f f - L o u i s e H i l l a n d , Sarah Saunders, Emily S c h o o n e r , and Aron Hans f o r t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e i n o b t a i n i n g and p r e p a r i n g samples i n B e l l a C o o l a ; Finally, a n d most i m p o r t a n t l y , t h e p e o p l e o f t h e N u x a l k N a t i o n for their particpation a n d s u p p o r t w h i c h made t h i s project b o t h p o s s i b l e and e n j o y a b l e . This research was f u n d e d i n p a r t b y H e a l t h Promotion Grant 5-52010, a U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia Summer Graduate F e l l o w s h i p a n d t h e Hugo E. M e l e i c k e M e m o r i a l F e l l o w s h i p .  x  CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION  Studies Indians  on  which  indicated  the  that the native population  studies  1981;  Kuhnlein,  specific of  factors  daily  across  years  habits  in  Schaefer that  the  erosion  nutritional  the  traditional aspects,  native  and  diets  of Eskimo  et  (1975)  one-third  folate,  calcium,  have  from been  traditional suggested  status  Eskimo  of  as  native  (1977) h a v e  diet,  which  was  was n u t r i t i o n a l l y a d e q u a t e and  populations.  decline  in  Several  studies  e t a l . , 1982a; K u h n l e i n  a l . , 1974) foods  Nation  iron.  are  have  superior,  t o t h e f o o d s w h i c h have r e p l a c e d  Smith  E,  in  dietary  Nuxalk  (1977 and 1 9 8 0 ) , and D r a p e r traditional  et a l . ,  findings  intakes of less than  o f t h i s d i e t has l e d t o a  status  Calloway  Hoffer  the  t h e poor n u t r i t i o n a l  (Hoppner e t a l . , 1978; K u h n l e i n 1982b;  from  have  nutritionally.  The 1981  and a move away  s t r o n g l y f i s h o r meat o r i e n t e d , that  old  native  years  these  Canada.  intake f o r vitamin  "westernized"  involved  argued  Canadian  1981;  confirmed  D, a s c o r b a t e ,  food  more  populations. both  have  19-49  A, v i t a m i n  to  of  i s at risk  et a l . ,  1984a) f o u n d f r e q u e n t  Changing diets  1984a)  women  recommended  vitamin  (Ellestad-Sayed  native populations  (Kuhnlein, the  status  were c o n d u c t e d o v e r t h e l a s t 30-40  Recent  survey  nutritional  et a l . ,  shown  that  specific  in  some  nutrient  them i n n a t i v e  diets.  s u g g e s t e d s e v e r a l f a c t o r s were i n v o l v e d 1  the  in  the changing growing  dependence  traditional in  Stepien  on  local  on  areas,  and  lack  adequacy,  heavily  on t r a d i t i o n a l  were  achieved  appears  that  foods can a f f e c t  programs  to  i n g r o u p s who  conducted  One  of  in Bella  of the Nuxalk the  Coola,  B.C. and  related  a l s o had  access  of  traditional groups.  status  food  It use  of  native  (Kuhnlein,  1984a)  purpose of the program  N a t i o n by e m p h a s i z i n g  o b j e c t i v e s o f t h e p r o g r a m was  t h i s area i s not adequate.  to  education.  Program The  found  relied  the n u t r i t i o n a l  n u t r i e n t composition of t r a d i t i o n a l  the  She  outlets.  improve the n u t r i t i o n a l  t o improve the f o o d use  people  practices  then, to incorporate t r a d i t i o n a l  Food and N u t r i t i o n  and  still  s t a t u s of n a t i v e  populations, along with basic n u t r i t i o n Nuxalk  which  o r l a c k o f use  the n u t r i t i o n a l  w o u l d seem f e a s i b l e ,  The  population.  studied.  f o o d r e s o u r c e s and who  the use  and  the knowledge  practice scores,  to w e l l - s t o c k e d , reasonably p r i c e d food  was  and  food  of t h e f o o d p r e p a r e r were r e l a t e d t o f o o d  dietary  into  the  over  i n stores  about  in  that i s o l a t i o n ,  the h i g h e s t n u t r i t i o n  It  trade-posts  of knowledge  t h e W e s t e r n C a n a d i a n n a t i v e g r o u p s she  that  was  and  the p a r t of food p r e p a r e r s  (1978) c o n f i r m e d  attitudes  stores  These i n c l u d e d , a  food r e s o u r c e s , l a c k of v a r i e t y a v a i l a b l e  isolated  nutrition  in  food h a b i t s of n a t i v e Indians.  foods,  T h i s s t u d y was  s t a t u s of  traditional to  foods.  determine  as i n f o r m a t i o n conducted  the  the in  as p a r t o f  program. The  purpose  o f t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y was 2  to  determine  the  nutrient  c o m p o s i t i o n o f f i v e common N u x a l k  - canned  sockeye,  sockeye,  coho  k'nuum  barbequed  sluq  sockeye,  (a h a r d ,  ( a half-smoked  barbequed  smoke-dried  product)  - and  salmon p r e p a r a t i o n s and  product)  t o compare t h e  canned  and  coho  nutrient  v a l u e s t o t h o s e o f c o m m e r c i a l l y a v a i l a b l e p r o t e i n f o o d s on b a s i s of standard s e r v i n g s i z e , dollar value. useful  study w i l l  be  i n a n a l y z i n g d i e t a r y d a t a from the Nuxalk  p e o p l e and  in  education  i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d from  equal  this  nutrition  The  e q u a l c a l o r i c v a l u e , and  the  materials.  3  CHAPTER I I LITERATURE REVIEW NUTRITIONAL  STATUS AND FOOD CONSUMPTION  PATTERNS  OF  CANADIAN  status of  Canadian  NATIVE INDIANS Most  early  s t u d i e s on t h e n u t r i t i o n a l  native populations,  conducted three  et a l . ,  1946;  Corrigan,  Girard,  1959;  Best e t a l . , 1961), concentrated  in Ontario,  et  nutritional  for  a l .  status They  food  V i v i a n e t a l . , 1 9 4 8 ; B e s t and on  (1946) of  studied the  over four  dietary  hundred  examined t r a d e - p o s t  northern  records  i n t a k e and p e r f o r m e d c l i n i c a l  habits  o f food  assessment they concluded t h a t i n t a k e s of  vitamin  C,  and  examinations  riboflavin  showed  individuals  were  deficient.  populations  findings.  examined a l o n g Dietary  clinical  the n u t r i t i o n a l  clinical of  changes  study  with  Food p u r c h a s e s f r o m  with c l i n i c a l  and  two local  anthropometric  except  calcium,  w e r e j u d g e d t o be a d e q u a t e .  and a n t h r o p o m e t r i c  A,  food.  intakes of a l l nutrients,  a s c o r b i c a c i d and v i t a m i n A, the  vitamin  The  (1948) c o n d u c t e d a s i m i l a r  o f James Bay I n d i a n s .  were  From t h e  They c o n c l u d e d t h a t t h e t i s s u e  were a s s o c i a t e d w i t h a l a c k o f " p r o p e r " et a l .  Manitoba  marked t i s s u e changes i n t h e m a j o r i t y  studied.  Vivian  and  purchases  examinations.  dietary  stores  populations  M a n i t o b a , and Saskatchewan.  Moore  Indians.  1946;  t o f o u r d e c a d e s ago (Moore  f i n d i n g s they concluded  From that  s t a t u s , e s p e c i a l l y o f t h e 10-19 y e a r o l d g r o u p , 4  in  both p o p u l a t i o n s ,  thirds  was  of teenagers,  and  Between o n e - t h i r d  i n both p o p u l a t i o n s ,  underweight f o r t h e i r Best  poor.  six  to  community  G i r a r d (1959) s t u d i e d two  fifteen o f 200  hospital.  months  to 5 years)  treaty time  year o l d  Metis  general  The  pounds  groups of  Metis  f i r s t g r o u p was  children  l o c a t e d 200  The  from  Pine  House,  second group i n c l u d e d p r e - s c h o o l e r s  600  I n d i a n H e a l t h S e r v i c e s H o s p i t a l and  full  weight,  a community  haemoglobin,  hematocrit,  serum c a r o t e n e , and  total  clear  found,  but  ascorbic  serum  acid  hypoproteinemia Narrows  (lice,  mites  one  year  were  Some  deficiencies levels,  cases  of  serum  anemia  i n the p r e - s c h o o l e r s from  h i g h l e v e l s o f s k i n i n f e c t i o n s and  were  and  i n t h e P i n e House s c h o o l c h i l d r e n .  l a c k of medical  or  Pelican The  Pine  infestations  care than to n u t r i t i o n a l  t h e two  appreciably acid  v i t a m i n D supplements  g r o u p s were t h e n r e - e x a m i n e d t h a t t h e serum v i t a m i n A and better  levels  status.  provided w i t h school lunches  (including dairy products,  They f o u n d  ascorbic  carotene  low.  P i n e House g r o u p was  fruit),and 1961).  No  serum  e t c . ) , w h i c h w e r e a t t r i b u t e d more t o p o o r s a n i t a r y  c o n d i t i o n s and The  were  were p r e s e n t  but not  House g r o u p had  measured.  v i t a m i n A and  levels  (2  of  Height,  were  a  nearest  serum a s c o r b i c a c i d , serum v i t a m i n A, proteins  and  composed  a i r m i l e s from the  from P e l i c a n Narrows,  I n d i a n s w i t h an  s t a f f nurse.  w e r e 10-30  two-  height.  Indian c h i l d r e n i n Saskatchewan. of  and  i n the Pine  were l o w e r .  5  House  (Best e t carotene  group,  This l a t t e r  for and  al., levels  but  the  finding  was  attributed  to  analysis.  S k i n i n f e c t i o n s and i n f e s t a t i o n s w e r e a b s e n t i n t h e  Pine  House  group  attributed general  a breakdown i n t h e t r a n s p o r t o f t h e  on  re-examination,  though  of  community, i n terms A later  the  project  on  the  study  (Dong and F e e n y ,  From d i e t h i s t o r i e s ,  not  but  to  the  awareness  of  the  practices.  1968) c o m p a r e d t h e d i e t a r y i n A l e r t Bay,  British  they concluded that the d i e t a r y  intakes  o f c a l c i u m and a s c o r b i c a c i d w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y  in  Indian c h i l d r e n than  the  dietary  intakes  for  was  o f s a n i t a t i o n and g e n e r a l h e a l t h  i n t a k e s o f I n d i a n and n o n - I n d i a n c h i l d r e n Columbia.  this  to the food supplementation d i r e c t l y , impact  serum  the  of both groups  non-Indian  lower  children.  o f c h i l d r e n met  the  The  Canadian  d i e t a r y s t a n d a r d s f o r a l l n u t r i e n t s , e x c e p t c a l c i u m and v i t a m i n A.  Vitamin  f o r both  of  was c o n s i d e r a b l y b e l o w t h e s t a n d a r d  groups.  While dietary  A consumption  some  earlier  studies  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s as w e l l  them w e r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e  as p h y s i c a l  more  regional In of  comprehensive  and a n a t i o n a l  Birkbeck included physical  et a l . , dietary  and  examinations,  none status  I n t h e l a t e 1960's and  s t u d i e s were c o n d u c t e d  on  early both  a  level.  1968 a s t u d y o f t h e n u t r i t i o n a l  B r i t i s h Columbia  biochemical  studies of the n u t r i t i o n a l  of the p o p u l a t i o n s i n q u e s t i o n . 1970's  included  I n d i a n s was c o n d u c t e d  1971;  D e s a i and  and  biochemical  Lee,  s t a t u s o f two  groups  (Lee e t  a l . , 1971;  1971).  This  evaluations  as  well  and d e n t a l e x a m i n a t i o n s o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 75 p e r 6  study as cent  of  the r e s i d e n t s of the Ahousat  and  Anaham  studies  (an i n t e r i o r C h i l c o t i n  (Lee  et a l . ,  calories,  calcium,  inadequate  i n both  old  age  (a c o a s t a l N o o t k a n  group,  1971)  found frequent  v i t a m i n A and communities,  and  was  community).  iron.  thought to  The  low  reflect  dietary  intakes  Calcium  particularly  community)  for  i n t a k e s were  i n t h e 9-20  year  inadequate  milk  intakes. The  biochemical  satisfactory populations do  not  serum  and  and  Lee,  vitamin A  intakes.  liver  hematocrit  levels  plasma  iron  vitamin  "acceptable"  levels.  that  25  both  Serum  numbers  serum  approximately  Indians serum  later  Urinary r i b o f l a v i n  levels  populations  were  saturation  i n s p i t e of  with  less  analyses  a  than  indicated old  were  were  lower  13  years than  old,  while  "normal"  in  36 p e r c e n t o f t h e Anaham p o p u l a t i o n t e s t e d . study  of  Lee,  two  populations  1974a; D e s a i  and  of Lee,  E l e v e l s i n 20-26 p e r c e n t o f  i n Upper L i a r d and  these  levels  c h o l e s t e r o l l e v e l s w e r e f o u n d t o be h i g h i n  E  ( D e s a i and vitamin  studied  residents  of both p o p u l a t i o n s over  vitamin  A  Ahousat  both  The  per cent of Ahousat c h i l d r e n under 3 years  deficient. large  of  in  A.  l e v e l s were "normal" o v e r a l l ,  number  found  However, serum  s t o r e s of  levels in  1971)  "normal" f o r Canadians w h i l e the t r a n s f e r r i n  significant  both  and  low  necessarily reflect and  (Desai  carotene  i n s p i t e of the  haemoglobin below  studies  Ross R i v e r .  p o p u l a t i o n s were i n t h e  7  Yukon  Territory  1974b) f o u n d the  populations  Cholestrol levels  low r a n g e .  low  S i x t y per  in cent  of the a d u l t s i n both of  c o m m u n i t i e s had  serum a s c o r b i c a c i d .  males  in  Upper  generally  Other  satisfactory.  The  two  biochemical  1975)  included  1800  remote)  was  Unfortunately, only  due  30  conducted  (Bureau of  b e t w e e n 1970  to problems c o n t a c t i n g  per cent of the  selected  vitamin  status i n this  al.  some  Low  longitudinal  study  begun  i n 1972.  (about  300  Hill  (300  t h e 90 p e r the  The  of p r e s c h o o l two  miles northeast  in  and  and  ascorbate  areas. studies Coodin  (1981) h a v e  reported  findings  Indian c h i l d r e n i n  from  a  Manitoba, Cross and  Lake Garden  p o p u l a t i o n 1300).  p o p u l a t i o n who  c o m m u n i t i e s had  Of  participated (Coodin low  et  in  al.,  hematocrit  serum a l k a l i n e p h o s p h a t a s e l e v e l s w e r e i n c r e a s e d  8  and  Canada.  p h y s i c a l examinations  per cent of both  this  folate  a number o f  dietary  of Winnepeg,  Canada.  Dietary  c o m m u n i t i e s s t u d i e d were  cent of the preschool  20-30  v a l u e s and  and  and  m i l e s n o r t h o f W i n n i p e g , p o p u l a t i o n 2100)  biochemical  1975),  physical  (urban  serum  i n remote  Ellestad-Sayed et a l .  biochemical,  and  calcium,  N u t r i t i o n Canada S u r v e y ,  (1975) and  1972  participants,  have been c o n d u c t e d w i t h n a t i v e groups a c r o s s et  and  sample.  population.  l e v e l s were a l s o found i n p o p u l a t i o n s the  not  Nutritional  the s i x n a t i v e c u l t u r e areas  a s s e s s m e n t s showed p o o r i r o n ,  Since  were  populations.  biochemical A  i n adult  findings  p a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m 29 d i f f e r e n t b a n d s  representing  levels  U n f o r t u n a t e l y d i e t a r y d a t a were  N u t r i t i o n Canada I n d i a n S u r v e y  Sciences,  was  H a e m o g l o b i n l e v e l s w e r e low  Liard.  a v a i l a b l e f o r these  " d e f i c i e n t " o r low  in  27.5  per  cent  o f t h e Garden H i l l  r i c k e t s were c o n f i r m e d . hour  The d i e t a r y d a t a  where 3 c a s e s  (based  from  23 p e r c e n t  o f t h e Garden H i l l  (less  than  the  pyridoxine, Garden  c h i l d r e n , excluding breast  Canadian  dietary  c a l c i u m and t h i a m i n .  Hill  participants  i n t a k e s were good i n b o t h  adult  (30  consumed  o f low  requirement)  less  t h e N u t r i t i o n Canada I n d i a n S u r v e y ,  ascorbic  Indian  Survey  compared they  to  are  as a whole.  program t o study  status  in  Bella 1984a). Coola  the  Coola,  o f l o w serum v i t a m i n A  However,  when t h e  than  than the urban  and  (Kuhnlein,  i n the  in  only, remote  nutritional in  Kuhnlein,  done i n B e l l a  i n v o l v i n g a d u l t women aged  9  were  conducted  1981;  Results of a p r e l i m i n a r y d i e t a r y survey,  i n t h e summer o f 1 9 8 1 ,  low  populations.  and improve f o o d use  Columbia  that  results  indicating that populations  p e o p l e o f t h e N u x a l k N a t i o n was British  Bay  and  t h e I n d i a n Survey r e s u l t s f o r remote areas  a r e a s may be a t g r e a t e r r i s k A  James  except  levels i n this population  comparable,  of the  t h e r e s u l t s were c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e  prevalence  acid  dietary  (1981) s t u d i e d 82 p e r c e n t  findings  serum  of the  P r o t e i n and a s c o r b i c a c i d  In general,  was a h i g h e r  folate,  the  o l d and over) p o p u l a t i o n o f t h r e e  there  intakes  of  than  Cree bands. of  per  communities.  Hoffer et a l .  years  a l . ,  fed infants.  More t h a n 50 p e r c e n t  r e q u i r e m e n t f o r v i t a m i n D and i r o n .  In 1978,  et  o f t h e C r o s s L a k e c h i l d r e n and 28  I n b o t h c o m m u n i t i e s t h e r e were h i g h f r e q u e n c i e s  of  on w e i g h e d 24-  i n t a k e s ) w e r e c o l l e c t e d i n 1974 ( E l l e s t a d - S a y e d  1981) cent  subjects,  19-49  years  o l d , r e s i d e n t on t h e r e s e r v e  indicate  that  intakes  less  a t t h e time o f t h e  more t h a n 33 p e r c e n t o f t h e g r o u p h a d than  one-third  of  the Canadian  study, dietary  recommended  n u t r i e n t i n t a k e s f o r v i t a m i n E, f o l a t e a n d c a l c i u m , w h i l e per  cent o f t h e group had d i e t a r y i n t a k e s  o f t h e recommended i n t a k e f o r v i t a m i n A, and  iron.  one-half Results and  l e s s than  one-third  v i t a m i n D,  ascorbate  A b o u t 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e g r o u p h a d i n t a k e s of  t h e recommended i n t a k e f o r t h i a m i n  of the n u t r i t i o n a l  Moody,  1984),  66 p e r c e n t  of  l e s s than  and  s t a t u s a s s e s s m e n t i n 1983  i n which  20-33  the  niacin. (Kuhnlein residents  p a r t i c i p a t e d , i n d i c a t e ' t h a t 30 p e r c e n t o f t h e women a n d 29 p e r cent  of  t h e men s t u d i e d e x c e e d e d t h e C a n a d i a n  c e n t i l e of weight f o r height. were in  Hemoglobin and h e m a t o c r i t  normal i n a l l b u t 5 a d u l t s , 32  per  teenagers cholesterol proportion levels  but f e r r i t i n  c e n t o f t h e a d u l t women a n d 43  tested.  Studies  on  ( B a r r and K u h n l e i n , o f t h e study  when  compared  national  serum  95th values  l e v e l s were l o w  per  cent  cholesterol  of the and  HDL  1985) i n d i c a t e t h a t a g r e a t e r  group had e l e v a t e d t o Native  serum  people studied  cholesterol by  Nutrition  Canada. The  studies  populations data  nutritional  that  population social,  contribute  status  of  native  Indian  c o n d u c t e d t o d a t e have been d i v e r s e i n terms o f t h e  c o l l e c t e d and t h e p o p u l a t i o n s  indicate  of  of  studied.  the native Indian population  at nutritional economic,  risk.  However, t h e y a l l i n Canada  Although there  and e n v i r o n m e n t a l r e a s o n s  to this condition,  is a  are a variety which  could  i t may be a r e f l e c t i o n o f t h e 10  general food consumption The  Nutrition  patterns of t h i s  Canada  Nutritional  Food C o n s u m p t i o n  (Bureau  of  Sciences,  average  d a i l y consumption  differed  from t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g n a t i o n a l  t h e y consumed l e s s m i l k , fish,  poultry,  servings  of  and  foods,  fruits,  primarily  (Vivian et a l . ,  Feeny,  1968;  and  a  Patterns  indicated  averages.  the  Indians  In  general  a n d v e g e t a b l e s a n d more meat, The a v e r a g e number  sugar,  1948;  Report  that  o f foods by Canadian n a t i v e  s i m i l a r t o the n a t i o n a l average.  which i n d i c a t e  1976)  cereal products.  reports  group.  and o f s o f t d r i n k s  of was  T h i s i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h many B e s t and G i r a r d ,  1 9 5 9 ; Dong a n d  S t e p i e n , 1978; A r m s t r o n g ,  1 9 8 0 ; K u h n l e i n , 1984a)  low consumption  f r u i t s and  higher  consumption  of milk,  of  cereal  products,  vegetables particularly  flour. Smith this  ( 1 9 7 5 ) , S c h a e f f e r (1977)  general  traditional  food foods  available i n local  consumption and  a  a n d S c h a e f f e r (1980)  pattern to a  growing  move  dependence  stores or trading posts.  away  on  of  transport.  preserved foods. foods  imported  molasses,  These  K u h n l e i n (1984a) into  include  about  t h e 1850's  a r e l i m i t e d depending  and t h e w e e k l y d e l i v e r y o f s u p p l i e s . that  flours,  stand the  sugars  were  t e a , s u g a r , s a l t , and w h i s k e y , and t h a t even  f r e s h foods i n t h e markets  on t h e  Moore e t a l . (1946)  85 p e r c e n t o f t h e c a l o r i e s p u r c h a s e d  11  foods  Foods a v a i l a b l e i n  has r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e  B e l l a Coola i n  from  the  remote a r e a s a r e n e c e s s a r i l y d u r a b l e items which w i l l rigours  relate  daily  and first  flour, today, season found from  trade-posts i n northern Manitoba, estimated  were f l o u r ,  lard,  jam.  They  foods  was  l o w due t o d e c r e a s i n g a v a i l a b i l i t y .  hand,  Lee  et  traditional  a l . (1971)  available,  stressed  game a n d f i s h p r o d u c t s  communities i n meeting Smith  t h a t use o f t r a d i t i o n a l  (1975)  cites  basic nutrition,  a  and  On t h e  importance  other  of the  and  l a c k o f knowledge  Anaham  about  a n d home-making s k i l l s  study of the food p a t t e r n s ,  fish  requirements.  i n f l u e n c i n g t h e food h a b i t s of n a t i v e Indians. in  game  t o t h e Ahousat  their nutrient  also  the  s u g a r , and  shopping  as f a c t o r s  Stepien habits  foods  (1978),  and  food  b e l i e f s o f I n d i a n s on i s o l a t e d a n d n o n - i s o l a t e d r e s e r v e s ,  found  that l o c a t i o n , education of the food preparer, a t t i t u d e s of the food  preparer  toward  nutrition,  general  available  practices.  H o w e v e r , t h e s i n g l e most s i g n i f i c a n t f a c t o r  f o o d c o n s u m p t i o n was i s o l a t i o n .  the  availability  selection in  of  foods  on  related  isolated  was p o o r e s t i n i s o l a t e d a r e a s .  fruits  practice  and v e g e t a b l e s .  to  food  related  T h i s c o u l d be r e l a t e d reserves  In this  as  food  fresh  meats,  study the highest  food  s c o r e s w e r e a c h i e v e d a t t h e two r e s e r v e s w h i c h  r e l i e d h e a v i l y on t r a d i t i o n a l  food sources b u t a l s o had  w e l l - s t o c k e d , reasonably p r i c e d food  to  The i t e m s most o f t e n  s h o r t s u p p l y i n markets were d a i r y p r o d u c t s ,  fresh  to  a l lpositively  household  facilities  to  were  and  still access  outlets.  NUTRITIONAL VALUE OF TRADITIONAL DIETS Many d i e t s over  researchers  have d i s c u s s e d t h e v a l u e o f  "westernized" d i e t s .  indigenous  Many e m p h a s i z e t h e e f f e c t 12  of  westernization introduction food and  on  plant  based  o f c a s h c r o p s has  plants  (Doughty,  Wadsworth,  1977;  1979; and  t h e p o i n t t h a t e a r l y man  food  systems  led to a reduction  Dewey, 1979;  Behar, 1976). was  able  They do,  t o s u r v i v e and  o f d i e t s w h i c h w e r e d e t e r m i n e d by  w h i c h he  lived.  was  able  provided  (1977) to  supply  i t  according  was  rich  methods.  calcium  and  the  The and  f a t soluble vitamins  v i t a m i n C i n f r e s h o r f r o z e n raw low  content  develop with environment  and  meat and  seafood  there  meat t o p r e v e n t  o f meat was  based oils  scurvy.  The  fish  concludes t h a t the e r o s i o n of t h i s d i e t w i t h a c c u l t u r a t i o n  has  a  decline  in  the  mammal  bones He  to  land  prepared  sufficient  o v e r c o m e by u s i n g  p o r t i o n o f s e a and  diet  as m a r i n e was  in  health  amounts  minerals,  and  for  a  bones.  led  spongy  h o w e v e r , make  essential  a v a i l a b l e i n adequate  s u f f i c i e n t vitamins  in  Robson  suggested t h a t the n a t i v e Eskimo  a l l the n u t r i e n t s  to t r a d i t i o n a l  diet provided are  has  the  the  in available  R o b s o n , 1976;  variety  Draper  where  nutritional  status  of  Eskimo  populations. Schaefer not but  o n l y a d e q u a t e f o r g r o w t h and s u p e r i o r i n some r e s p e c t s  diet. was  (1977) a r g u e d t h a t t h e a b o r i g i n a l E s k i m o d i e t  He  to the  stated that, although  lower  consumption  in by  the t r a d i t i o n a l  development of the " t y p i c a l " North  t h e d i e t was  f a t than the p u b l i s h e d  values  u r b a n A m e r i c a n s i n 1955. diet, while  low  He  high for  13  population American  in protein i t average  also stated  i n carbohydrate,  was  was  not  fat that  devoid  of t h i s component.  The s t o m a c h c o n t e n t s  of caribou  animals,  glycogen r i c h  tissues  were s o u r c e s o f c a r b o h y d r a t e i n t h e t r a d i t i o n a l  These  sources  consumption of  have  l i v e r s and g l y c o p r o t e i n s  and  been  replaced  of r e f i n e d sugars.  by  an  from e p i t h e l i a l  of  the  population  diet.  extremely  high  He c o n c l u d e s t h a t t h e e r o s i o n  t h i s d i e t has n o t o n l y a f f e c t e d t h e h e a l t h and  status  other  but also the  social  nutritional  and  cultural  structure of the population. Several of s p e c i f i c to  a  s t u d i e s have d e t e r m i n e d t h e n u t r i e n t foods i n t r a d i t i o n a l  n u t r i e n t standard  replaced  of  seven  Calorie  d i e t s a n d c o m p a r e d them e i t h e r  o r t o the foods which  them i n t h e " w e s t e r n i z e d "  Toma a n d C u r r y  composition  have  diet.  (1980) c a l c u l a t e d t h e n u t r i e n t  composition  t r a d i t i o n a l North Dakota n a t i v e foods. Benefit  Ratio  (NCBR)  was  calculated  v i t a m i n A,  thiamin, r i b o f l a v i n , niacin,  and  F i v e o f t h e seven foods q u a l i f i e d  iron.  Guthrie's  definition  (NCBR  of  generally  1  A  f o r protein,  ascorbic acid,  o r more  Nutrient  calcium  as n u t r i t i o u s f o r at  by  least  4  n u t r i e n t s o r a n NCBR o f 2 o r more f o r a t l e a s t 2 n u t r i e n t s ) . Hoppner e t a l . (proximate  (1978) d e t e r m i n e d t h e n u t r i e n t  composition,  pyridoxine,  folate,  B  ,  composition pantothenic  12 acid,  ascorbate,  thiamin,  riboflavin,  s o d i u m , p o t a s s i u m , magnesium, i r o n , for  s e a l meat a n d s e a l l i v e r .  based on a r c t i c  char,  The c a r i b o u a n d s e a l  meat w e r e c o m p a r a b l e t o b e e f i n t e r m s o f f a t a n d 14  phosphorus,  z i n c , c o p p e r a n d manganese)  e i g h t t r a d i t i o n a l Eskimo p r e p a r a t i o n s  c a r i b o u meat,  calcium,  protein,  but  had  average  to  high  levels  of  thiamin,  riboflavin,  B  , 12  folacin,  and p a n t o t h e n i c a c i d i n c o m p a r i s o n .  content  of  t h e e i g h t f o o d s was h i g h e r t h a n t h a t o f  group o f t h e "mixed C a n a d i a n d i e t " . arctic  The a v e r a g e  c h a r a l l had h i g h l e v e l s  iron  the  meat  S e a l meat and l i v e r ,  and  of long chain unsaturated  fatty  acids. Kuhnlein composition Nuxalk to  et  Nation.  determined  The t o t a l u n s a t u r a t e d i t was f o u n d  satisfy  that  2-3  second study  pacific  foods  manganese diet.  vitamin  in  lard  and  content. per  They  day  could In a  1982b) t h e n u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n  u s e d by t h e N u x a l k p e o p l e  higher  similar  f o r v i t a m i n s A and E.  s i l v e r w e e d was d e t e r m i n e d .  were  of the  f a t c o n t e n t was  of "grease"  requirement  (Kuhnlein et a l . ,  o f two r o o t f o o d s  nutrient  t o be s u p e r i o r t o b o t h  tablespoons  the adult d a i l y  the  a f i s h o i l u s e d by p e o p l e  o i l i n terms of t h e f a t s o l u b l e  estimated  and  (1982a)  of ooligan grease,  c o r n o i l and  corn  a l .  calcium,  - springbank  I t was  magnesium,  clover  found  that the  iron,  copper,  and z i n c t h a n p o t a t o w h i c h h a s r e p l a c e d them i n  The  r o o t s were a l s o s u b s t a n t i a l l y  higher i n  the  strontium  than the potato. Calloway Papago  et  a l .  Indian foods  (1974) e x a m i n e d  along with federal  h a v e r e p l a c e d them i n t h e d i e t ,  Hopi  commodity f o o d s ,  elements.  found  that native  Arizona  r e s e r v a t i o n a r e a s were c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e r i n t h a n t h e s u b s t i t u t e d commodity f o o d s .  15  foods  They  and which  f o r n i t r o g e n and f i f t e e n  mineral  content  They  traditional  from  other the  mineral concluded  that  the  meeting  two  p o p u l a t i o n groups  their  mineral  had a b e t t e r  requirements  probability  from  locally  of  grown,  t r a d i t i o n a l l y p r e p a r e d p l a n t f o o d s t h a n from commodity f o o d s o f equal  caloric  value.  This study also  bromine,  strontium,  compared  t o t h e commodity f o o d s .  consequences  of  rubidium  increased  and  found h i g h e r l e v e l s  lead i n  the  local  foods  The a u t h o r s n o t e d t h a t  intakes  of  these  of  the  elements  are  nutrients  for  unknown. Traditional growth some  diets  can p r o v i d e s u f f i c i e n t  and d e v e l o p m e n t o f a p o p u l a t i o n . concern  traditional traditional  about  the  toxicological  Although  there  properties  of  f o o d s i t h a s b e e n shown t h a t some e l e m e n t s d i e t s are n u t r i t i o n a l l y  some  of  s u p e r i o r t o the foods  is  the which  o f t e n r e p l a c e them i n t h e d i e t . COMPOSITION OF NATIVE SALMON PRODUCTS A survey of t r a d i t i o n a l the  foods s t i l l  Nuxalk N a t i o n found t h a t a v a r i e t y of t r a d i t i o n a l  f o o d s were s t i l l most  popular  ( K u h n l e i n , 1981; K u h n l e i n , 1984a).  These were Oncorhyncus n e r k a  0. k i u t s c h  (coho) , 0_^ t s c h a w y t s c h a  gorbuscha  ( p i n k ) and Salmo g a i r d n e r i  preparing the f i s h  frying  and  traditional dry  barbequing  included: over  an  baking, open  p r e s e r v a t i o n t e c h n i q u e f o r s a l m o n was  (Kuhnlein,  1984a).  The  The  methods  broiling, primary  smoking  In the l a s t century canning, 16  species  (chum) , 0.  stewing,  fire.  The  (sockeye),  ( s p r i n g ) , 0_^ k e t a (steelhead).  of  protein  p o p u l a r p r e p a r a t i o n s were from t h e s i x s a l m o n i d  a v a i l a b l e i n the area.  of  u s e d by t h e p e o p l e  until  freezing,  and  s a l t i n g h a v e become p o p u l a r t e c h n i q u e s  or l i g h t l y  smoked p r o d u c t s .  Published preparations There  nutrient commonly  are  some  (Pennington  and  Thurston, 1954).  Church,  people  raw,  1 9 8 0 ; Mann,  or  Canada,  grilled  salmon  Chatfield,  missing.  are moisture,  The  f o r v i t a m i n s and m i n e r a l s i s t h e i n the  l i t e r a t u r e are not  (Mann,  identify  (Zottola et a l . ,  t h e samples  most  most  useful  (1962), the  because  1962) o r common names a r e u s e d  cut of the f i s h  Stansby  a specific  stated.  traditional the  many c a s e s . these  area  that the  c l o s e t o t h e head i n c o n t r a s t t o  preparations i s also  actual preparation process  could affect the 17  inside.  difficult  i s not  Preparation techniques d i f f e r differences  Higashi  (1942) h a v e a l l n o t e d  or close to the skin i n contrast to the  on  because  - i.e.  to  o f much o f t h e d a t a i s t h a t  used i s n o t  (1962) a n d B a i l e y  was t a k e n f r o m  the t a i l  and  problem  the  1983) a n d t h e s e c a n v a r y  c o m p o s i t i o n o f a sample o f f i s h v a r i e s w i t h t h e  sample  data  Another  while  incomplete.  from a r e a t o a r e a making i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f d a t a from species d i f f i c u l t .  common  p r o t e i n and l i p i d s ,  species i s not given  specific  native  The d a t a a v a i l a b l e a r e s u m m a r i z e d i n T a b l e 1.  the  the  1942;  1954; H e l l e r , 1967;  determined  values  scarce.  1979;  nutrients  Some  fish  are  1962; B a i l e y ,  (Mann, 1 9 6 2 ; C h a t f i e l d ,  the nutrient values are  data  f o r the  few v a l u e s a r e a v a i l a b l e f o r t r a d i t i o n a l  1949).  of  values  used by t h e Nuxalk  v a l u e s f o r canned,  p r e p a r a t i o n methods  Many  composition  1958; H e a l t h and W e l f a r e Very  Rivera,  f o rpreserving fresh  The  t o use  documented  in  among n a t i v e g r o u p s composition  of the  product.  These  differences  differences  c o u l d be s m a l l b u t  c a n be s i g n i f i c a n t  even  small  i f consumption o f a product  is  high. T h e r e d o e s n o t a p p e a r t o h a v e b e e n a n y s y s t e m a t i c s t u d y on the  effect  of  t r a d i t i o n a l North American  t e c h n i q u e s on n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t . and  smoking on n u t r i e n t s  and  f i s h products  have and  been smoking  vitamins, smoked  do  i n flesh  foods  although  (Cutting,  appreciably  thiamin  are  generally  affect  (Daun, 1975)  1962;  the  Tarr, that  salting of  salted  The a u t h o r s n o t e  based on t h e  1962)  content  i s c o n s i d e r e d low i n  f i s h products worldwide.  conclusions  i n general  and i n g e n e r a l i t i s thought  not  processing  The e f f e c t s o f s a l t i n g , c u r i n g  i n particular  reviewed  native  that  composition  B  and these  of  the  f i n i s h e d product without comparing i t t o the composition of t h e comparable raw p r o d u c t s . (1983),  on  the  Alaskan  preserved  A study,  r e p o r t e d by Z o t t o l a e t a l .  c o m p o s i t i o n and m i c r o b i o l o g y o f f o o d s c o n c e n t r a t e d on t h e  pH  some  native  level,  salt  c o n t e n t and m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t i n terms o f r e d u c i n g o r p r e v e n t i n g bacterial  growth i n these products.  Again, the composition of  t h e p r o d u c t was n o t c o m p a r e d t o a c o r r e s p o n d i n g r a w s a m p l e . In  summary,  composition products  of  t h e r e i s much w o r k t o be done on t h e n u t r i e n t traditional  t o determine  Pacific  the n u t r i t i o n a l  18  Northwest  native  value of these  fish  products.  TABLE 1 Summary o f P u b l i s h e d Product  nerka  raw canned canned canned air/dried B:  Kcals  _ 71 -  _ 169 171 203  D:  E:  0. k e t a  raw canned F:  P/C BB HW R  g  _  IU  1  5  0  9 9 230 12 2 5 -  19.9 20.0 21.0 19.5  mg  mg  mg  I r o n Sodium P o t a s s i u m C a l c i u m P h o s p h o r o u s  ug  mg  mg  27 _  1.3 1. 2 0.9 _  mg  mg  Source  mg  0  _  1  4  tr 0.04 0.03 -  0  0  7  0.22 0. 16 0.15 -  _ 5 .9 7.3 7.2 _  4  3  3  522 _  9  _  1  344  _  p/  c  286 344 840  BB P/C HW R  78  212  286  297  FAO BB BB ADS EZ  13 187 196  230 264 286  P/C BB P/C  154 28 41 19  301 253 289 653 840 -  P/C BB P/C ADS R M  -  11 -  283 -  ADS BB  -  -  _  231 259 111 32  30  0.26  0.22  1.8  7.0  36 23  1.5  (pink)  71  119 139 141  73  15-  -  -  20.0 19.5 20.5  100  0.14  0.05  7.0  1.1  64  306  70  0.05  0.18  8.0  0.8  387  361  310  0..10  0.,23  640  0..13 0..15  0.,14 0. 82  219  0..10  0. 22  _  0.,08  0. 18  (spring)  222 200 210  -  14  -7  19 .1 20..0 19..6 37..5 48..2 56.,0  16 13 14 2 22 25  _  12.,0 21..5  2 5  230  -  7.3 17.5  _  _  _  _  -  -  0.9 _  -  45 • _ _  399 366 -  (chum) 84  -  values values values values  _ 20. 0 20 . 3 22.2 47.5  11 29  65 112  Salroo g a i r d n e r i  raw  _ -  140 123 158  0_;_ t s c h a w y t s c h a  raw raw canned air/dried air/dried smoked  g  Fat V i t A Thiamin R i b o f l a v i n N i a c i n F o l a t e  (coho)  0. g o r b u s c h a raw canned canned  g  Weight  (sockeye)  0. k i u t s c h  raw raw canned air/dried half/smoke  -3  V a l u e s f o r Salmon P r o d u c t s p e r 100 g Wet  H20 Energy CHO P r o t e i n %  A:  Nutrient  from from from from  -  -  (steelhead)  189  -  21.0  11  P e n n i n g t o n and Church (1980) B a i l e y (1942) H e a l t h and W e l f a r e Canada (1979) R i v e r a (1949)  8.4  -  FAO ADS EZ M  -  -  values values values values  from from from from  C h a t f i e l d (1954) H e l l e r (1967) Z o t t o l a e t a l (1983) Mann (1962)  -  BB  D E S C R I P T I O N OF The Bentick of  to  valley  i s located at  Arm,  about  450  north  i s 480  3.0  km  in  Bella  km  east  village  In  the  of  the  16  largest  and  350  km  south  by  20.  The  from  mountains  (Bella  0.8  which  Coola  is  east  a  of  i n supply  week.  There  foods  in Bella  population  Museum  and  on  reserve.  of  the  live  i n the  Coola. valley  or  bed  valley  Nuxalk Nation Bella  on  An  is  the  Bella  store  fresh  season  and  of  frozen,  Medical  services  about  with  three with  2000, of  additional of  adjacent  200 B.C.  people  a  whom,  Approximately  reserve  in  Coola.  Services Clinic  i n urban areas 20  supply  hospital  Indian.  on  in  Bella  the  1984a).  a Medical  people  of  the  valley.  o n c e a week and  is a reliable  Coola,  i n the Co-op  village  valley  mouth of  general  depending  Native  the  the  a fifteen  the  i s the small  (Kuhnlein,  include  the  settlement  valley  o n e - t h i r d are  elsewhere  North  varies i n width  2600 m  d e l i v e r e d to the  packaged  of  the  v i a Highway  located at  approximately  village  and  to  store i n the  h e a l t h nurse  of  of  l a r g e town i s W i l l i a m s  valley  Coola,  i s the  limited  valley  The  long  km  be  public  km  about  can  physicians  the  there  produce  the  nearest  1800  head  of Vancouver  of  addition,  supplies are  and  the  I t i s surrounded  of B e l l a  food  Hagensberg,  canned  80  from  River,  primary  day  The  STUDY  1979)  Coola  Coola.  in  air.  elevation  The  Food  by  (Figure 1).  Association,  The  km  i s approximately  range  INVOLVED IN  Coola  which  valley  AREA  Bella  Prince Rupert,  Lake  km  GROUP AND  to  675 the live  (Kuhnlein,  1984).  At i t s h e i g h t , the people  Nuxalk  Nation  villages  numbered  occupies Coola  river,  ( M c l l w r a i t h , 1948). 2  approximately  major  fishing  spread  in  t h e Dean C h a n n e l and  the  25 km  were  Today, t h e major  employers  industries.  i n the v a l l e y are the  In  1981  (Census 19.4  p e r c e n t f o r t h e p r o v i n c e o f B.C.  income  of males over  the p r o v i n c i a l province  disadvantaged Boland  this  could  be  Canada)  as a w h o l e .  The  $9,892 c o m p a r e d  considered  an  to  average  Compared t o o t h e r a r e a s  (1974)  estimated  to of  economically  t h a t 71 p e r c e n t o f  and He  a t $63,200  Kuhnlein declined,  the  estimated (based  (1984b)  found  on w h o l e s a l e  t h a t use  one-half  the  value)  w h i c h he  per person  of t r a d i t i o n a l i n the  last  per  then year.  seafoods century  of reserve r e s i d e n t s g e n e r a l l y  feel  t h e y h a v e enough f i s h  (Kuhnlein,  use  of l o c a l l y a v a i l a b l e t r a d i t i o n a l  21  among  the v a l u e of the n a t i v e c a t c h ,  among t h e N u x a l k p e o p l e ,  approximately  people  i n the n a t i v e  t h a t the b e n e f i t s were s h a r e d  c a l c u l a t e d as an i n c o m e s u p p l e m e n t o f $105  although  the  area.  fishery,  that year,  and  per c e n t , compared  15 on t h e r e s e r v e was  a v e r a g e o f $18,875.  entire population.  has  Bella  logging  of  r e s i d e n t on t h e r e s e r v e a t t h a t t i m e p a r t i c i p a t e d food  reserve  adjacent to the v i l l a g e of  u n e m p l o y m e n t r a t e on t h e r e s e r v e was  the  the  (Figure 1). The  5.6  known as  i n t h e t h o u s a n d s and  along the B e l l a Coola  S o u t h B e n t i c k Arm  o f what i s now  1984a). foods  has  I n c r e a s i n g the been  suggested  as  an  e c o n o m i c a l way  t o improve n u t r i t i o n a l  group.  22  status  of  this  Figure  1.  Map  of the B e l l a Coola V a l l e y  of the  r e s e r v e i n t h e v a l l e y and t h e l o c a t i o n o f t h e v a l l e y i n  the p r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia  23  (inset)  showing the  (from K u h n l e i n  location  1984a)  CHAPTER I I I RATIONALE This  study  Nutrition from  Program,  1983-1986.  food  use  traditional  composition  of  the  conducted  in Bella  s t a t u s of  the  food resources  t h e p r o g r a m was  o f t r a d i t i o n a l p l a n t and  Food  B.C.  t o improve  the  Nuxalk  to determine animal  and  Coola,  people  ( K u h n l e i n 1984). the  by  One  of  nutrient  f o o d s u s e d by  p u r p o s e o f t h i s p o r t i o n o f t h e s t u d y was  nutrient  composition of f i v e Nuxalk  commonly u s e d ,  and  of  a v a i l a b l e p r o t e i n foods.  commercially  included  canned  canned sockeye, to  Nuxalk  the  people.  The the  as p a r t o f  p u r p o s e o f t h e p r o g r a m was  nutritional  objectives  Nuxalk  done  w h i c h was  The  and  emphasizing the  was  comparison products  sluq  Nuxalk  barbequed  and k n u u m  (a h a l f - s m o k e d  1  the  Nuxalk  made t o t e s t  products  The  products  sockeye,  products  studied  barbequed  and  similar  coho p r o d u c t ) . and  The  the  commercial  the hypothesis t h a t the  indigenous  p r e p a r a t i o n s s t u d i e d were equal  commercial  preparations  (a h a r d - d r i e d , smoked c o h o p r o d u c t  between was  salmon  determine  t o compare t h e n u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n t o t h a t  sockeye,  salmon j e r k y ) ,  to  to or s u p e r i o r  to  the  i n p r o v i d i n g p r o t e i n , v i t a m i n A, v i t a m i n  thiamin,  riboflavin,  compared  on t h e b a s i s o f s t a n d a r d p o r t i o n s i z e ,  value or equal d o l l a r  niacin,  calcium,  value.  24  iron  and  zinc  equal  D,  when  caloric  The  o b j e c t i v e s of the study were: 1)  to describe  the f i v e salmon  preparation  methods  studied 2)  to  determine  fat,  the n u t r i e n t  calories,  thiamin,  moisture,  riboflavin,  pantothenic  a c i d and  manganese c o p p e r , and  composition  magnesium)  (protein,  vitamins  niacin,  minerals  A,  D,  E,  folate  sodium,  and  chromium,  z i n c , i r o n , phosphorous, calcium of  fish  prepared  by  the  five  of  the  techniques. 3)  to  compare  prepared sample  the  nutrient  samples from  determine  to  the  the  composition  t h a t of same  changes  a  fish  comparable order  to  nutrient  content  in  v i t a m i n A,  vitamin  D,  in  in  raw  processing. 4)  to  compare  thiamin, zinc  the p r o t e i n ,  riboflavin,  content  published protein  of the Nuxalk  values foods  analyzing  for  on  c a l o r i c v a l u e and The  niacin,  the dollar  information obtained i n this dietary  data  from  calcium,  and  to  the  preparations  commercially basis  of  available  serving  size,  value. study w i l l  this population  developing n u t r i t i o n education materials.  25  iron  be u s e f u l group  and  in in  CHAPTER I V METHODS  This general  chapter description  descriptions field  and  of  the  study,  of the sampling,  followed  by  a  detailed  a n d t h e methods u s e d i n  t h e samples f o r s p e c i f i c n u t r i e n t s ,  cost of products  with  t h e h a n d l i n g o f samples i n t h e  a n d i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y a t U.B.C.,  analyzing the  i s divided into sections starting  in  determining  and t h e n u t r i e n t q u a l i t y o f t h e p r o d u c t s ,  i n analyzing the data  statistically.  DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY Samples B e l l a Coola. techniques  o f f i v e N u x a l k f i s h p r e p a r a t i o n s were o b t a i n e d i n To d e t e r m i n e  the e f f e c t of the Nuxalk p r e p a r a t i o n  o n n u t r i e n t s , two s a m p l e s w e r e t a k e n  sampled f o r a g i v e n p r e p a r a t i o n . in  half  In effect,  from each  fish  t h e f i s h was c u t  l e n g t h w i s e a n d a p o r t i o n o f one h a l f o f t h e  fish  was  processed  by t h e a p p r o p r i a t e t e c h n i q u e .  A comparable p o r t i o n ,  from  opposite  was  the  side  of  the  fish  frozen  raw f o r  comparison. The n u t r i e n t s a n a l y z e d w e r e m o i s t u r e , p r o t e i n , a s h , l i p i d , v i t a m i n A,  v i t a m i n D,  total  free  and  minerals. values table  v i t a m i n E, t h i a m i n , r i b o f l a v i n ,  folate,  Carbohydrate  total  and  free  pantothenate,  and  was c a l c u l a t e d b y d i f f e r e n c e a n d e n e r g y  were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g s t a n d a r d c o n v e r s i o n of  niacin,  f o o d c o m p o s i t i o n was c o m p i l e d  26  factors.  f o r the Nuxalk  A fish  preparations. The  n u t r i e n t q u a l i t y of  comparing the Nutrient D,  an of  portion  Index of N u t r i e n t nutrient  food.  The  compared  to  alternates, Agriculture and  riboflavin,  a serving  a  fish  s a m p l e s was  determined  n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t of a p r o d u c t to the  Intake f o r Canadians  thiamin,  both  the  (for protein,  niacin,  basis  and  Q u a l i t y was  calculated  that  quality  of the  products  Canada's  i r o n , and  vitamin zinc)  fish  and  value  amount  of  that  preparations  was  foods  eggs)  on  Also,  r e l a t i n g the  caloric  of commercial p r o t e i n  dairy  A,  a d o l l a r value basis.  i n a g i v e n food to the  nutrient  Recommended  vitamin  calcium,  by  as  N u t r i t i o u s Food B a s k e t  (meats,  meat  described  in  (Robbins,  1984)  a v a i l a b l e i n B e l l a Coola.  SAMPLING R e c r u i t m e n t of p a r t i c i p a n t s f o r the J u n e , 1983,  p r i o r to the  B e l l a Coola. reserve  A notice  bulletin.  smokehouses  had  s t a r t of the describing  Previously,  been c o m p i l e d .  the  p e o p l e most l i k e l y  and  t h e y w e r e c o n t a c t e d by  the  b u l l e t i n notice  families might  list  of  the  investigator's project were  r i v e r landing  site,  As  in  the with  and  products  a result  visits,  to observe the  they  contact  Regular  of  fourteen  said that  made t o  f a m i l i e s when f i s h became a v a i l a b l e .  w e r e made t o t h e  printed  used to i d e n t i f y  investigator.  Arrangements  early  households  T h i s l i s t was  expressed i n t e r e s t i n the  participate.  fourteen  and  s t u d y was  t o p r e p a r e t r a d i t i o n a l salmon the  in  sockeye f i s h i n g season i n  the a  study s t a r t e d  the  visits  fishermen's  catch,  t o d e t e r m i n e when s o c k e y e From  samples  June  were  29,  and coho  1983 t o A u g u s t  31,  t h e 45 s a m p l e s ,  four  9 10 10  k^nuum sluq  canned  and one barbequed/canned  members o f t h e c o m m u n i t y . by  the investigator  using  fish  Coop,  which  Channel, fishing  an  area  by n a t i v e  used  Samples  and i n l e t  from  caught  came  were  staff,  Fisherman's  i n  Labouchere  f i s h e r m e n on one  t h e community  from  prepared  project  Native  licences  (BBQ)  day  were  food  prepared  fish.  SAMPLES  preparations  of  nutrition  donated  and a l l o w e d  project  facilities  to  samples  and t h e p r o j e c t  the  samples.  f o r each  the investigator  staff  prepare  investigator  except  sockeye  The r e m a i n i n g s a m p l e s  on c o m m e r c i a l  sockeye  All  following  two b a r b e q u e d  (BBQ/canned)  were caught  One c o m m u n i t y member  remaining  sockeye,  a n d members o f t h e n u t r i t i o n  licences.  P R E P A R A T I O N OF  canning  the  8 8  p u r c h a s e d f r o m members o f t h e  from both r i v e r  the  1983  COHO  canned barbequed barbequed/canned  sockeye  available.  collected: SOCKEYE  Of  became  staff  t o use the used  her  other  of the three and  smokehouse  and  samples.  The  h e r method  to  m a t e r i a l s were p u r c h a s e d a t t h e Co-op i n B e l l a t h e p r e s s u r e c a n n e r w h i c h was p r o v i d e d  28  members  by a  prepare  Coola  member  of  the  community.  processed to  The c a n n e d a n d b a r b e q u e d / c a n n e d s a m p l e s  i n K e r r 1 p i n t mason j a r s w h i c h w e r e s e a l e d  the manufacturers  were  cooled  outside, dark  directions.  slowly,  wrapped  i n Co-op a l u m i n u m f o i l  bags,  and  wrapped  degrees  C  foil  t o exclude  i n the Health C l i n i c  l a b e l l e d w i t h t h e f i s h number, s a m p l e was  fresh  easier. the  light  1  pint  samples freezer  and f r o z e n  freezer.  cool  at  -18  A l l samples  were  sample d e s c r i p t i o n and d a t e t h e  t h e f i s h were s t o r e d o v e r n i g h t  i n a tub  t o make  cutting  To s t a r t c u t t i n g , a s m a l l s l i t was made on one s i d e o f  fish  j u s t forward steady.  of the t a i l .  removed  preparations  This served  as a g r i p  to  F o r a l l f i s h p r e p a r a t i o n s , t h e head, t h e  a n a l and p e c t o r a l f i n s and t h e t a i l was  The o t h e r  r u n n i n g w a t e r t o ""firm u p ' , i n o r d e r  hold the f i s h  fin  the  processed.  Prior to cutting, of  from  and s t o r e d i n a  raw) w e r e p l a c e d i n new Co-op in  the jars  residue  p l a c e p r i o r t o shipment t o Vancouver.  (prepared  according  After processing,  washed t o remove a n y  were  f o r canning,  were removed.  but  was  The  retained  a n d was u s e d t o a n c h o r t h e f i s h d u r i n g  dorsal  in  other  processing  i n t h e b a r b e q u e d a n d k'nuum p r e p a r a t i o n s . Canning The entrails steaks in  half  fish  were  removed.  gutted  from g i l l  arch  anus  and t h e  The f i s h w e r e t h e n c u t i n r o u n d s o r  t h e l e n g t h o f t h e j a r s t o be u s e d . lengthwise.  to  H a l f o f t h e rounds  i n t o j a r s w i t h 2 mL o f t a b l e s a l t .  thick  E a c h r o u n d was c u t (250 g)  were  packed  The j a r s w e r e p r o c e s s e d  at  115 l b s p r e s s u r e f o r 110 m i n u t e s .  The o t h e r h a l f o f t h e r o u n d s  (250 g) w e r e f r o z e n r a w . B a r b e q u e d a n d K'nuum For  the  were c u t i n t o on  either  backbone,  the  "overcoats" or b u t t e r f l y f i l l e t s .  side ribs  boneless  b a r b e q u e d s o c k e y e a n d t h e k'nuum  of  t h e r i b cage o f  fillet  d o r s a l f i n o n one s i d e .  at i t s thickest point.  then c u t i n t o f i l l e t s taken  C u t s w e r e made  fish  so  that  the  l a yf l a t with the centre being the b e l l y  was c u t a b o u t 1 cm t h i c k ,  was  fish  a n d e n t r a i l s w e r e removed i n one u n i t a n d t h e  from  remaining f i l l e t  so t h e f i l l e t  was 2-2.5  F o r t h e k'nuum s a m p l e s t h e  fillet  l e a v i n g f l e s h on t h e b o n e s w h i c h was  f o rsluq.  one  and  F o r t h e barbequed samples t h e c u t s  w e r e made c l o s e t o t h e r i b s o f t h e f i s h cm  the  the  A f t e r c u t t i n g , a 250 g p o r t i o n  side of  the  fillet  and  frozen.  The  was s o a k e d i n a b r i n e s o l u t i o n o f 125 mL  table  s a l t i n 5 L o f w a t e r f o r 20 m i n u t e s . Barbequed The f i l l e t s a  fire,  barbeque The  w e r e hung i n t h e smokehouse o v e r n i g h t ,  f o r the  surface to dry.  They w e r e t h e n  " s t i c k s " made o f c e d a r s t i c k s  sticks  approximately  were  split  down  the  20 cm f r o m t h e e n d .  was s h a p e d t o a l l o w room f o r t h e f i s h .  placed  on  2 x 5 cm, 1 m i n l e n g t h . centre  lengthwise  The u n c u t e n d  i n t o a p o i n t and r e i n f o r c e d w i t h w i r e .  without  was  to  shaped  The i n s i d e o f t h e s t i c k The f i s h ,  s u p p o r t e d by  t h i n c e d a r s t i c k s o n e a c h s i d e , was t h e n i n s e r t e d , t h e open e n d 30  of  the  stick  inserted  into  was  bound w i t h w i r e a n d  t h e ground  the  After  of the f i s h  f a t a n d j u i c e c o n g e a l e d on  considered  shaped  0.5 m f r o m a h o t c e d a r  were r o t a t e d , so t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e when  the  the  the  s a m p l e was  cooled  in  fire.  was They  faced the f i r e ,  surface  done when " t h e f a t s t o p p e d d r i p p i n g "  cooking  end  the  and  were  ( 2 - 3 hours). refrigerator,  wrapped, and f r o z e n . K'nuum A f t e r s o a k i n g i n b r i n e f o r 20 m i n u t e s , fillets  were  alder f i r e slits tail  hung  i n t h e smokehouse a b o u t  f o r f o u r days.  the "overcoats" or 2 m above  To h a n g t h e f i s h ,  four  a  slow  lengthwise  ( a b o u t 2 cm l o n g ) w e r e made a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 cm f r o m 2 of the f i l l e t .  slits. flesh)  Two  small  A 1 cm  c e d a r s t i c k was woven t h r o u g h t h e  c u t s w e r e made t h r o u g h t h e s k i n  at the level of the dorsal f i n .  inserted smoking.  between The  t h e smokehouse,  these  fillet  the  cuts  (not the  A s m a l l f o r k e d t w i g was  to hold the  fish  flat  during  was hung b e t w e e n p o l e s s t r e t c h e d  across  s u p p o r t e d by t h e cedar s t i c k .  After  smoking,  were p r e p a r e d as  f o r the  t h e s a m p l e was f r o z e n . Barbequed/Canned The barbequed  Barbequed/Canned sample.  samples  A f t e r c o o k i n g t h e f i l l e t s w e r e k e p t on t h e  s t i c k s and p l a c e d o v e r p o l e s i n t h e smokehouse, about a slow a l d e r f i r e ,  f o r 2 days.  2 m above  The s a m p l e was t h e n p a c k e d  into  a mason j a r w i t h 1 mL t a b l e s a l t a n d 32 mL w a t e r , a n d p r o c e s s e d  at  10 l b s p r e s s u r e f o r 100 m i n u t e s .  Sluq Fillets on  the  bones  k'nuum.  of the f i s h after cutting  These  ribs. the  1 cm t h i c k w e r e c u t l e n g t h w i s e f r o m t h e f l e s h  fillets  the  "overcoat"  included short lengths of the  Two h u n d r e d a n d f i f t y  f i s h were f r o z e n raw.  grams o f f i l l e t s  left for  lateral  f r o m one s i d e o f  The c o r r e s p o n d i n g 250 g o f  fillets  f r o m t h e o p p o s i t e s i d e o f t h e f i s h were soaked i n b r i n e  (125 mL  table  on  the  fire,  to  rails dry  salt  in  5 L w a t e r ) f o r 20 m i n u t e s ,  o f t h e smokehouse o v e r n i g h t , the  surface.  removed  from  fingers  or  through  the  fillets  were  The  the  t h e n hung  over a low a l d e r  f o l l o w i n g morning  the  smokehouse a n d t h e r i b s w e r e  tweezers fillets threaded  (forceps).  Toothpicks  t o reinforce the o n t o a 1/4 i n  were  removed  with  were  upper dowel  fillets  edge, which  inserted and  the  was  hung  b e t w e e n t h e r a f t e r s o f t h e smokehouse a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 m a b o v e a slow a l d e r f i r e . dry. the  Following  The s l u q was smoked f o r f i v e d a y s ,  or u n t i l  s m o k i n g t h e s l u q was removed f r o m t h e  t o o t h p i c k s w e r e removed and t h e s a m p l e s w e r e  dowel,  frozen.  SHIPMENT OF SAMPLES The  canned  samples  were  a u t o m o b i l e i n August, 1983.  transported  to  Vancouver  by  The f r o z e n s a m p l e s , t o g e t h e r w i t h 4  f r o z e n " C o l d P a c s " , w e r e s h i p p e d by W i l d e r n e s s A i r on S e p t e m b e r 6,  1983,  packed  in  a l a r g e s t y r o f o a m c o o l e r which had  c o o l e d o v e r n i g h t i n a home f r e e z e r . 32  been  Empty s p a c e i n t h e c o o l e r  was  p a c k e d w i t h c r u m p l e d n e w s p a p e r a n d t h e l i d was s e a l e d  masking t a p e . half  hours  Vancouver were the  The s a m p l e s w e r e i n t h e c o o l e r f o r f o u r a n d one before  being transferred to a  (-18 d e g r e e s C ) .  On O c t o b e r 1 5 ,  t r a n s f e r r e d t o U.B.C. School  with  home  freezer  in  1983, t h e samples  and s t o r e d i n t h e main f r e e z e r  o f F a m i l y and N u t r i t i o n a l  Sciences.  The  of  storage  t e m p e r a t u r e , a t U.B.C., was -20 d e g r e e s C w i t h a r a n g e f r o m -10 degrees  C t o -25 d e g r e e s C.  malfunctioned  I n November  1984,  the  freezer  a n d t h e t e m p e r a t u r e r o s e t o 10 d e g r e e s C.  for a  p e r i o d o f n o t more t h a n s i x h o u r s . TREATMENT OF SAMPLES I N THE LABORATORY Five  samples from each  preparation  c o r r e s p o n d i n g r a w s a m p l e s , w e r e thawed each  p r e p a r a t i o n method,  corresponding  raw  samples,  were a l l o c a t e d  ( b a s e d on a 250 g s a m p l e ) :  vitamin  E  thiamin,  for in  samples,  method  with  For  with the as  v i t a m i n s A a n d D - 15  g;  m i n e r a l s - 5 g;  - 100  F o r t h e p r e p a r e d samples t h e w e i g h t  The r e m a i n i n g two s a m p l e s o f e a c h  t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw samples  were  g;  and p r o x i m a t e allocated  e a c h a n a l y s i s was a d j u s t e d t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e w e i g h t processing.  the  f o r analysis  r i b o f l a v i n and n i a c i n  f o l a t e a n d p a n t o t h e n a t e - 40 g; a n a l y s i s - 50 g .  with  and f i n e l y chopped.  three of the f i v e  follows  - 40 g;  method,  lost  preparation divided  for  p r o x i m a t e a n a l y s i s and f o r f o l a t e and p a n t o t h e n a t e , o n l y . The  aliquots  homogenized  f o r m i n e r a l and  i n a S e a r s 14-speed  proximate  analysis  b l e n d e r (Model 3 4 - 6 8 0 6 1 ,  33  were Sears  Ltd.  Vancouver),  (DDW)  t o f o r m a smooth homogenate  sample  with  depending  sufficient  distilled  (2-6 t i m e s t h e w e i g h t  on t h e p r e p a r a t i o n m e t h o d ) .  aliquots  were s t o r e d i n acid-washed  aliquots  for  bags  (B736,  washed  The  Nasco  Educational).  container,  of  the  homogenized  in  degrees  c u t t i n g board  the  Whirlpac  A l l a l i q u o t s of each  t h e n r e f r o z e n a t -18  blender  water  Nalgene b o t t l e s w h i l e  t h e r e m a i n i n g a n a l y s e s were s t o r e d  were l a b e l l e d , The  deionized  sample  C. and  knives  were  i n S u n l i g h t l i q u i d detergent r i n s e d w i t h tap water  t h e n r i n s e d t h r e e t i m e s w i t h DDW  between  and  samples.  ANALYSIS OF NUTRIENT COMPOSITION Moisture Approximately of three f o i l  weighing boats.  degrees  C,  reduced  pressure  samples  determined  (25 t o r r e s ) f o r 2 h o u r s  Analytical  by t h e f o l l o w i n g  % m o i s t u r e = 100  - % d r y wt  A f t e r t h e m o i s t u r e was allocated  (VWR  f o r proximate  a d e s s i c a t o r a t -18  balance.  each  under  C.  (+_ 0.0005 g)  Percent  70  The on  moisture  a was  formula: (as d e t e r m i n e d determined  a n a l y s i s was  degrees  model 1410)  a t 60 d e g r e e s  weighed t o a c o n s t a n t weight  2434  put i n  These were d r i e d o v e r n i g h t a t  t h e n p l a c e d i n a Vacuum o v e n  were  Sartorius  10 g o f h o m o g e n i z e d s a m p l e was  C.  34  by t h e w e i g h t  the remaining l y o p h y l i z e d and  loss).  homogenate stored i n  Ceramic  crucibles  w e r e s o a k e d i n an a c i d b a t h  o v e r n i g h t and d r i e d f o r 12 h o u r s a t 16 0 d e g r e e s C. and  0.4  g  of  crucibles.  dried  s a m p l e was  placed  in  (5M  HCl)  Between  each  of  three  A f t e r a s h i n g f o r 24 h o u r s a t 550 d e g r e e s C.  Thermolyne  1400  furnace,  the  samples  were  dessicator  t o c o o l f o r 12 h o u r s t h e n w e i g h e d  0.1  removed  in  a  to  a  to determine  ash  c o n t e n t as m i l l i g r a m s p e r gram d r y w e i g h t . Protein Total Kjeldahl were  Kjeldahl method  made  following:  nitrogen  was  determined  o f F u k i m o t o and Chang  according  to  their  by  (1982).  the  micro  A l l reagents  specifications  using  the  Amonium S u l p h a t e (Sigma A5132) Sodium  nitroferricyanide  dihydrate  (Western  JT3792-4) Sodium s a l i c y l a t e Tri-basic  (BDH  a s s u r e d l o t #96554/7174)  sodium phosphate.12H  0  (NASC)  2 Clorox Three 0.015 on  digests  g, and 0.02  a Labconco  they  were  eight  1110A-1,  C  in  o f each sample were done,  g of d r i e d  sample.  The  using  0.01  samples were  The a  Canlab),  (at l e a s t 4 hours),and  were  g,  digested  Kjeldahl digest rack with a glass manifold  clear  hours.  degrees  bleach  assayed  until within  a s s a y t u b e s w e r e i n c u b a t e d 25 m i n u t e s a t  45  Magni-whirl Constant  (MW  Temperature  Bath  c o o l e d 25 m i n u t e s i n c o l d t a p w a t e r and  the  a b s o r b a n c e r e a d a t 655 nm on a P e r k i n - E l m e r C o l e m a n Beam  Spectrophotometer.  standard grams  Results  were  plotted  c u r v e a n d p r o t e i n was d e t e r m i n e d by  nitrogen  by  the factor  6.25  124  Double  against  multiplying  (Watt a n d  Merrill  a the  1963).  Lipids Lipids (1959) were  w e r e d e t e r m i n e d u s i n g t h e method  m o d i f i e d f o r t h e s m a l l sample s i z e . a n a l y t i c a l grade.  D r i e d sample  total  v o l u m e o f 8 mL.  hours i n the r e f r i g e r a t o r methanol  A l l solvents  (0.2-0.4 g) was  i n t o l a r g e t e s t t u b e s (200 x 40 mL), and a  o f B l i g h and D y e r  weighed  DDW was a d d e d t o make  The s a m p l e s w e r e a l l o w e d t o to soften.  (20.0 mL) w e r e a d d e d ,  used  Chloroform  s i t 4  (10.0 mL) a n d  and t h e m i x t u r e was h o m o g e n i z e d  f o r 60 s e c o n d s w i t h a P o l y t r o n h o m o g e n i z e r f i t t e d w i t h a g e n e r a t o r / homogenizer blade 10.0  mL  aliquot  of  (Brinkman I n s t r u m e n t s ) .  c h l o r o f o r m was  added,  was  10.0 mL o f DDW was a d d e d and  the  f o r 30 s e c o n d s ,  sample  h o m o g e n i z e d a f u r t h e r 30 s e c o n d s .  was  covered  with  refrigerator  parafilm  A second sample  homogenized  the  PT-10  The  tube  and a l l o w e d t o s i t o v e r n i g h t  was  i n the  to separate.  The f o l l o w i n g m o r n i n g 15-18 mL o f t h e c h l o r o f o r m l a y e r was removed,and bath.  e v a p o r a t e d u n d e r n i t r o g e n i n a 50 d e g r e e s  The r e s i d u e was d i s s o l v e d  quantitatively methanol. chloroform. dishes  and  to  The  water  i n c h l o r o f o r m and t r a n s f e r r e d  a 10 mL v o l u m e t r i c f l a s k c o n t a i n i n g 0.2  samples  Three  C  were  brought  up  to  volume  mL with  2 mL a l i q u o t s were p l a c e d i n f o i l w e i g h i n g  e v a p o r a t e d u n d e r t h e fume h o o d .  They  were  then  dried  under  degrees  C  dishes  reduced before  pressure  (15 t o r r e s ) f o r 2  being weighed t o  hours  determine  to constant weight.  determine  the  s m a l l sample F o l a c i n and The  method,  o f b o t h f o l a c i n and  Lactobacilli growth,  in  every respect except  assays  u s i n g s t r a i n s of  d e p e n d i n g on t h e a s s a y .  the of  the  both  duplicate.  v i t a m i n i n the t e s t  assays  The  sample  acid  complete  and  can  to a standard  each  food  extract  was  e a r l i e s t e x p i r y d a t e on any  for  determinations  were  containers,  t h e a n a l y s e s were  of  to be  folacin  solution.  samples  sealed  strains  w i l l be p r o p o r t i o n a l  m e d i a o r s t a n d a r d s u s e d i n e i t h e r a s s a y was fish  The  f o r the f o l a c i n or pantothenic a c i d i s  growth of the organism  pantothenic acid For  acid  Lactobacilli  I f a b a s a l medium  measured a g a i n s t the organism's response or  the  used r e q u i r e d e i t h e r f o l a c i n or p a n t o t h e n i c  for  amount  using  pantothenic  b a c t e r i a i n a 22 h o u r t u r b i d i m e t r i c p r o c e d u r e .  the  done t o  Pantothenic Acid  microbiological  provided,  then  size.  determination  involved  this  The  and  A p r e l i m i n a r y s t u d y was  p e r c e n t r e c o v e r y from  60  lipids.  w e r e r e t u r n e d t o t h e vacuum o v e n f o r 1 h o u r ,  reweighed  at  both  folacin  freeze dried  of the October  and  completed.  37  in  chemicals, 1986.  The  pantothenic  i n J u n e 1984  u n d e r d e s s i c a t i o n a t -20  prepared  and  acid  stored  d e g r e e s C.  in  until  Folacin  (folate)  Both  free  adaptation Baker al.  and  of  total  f o l a t e were  determined  t h e methods o f H e r b e r t a n d B e r t i n o  and Frank  (1967) a s u s e d by Hoppner  using  an  (1967)  and  (1971) and Hoppner e t  (1972). A c u l t u r e o f L a c t o b a c i l l u s c a s e i i ATCC 7469 was m a i n t a i n e d  on  B a c t o - L a c t o b a c i l l i A g a r A.O.A.C.  e v e r y two w e e k s . prepared hours  prepared sterile and  37  degrees  by  washing  Innoculum B r o t h  C.  the c e l l s  acid  prepared Each 0.2,  working  i n 0.85% s t e r i l e  saline  (PGA) -  #2860) s o l u t i o n o f 200 ug f o l a c i n p r o t e c t e d from  s t o c k s t a n d a r d was p r e p a r e d standard  o f 0.2 ng f o l a c i n  light, at every  per  assay rack i n c l u d e d d u p l i c a t e standards w i t h  six  mL  from t h e s t o c k s t a n d a r d e v e r y day p r i o r t o each 0.05,  was  assay. 0.1,  0.3, 0.4 o r 0.5 ng o f f o l a c i n p e r t u b e . Phosphate-ascorbate  and  0.85%  (pteroyl glutamic acid  p e r mL was p r e p a r e d a n d s t o r e d ,  A  with  Spectrophotometer.  (PGA)  Fresh  was  Perkin  Pharmacopeal Convention  months.  times  assay  a  U.S.  C.  i n c u b a t e d 18  t o 80% t r a n s m i t t a n c e a t 660nm on  C o l e m a n 124 D o u b l e Beam  degrees  transferred  f o r the  t h e s u b c u l t u r e seven  A stock standard f o l i c  4  (Difco),  The i n n o c u l u m  s a l i n e and s u s p e n d i n g  standardizing  Elmer  and  P r i o r t o r u n n i n g e a c h a s s a y a s u b c u l t u r e was  i n Bacto-Micro  at  (Difco)  stored  at  buffer,  4 degrees  C.  (0.05M,  pH 7.8) was  J u s t p r i o r t o use  prepared  5 mg p e r  a s c o r b i c a c i d was a d d e d a n d t h e pH was r e a d j u s t e d t o 7.8.  38  mL  The c h i c k e n p a n c r e a s  enzyme s o l u t i o n was p r e p a r e d  each day  o f 10 mg d e s s i c a t e d c h i c k e n  pancreas  by e x t r a c t i n g a s u s p e n s i o n (Difco) The  p e r mL s t e r i l e DDW  supernatant  supernate and  was  on a v o r t e x m i x e r  and c e n t r i f u g i n g .  s t i r r e d w i t h 1 g Dowex 1-X8  f o r 10 m i n u t e s .  per  10  mL  The s u s p e n s i o n was c e n t r i f u g e d a g a i n  t h e Dowex d i s c a r d e d . To  prepare  sample  t h e f o o d e x t r a c t s 0.25 g o f e a c h  dried  was m i x e d w i t h 8 mL o f b u f f e r a n d a u t o c l a v e d a t 15  pressure  and  c o l d water  121 d e g r e e s C f o r 10 m i n u t e s ,  bath.  supernatant solution total  diluted  so  the f i n a l  16 h o u r s ,  final  assay  blank  was  and i n c u b a t e d i n a w a t e r  pancreas  prepared  duplicate  assay  i n t h e same manner a s  (12  rack tubes),  enzyme b l a n k f o r t o t a l (6 t u b e s ) extract adding  (72 t u b e s )  included  the  (3 t u b e s ) ,  and  either  a t 0.5,  standard  the  the  enzyme  total  folate  standards (3  tubes),  in an  an i n n o c u l a t e d b l a n k  1.0 a n d 1.5 mL p e r  or food e x t r a c t s t o  39  C  An  a n d 8 f o o d s a m p l e s i n d u p l i c a t e (48 t u b e s ) . E a c h was a s s a y e d  tubes  DDW.  an u n i n n o c u l a t e d b l a n k folacin  enzyme  The  mL,  as f o r f r e e f o l a t e .  e x t r a c t s by r e p l a c i n g t h e f o o d sample w i t h Each  the  b a t h a t 37 d e g r e e s  t h e c o n t e n t s w e r e a d j u s t e d t o 10  s o l u t i o n prepared  assay  For  s o l u t i o n was a d d e d t o e a c h t u b e a f t e r a u t o c l a v i n g .  for  contents  concentration of the  d e t e r m i n a t i o n s 1 mL o f c h i c k e n  stoppered  a  m i x e d , c e n t r i f u g e d and t h e  was b e t w e e n 0.1 and 0.2 ng f o l a c i n p e r mL.  folate  lbs  then cooled i n  For free f o l a t e determinations the  w e r e a d j u s t e d t o 10 mL w i t h b u f f e r ,  were  fish  tube.  the  food After  appropriate  tubes  t h e v o l u m e i n a l l t u b e s was b r o u g h t  sterile  DDW.  (Difco  - b a t c h # 704725)  were  Prepared  autoclaved  degrees  C  and  microliters  of  was added t o e a c h a t 15  cooled i n a  the prepared  37  d e g r e e C f o r 22 h o u r s  on  a  The  tube.  with  The  l b s pressure  cold  innoculum  except the uninnoculated blanks.  P e r k i n Elmer  mL  B a c t o - F o l i c A c i d C a s e i i Medium(2.5  f o r 5 minutes then  up t o 2.5  water  mL) tubes  and  bath.  121 Fifty  were added t o a l l t u b e s  The t u b e s w e r e i n c u b a t e d  and t h e absorbance  C o l e m a n 124 D o u b l e  at  was r e a d a t 660 nm  Beam  Spectophotometer.  s t a n d a r d c u r v e was p l o t t e d on s e m i - l o g a r h y t h m i c  paper  and  the f o l a c i n content o f the t e s t e x t r a c t s read o f f t h e curve. The the  f o l a c i n content of the dried  s a m p l e s was d e t e r m i n e d  by  formula:  Folate in 1 gram D r i e d Sample  =  (Amount  from  C u r v e / Amount o f D i l u t e E x t r a c t ) x D i l u t i o n Weight o f D r i e d Sample i n E x t r a c t  Factor  Pantothenic Acid Free adaptation  and t o t a l of  the  p a n t o t h e n i c a c i d were d e t e r m i n e d method o f Zook e t a l .  (1956) a s  using  an  used  by  Sarwar e t a l . (1985). A  culture  maintained transferred prepared  on  of  Lactobacillus  plantarum  B a c t o - L a c t o b a c i l l i Agar  e v e r y week.  P r i o r t o each  i n Bacto-Lactobacilli  Broth  ATCC  A.O.A.C.  8014 (Difco)  was and  a s s a y a s u b c u l t u r e was A.O.A.C.  (Difco),  incubated assay  18  was  h o u r s a t 37 d e g r e e s  acid  f o r the f o l a c i n assay  innoculum  per  degrees  mL  was  prepared using calcium  Convention  C.  #870.  a c i d p e r mL was  Each assay r a c k i n c l u d e d  "Tris"-buffer C.  The  10%  pigeon  mg  as  pantothenic  pantothenate  T h i s s o l u t i o n was  -  U.S.  stored at  prepared from the s t o c k  (1M,  pH  b u f f e r was  pigeon l i v e r  liver  8.3)  k e p t no  was  ng  2,  4,  tube. p r e p a r e d and  stored at  4  l o n g e r than 2 weeks.  extract solution  a c e t o n e powder  4  standard.  s t a n d a r d s i n d u p l i c a t e w i t h 1,  8, o r 10 ng o f p a n t o t h e n i c a c i d p e r  A  the  E a c h day a f r e s h w o r k i n g s t a n d a r d c o n t a i n i n g 4  pantothenic  degrees  for  above.  s t o c k p a n t o t h e n i c a c i d s o l u t i o n o f 0.5  Pharmacopeal  6,  The  p r e p a r e d f r o m t h e s u b c u l t u r e i n t h e same manner  the innoculum A  C.  was  (Sigma) e x t r a c t e d  prepared i n 0.02  M  from KHCO 3  and  centrifuged.  Dowex  resin  1-X8  The  (pH 8.0)  t h r e e t i m e s i n I N HC1 was  centrifuged  t u b e s i n 5 mL until  resulting  and  and  treated  w h i c h had b e e n a c t i v a t e d by 11 t i m e s i n s t e r i l e DDW.  the supernatant t r a n s f e r r e d  quantities.  needed.  s u p e r n a t a n t was  T h e s e w e r e s t o r e d a t -20  with  washing  The  extract  to  sterile  degrees  A l l e q u i p m e n t and r e a g e n t s w e r e k e p t i c e  C  cold  during preparation. A  2%  #3.1.3.1.) The 0.25  water  extract  (Sigma) was food  g of d r i e d  of  alkaline  prepared fresh  phosphatase  (E.C.  daily.  e x t r a c t s were p r e p a r e d i n d u p l i c a t e  by  mixing  s a m p l e w i t h 2.5  of  "Tris"-  mL 41  o f DDW  and  0.7  mL  buffer, C  m i x i n g , a u t o c l a v i n g a t 15 l b s p r e s s u r e and  f o r 15 m i n u t e s , and c o o l i n g  the  free  volume  pantothenate  with  diluted.  DDW, After  determination intestinal prepared were  centrifuged  samples  for  and  the  phosphatase  l i v e r e x t r a c t were added  t o each  hours).  The  preparation  volume  was  mL  of  the  0.4  mL  of  tube.  The  enzyme  blank  was  a s s a y was  was  plotted  pantothenate  total  (Difco batch  as  content  for  of  the  the tubes  and  the  extracts.  DDW. the  folate  Bacto-Pantothenate  # 687739).  folate  2%  pantothenate  p r e p a r e d i n t h e same manner as  Medium A.O.A.C. (U.S.P.) curve  5 mL  replaced with  d e t e r m i n a t i o n e x c e p t t h a t t h e m e d i a u s e d was  mL  overnight  pantothenate  p r e p a r e d as f o r t h e  e x t r a c t s e x c e p t t h e f o o d s a m p l e was The  C  then adjusted to  c o n t i n u e d as f o r t h e f r e e  5  pantothenate  0.4  s o l u t i o n and  to  supernatant  total  a u t o c l a v e d and c o o l e d ,  degrees  samples f o r  the  i n c u b a t e d i n a h o t w a t e r b a t h a t 37 d e g r e e s  (16  An  the  alkaline  The  d e t e r m i n a t i o n were a d j u s t e d  mixed,  were  i n an i c e b a t h .  121  The  analysis  t h e t e s t e x t r a c t s was  read  standard and  the  off  the  samples  was  curve. The determined  pantothenic  a c i d content of the d r i e d  by t h e f o r m u l a :  Pantothenate i n 1 gram D r i e d Sample  =  (Amount  from  C u r v e / Amount o f D i l u t e E x t r a c t ) x Weight of D r i e d Sample i n Extract  42  Dilution  Factor  Vitamins  A and D  Samples were  f o r determination  packed  in  O c t o b e r 25, Neville and  of r e t i n o l  and  d r y i c e and s e n t t o O t t a w a  1983.  cholecalciferol via  Expidair  on  The a n a l y s e s w e r e done c o u r t e s y o f D r .  J.  Thompson o f t h e N u t r i t i o n R e s e a r c h D i v i s i o n o f  Welfare  (Thompson  Canada.  et a l . ,  HPLC (Thompson Vitamin  R e t i n o l was d e t e r m i n e d  by  Health  flourometry  1978) w h i l e c h o l e c a l c i f e r o l was d e t e r m i n e d by  e t a l . , 1982).  E  The  a n a l y s i s o f ^ - t o c o p h e r o l was done c o u r t e s y  Nakai  of  t h e Department o f Food  method  o f Thompson and H a t i n a  grade.  The  <*•- t o c o p h e r o l  Hoffmann  LaRoche.  Lipids  (1979).  The f i l t e r e d  t h e n washed w i t h DDW  ^-tocopherol  using  te  A l l s o l v e n t s were  standard  used  e x t r a c t was  and e v a p o r a t e d  S.  U.B.C,  was  a  were e x t r a c t e d from 5 g o f sample w i t h  and a c e t o n e .  The  Science,  of Dr.  separated  gift  from  isopropanol  with  under reduced  HPLC  hexane,  pressure.  c o n t e n t was d e t e r m i n e d by HPLC u s i n g  S h i m a d z u RF-540 s p e c t r o f l u o r o m e t e r w i t h a f l o w c e l l  to  monitor  t h e e f f l u e n t and a S h i m a d z u C-R3A C h r o m a t o p a c i n t e g r a t o r . excitation 330  nm  system standard  was  (slit was  set  5 nm).  a t 290 nm  5 nm)  The f l o w r a t e was  1% i s o p r o p a n o l  was  (slit  injected  at  i n moist  hexane.  the s t a r t of  43  and t h e e m i s s i o n  2 ml/min. An  daily  The  a  The at  solvent  "^-tocopherol analysis  and  approximately results The  every  10  samples  throughout  were c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g an A b s o l u t e  minimum  level  analysis.  Calibration  The curve.  o f d e t e c t i o n was 0.003 mg ^ - t o c o p h e r o l p e r  lOOg f r e s h w e i g h t .  The a n a l y s e s o f t h e s a m p l e s  were  completed  i n June 1985. T h i a m i n , R i b o f l a v i n and N i a c i n The  analyses of thiamin,  by E c o n o t e c h S e r v i c e s L t d . , riboflavin (1980)  were b o t h  methods  riboflavin  New W e s t m i n s t e r ,  analyzed  4 3 - 024  a n d n i a c i n w e r e done B.C. T h i a m i n a n d  flourometrically  (thiamin)  and  43-039  N i a c i n was a n a l y z e d b y c o l o r i m e t r y u s i n g A.O.A.C. 43-044.  Samples  w e r e moved t o E c o n o t e c h  by  A.O.A.C.  (riboflavin). (1980)  method  i n May 1984 a n d t h e  a n a l y s e s were c o m p l e t e d by t h e end o f 1984. Minerals The  analysis  performed the  The  o f McQuaker  (1976)  emission  o f t h e samples  using the  a n d McQuaker e t a l . ( 1 9 7 9 a ,  1979b).  nitric-perchloric  on a n i n d u c t i v e l y c o u p l e d  was  Canada, i n  Canada L a b o r a t o r i e s , N o r t h V a n c o u v e r ,  method i n v o l v e s t h e a n a l y s i s o f a  digest  samples  c o u r t e s y of Dr. Paul K l u c k n e r , Environment  Environment  method  of the mineral content of the  acid  plasma-atomic  spectrophotometer.  C a r b o h y d r a t e and Energy Carbohydrate calculated  and  following  energy  content  of  the  samples  t h e p r o x i m a t e a n a l y s i s on t h e b a s i s  44  were of  100  g  f r e s h sample.  Carbohydrate  (CHO)  was  determined  by  d i f f e r e n c e by t h e f o r m u l a : CHO= 100 - (% m o i s t u r e E n e r g y was d e t e r m i n e d Merrill, Energy  + % protein + % ash + % l i p i d )  by t h e f o r m u l a  ( k c a l v a l u e s from Watt and  1963): (kcals)=  % p r o t e i n x 4.27 k c a l s + % l i p i d x 9.02 k c a l s + % c a r b o h y d r a t e x 4.11 k c a l s  FOOD PRICING Salmon Samples The  economic v a l u e o f a product  i s generally  when  i t i s o f f e r e d f o r s a l e on t h e open  price  obtained  demand  ( B e l l a n , 1976).  sold  legally  food f i s h  for a  thought catch from  to  i n t h i s manner.  supply  and  of the  In a report  (1974) u s e d t h e w h o l e s a l e v a l u e o f  caught salmon t o determine  be  the  t h e r e f o r e t h e economic v a l u e  Boland  n a t i v e food catch.  by  where  I n d i a n f o o d f i s h c o u l d n o t be  c o u l d n o t be d e t e r m i n e d  commercially  market,  i sdetermined  I n 1983,  i n Canada,  t o F i s h e r i e s Canada,  the  product  determined  t h e economic v a l u e  The w h o l e s a l e v a l u e o f t h e c a t c h  more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e t r u e v a l u e  t h a n t h e " l a n d e d " v a l u e because t h e c a t c h went the fisherman  t o t h e consumer.  directly  T h i s method h a s b e e n u s e d  in  t h e Yukon and N o r t h w e s t T e r r i t o r i e s as w e l l  In  that  the wholesale value of 45  was  of the  i n e s t i m a t i n g t h e economic v a l u e o f t h e n a t i v e c a r i b o u  instance  of  beef  harvest  (Brody, was  1981).  used  to  estimate the value of the caribou. Fresh  fish  however,  are not generally  fresh  commercial  fish  were  for sale i n B e l l a  purchased  from  fishermen for the project.  Coola,  several  native  The p r i c e a g r e e d  upon  f o r t h e s e f i s h was t h e w h o l e s a l e p r i c e f r o m t h e Canada P a c k e r s ' boat i n B e l l a B e l l a , $1.15  B.C. - $1.00 p e r l b f o r d r e s s e d Coho a n d  p e r l b f o r dressed Sockeye.  i t s e l f was c a l c u l a t e d  taking  The c o s t  i n t o a c c o u n t t h e amount  as w a s t e a n d t h e l o s s i n w e i g h t d u r i n g Commercial The  product discarded  processing.  Products c o m m e r c i a l p r o d u c t s p r i c e d were t a k e n from t h e  products,  eggs,  Agriculture  meats,  Canada's  and  meat  alternates  N u t r i t i o u s Food B a s k e t  The  p r o d u c t s were p r i c e d  The  cost  purchase  of the  using  yield  Economics A s s o c i a t i o n  section  (Robbins,  of  1984).  a t t h e B e l l a C o o l a Co-op i n J u l y 1 9 8 3 .  p e r e d i b l e p o r t i o n was c a l c u l a t e d unit  dairy  from t h e c o s t  f i g u r e s from  (1980) a n d T e r r e l l  of the  the American  Home  (1979).  EVALUATION OF NUTRIENT QUALITY Nutrient nutrients  quality  protein,  n i a c i n , calcium, Nutrient and  was e v a l u a t e d i n t h r e e ways  vitamin  A,  i r o n and z i n c .  Intake f o r Canadians  Welfare  vitamin  Canada  the  riboflavin,  The p e r c e n t o f t h e Recommended (R.N.I.) f o r women 25-49  1983) f o r e a c h o f  p r o v i d e d b y one s e r v i n g  D, t h i a m i n ,  using  t h e above  (Health  nutrients,  o f each o f t h e commercial p r o d u c t s  46  and  of  the f i s h  for  p r o d u c t s was c a l c u l a t e d .  The p e r c e n t o f t h e R.N.I,  women 25-49 f o r t h e a b o v e n u t r i e n t s p r o v i d e d b y a  r e p r e s e n t i n g a $1.00 v a l u e o f e a c h o f t h e c o m m e r c i a l fish  p r o d u c t s was c a l c u l a t e d .  Quality for  Finally,  (I.N.Q.) was c a l c u l a t e d  each  provided R.N.I.  an Index o f N u t r i e n t  p r o d u c t u s i n g t h e method o f S o r e n s o n  by  et  nutrients al.(1976).  for a given  a p o r t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r food t o the  f o r energy  and o f t h e  f o r each o f t h e above  T h i s method r e l a t e s t h e % o f t h e R.N.I.,  portion  nutrient, %  of the  p r o v i d e d b y t h e same p o r t i o n o f t h a t  food,  using the formula:  I.N.Q. =  (Amount (Amount  o f N u t r i e n t i n Food Sample / S t a n d a r d f o r N u t r i e n t ) o f E n e r g y i n Food Sample / S t a n d a r d f o r E n e r g y )  S T A T I S T I C A L ANALYSIS OF DATA The  data  w e r e a n a l y z e d on an Amdahl 5860 c o m p u t e r  t h e SPSS-X s t a t i s t i c a l A Pearson was  a  dried  The  where  prepared  sample.  by t h e P a i r e d  were t h e r a w s a m p l e The n u l l  and  processing  Comparison the  t-Test  corresponding  h y p o t h e s i s was t h a t t h e r e  47  and  samples.  significance of the effect of  was d e t e r m i n e d  the pairs  and f r e e f o l a t e and t h e t o t a l  contents of the dried  statistical  nutrients  i f there  c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e f a t c o n t e n t o f t h e  samples and t h e t o t a l  free pantothenate  on  package.  C o r r e l a t i o n T e s t was u s e d t o d e t e r m i n e  statistical  using  was  no  significant  d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two s a m p l e s .  The l e v e l  s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s b e i n g r e j e c t e d was p< unless otherwise A comparison and  that  Whitney  significant significance p<  of the n u t r i e n t q u a l i t y of the f i s h  The  differences for  0.05  stated.  of the commercial U-test.  of  the  p r o d u c t s was done u s i n g t h e  n u l l h y p o t h e s i s was between t h e null  products  groups.  hypothesis  0.05.  48  that there  being  The  Mann-  was  no  level  of  rejected  was  CHAPTER V RESULTS I  VALIDATION OF METHODS  A:  Lipids A  preliminary  recovery with  generator/  sample  sizes  homogenizer  homogenizer. salmon  (trial  was  done t o d e t e r m i n e  o f l i p i d s u s i n g t h e method  small  dried  study  Corn  o f B l i g h and  Dyer  (0.3 g d r y w e i g h t ) and blade  o i l was  (PT-10)  a d d e d t o 0.3  on  an the  #2 - 0.05  g samples of  g , and  trial  s a l m o n and f r e e z e - d r i e d raw p o t a t o  percent (1959) enclosed Polytron  and f r e e z e - d r i e d raw p o t a t o i n i n c r e a s i n g  #1 - 0.025 g , t r i a l  Freeze-dried  the  freezeamounts  #3 - 0.1 g ) . ( 0.3  g each)  w e r e a s s a y e d a s c o n t r o l s . The r e s u l t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 2.  TABLE 2 Percent Recovery D y e r (1959) L i p i d per Nuxalk n=3  o f L i p i d s f r o m t h e Method o f  Bligh  and  Sample  g  lOOg * % R e c o v e r y o f Added L i p i d HW Trial 1 T r i a l 3 Mean Trial 2 n=l n=3 n=3 n=3 + SD  potato  <0.01  tr  95.8 + 0.4  96.2 + 1.0  94.5 + 0.8  95.5 + 0.9  salmon  10.0 + 0.9  11  94.6 + 0.5  95.3 + 0.2  95.9 + 0.7  95.3 + 0.7  * fresh weight HW V a l u e s f r o m H e a l t h and W e l f a r e Canada The  measured  (1979)  v a l u e s f o r b o t h t h e p o t a t o and  49  the  canned  salmon  were comparable t o t h e v a l u e s p u b l i s h e d by  Welfare  Canada  less  of  both  the  (1979).  the level salmon  Health  The p e r c e n t r e c o v e r y o f l i p i d s ,  o f o i l added,  was a p p r o x i m a t e l y  (95.3 +_ 0.7) and t h e  potato  and  regard-  95%  (95.5  for  +  0.9)  samples. B:  M o i s t u r e i n S t o r e d F r e e z e D r i e d Samples The  and  fish  samples used i n t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f t h e  pantothenate  c o n t e n t were f r e e z e - d r i e d  a c t u a l a n a l y s e s w e r e n o t done u n t i l a  series  concern had  of delays i n testing  that the  folate  i n August 1984.  t h e summer o f 1 9 8 5 ,  t h e methods.  moisture content of the  There  due t o  was  freeze-dried  The  some  samples  i n c r e a s e d over t h i s p e r i o d o f t i m e , even though t h e samples  had  been  stored  u n d e r d e s s i c a t i o n a t - 20  degrees  m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t o f t h e s t a n d a r d salmon sample, prepared, other  dried  samples,  folate  analyses  pantothenate presented  (to constant weight) was d e t e r m i n e d  which  C.  had been  and s t o r e d a l o n g w i t h t h e  just prior to the start of  (9 months s t o r a g e ) a n d a g a i n j u s t p r i o r  analyses  i n Table  The  (11 months s t o r a g e ) .  The  t o the  results  3. TABLE 3  Percent M o i s t u r e i n F r e e z e - D r i e d Samples A f t e r S t o r a g e f o r 9 M o n t h s a n d 11 M o n t h s Length  of  Storage  % Moisture  (n=3)  9 months  3.5 + 1.0  11 months  3.1 + 0.6  50  the  are  After  9  approximately 3.1%  standard  sample  had  up  B o t h m e a s u r e m e n t s w e r e made r e l a t i v e t o t h e  d r y weight  o f t h e sample. Determinations  methods u s e d i n d e t e r m i n i n g f o l a t e a n d p a n t o t h e n a t e i n  food samples suggested de-fatting  defat  picked  approximately  E f f e c t o f L i p i d s on F o l a t e a n d P a n t o t h e n a t e The  and  the  3.5% m o i s t u r e a n d a f t e r 11 months  moisture.  original C:  months  the  trimming v i s i b l e  f a t s from  t h e f a t t e r meat p r o d u c t s .  fish  products  because t h e  meat  products  I t was d e c i d e d n o t t o f a t content  was  low  c o m p a r e d t o many meat p r o d u c t s . To affect  check  that the l i p i d  c o n t e n t o f t h e samples  the determination of free  pantothenate  or t o t a l  folate,  pantothenate,  total  the l i p i d  d i d not  folate,  free  content of the  s a m p l e s was p l o t t e d  a g a i n s t t h e v i t a m i n c o n t e n t o f t h e samples.  F i g u r e s 2,  and 5 p r e s e n t t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e l i p i d  3,  4,  content  o f t h e s a m p l e s i n mg/g d r y w e i g h t  content  (ng/g d r y  weight),  free pantothenate  pantothenate Pearson for  weight),total content  (ug/g d r y w e i g h t ) .  content,  and any o f t h e f r e e the  pantothenate  folate  free  content  free  content.  folate  (ng/g d r y  (ug/g d r y w e i g h t )  and t o t a l  respectively.  c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s were c a l c u l a t e d  significant correlations  samples  versus  between t h e l i p i d f o l a t e content,  pantothenate  content,  test  content of the  the total and  The r e s u l t s a r e p r e s e n t e d  51  to  the  folate total  i n Table  4.  2601  195  130  65  o  W  "80-  120  160  200  FREE FOLATE F i g u r e 2.  P l o t of L i p i d Content  240  280  320  360  400  .  (ng)  (mg/g dry weight) v e r s u s Free F o l a t e  Content  (ng/g dry w e i g h t ) .  440  • •  H  40  •• •  1-  120  ••  • ••• •  200  280  360  kkO  520  600  680  760  8^0  TOTAL FOLATE ( n g ) gure 3  P l o t of L i p i d  Content  (mg/g dry weight) v e r s u s T o t a l F o l a t e  Content  (ng/g dry w e i g h t ) .  920  260  195.  L I P I D  13Q.  (mg)  65-  1.2  1.5  (—  2.1  2.4  2.7  3-0  3-3  3-6  3-9  4.2  4.5  FREE PANTOTHENATE (ug) Figure 4.  P l o t of L i p i d Content (mg/g dry weight) versus Free Pantothenate Content (ug/g dry weight).  2601  195  L I P I  D (mg)  130.  65 1  T%  Tfr  -J72  • •• jls  zrTo  O  J%  57o  6\k '6.6  TOTAL PANTOTHENATE (ug) F i g u r e 5.  P l o t of L i p i d Content  (mg/g d r y weight) v e r s u s T o t a l Pantothenate Content  (ug/g d r y weight),  TABLE 4 P e a r s o n C o r r e l a t i o n s ( t w o - t a i l e d ) B e t w e e n The L i p i d C o n t e n t and t h e F o l a t e C o n t e n t , and t h e P a n t o t h e n a t e C o n t e n t o f t h e Samples Component  Correlation  Free f o l a t e Total folate Free Pantothenate Total Pantothenate NS  means n o t  Coefficient  Significance  0.0971 0.0012 -0.1294 -0.1669  NS NS NS NS  significant  None o f t h e t e s t s g a v e a s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t , was  assumed  that  the l i p i d  content of the  i n t e r f e r e w i t h the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of these II  therefore i t  samples  did  not  nutrients.  NUTRIENT COMPOSITION The  Table  fish  5  i n B e l l a C o o l a i n 1983  by t h e s a m p l e number,  sampled, were  sampled  the  ( i n l e t or r i v e r )  were c a u g h t .  The  July  1,  and J u l y  (26N,  260,  1983 26P,  and  the area i n which t h e d a t e on w h i c h  sockeye were a l l caught  26Q,  12,  26R,  1983.  26S)  The  samples were caught between J u l y  1983.  The  earlier  caught  in  caught  within  samples  (31B,  t h e i n l e t w h i l e t h e two four  m a j o r i t y of  1983  31E,  31F,  samples  m i l e s o f t h e mouth o f  River.  56  fish  the  fish  the  fish  between  the  fish  12, w h i c h  ended t h a t y e a r .  8,  and A u g u s t and  in  the  i n the i n l e t  w e r e t a k e n on J u l y  a f t e r t h e main r u n of B e l l a C o o l a sockeye coho  listed  w i t h the s e c t i o n of  p r e p a r a t i o n method,  caught  are  was The 24,  31G)  were  from  August  were  the  Bella  Coola  TABLE 5 D e s c r i p t i o n o f Samples A n a l y z e d - S e c t i o n Sampled, Method, L o c a t i o n Caught and Date Sampled. Fish  Sample A:  Section  Method  Preparation  Location  Date  Sockeye  26D  1/2  Mid  Canned  Inlet  7/01/83  •26E  1/3 2/4  Tail Mid  BBQ BBQ/Cnd  Inlet  7/08/83  261  1/3  Mid  Canned  Inlet  7/08/83  26N  1/4 2/5 3/6  Head Tail Mid  Canned BBQ BBQ/Cnd  Inlet  7/12/83  260  1/4 2/5  Head Tail  Canned BBQ  Inlet  7/12/83  26P  1/4 2/5 3/6  Head Tail Mid  Canned BBQ BBQ/Cnd  Inlet  7/12/83  26Q  2/4  Mid  BBQ/Cnd  Inlet  7/12/83  26R  1/2  Tail  BBQ/Cnd  Inlet  7/12/83  26S  1/3  Tail  BBQ  Inlet  7/12/83  B:  Coho  3 IB  1/4 2/3  Fillet Head  Sluq K'nuum  Inlet  7/08/83  31E  2/4  Head  K'nuum  Inlet  8/19/83  3 IF  1/3 2/4  Fillet Head  Sluq K'nuum  Inlet  8/19/83  31G  1/3  Fillet  Sluq  Inlet  8/19/83  31H  1/3 2/4  Fillet Head  Sluq K'nuum  River  8/24/83  311  1/3 2/4  Fillet Head  Sluq K'nuum  River  8/24/83  57  The  barbequed  sections  of  adjacent  to the t a i l .  section (26N,  the  samples were a l l p r e p a r e d u s i n g  260,  except  of  section  26P)  or  the  the  body  The c a n n e d s a m p l e s w e r e f r o m t h e  the  mid-section  (26D  the  and  tail  head  samples  261) .  The  s a m p l e s came f r o m t h e m i d - s e c t i o n o f t h e  fish  s a m p l e s f o r k'nuum w e r e t a k e n  of the f i s h ,  section. A l l  from  the  w h i l e t h e samples f o r s l u q were  headfillets  the length of the f i s h . The  n u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n o f 100 g p o r t i o n s o f raw s o c k e y e  the  sockeye  barbequed/canned) moisture, folate,  each  preparations, i s reported  protein,  lipids,  free folate,  represent of  the section of  f o r s a m p l e 26R w h i c h came f r o m t h e t a i l  five  and  that i s ,  ( i e . a d j a c e n t t o t h e head) f o r t h r e e o f  barbequed/canned  cut  fish,  the  total  (canned,  i n T a b l e 6.  The  values  ash, carbohydrate,energy,  of  the  other  nutrients  preparations.  The  r e p r e s e n t t h e mean o f 9  s o c k e y e and 3 samples o f each o f t h e r e m a i n i n g range  preparation  and for total  p a n t o t h e n a t e and f r e e p a n t o t h e n a t e  t h e mean o f 15 s a m p l e s o f r a w s o c k e y e a n d 5  remaining  The  barbequed  i n values f o r the  t e n d s t o be l a r g e .  nutrients  Overall  values samples  samples f o r the of  raw  preparations. f o r any  t h e barbequed  t e n d t o show t h e g r e a t e s t r a n g e i n v a l u e s f o r a n y one  given samples  nutrient  w h i l e t h e v a l u e s f o r v i t a m i n E, t h i a m i n , s o d i u m a n d c o p p e r t e n d to  show t h e g r e a t e s t r a n g e f o r a n y one p r e p a r a t i o n Published  v a l u e s f o r raw,  comparison w i t h raw,  canned,  canned and b r o i l e d  method. sockeye f o r  and barbequed N u x a l k samples a r e 58  TABLE 6 Nutrient Processed  Composition of Sockeye P r e p a r a t i o n s (Reported as Mean and Range)  per  100 g  as  Raw(a)  Canned(b)  BBQ(b)  BBQ/Cnd(b)  %  70 (62-79)  66 (62-73)  60 (31-70)  55 (47-60)  Kcals  143 (107-169)  159 (121-176)  190 (150-308)  215 (136-247)  Protein  g  20 (16-24)  20 (17-24)  28 (21-47)  28 (22-37)  Lipid  g  5 (1-7)  6 (2-6)  5 (4-6)  8 (5-12)  Ash  g  2 (1-2)  3 (2-4)  3 (2-3)  3 (2-4)  CHO  g  3 (0-4)  6 (0-12)  4 (3-13)  6 (3-11)  Vitamin A  IU  167 (93-320)  233 (143-276)  400 (193-723)  486 (200-709)  Vitamin D  IU  227 (172-298)  211 (171-247)  649 (284-1345)  434 (321-571)  Vitamin E  mg  0.37 (0.13-0.92)  1.35 (1.0-1.7)  0.08 (0.04-0.12)  1.60 (0.79-2.09)  Thiamin  mg  0.40 (0.09-1.15)  0.14 (0.06-0.28)  0.19 (0.02-0.28)  0.03 (0.01-0.03)  Riboflavin  mg  0.28 (0.13-0.90)  0.16 (0.14-0.18)  0.54 (0.3-0.9)  0.43 (0.38-0.51)  Niacin  mg  4.6 (3.6-6.1)  4.6 (4.0-5.0)  6.4 (5.9-6.3)  6.1 (4.8-8.2)  Folate (Total)  ug  7 (3-22)  6 (3-8)  14 (7-27)  7 (3-11)  Folate (Free)  ug  5 (2-10)  5 (1-8)  12 (8-16)  6 (2-9)  127 (74-174)  138 (115-153)  lomponent Moisture Energy  Units  P a n t o t h e n a t e ug (Total)  59  238 (198-373)  188 (172-208)  TABLE 6 (con't) Component  Units  Raw(a)  Canned(b) 88 (82-96)  BBQ(b)  BBQ/Cnd(b)  Pantothenate (Free)  ug  72 (52-96)  Sodium  mg  58 (26-100)  Chromium  ug  44 (12-166)  Manganese  ug  17 (11-41)  Copper  ug  665 (217-2272)  166 (143-178)  1390 (760-2380)  624 (440-864)  Zinc  mg  0.9 (0.7-1.6)  0.5 (0.4-0.8)  1.3 (0.9-1.7)  1.0 (0.8-1.1)  Iron  mg  0.8 (0.5-1.7)  0.3 (0.3-0.4)  1.3 (0.7-1.9)  0.9 (0.8-1.1)  Phosphorus  mg  216 (231-387)  238 (216-280)  361 (268-455)  325 (285-381)  Calcium  mg  52 (30-105)  59 (35-106)  81 (59-93)  70 (51-82)  Magnesium  mg  25 (24-36)  20 (18-23)  36 (27-44)  33 (29-37)  783 (462-1153) 13 9 (7-13)  155 (110-276)  112 (97-149)  270 (93-546)  438 (364-493)  72 (22-109)  28 (22-36)  67 (49-92)  67 (41-104)  a) n= 15 f o r m o i s t u r e , energy, p r o t e i n , l i p i d , a s h , CHO, t o t a l and free folate, and t o t a l and f r e e pantothenate. n=9 f o r a l l other n u t r i e n t s . b) n= 5 f o r m o i s t u r e , energy, p r o t e i n , l i p i d , a s h , CHO, t o t a l and free folate, and t o t a l and f r e e pantothenate. n=3 f o r a l l other n u t r i e n t s .  60  TABLE 7 Published N u t r i e n t Values S i m i l a r Nuxalk P r e p a r a t i o n s Nutrient  f o r Sockeye Salmon w i t h V a l u e s (Based on lOOg p o r t i o n s )  Raw  Canned  Broiled/BBQ  P/C  N  P/C  BB  HW  N  HW  N  (%)  -  70  -  -  71  66  71  60  (kcals)  -  143  171  169  203  159  182  190  -  20.0  20.3  20.0  22.2  20.0  26.7  28.0  -  5.0  9.3  9.3  12.2  6.0  7.7  5.0  -  233  160  400  ==================  Moisture Energy Protein Lipid  for  (g) (g)  Vitamin A  (IU)  150  167  230  -  Vitamin D  (IU)  -  227  -  440  -  211  -  649  0.14  0.40  0.04  -  0.03  0.14  0.16  0.19  0.07  0.28  0.16  -  0.15  0.16  0.05  0.54  -  4.6  7.3  -  7.2  4.6  14.5  6.4  -  7  -  -  27  6  27  14  48  58  522  52  Thiamin  (mg)  Riboflavin Niacin Total  (mg) Folate  Sodium  (ug)  (mg)  Calcium  (mg)  Phosphorus Iron  (mg)  (mg)  (mg)  Magnesium  (mg)  -  783  116  270  259  -  Ill  59  -  81  216  344  253  -  238  -  361  -  0.8  1.2  -  0.9  0.3  1.2  1.3  -  25  29  -  -  20  -  36  -  P/C v a l u e s from Pennington and Church (1980) N v a l u e s f o r Nuxalk Sockeye Samples from T a b l e 6. BB v a l u e s from B a i l e y (1942) HW v a l u e s from H e a l t h and W e l f a r e Canada (1979)  61  reported  i n T a b l e 7.  The raw  raw N u x a l k s o c k e y e samples were compared t o v a l u e s f o r  sockeye p u b l i s h e d  mean  values  f o r the  published values. and  sodium  nutrients  given in  published  value.  for  greater  values  value  moisture,  for  vitamin  Canada A,  (1979).  riboflavin,  published  of  values  t h e N u x a l k s a m p l e s was b e l o w reported  (169 k c a l s t o  a l l but the Health  were  and W e l f a r e  w i t h i n t h e range r e p o r t e d  the  thiamin those  riboflavin twice  the  values  (1980),  Bailey  The v a l u e s  for  phosphorus  and  were comparable t o t h e p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s .  value  however,  and W e l f a r e  protein,  magnesium  lOOg  than  canned N u x a l k salmon samples were compared t o  and H e a l t h  energy  The  for  was a p p r o x i m a t e l y  canned s o c k e y e f r o m P e n n i n g t o n and C h u r c h  (1942)  171  of  The l o w e s t  however,  (1980).  f o r v i t a m i n A,  w i t h i n t h e range  i n T a b l e 6.  T a b l e 6,  Church  N u x a l k samples were  The p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s  a l l fell  reported  The  i n P e n n i n g t o n and  The range  of  203 k c a l s p e r 100  g)  value  the  mean  o f 203 k c a l s p e r  i n T a b l e 4 (121 k c a l s  to  k c a l s p e r 100 g ) . Values  calcium  vitamin  and i r o n were a l l lower  published Health  for lipids,  values.  Both  and W e l f a r e  the d e t e r m i n a t i o n  the  t h e N u x a l k samples were g r e a t e r  niacin,  total  folate,  i n t h e Nuxalk samples than P e n n i n g t o n and C h u r c h  Canada v a l u e s  of calcium.  D,  the  and t h e  i n c l u d e d t h e salmon bones  in  V a l u e s f o r t h i a m i n and sodium i n than the published  values.  The  n u t r i e n t v a l u e s f o r t h e barbequed Nuxalk  compared Welfare and  to Canada  values f o rbroiled (1979).  samples  salmon s t e a k s i n  The v a l u e s f o r e n e r g y ,  were  Health  protein,  and  thiamin  i r o n were comparable t o t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s ,  however, less  the  than  Values the  mean  moisture value o f t h e Nuxalk  t h e p u b l i s h e d v a l u e f o r sockeye  forlipids,  published  riboflavin  n i a c i n and t o t a l  values.  were  values  nutrient  was  broiled.  f o l a t e were a l l l e s s  f o r vitamin  A,  than  sodium  and  published  salmon s t e a k s . for a  barbequed/canned sockeye The  steaks,  a l l g r e a t e r than the corresponding  values f o rbroiled Published  Values  samples  process  corresponding  to  were n o t a v a i l a b l e .  c o m p o s i t i o n o f 100 g p o r t i o n s o f r a w  and  w i t h o u t s k i n ) and p r o c e s s e d  The  v a l u e s f o r moisture, energy,  Coho i s r e p o r t e d i n  Table  8.  lipid,  carbohydrate,  and  a s h r e p r e s e n t t h e mean o f 5 s a m p l e s f o r e a c h  preparation.  The  values f o rfree folate,  pantothenate,  and  total  pantothenate  preparation calculated these  except over  total  folate,  free  r e p r e s e n t t h e mean o f 5 s a m p l e s f o r e a c h  f o r t h e raw f i l l e t  where  analyses.  The  values  f o r the  remaining  r a n g e r e p o r t e d f o r most v a l u e s t e n d s  the  p r e p a r a t i o n methods. tend  mean  was  to  p r e p a r a t i o n method.  show  the  nutrients  each.  The  thiamin  the  4 s a m p l e s a s s a m p l e 3111 was n o t a v a i l a b l e f o r  r e p r e s e n t t h e mean o f 3 s a m p l e s  all  protein,  (with  t o be l a r g e o v e r  The v a l u e s f o r v i t a m i n greatest  range  f o r any  E  and  given  TABLE 8 N u t r i e n t C o m p o s i t i o n o f Coho P r e p a r a t i o n s p e r 100 g as P r o c e s s e d (Reported as Mean and Range)(a) Component Moisture  U n i t s Raw(+ s k i n )  K nuum 1  %  65 (59-73)  45 (39-51)  Kcals  177 (130-222)  278 (232-325)  Protein  g  18 (16-19)  29 (24-32)  Lipid  g  8 (5-12)  11 (7-16)  Ash  g  1 (1-2)  CHO  g  7 (4-10) .  Vitamin A  IU  Vitamin D  IU  Vitamin E  mg  Thiamin  Energy  Raw f i l l e t ( b ) 75 (73-81) 111 (82-129)  Sluq 26 (14-44) 311 (239-360)^  23 (16-28)  60 (40-78)  1  3 (2-4)  2 (2-3)  2 (1-2)  7 (3-5)  13 (11-19)  1 (0-3)  7 (0-15)  87 (47-113)  343 (310-109)  20 (10-33)  246 (130-363)  133 (89-169)  343 (311-364)  26 (16-40)  245 • (128-363)  0.45 (0.10-1.13)  0.27 (0.16-0.38)  0 .07 (0.03-0.12)  0.26 (0-0.40)  mg  0.77 (0.14-2.00)  0.09 (0.06-0.11)  0.35 (0.03-0.95)  0.05 (0.01-0.07)  Riboflavin  mg  0.22 (0.20-0.23)  0.29 (0.24-0.34)  0.10 (0.06-0.14)  0.25 (0.20-0.33)  Niacin  mg  3.1 (2.4-3.7)  5.4 (4.2-7.3)  4.1 (4.0-4.6)  11. 6 (10.0-13.7)  Folate (Total)  ug  6 (1-9)  15 (7-24)  5 (3-7)  Folate (Free)  ug  3 (1-8)  5 (2-8)  1 (0-2)  Pantothenate (Total)  ug  117 (65-176)  64  182 (157-208)  91 (67-102)  9 (4-21) ND 230 (184-283)  TABLE 8 Component  U n i t s Raw( + s k i n )  (con't)  K'nuum  Raw  fillet  Sluq  Pantothenate (free)  ug  63 (51-68)  128 (113-162)  46 (33-58)  147 (100-185)  Sodium  mg  53 (39-63)  89 (68-106)  35 (21-62)  197 (155-227)  Chromium  ug  26 (21-36)  14 (10-17)  34 (29-39)  Manganese  ug  20 (14-28)  52 (34-48)  8 (7-11)  73 (51-38)  Copper  ug  364 (292-495)  158 (127-209)  271 (146-469)  490 (333-676)  Zinc  mg  0.7 (0.6-0.7)  1.0 (0.8-1.3)  0.4  1.2 (0.9-1.4)  Iron  mg  0.6 (0.5-0.7)  0.7 (0.6-0.9)  0.4 (0.3-0.5)  0.9 (0.7-1.0)  Phosphorus  mg  217 (204-243)  407 (356-472)  250 (230-271)  637 (570-773)  Calcium  mg  66 (37-109)  128 (67-191)  Magnesium  mg  24 (19-29)  42 (36-49)  a) b)  32  8. (4-13)  21 (15-28)  29 (27-31)  84 (69-94)  n=5 f o r m o i s t u r e , energy, p r o t e i n , l i p i d , a s h , CHO. n=4 f o r free and t o t a l f o l a t e and f r e e and t o t a l pantothenate. n=3 f o r a l l other n u t r i e n t s . without s k i n .  65  Published comparison  . values  with  smoked/dried Table  the  raw  ( w i t h and  and  dried  without  coho  skin)  raw  N u x a l k coho samples were compared  from C h a t f i e l d  Church  (1980).  (1954),  Bailey  None o f t h e s e  and t h e  with  vitamin  A  published sodium,  skin and  (NI) t h e mean  thiamin  values.  in  published  values.  The  riboflavin  to  Pennington  and Church v a l u e s  without  f o r energy,  lipid,  the  corresponding  f o r protein,  vitamin  were comparable and c a l c i u m  (N2) t h e mean v a l u e s  values  value,  but  energy, were  was  f o r v i t a m i n A,  Pennington  the Chatfield  were  sodium,  value.  and  The v a l u e and  Church  Values  for  l i p i d s , v i t a m i n D, n i a c i n , c a l c i u m , i r o n a n d magnesium  a l l below t h e corresponding  values  greater  I n t h e raw N u x a l k coho sample  was c o m p a r a b l e t o t h e l e s s than  were  to the  is  phosphorous were comparable t o t h e p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s . riboflavin  D,  to the  The n i a c i n a n d i r o n v a l u e s  the published values.  skin  Nuxalk  the r i b o f l a v i n value  i s lower.  skin  I n t h e raw  the C h a t f i e l d values but i n comparison  the calcium value than  than  magnesium  comparable  lower  values  were h i g h e r  and  published  (1942) a n d P e n n i n g t o n a n d  or not.  The mean v a l u e s  phosphorous,  to  r e p o r t s s t a t e d whether t h e  included i n the determination  sample  for  for  (k'nuum a n d s l u q ) N u x a l k s a m p l e s a r e r e p o r t e d  values  and  coho  9. The  was  f o r raw  published values,  f o r p r o t e i n and t h i a m i n were b o t h  above t h e  while  the  published  values. The  Nuxalk  smoke/dried p r e p a r a t i o n s 66  ( k'nuum  and  sluq)  TABLE 9 Published Nutrient V a l u e s f o r Coho w i t h V a l u e s for P r e p a r a t i o n s f o r Comparison (based on lOOg p o r t i o n s ) Nutrient  Raw FAO  Protein Lipid  P/C  -  (%)  -  -  (kcals)  140  123  19.9  20.0  6.1  4.5  30  -  Moisture Energy  BB  (g) (g)  Vitamin  A  Vitamin D  (IU) (IU)  -  154  Niacin  (mg)  7.0  -  Sodium  (mg)  -  -  Thiamin  Riboflavin  Calcium  (mg)  (mg)  Phosphorus Iron  0.26  (mg)  78 (mg)  (mg)  Magnesium  0.22  212 1.3  (mg)  -  -  NI  N2  ADS  NI  N2  65  75  10.7  45  26  177  111  -  278  311  18.0  23.0  -  29.0  60.0  8.0  1.0  11.0  3.0  87  20  -  343  246  133  26  -  343  245  0.09  0.05  0.29  0.25  36.5  -  5.4  250  0.6  0.4  20  8  0.77  0.35  0.11  0.22  0.10  -  3.1  4.1  48  53  .35  175  66  8  231  217  -  FAO V a l u e s from C h a t f i e l d (1954) BB V a l u e s from B a i l e y (1942) P/C V a l u e s from P e n n i n g t o n and Church (1980) NI V a l u e s f o r raw w i t h s k i n or k'nuum from T a b l e N2 V a l u e s f o r raw f i l l e t or s l u q from T a b l e 8. ADS V a l u e s from H e l l e r and S c o t t (1967)  67  Nuxalk  Dried  0.09  29  Similar  8.  11.6  89  197  128  21  1000  407  637  1.3  0.7  0.9  were compared t o a i r / d r i e d skin  was  ( H e l l e r and  S c o t t , 1967) .  not i n c l u d e d i n the d e t e r m i n a t i o n s of  values.  For  content  coho  was  phosphorous  both  of the Nuxalk  the  preparations  published  the  moisture  g r e a t e r than the p u b l i s h e d value w h i l e the and  i r o n v a l u e s were l e s s t h a n the  The  lipid,  corresponding  published values. Ill  EFFECT OF  PROCESSING ON  Moisture, total  protein,  pantothenate,  and  NUTRIENTS  lipid,  ash, t o t a l  free pantothenate  samples are r e p o r t e d i n Tables  10 and  10A  for  includes  the  c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw and  values  samples,  Table  t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw  and  11B  include  11  10B  lipid  and  T o t a l and dry  and  values  Table  t h e raw for  the sockeye  includes  samples.  K'nuum  the Table  and  sluq  samples. Protein, weight.  f r e e f o l a t e v a l u e s a r e r e p o r t e d as nanograms p e r and  total  sluq  samples  l i m i t o f 10 ng p e r g d r y  samples  10C  coho  and  s t a t e d as p e r c e n t o f f r e s h w e i g h t .  and  free pantothenate  m i c r o g r a m s p e r gram d r y w e i g h t .  In  sockeye  a s h a r e r e p o r t e d as m i l l i g r a m s p e r gram d r y  weight  prepared  and  respectively.  Table  r e s p e c t i v l e y , w i t h t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw M o i s t u r e was  folate,  i n c l u d e s barbequed  s a m p l e s and  the  f o r sockeye  canned  v a l u e s f o r barbequed/canned sockeye 11A  folate, free  are  reported  L e v e l s of f r e e f o l a t e  ( T a b l e 11A)  were below  the  the  as the  detectable  weight.  comparing the n u t r i e n t v a l u e s of each of the to  in  gram  c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw  68  samples  using  the  prepared Paired  TABLE 10 Moisture, Protein, Lipid, Ash, F o l a t e P a n t o t h e n a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) i n Sockeye. A:  ( t o t a l and f r e e ) , and ( r e p o r t e d as mean _+ SD)  Raw v e r s u s Canned Sample  Moisture Protein L i p i d %  mg  mg  Ash mg  Folate Pantothenate Total Free Total Free ng ng ug ug  r  i J  i 26D 1 raw 2 canned 261 1 raw  75 .1 + 5 .2  781 + 18  1  72 .8 + 2 .4  863 + • 78  1  66 .7 + 0 .8  1  64 .4 0 .1  1  67 .2 1 o. 7  1  2 canned  1 26N 1 raw 4 canned 260 1 raw  canned  602 4 1  451 2 3  1  69 .0 +_ 1 .5  524 +_ 99  539  1  62 .0 0 .3  1  1  66 .2 0 .6  1  26P 1 raw  Mean raw  3 1  64 .3 1 0 .2  4 canned  4 canned  716  2 8  449 1 0  586 1 9  548  58  59  4  +  81  75  6  1  172 + 6  +  157 + 5  +  190  1  1 2  1  166 + 7  3.1 + 0  189  4.0 + 1.0  2.9 + 0.1  4.2 +_ 0.4  2.7 + 0.1  129 +_ 1  2.3 +_ 0.2  1.6 +_ 0.1  223 + 13  3.6 + 0.2  2.5 +_ 0.1  3.0 + 0.0  1.8 + 0.0  3.9 + 0.3  2.2 + 0.1  4.0 + 0.3  1.8 +_ 0.1  164 + 28  3.3 +_ 0.1  2.6 + 0.1  7  106 + 8  ±  2  1  +  130 4  222  1  9  1 3  79 8  253  176  6  1  1  2  +  2  1  1 7  71  85 + +  5. 6 + 0.3  75  34  1 0  173  1 28 1  75 + 2  207  1  1 7  1 °-  172 + 44  31  1 5  1  88 3  3.6 + 0.1  +  44 6  +  196  125 + 2 182  4  34  8  163  1  1  0 98 1 4  30 ±  4  139  1  5  7  65 .1 + 3. 6  1  69 .0 1 4 .0  612 + 132  165 + 57  41(a) 157 + 61 1 1]-  1 38  144  4.1 _+ 0.9  2.3 + 0.3  65 .7 + 4 .2  601 + 152  146 + 34  83 (a) 159 + 14 + 65  134 + 75  4.3 + 0.4  2.6 + 0.3  1 8  163  1  5  69  102 + 3  217  2 2  6.2  1  3 1  TABLE 10 B:  Raw  v e r s u s Barbeque  Sample  (BBQ)  Moisture Protein L i p i d %  mg  Ash  mg  mg  [ 26E 1 raw 2 BBQ 26N 2 raw 5 BBQ 260 2 raw • 5 BBQ 26P 2 raw  3 BBQ Mean raw BBQ  78 .7 1 .6  1  +  31 .0 5 .1  +  +  70 .8 1 .2  1  +  70 .3 1 .8  1  +  70 .0 1. 4  1  +  60 .5 1 .1  +  71 .4 0 .3  1  62 . 7 1 .5  +  +  67 .2 0 .5  1  +  67 .3 0 .6  626 1 16  135 + 7  +  71 .6 4 .0  667 + 108  135  776 22  675 29 562 34  586 1 5 1  634 31  769  1  56  781 115  652 40 582  58 .3  + 14 . 7  +  Folate Total Free ng ng  Pantothenate Total Free ug ug  per gram d r y w e i g h t  +  5 BBQ 26S 1 raw  (con't)  21  661 90  78 +  55 1  +  2  1  47  92 +  1  132 + 7  6  36 +  5  135  • 53  1  1  8  161 + 3  1  115 + 1  +  42  1  17  4.2 +_ 0.0  +  2.8 0.1  376  318  6.1 +_ 0.3  +  3.1 ' 0.2  4.9 + 0.1  +  2.5 0.1  199 + 93  338 + 80  1  9  2.2 0.2  339 + 29  280 + 125  54  +  379 + 12  1  1  4.3 _+ 0.1 +  22  365 + 2  1  4.0 0.1  403  54 + 12 9  +  1  102 + 7  43  5.4 1-1  374 + 11  3  36  1  127 + 13  190 + 4  +  2.5 + 0.1  273 + 3  3  62  70  12  437 + 3  +  118  1  234  1  41  2  191  42  385  1  4.6 0.6  +  14  1  46  24  224  1  7  +  9  115 + 7  1  12  54  111  1  11  210 + 10  ]  21  1  22  213  1  15  213  1  90  1  29  322  3.8 + 0.1  5.3 + 0.1  2.2 + 0.1  6.5 0.4  3.4 + 0.1  +  16  4.8(b) 2.4(b) + 0.3 0.4  298 73  4.4 + 0.1  5.3 0.5  +  15  5.5 0.8  +  5.8(b) 3.7(b) 0.7 + 0.5  TABLE 10 C:  Raw v e r s u s Barbequed/Canned (BBQ/CND) Sample  Moisture Protein L i p i d %  mg  2 raw 4 BBQ/cnd  mg  26N 3 raw 6 BBQ/cnd 26P 3 raw 6 BBQ/cnd 26Q 2 raw 4 BBQ/cnd  +  736 71  +  46 .6 0 .3  +  690 86  +  1  67 .5 0 .5  1  694 27  148 _+ 7  54 .2 + 1 .1  661 + 66  69 .1 1 0 .2  724  2 BBQ/cnd Mean raw BBQ/cnd a) p r e p a r e d b) p r e p a r e d c) p r e p a r e d  1  52 .7 1 0 .5  1  69 .5 + 0 .3  1  58 .6 + 0 .6  1  71 .5 1 0 .2  26R 1 raw  60 .3 1 0 .6  37  464 17  707 32  ' 528 32  764  1  15  694 i  Folate Total Free ng ng  Pantothenate Total Free ug ug  p e r gram d r y weight  75 .1 + 2 .0  1  Ash  mg  [ 26E  (con't)  4  5  70  59 2  +  8  1  65  99  45  883  331  1  1  72  148 + 13  2  106 + 11  1  70 _+ 7  55 +  11  46  152  1  8  +  163  1  2  90  +  7  1  257 _+ 5  +  42 3  129 + 0  140 + 5  45  1  263 +_ 1  4  196  1  4  53  1  9  71  116 _+ 1  1  142 27  +  1  189  4  8  65 1  1  8  5.1 + 0.8  3.5 + 0.1  3.9 + 0.7  2.8 + 0.1  4.2 + 0.2  2.5 _+ 0.1  42 3  3.9 + 0.1  2.2 +_ 0.1  98  3.5 +_ 0.1  2.3 + 0.0  3.8 +_ 0.6  2.1 + 0.1  3.9 + 0.1  2.4 + 0.1  122 + 1  4.2 +_ 0.1  2.6 + 0.0  266  5.3 + 0.5  2.6 + 0.1  5.2 + 0.1  2.7 + 0.1  4.4 + 0.8  2.6 + 0.5  4.2 + 0.6  2.5 + 0.3  33  174  1  ll  85  1 +  1  14  14  118  1  12  221  1  32  267 + 12  1  270  200  1  14  1  13  6  70 -5 (a) 725 + 2 .8 + 43  125(c) 53 + 31 1 ll  322 + 307  1  54 .5 (a) 607 + 5 .0 + 107  161(c) 56 + 71 + 10  161 + 70  131 + 53  sample d i f f e r s sample d i f f e r s sample d i f f e r s  significantly significantly significantly  71  ]  196 97  from raw p< 0.01 from raw p< 0.02 from raw p< 0.05  TABLE 11 Moisture, Protein, Lipid, Ash, F o l a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) , and P a n t o t h e n a t e ( t o t a l and f r e e ) i n Coho. ( r e p o r t e d as mean _+ SD) A:  Raw v e r s u s Sample  Sluq  Moisture Protein L i p i d %  Ash  mg  mg  mg  Folate Total Free ng ng  Pantothenate Total Free ug ug  r I  31B 1 raw 4 sluq 31H 1 raw 3 sluq 311 1 raw(b) 3 sluq 31F  1 raw 3 sluq  31G 1 raw 3 sluq Mean  raw sluq  73 .5 + 0 .9  +  10 6 7 40  44 .4 + 10  +  713 54 874 166  73 .8 + 1 .1 33 .9 + 3 .4  +  80 .7 + 0 .6 20 .2 + 4 .9  876 32  42  9  182 + 4  51 + 10  62 + 13  185 + 14  36  68  +  53 2  1  +  1  4  63  64 6  3.6 + 0.0  1.3 + 0.1  ND (a)  3.3 + 0.0  1.8 +_ 0.1  191 + 16  ND  2.6 + 0.1  1.8 + 0.1  83  ND  3.6 + 0.1  2.1 + 0.1  261 + 2  ND  2.6 + 0.1  1.7 + 0.1  270  41  3.7 + 0.1  1.7 _+ 0.0  ND  2.3 + 0.1  2.1 + 0.0  ND  3.7 +_ 0.1  2.1 +_ 0.0  ND  3.5 + 0.2  2.3 +_ 0.1  25 (c) 3.4 + 30 + 0.5  + 0.3  +  1  + 139  +  28 S  44 +_ 7  +  823 51  +  54 6  67 + 12  73 .1 + 0 .5  +  1023 135  +  28 3  65 + 16  14 .2 + 3 .6  + 126  +  30 3  61 + 11  72 .5 + 0 .5  +  765 1  27 +  7  58 + 12  17 .9 + 0 .6  +  732 33  +  3  +  74 .7(c) 913 + 3 .2 + 153  +  7  58 + 16  185 + 66  26 • 1(c) 812 + 12 .6 + 100  45 + 15  63  124 + 90  835  915  +  30  26 31  72  +  62  4  3  60 + 27  +  1  1  11  46 +  8 97  1 +  ll  47 3  ND (c)  3.1 + 0.4  1.7(i  2.0 (. + 0.1  TABLE B:  11 (con't)  Raw v e r s u s K'nuum Sample  Moisture Protein L i p i d %  mg  mg  [ 31E 2 raw 4 k'nuum 3 IF 2 raw 4 k'nuum 311 2 raw 4 k' nuum 31B 2 raw 4 k nuum 1  31H 2 raw 4 k' nuum Mean raw k'nuum a) b) c) d) e)  +  533 59  1  48 .6 + 0 .3  +  553 33  200 + 2  72 . 6 + 2 .9  +  596 57  167 + 44  46 .6 + 2 .9  +  536 35  +  441 96  38 .8 +_ 1 .4  +  528 32  64 .8 + 1 -0  +  481 31  38 .8 + 2 .5  +  396 9  63 .0 + 0. 6  + 135  256 + 48  551 93  212 + 12  50 .9 1 0 .3  522  +  50 • 0(d) 514 + 5 .1 + 88 44 .7 (d) 513 _+ 5 .5 + 74  mg  Folate Total Free ng ng  Pantothenate Total Free ug ug  p e r gram d r y weight-  65 .5 _+ 5 .0  58 .9 1 0 .7  Ash  196  45  1  13  29 _+ 7  31 + 10  2.4 +_ 0.4  1.9 + 0.1  444 + 15  157 + 12  3.7 + 0.3  2.2 + 0.1  300 + 45  36 +  8  3.2 + 0.2  1.7 + 0.1  41 _+ 5  354 +_ 1  70 + 21  3.4 + 0.0  2.0 + 0.1  1  36  253 + 25  38 + 12  3.2 +_ 0.1  1.9 + 0.1  234 52  1  260  1  38 0  3.0 +_ 0.1  2.7 + 0.1  34 + 13  2.8 + 0.2  1.8 + 0.1  48  3.2 + 0.2  2.3 +_ 0.0  71  3.3 + 1.1  1.8 (< +_ 0.1  95 + 51  3.3 + 0.3  2.3 (< + 0.3  9  4  4  38 5  38  1  8  44 + 13 39  1  79  204  1  +  1  30  213  1  4  30  24  8  36  1  67  13  1 1  9  137  ±  6  254 + 3  +  145  1  6  247  1  20  270 + 126  1 +  24  ND means n o t d e t e c t a b l e a l i q u o t n o t a v a i l a b l e f o r f o l a t e and p a n t o t h e n a t e p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s s i g n i f i c a n t l y from raw p< p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s s i g n i f i c a n t l y from raw p< p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s s i g n i f i c a n t l y from raw p<  73  1.9 + 0.1  235  45  1  1  242  5.1 + 0.8  2.6 + 0.1  43  19  47  3.3 + 0.1  281  1  220  1  27  131 + 2  1  22  242  1  268 28  171  1  11  analysis. 0.001 0.01 0.02  Comparison  t - t e s t t h e r e were s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n t h e a s h  v a l u e s o f t h e canned sockeye samples free  (p< 0 . 0 1 ) ,  t h e t o t a l and  p a n t o t h e n a t e v a l u e s o f t h e barbequed sockeye samples  0.01), t h e l i p i d  v a l u e s o f t h e barbequed/canned  sockeye samples  (p< 0 . 0 5 ) , a n d t h e f r e e p a n t o t h e n a t e v a l u e s o f t h e s l u q (p<  0.02)  and  significant  the  k'nuum  decreases  barbequed/canned  in  samples the  (p<0.01).  moisture (p< 0 . 0 1 ) ,  (p< 0.001) a n d t h e k'nuum s a m p l e s  (p< 0 . 0 1 ) .  was  a  s i g n i f i c a n t decrease i n the free  sluq  samples. Tables  vitamin  12  E,  and  thiamin,  13 p r e s e n t t h e riboflavin  on  a  per  As  of  the  samples  well,  there  f o l a t e content of the  and n i a c i n  gram d r y w e i g h t b a s i s .  were  the sluq  vitamin  S o c k e y e a n d Coho s a m p l e s r e s p e c t i v e l y .  samples  There  content  sockeye samples  A,  vitamin  content  0.07  D,  of the  A l l values are reported  The v i t a m i n E  content  m e a s u r e d a s ug «<-tocopherol a n d was b e l o w t h e d e t e c t a b l e of  (p<  ug p e r g d r y w e i g h t f o r s a m p l e 31B4  (sluq,  is  limit  Table  13) . The sockeye  riboflavin samples  corresponding sluq  samples  vitamin  E  and  the niacin  content  was s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r  of  the  (p< 0.01)  than  r a w s a m p l e s a s was t h e v i t a m i n D c o n t e n t (p< 0.05) a n d t h e k'nuum s a m p l e s content  significantly  of  the  barbequed  (p<  sockeye  l o w e r (p< 0.05) t h a n t h a t o f  the  canned the  of the  0.01).  The  samples  was  corresponding  raw s a m p l e s . The parations  mineral is  composition  o f the sockeye  shown i n T a b l e s 14 a n d 74  15  and  coho  pre-  respectively.  A l l  TABLE 12 V i t a m i n A, V i t a m i n D, V i t a m i n E, T h i a m i n , Sockeye. Sample  Vitamin A Vitamin D Vitamin E IU IU ug(a) [  A:  2 canned 26N 1 raw 4 canned 260 1 raw 4 canned Mean raw _+ S.D. canned +_ S.D.  Thiamin mg  and N i a c i n i n  Riboflavin mg  Niacin mg  p e r gram d r y w e i g h t  Raw v e r s u s  26D 1 raw  Riboflavin,  ]  Canned  4.41  10 .74  5.04  0 .006  0 .004  0.1125  5 .36  6 .49  66.88  0 .010  0 .005  0.1425  9 .08  10 .30  6.86  0 .033  0 .004  0.1171  7 .80  6 .08  27.50  0 .002  0 .005  0.1441  5 .80  7 .76  12.53  0 .008  0 .004  0.1171  5 .36  6 .53  34.39  0 .002  0 .005  0.1388  6 .43 _+l .41  9 .57 _+l .59  6 .17 + 1 .41  6 .37 + 0.25  8.14 0 .156 +_ 3.90 + 0.015 42.90 ^21.00  0 .005 1° .005  0 .004(b) + 0.0  0.1156(b) +0.003  0 .005(b) 0.1419(b) + 0.0 +0.003  =: = = = =: = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = •= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  B:  Raw v e r s u s Barbequed (BBQ)  26E 1 raw 3 BBQ 26N 1 raw 5 BBQ 260 1 raw 5 BBQ  7 .42  11 .55  44 .00  0 .005  0 .005  0 .1355  10 .52  19 .49  17 .83  0 .0004  0 .015  0 .1259  7 .32  5 .92  14 . 60  0 .006  0 .006  0 .1906  9 .56  9 .55  3 .03  0 .008  0 .007  0 .1372  4.69  8 .32  12 .76  0 .003  0 .005  0 .1931  4.90  8 .06  0 .88  0 .007  0 .11  0 .1500  Mean raw + S.D.  6 .48 + 1 .55  8 . 60 + 2 .82  23 . 70(c) 0 .005 + 17 .00 + 0.002  0 . 0053 + 0.0006  1°.0326  BBQ + S.D.  8 .33 + 3 .01  6 .46 + 4.12  7 .25(c) 0 .005 + 9 .23 + 0.004  0 .011 + 0.004  0 .1731 + 0.0121  0 .1731  ============:= = = = ======= = = = == = = = = = = = = = ====== : = ========= = = ======= = = = = = = = =  75  TABLE 12 Sample  Vitamin A Vitamin D Vitamin E IU IU ug(a) [  C:  Raw  26E  2 raw  26P  Thiamin mg  Riboflavin mg  Niacin mg  per gram d r y w e i g h t  v e r s u s Barbequed/canned  ]  (BBQ/cnd)  4 .87  7. 06  8 .56  0 .042  0 .007  0 .1556  13 .31  10. 72  39 .39  0 .001  0 .008  0 .1673  3 raw  9 .82  6. 73  14 .38  0 .005  0 .004  0 .1515  6 BBQ/cnd  4 .45  7. 07  17 .35  0 .001  0 .012  0 .1209  3 raw  3 .01  5. 60  10 .58  0 .007  0 .006  0 .1419  12 .03  8. 65  40 .80  0 .004  0 .008  0 .1403  4 BBQ/cnd 26N  (con't)  6 BBQ/cnd  a) ug <*-tocopherol b) p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s c) p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s  significantly significantly  76  from raw from raw  p< p<  0.01 0.05  TABLE 13 V i t a m i n A, V i t a m i n D, V i t a m i n E, T h i a m i n , Coho Sample  Vitamin A Vitamin D Vitamin E IU IU ug(a) [  A:  4 sluq 31H 1 raw 3 sluq 311 1 raw 3 sluq  Thiamin mg  1.21  0. 84  1.44  2. 31  0.32  1. 51  1.17  1.27  Niacin mg ]  0 .0026  0 .0024  0 .160  0 .0013  0 .0038  0 .189  2.12  0 .0012  0 .0054  0 .170  3. 70  6.08  0 .0009  0 .0032  0 .152  0.56  0. 84  6.53  0 .038  0 .004  0 .184  1.85  4. 40  4.42  0 .001  0 . 0043  0 .178  0 .0037 + 0 .0015  0 .171. + 0.021  1° . 0006  0 .0037  0 .173 + 0.019  ND (b)  0.86 + 0.33  1. 06 (d) 3.31 + 0.39 + 2.82  0 .0014 + 0.021  sluq +_ S.D.  1.49 j-0.34  3. 47(d) + 1. 06  5.25 + 1.17  0 . 0067 + 0 .0006  B: Raw v e r s u s  31F  Riboflavin mg  sluq  Mean raw + S.D.  31E  and N i a c i n i n  p e r gram d r y weight  Raw v e r s u s  31B 1 raw  Riboflavin  k nuum 1  2 raw  2.84  4. 89  3.06  0 .598  0 .0065  0 .091  4 k'nuum  3.35  7. 08  5.59  0 .001  0 .0044  0 .089  2 raw  1.64  3 .23  5.00  0 .0053  0 .0072  0 .115  4 k'nuum  2.45  5. 83  2.98  0 .0026  0 .0067  0 .169  2.73  3. 43  27.48  0 .0039  0 .0056  0 .067  3.01  5. 77  6.15  0 .0018  0 .0057  0 .070  311 2 raw 4 k'nuum Mean raw _+ S.D.  2.40 + 0.66  3. 85 (c) 10.20 + 0.91 +15.04  0 .023 + 0 .032  0 . 0067 + 0 .0006  0 .091 + 0.024  k nuum + S.D.  2.94 + 0.45  6. 23 (c) 4.91 + 0.74 + 1.69  0 .002 + 0 .001  0 .0057 + 0 .0015  0 .109 + 0.053  1  a) ug "^-tocopherol c) p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s d) p r e p a r e d sample d i f f e r s  b) ND means n o t d e t e c t a b l e s i g n i f i c a n t l y from raw p< 0.01 s i g n i f i c a n t l y from raw p< 0.05  77  TABLE 14 M i n e r a l C o m p o s i t i o n o f Sockeye P r e p a r a t i o n s Sample  Na ug  Cr ug  Mn ug  Cu ug  Zn ug  Fe ug  P ug  Ca ug  Mg ug  r L A:  Raw v e r s u s Canned  26D 1 raw 2 canned 2 6N 1 raw 4 canned  1830  5.2  1.27  71.0  49  54  12100  6460  1130  20800  0.6  0.32  8.0  17  15  9770  1590  828  1150  1.6  0.55  37.0  33  23  7930  2730  773  ND (a) 0.28  6.0  23  10  7360  1270  646  0.40  17.0  22  15  7630  3000  705  ND (a) 0.37  4.0  22  10  7850  2970  653  25000 1020  260 1 raw 4 canned  32300  0.7  Mean raw _+ S.D.  1333(b) 2.5 + 435 +2.3  0.74 42.0 + 0.47 + 27.0  35 + 14  31 + 21  9220 4063 +_2498 + 2080  869 + 228  canned +_ S.D.  25866(b) 0.6 + 6047 _+0.0  0.32 6.0 + 0.05 _+ 2.0  21 + 3  12 + 3  8327 1943 + 1274 + 903  709 + 103  B:  Raw v e r s u s  Barbequed(BBQ)  26E 1 raw  1350  0.5  0.44  7.0  30  23  9350  959  1060  3 BBQ  8980  1.8  0.81  17.0  21  22  7490  1530  730  26N 2 raw  3110  ND (a) 0.37  7.0  24  19  7350  870  815  5 BBQ  1950  1.8  1.94  50.0  35  39  7590  1940  758  260 2 raw  2930  ND (a) 0.47  16.0  26  19  7980  1140  834  5 BBQ  4780  0.6  21.0  26  19  7450  1630  755  Mean raw + S.D.  2463 _+ 968  0.5 +_0.0  0.42 10.0 jMD.05 + 5.2  27 + 3  20 _+ 2  8227 + 1023  990 + 138  903 + 13 6  BBQ + S.D.  5237 + 3537  1.0 + 0.7  1.48 29.3 + 0.59 + 18.0  27 + 7  27 + 11  +  7510 72  1710 + 214  748 + 15  1.7  78  TABLE 14  Sample  Na ug  Cr ug  Mn ug  [ C:  (con't)  Cu ug  Fe ug  P ug  Ca ug  p e r gram d r y w e i g h t  Raw v e r s u s Barbequed/canned  26E 2 raw  Zn ug  Mg ug ]  (BBQ/cnd)  1420  0 .6  0 .61  9. 0  28  31  9150  2190  936  8980  0 .7  0 .81  17. 0  21  22  7490  1530  730  2090  0 .6  0 .41  13 .0  25  20  6990  820  791  6 BBQ/cnd 11300  0 .5  1 .27  13. 0  21  21  6540  1180  653  1730  0 .4  0 .36  8. 0  23  19  7970  1120  862  8280  0 .6  2 .36  10. 0  21  17  7020  1860  720  1746(b)  0. 5 + 0.1  0 .46 + 0.13  10 .0 + 2 .6  25 +3  23 +7  8037 + 1081  1377 +_720  863 + 73  9520(b) 0 .6 BBQ/cnd + 0.1 + S.D. + 1580  1 .48 + 0.80  ' 13.3 + 3 .5  21 +0  20 +2  7017 + 475  1523 + 340  701 + 42  4 BBQ/cnd 26N 3 raw  26P 3 raw 6 BBQ/cnd Mean raw  1  --  S  D  t  3 3 5  a) ND means not d e t e c t a b l e b) p r e p a r e d samples d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y  79  from raw samples p<0.01  TABLE 15 M i n e r a l C o m p o s i t i o n of Coho P r e p a r a t i o n s Sample  Na ug  Cr ug  Mn ug  Cu ug  [ A:  4 sluq  Ca ug  Mg ug 1  Sluq 0.7  0 .29  20.0  17  14  9710  165  1150  2700  0.5  0 .88  8.0  15  12  9920  257  1200  910  0.6  0 .43  8.0  15  20  9880  270  1170  2860  0.5  1 .0  9.0  15  13  9250  241  1130  820  0.4  0 .28  6.0  16  12  10400  511  1190  ND (a) 1 .03  4.0  17 .  11  9050  324  1143  311 1 raw 3 sluq  P ug  2610  31H 1 raw 3 sluq  Fe ug  p e r gram d r y weight  Raw v e r s u s  313 1 raw  Zn ug  2480  Mean raw + S.D.  1447 + 1008  0.6 + 0.2  0 .33(b)11.3 + 0.08 + 7.5  16 +1  16 j+4  9996 + 359  315 + 177  sluq + S.D.  2680 + 191  0.5 +0.0  0 .98(b) 7.0 + 0.09 + 2.6  16 +1  12 +1  9407 + 456  274 1143 + 44 + 51  =  =  ~  — =  — — — — =  :=  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  =  = =  =  =  = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  == = =3 = =  1170  1  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  =  20  -=-=  =  B: raw v e r s u s k'nuum 3 IE  2 raw  1110  0.6  0 .80  8.0  20  15  5870  3130  532  4 k'nuum  1810  ND  0 .66  3.0  16  11  7030  1340  810  1840  0.7  0 .44  10.0  21  16  6540  1200  739  1970  0.6  1 .37  4.0  25  17  8790  3460  909  1590  0.9  0 .45  12.0  18  18  6100  1280  718  1230  ND  0 .86  3.0  18  12  7100  3440  644  1513 + 371  0.7 + 0.2  1°.21  0 .56  10.0 +_2.0  20 +2  16 +_2  6170 + 340  1870 663 + 1092 + 114  1670 + 389  0.6 + 0.2  0 .96 + 0.37  3.3 + 0.6  20 +5  13 +_3  10973 + 5312  2747 788 + 1218 +_134  31F 2 raw 4 k'nuum 311 2 raw 4 k'nuum Mean raw k'nuum - - - - - -  i :i - - - —  =  =:_: =  :_:=_  = =  =  _: =  =  =  -_  =  -_ =  =: =  =  =  -= =  =  ___________  :  a) ND means not d e t e c t a b l e b) p r e p a r e d samples d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y  80  =  r =_ = = = 2  _ _ = = _ __=___=._=__•=_ =  : =  =  =  from raw p< 0.01  =  =  =  v a l u e s a r e on a p e r gram d r y w e i g h t There content  were s i g n i f i c a n t of  t h e canned  basis.  increases  s o c k e y e and  (p< 0.01)  barbequed/canned  s a m p l e s o v e r t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g raw s a m p l e s . significant  increase  (p< 0.01)  and  2602  (k'nuum)  l e v e l s i n 26N4 and 2604  (raw o f b a r b e q u e d were  sodium sockeye  T h e r e was  also  a  i n t h e manganese c o n t e n t o f t h e  s l u q s a m p l e s c o m p a r e d t o t h a t o f t h e raw Chromium  i n the  samples.  (canned  sockeye),  3113  sockeye), (sluq)  and  a l l b e l o w t h e d e t e c t a b l e l i m i t o f 0.4  26N2 3114  ug p e r  g  dry weight. IV  EVALUATION OF NUTRIENT QUALITY The  compared  nutrient to  c o n t e n t o f t h e Nuxalk salmon  the published n u t r i e n t  a v a i l a b l e p r o t e i n foods and  eggs).  basis  of  (R.N.I.)  The  (meat,  content  riboflavin,  of  commercially  two g r o u p s o f p r o d u c t s w e r e c o m p a r e d on  protein,  niacin,  vitamin  calcium,  was  meat a l t e r n a t e s , d a i r y p r o d u c t s  t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e Recommended for  products  A,  Nutrient  vitamin  D,  the  Intakes thiamin,  i r o n , and z i n c , p r o v i d e d by  one  s e r v i n g o f t h e p r o d u c t , and by $1.00's w o r t h o f t h e p r o d u c t and by  the Index of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y  each o f t h e above The is  list  presented  (Sorensen e t a l . ,  1976)  for  nutrients.  of the commercial p r o d u c t s used i n the comparison i n T a b l e 16 w i t h t h e c o s t o f t h e g i v e n  unit,  i n Bella Coola,  given  p u r c h a s e u n i t and t h e e d i b l e p o r t i o n p e r $1.00  purchase  i n J u l y 1983, t h e e d i b l e p o r t i o n i n t h e  81  value  of  the  product.  The  products  included  C a n a d a ' s N u t r i t i o u s Food B a s k e t and  are  (Robbins,  from  1984).  Beef  liver  t u r k e y w e r e e x c l u d e d as t h e y w e r e n o t r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e  t h e B e l l a C o o l a Co-op on a week t o week b a s i s . given  purchase  per  u n i t r e p r e s e n t s the lowest non-"sale' c o s t  for  purchase  u n i t was  i n A.H.E.A The  The  edible portion  c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g the percentage  i n comparison  p r o d u c t s a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 17.  of the  z i n c a r e f r o m H e a l t h and W e l f a r e Canada  D and  z i n c v a l u e s are from Pennington estimated  cost  i n T a b l e 18.  of The  c o s t of the dressed f i s h , fish  the Nuxalk c o s t was  based  Vitamin  (1980) . •  salmon on  t h e mean p e r c e n t a g e  i n processing.  commercial  (1979) .  and C h u r c h  p r e p a r e d by t h e i n v e s t i g a t o r , and weight  values  A l l values except v i t a m i n  D and  presented  yield  per  (1980). n u t r i e n t v a l u e s used  The  The  at  cost  t h a t p r o d u c t a t t h e Co-op i n J u l y 1983.  of  Agriculture  products the  is  wholesale  d i s c a r d e d f o r the  t h e mean p e r c e n t a g e  These v a l u e s a r e i n c l u d e d  loss  in  the  table for reference. The  percentage  o f t h e R.N.I.  v i t a m i n D,  thiamin,  riboflavin,  zinc,  Canadian  women  for  serving  niacin,  bologna,  a l l  vitamin  A,  iron,  and  calcium,  provided  the commercial  by  a  products  is  V i t a m i n A and v i t a m i n D v a l u e s w e r e  not  a v a i l a b l e f o r s e v e r a l meat p r o d u c t s . and  protein,  aged 24-49 y e a r s ,  o f e a c h o f t h e s a l m o n and  p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 19.  for  Except  f o r peanut b u t t e r  t h e p r o d u c t s p r o v i d e d a t l e a s t 10%  82  of  the  TABLE 16 List of Commercial Protein Products Used i n Comparison o f Nutrient Quality, with Cost i n B e l l a Coola i n J u l y , 1983 with Edible Portion i n Given Purchased U n i t and Edible Portion in $1.00 V a l u e o f t h e Product Product  Purchase U n i t (p.u.)  Round Steak 1000 g B l a d e Roast 1000 g 1000 g Stewing Beef Ground Beef 1000 g L o i n Pork Chops 1000 g Pork B u t t Roast 1000 g Sausage 500 g Bacon 500 g Weiners 1000 g Bologna 1000 g Luncheon Meat 340 g 1000 g Chicken (fryer) Canned Tuna 198 g Canned Salmon 220 g Canned S a r d i n e s 100 g Froz.Fish F i l l e t s 350 g Froz. Fish Sticks 680 g Peanut B u t t e r 500 g Canned Baked Beans 398 mL White Beans (dry) . 907 g C o t t a g e Cheese 500 g 2% M i l k 2000 mL Powdered Skim M i l k 1500 g Cheddar Cheese 450 g P r o c e s s Cheese 250 g Yogurt 500 g Eggs 12 * from A.H.E.A.  Cost  $8..19 8,.39 3,.29 4,.39 5,.59 3..16 2..29 2..99 3..49 3 .29 . 2..14 4..35 1..53 2..29 .63 2..37 2. .91 2. .13 1. .01 1..14 1..60 2..19 7..85 4..31 1..78 1..25 1..69  (1980)  83  Edible Portion i n p.u.* 563 563 563 750 563 375 160 180 1000 1000 340 231 198 220 100 350 680 500 398 2100 500 2000 1500 450 250 500 12  g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g mL g g mL g g g g  Edible Portion p e r $1.00 69 g 67 g 171 g 171 g 101 g 119 g 70 g 60 g 287 g 304 g 159 g 53 g 129 g 96 g 159 g 148 g 234 g 235 g 394 mL 1842 g 313 g 913 mL 191 g 104 g 140 g 400 g 7  TABLE 17 N u t r i e n t Composition of Commercial P r o t e i n Products Used i n Comparison o f N u t r i e n t Product  Portion  Energy  Protein  Size  kcals  g  90g 90g 90g 90g 66g 99g 40g 30g 50g 13g 60g 90g 90g 90g 90g 90g 90g  235 285 339 257 260 336 190 184 124 226 176 122 177 183 183 75 170  26 22 22 22 16 20 8 10 7 2 9 21 26 20 22 16 11  16g 250mL 190g 237g  95 385 222 213  4 20 15 36  250mL 25g 45g 45g 125g 1  129 90 181 169 85 79  9 9 11 10 6 6  A RE  D IU  8 11 16 11  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11  Vitamins Thia Rib mg mg  Nia mg  Ca mg  Quality*  Minerals Fe Zn mg mg  MEAT PRODUCTS Round Steak Blade Roast Stewing Beef Ground Beef L o i n Pork Chops Pork Butt Roast Pork Sausage Bacon Weiners Bologna Luncheon Meat Chicken Canned Tuna Canned Salmon Canned Sardines Fish Fillets(Frozen) F i s h S t i c k s (Frozen)  24-  -  -  0  72 63 59  0..07 0..05 0..03 0,.08 0,.63 0,.45 0..32 0..16 0..08 0..02 0..19 0..05 0..04 0..03 0..02  -  0..19 10.,2 11 0..17 8..2 10 9 0..17 7..7 0..18 9..0 10 0 .18 . 8 5..5 9 0..20 9..0 0..14 2 2..6 0..10 4 3..0 3 0..09 2..2 0..02 1 0..5 0,.13 5 3..2 0..17 11..6 8 0..10 14..9 7 0..14 6..5 100 0..18 8..2 393 5 6  -  3.1 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.2 2.6 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.2 1.3 1.5 1.7 0.8 2.6  6..8 4..9 5..1 3.,8 2..6 3..2 1..2 0..7 0.,5 0..9 1..0 0..9  —  MEAT ALTERNATES Peanut B u t t e r Canned Baked Beans White Beans (cooked) Cottage Cheese  9 99 3..8 95 6..4 161  0.3 5.0 5.2 0.4  0..5  315 308 324 142 203 28  0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3  0..9 1..1 1..7 1..4 1..1 0..5  -0  0..02 0..15 0..13 0..44  3..4  5  0..02 0..18 0..26 0..06  106 100 106 136 114 16 78 38  0..10 0..10 0..01 0..05 0..10 0..04  0..43 0..43 0..17 0..16 0..15 0..15  2..3 2..2 2..6 2..4 1..1 1.,8  35 0 47  5..3 1..0  DAIRY PRODUCTS 2% Milk Skim Milk Powder Cheddar Cheese Process Cheese Yogurt Eggs  =====================:======== =========  .  -  .. .=====  * A l l values are from Health and Welfare Canada are from Pennington and Church (1980)  ;===  -  1.1  : = _ =: = = = : = ====== ======== = = = == = :  (1979) except f o r v i t a m i n D and Z i n c which  TABLE 18 C o s t o f Nuxalk Salmon, Dressed Weight, and P r e p a r e d Weight w i t h Mean P e r c e n t a g e D i s c a r d and Mean P e r c e n t a g e Loss i n P r o c e s s i n g Preparation  Cost  Sockeye Canned Barbeque Barbeque/canned Coho k'nuum sluq  (Dressed) D i s c a r d per kg Mean % $2.53  2.20  Loss (Process) Mean %  Cost  (Prepared) p e r kg  22 0 43 43  $3.24 5.68 5.68  42 70  5.05 9.76  25  85  R.N.I  for protein for this particular The  two  groups  group.  ( N u x a l k s a l m o n and  commercial  were compared u s i n g t h e Mann-Whitney U T e s t results the  of the t e s t are presented i n Table  Nuxalk  salmon p r o d u c t s p r o v i d e d a  percentage  of  (p<0.005),  vitamin D  (p<0.001),  niacin  no  t h e R.N.I.  The age)  (p<0.002) and  calcium  The group,  greater  vitamin  percentage  riboflavin  (p<0.001).  There were  groups i n terms  o f t h e R.N.I.  f o r women (24-49 y e a r s  f o r t h e n i n e n u t r i e n t s e x a m i n e d , p r o v i d e d by a $1.00  worth  s e r v i n g was  The  two  were,again, tailed) . A  particular vitamin D calcium  the  greater  group  percentage  for protein  (p<0.001), r i b o f l a v i n T h e r e was  o f t h e R.N.I.  commercial  one  chicken  products  commercial  Mann-Whitney  p o r t i o n of the Nuxalk  (p<0.001).  percentage  using  r e s u l t s of t h i s comparison  significantly  For the m a j o r i t y of  s t e a k , b l a d e r o a s t and  ( N u x a l k s a l m o n and  compared  $1.00  value  less  provided.  groups  The  of  of  o f t h e p r o d u c t p r o v i d e d more t h a n  s e r v i n g , however, f o r round t h a n one  A  o f t h e R.N.I, f o r i r o n o r z i n c p r o v i d e d .  t h e p r o d u c t s $1.00  The  As a  t h i a m i n (p<0.005),  o f t h e p r o d u c t s i s p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 20.  22.  22.  (p<0.001),  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e two  the percentage  (two-tailed).  significantly  for protein  (p<0.001),  products)  U  products) Test  (two-  are presented i n Table  salmon p r o d u c t s p r o v i d e d a of  (pO.OOl),  the  R.N.I.  vitamin  (p<0.001), n i a c i n  for A  this  (p<0.02),  (p<0.001)  and  no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e  i n the  f o r t h i a m i n p r o v i d e d by e i t h e r  group.  provided 86  a  significantly  greater  TABLE  19  Percentage o f t h e Recommended Nutrient Intake f o r Canadians Provided Per P o r t i o n of Salmon and Commercial P r o d u c t s (based on the R.N.I, f o r females 24-49 y e a r s o f age) Product  Portion  Protein A  % o f RNI P r o v i d e d Vitamins Minerals D T h i a Rib N i a Ca Fe Zn  SOCKEYE Canned BBQ BBQ/Cnd  90g 90g 90g  41 57 57  7 190 14 581 16 391  16 22 4  14 49 39  29 40 38  7 11 9  2 8 5  7 14 12  90g 90g  122 59  8 309 12 221  5 10  23 26  68 34  3 16  5 5  14 12  90g 90g 90g 90g 90g 90g 40g 30g 50g 13g 60g 90g 90g 90g 90g 90g 90g  59 50 50 50 36 45 18 22 16 5 20 48 59 45 50 36 25  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11  9 6 4 10 79 56 40 20 10 3 24 6 5 4 3  71 19 17 57 17 53 18 63 18 38 20 63 14 18 10 18 10 . 9 2 3 13 22 17 80 10 103 14 45 18 . 57  2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 <1 <1 1 1 1 14 56  22 19 20 21 16 19 8 6 4 1 9 11 12 6 19  85 61 64 48 33 40 16  2 15 13 44  24  21 44  -  1 14 14 23  2 36 37 3  6  5  3 23 33 8  13 100 13 17 14 2 10 38  13 13 1 6 13 5  43 43 17 16 15 15  16 15 18 17 813  45 44 46 20 29 4  1 1 2 2  COHO Sluq K'nuum COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS Round steak B l a d e Roast Stewing Beef Ground Beef L o i n Pork Chops Pork B u t t Roast Pork Sausage Bacon Weiners Bologna Luncheon Meat Chicken Canned Tuna Canned Salmon Canned S a r d i n e s Fish F i l l e t s Fish Sticks  '  Peanut B u t t e r Canned Baked Beans White Beans C o t t a g e Cheese  16g 250mL 190g 237g  9 45 34 82  2% M i l k Skim M i l k Powder Cheddar Cheese P r o c e s s Cheese Yogurt Eggs  250mL 25g 45g 45g 125mL 1  20 20 25 23 14 14  1 1 2 1  -3  9 8 7  _  4 0 6  -  0  -0 -  87  -8  -9 6  -  11 13 11  -  66 13 11 14 21 18 14 6  TABLE 20 Percentage of the Recommended Nutrient Intake f o r Canadians P r o v i d e d Per D o l l a r V a l u e o f Nuxalk Salmon and Commercial Products (based on the R.N.I, f o r f e m a l e s 24-49 y e a r s o f age) Product  Portion  % o f RNI P r o v i d e d Vitamins Miner,a l s A D T h i a Rib N i a Ca Fe Zn  Protein  = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = === = : = = == = = = = = = = = = = == = = = ====== = = = = ==== = ==== = ==: = = == = = =  SOCKEYE Canned BBQ BBQ/Cnd  308 176 176  g g g  141 112 63  24 653 26 1144 18 434  54 5 4  50 13 43  99 43 42  26 21 10  7 14 6  39 46 13  102 198  g g  136 66  9 13  343 245  6 11  25 29  76 38  3 18  6 5  15 13  69 67 171 171 101 119 70 60 287 304 159 53 129 96 159 148 234  g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g  45 37 95 95 56 55 32 46 91 106 54 29 85 49 88 60 65  1 1 4 3  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63  7 5 7 19 . 96 67 70 40 57 58 63 4 7 4 4  15 13 32 34 28 24 25 20 51 47 34 10 14 15 32  54 43 101 119 58 75 32 42 88 81 59 48 149 48 100  1 1 2 3 2 2 <1 1 2 3 2 1 1 15 99  Peanut B u t t e r 235 g Canned Baked Beans 394 mL White Beans 1842 g 313 C o t t a g e Cheese g  133 72 330 108  _  2% M i l k Skim M i l k Powder Cheddar Cheese P r o c e s s Cheese Yogurt Eggs  75 156 58 71 44 97  48 101 39 45 6 69  COHO Sluq K'nuum COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS Round steak B l a d e Roast Stewing Beef Ground Beef L o i n Pork Chops Pork B u t t Roast Pork Sausage Bacon Weiners Bologna Luncheon Meat Chicken Canned Tuna Canned Salmon Canned S a r d i n e s Fish F i l l e t s Fish Sticks  913 mL 191 g 104 g 140 g 400 g 7  -2  13 8 13  7 0 8  88  -  -  37 36 0 315 7 10 0  365  270-  46 96 3 19 40 36  -  -  -  17 65 14 46 38 121 39 90 32 73 22 48 13 26 11 50 25 33 146 25 6 7 18 18 6 12 33  -  -  -  29 346 19 31 92 24 22 56 126 256 132 360 642 58 4 16 59 30  -  157 58 164 329 117 336 39 43 107 50 52 63 48 24 93 106 88 28  -  3 41 5 105 5 49 7 55 44 56 44  -  percentage  o f t h e R.N.I.  i n $1.00 w o r t h An  Index  f o riron  than t h e Nuxalk  (p<0.002) a n d z i n c  products.  of Nutrient Quality  (I.N.Q.) was  t h e salmon p r o d u c t s and t h e commercial are  presented i n Table  Test  21.  (p<0.002)  calculated f o r  products.  The  results  The r e s u l t s o f t h e M a n n - W h i t n e y U  t o compare t h e two g r o u p s  (Nuxalk salmon  and  commercial  p r o d u c t s ) a r e p r e s e n t e d i n T a b l e 22.  The I.N.Q. o f t h e N u x a l k  products  f o r protein  was  significantly  v i t a m i n D (p<0.001), and  zinc  between  riboflavin  (p<0.002). t h e I.N.Q.  products  of the Nuxalk  To  A,  products ranked  products f o rcalcium check  responsible  (p<0.001),  T h e r e w e r e no  f o r vitamin  commercial  higher  (p<0.001),  niacin  significant  (p<0.005), differences  p r o d u c t s and t h e  and t h i a m i n .  The  commercial  I.N.Q.  of the  s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher than t h e Nuxalk  (p<0.001) a n d i r o n  (p<0.005).  i f any s p e c i f i c t y p e o f c o m m e r c i a l  f o r the higher rankings i n the  product  comparison  was of  %  R . N . I , p e r $1.00 v a l u e a n d t h e I.N.Q. f o r t h e m i n e r a l s c a l c i u m , iron  and z i n c ,  groups.  the commercial  These groups were:  p r o d u c t s were b r o k e n  meats  into  (including beef,  c h i c k e n b u t e x c l u d i n g b a c o n a n d s a u s a g e ) , c u r e d meats bacon,  bologna,  luncheon  sardines, frozen f i s h (peanut (milk,  butter, cheese,  comparing Nuxalk  meat),  fillets  beans,  fish  and f i s h  cottage  yogurt, eggs).  t h e p e r c e n t R.N.I,  salmon p r o d u c t s and each  ( canned t u n a , sticks),  cheese) and  pork  five and  (sausage, salmon,  meat a l t e r n a t e s dairy  products  The M a n n - W h i t n e y U T e s t was r u n p e r $1.00 v a l u e p r o v i d e d by  the  o f t h e g r o u p s a n d t h e I.N.Q. o f  89  TABLE 21 Indices of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y f o r Nuxalk Salmon P r o d u c t s and Commercial P r o t e i n Foods Product  Protein  ====================  SOCKEYE  A  D  Vitamins Thiamin R i b o f l a v i n N i a c i n  Ca  Minerals Fe  Zn  ======= = = ==== = = == = = == = = == = = = == = = = = = = ========= = = == = = = = = ====== : : = = = ====== • = = = == = = •  5,.43 6,.36 5,.62  0..93 1..50 1..61  25 .20 64 .90 38 .30  2. 09 2. 38 0.33  1 .91 5 .40 3 .80  3. 82 4. 44 3. 74  1 .01 1 .15 0 .88  0 .25 0 .92 0 .56  1 .49 1 .63 1 .10  8,.33 4..50  0..56 0..88  14 .90 23 .40  0.38 0. 77  1 .22 1 .98  4. 92 2. 56  0 .18 1 .25  0 .39 0 .34  0 .92 0 .85  Round steak Blade Roast Stewing Beef Ground Beef L o i n Pork Chops Pork Butt Roast Pork Sausage Bacon Weiners Bologna Luncheon Meat Chicken Canned Tuna Canned Salmon Canned Sardines Fish F i l l e t s Fish Sticks  4,.77 3,.33 2..80 3..69 2..66 2,.57 1..82 2..30 2..40 0..38 2..21 7..40 6..30 4..70 5..19 9..20 2..79  0..08 0..09 0..11 0..10  0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 0 .0 1 .60  0.71 0. 42 0.21 0. 73 4. 60 3. 18 4.00 2. 00 1. 53 0. 21 2. 56 0.97 0. 54 0.35 0. 26  1 .54 1 .13 0 .95 1 .33 1 .32 1 .13 1 .40 1 .03 1 .37 0 .17 1 .40 2 .65 1 .07 1 .45 1 .87  5. 73 3. 79 2. 99 4. 62 2. 79 3. 53 1. 80 2. 15 2. 30 12. 54 11. 10 4. 69 5. 90  0 .13 0 .09 0 .07 0 .11 0 .08 0 .07 0 .03 0 .06 0 .07 0 .01 0 .08 0 .17 0 . 10 1 .48 5 .80 0 .18 0 .09  1 .79 1 .29 1 .12 1 .53 1 .50 1 .05 0 .71 0 .59 0 .65 0 .12 1 .00 1 .67 0 .01 0 .59 1 .93  6 .87 4 .08 3 .50 3 .51 3 .47 2 .26 1 .50  Peanut Butter Canned Baked Beans White Beans Cottage Cheese  1..82 2..20 2..92 7..30  0.50  4. 70  0 .0 0 .45  2. 78 0. 67  0 .40 0 .74 1 .11 3 .92  2. 20 3. 96  0 .26 0 .69 1 .16 2 .05  0 .43 1 .76 3 .17 0 .25  1 .25  0.,21 0..00 0.,52  0 .0  2% M i l k Skim Milk Powder Cheddar Cheese Process Cheese Yogurt Eggs  3..01 4..32 2..62 2..55 3..05 3..28  1..95 2.,79 1..78 1..60 0..44 2..34  14 .70  1. 84 2. 63 0.13 0. 70 2. 79 1. 20  6 .30 9 .08 1 .78 1 .80 3 .35 3 .61  2. 30 3. 23 1. 89 1. 87 1. 71 3. 01  6 .60 9 .29 4 .86 2 .28 6 .48 0 .96  0 .10 0 .15 0 .22 0 .24  1 .65 2 .90 2 .20 1 .96 3 .07 1 .50  Canned BBQ BBQ/Cnd COHO Sluq K'nuum COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS  o  0..46 0.,97 0..82 0..76  -  -  -  9 .14  -  -  -  1 .89  -  1 .30 0 .53 1 .75 1 .34 1 .16  5 .67 1 .11  TABLE 22 Comparison o f N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y between Nuxalk Salmon P r o d u c t s (N) and C o m m e r c i a l l y A v a i l a b l e P r o t e i n P r o d u c t s (C) by t h e Mann-Whitney U T e s t ( 2 - t a i l e d ) Nutrient  % R.N.I Mean Sig. Rank  % R.N.I./$ v a l u e Mean Sig. Rank  I.N.Q. Sig. Mean Rank  Protein  N 62.8 C 20.1  p<0.001  62.4 21.2  p<0.001  61.0 25.1  p<0.001  Vitamin A  N 51.6 C 31.3  p<0.005  50.8 34.5  p<0.02  49.2 40.8  N.S.*  Vitamin D  N 52.0 C 7.5  p<0.001  51.6 9.6  p<0.001  52.0 7.5  p<0.001  Thiamin  N 56.8 C 36.8  p<0.005  51.8 50.7  N.S.*  51.8 50.8  N.S.*  R i b o f l a v i n N 61 .0 C 25 .1  p<0 .001  57 .4 35 .1  p<0 .001  59 .4 29 .6  p<0 .001  Niacin  N 57 .0 C 36 .2  p<0 .002  56 . 4 37 .9  p<0 .001  56 .4 37 .9  p<0 .005  Calcium  N 57 .3 C 34 .0  p<0 .001  56 .8 36 .3  p<0 .005  39 .0 82 .4  p<0 .001  Iron  N 48 .8 C 55 .6  N .S.*  46 .2 63 .4  p<0 .01  45 .4 65 .8  p<0 .005  Zinc  N 48 .6 C 48 .1  N .S.*  43 .8 65 .3  p<0 .002  57 .0 36 .2  p<0 .002  * N.S. means not s i g n i f i c a n t  91  p>0.05  the  Nuxalk products  reported  in  Table  significantly  meat p r o d u c t s  fish  (p<0.005),  no  each o f the groups.  23.  The  Nuxalk  higher percentage  the  more  and  calcium  (p<0.001),  but  products  o f t h e R.N.I  t h e c u r e d meats  the d a i r y products  In terms o f the percentage  (p<0.001)  were  products,  there  fish  alternates  products  were  and  the  significantly  In  differences  between t h e percentage  but  terms  of  lower  products.  worth  the  cured  meats  signifcantly  commercial  zinc  than  the  The  were  the  fish  products  products  ranked  met b y $1.00  dairy the  provided  cured  meats  (p<0.001).  There  was no s i g n i f i c a n t  meats  (p<0.005),  (p<0.0001),  the Nuxalk products  and f i s h  products  Nuxalk  products, (p<0.001)  products.  significantly  less  The zinc  products.  Quality f o r calcium, the  significantly  and t h e N u x a l k  Nuxalk  o f t h e R.N.I.  (p<0.0001),  alternates  dairy  significant  In terms o f t h e Index of N u t r i e n t Nuxalk  the  no  (p<0.01) and higher than  the  salmon  between  (p<0.01) t h a n  there  and  was  (p<0.002) and c u r e d  products.  (p<0.05) p e r $1.00 v a l u e t h a n t h e N u x a l k  cured  and t h e r e  o f t h e meat o r meat a l t e r n a t e s and t h e N u x a l k  ranked  meat  significantly  differences  salmon  and  o f t h e R.N.I, f o r  s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher  w e r e no s i g n i f i c a n t  a than  (p<0.001),  provided  i r o n p r o v i d e d b y a $1.00 p o r t i o n , t h e meats  and  provided  d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e meat a l t e r n a t e s  Nuxalk products.  are  f o r calcium  (p<0.0005) t h a n t h e N u x a l k p r o d u c t s  significant  meats  The r e s u l t s  fish  lower  than  meat  (p<0.05) and  dairy  difference  products.  between  Meat  (p<0.05) r a n k e d  the  (p<0.0001), higher  i n t e r m s o f t h e I.N.Q. f o r i r o n .  The  than dairy  TABLE 23 Comparison o f I.N.Q. and % R.N.I, p e r $1.00 V a l u e f o r C a l c i u m , I r o n , and Z i n c , Between Nuxalk Salmon P r o d u c t s and C o m m e r c i a l l y A v a i l a b l e Meats, Cured Meats, F i s h , Meat A l t e r n a t e s and D a i r y P r o d u c t s , by t h e Mann-Whitney U T e s t ( 2 - t a i l e d ) Group  Calcium Sig. Mean Rank  Iron Mean rank  Sig.  Zinc Mean Sig. rank  % R.N.I./$1.00 VALUE 4.0 45.0  p<0.001  68.3 39.0  p<0.002  56.0 39.8  N.S.  Cured Meats 6.0 42.8 Nuxalk  p<0.001  75.0 38.2  p<0.001  77.0 38.0  p<0 .01  Fish Nuxalk  3.0 43.0  p<0.005  52.0 39.0  N.S*  12.0 40.0  p<0.05  Alternates Nuxalk  47.5 39.6  N.S.*  58.8 39.0  N.S.*  57.0 38.8  N.S.*  Dairy Nuxalk  73.5 38.4  p<0.0005  16.0 43.0  p<0.01  71.0 38.6  p<0.001  Meat Nuxalk  76.0 3 8-2  p<0.0001  79.0 38.0  p<0.0001  4.0 45.0  p<0.0001  Cured Meat Nuxalk  77.0 38.0  p<0.005  79.0 38.6  p<0.0001  3.0 43.0  p<0.001  Fish Nuxalk  67.0 38.4  p<0.05  67.0 38.4  p<0.05  3.0 43.0  p<0.001  Alternates Nuxalk  57.0 38.8  N.S.*  51.3 43.0  N.S.  36.3 38.6  N.S.*  Dairy Nuxalk  78.5 38.0  p<0.001  16.0 43.0  p<0.01  71.0 38.6  p<0.001  Meat Nuxalk  I.N.Q.  * N.S. means n o t s i g n i f i c a n t p>0.05 A l t e r n a t e s means Meat A l t e r n a t e s Nuxalk means Nuxalk Salmon P r o d u c t s  93  products  were  significant Nuxalk  difference  products.  significantly (p<0.0001), but  significantly  was  (p<0.001).  between  The I.N.Q higher  cured  meat  significantly There  was  (p<0.01) a n d t h e r e  t h e meat a l t e r n a t e s  f o r z i n c of the Nuxalk  than  that  of  the  l e s s than that of no s i g n i f i c a n t  was and  products  commercial  (p<0.001) and f i s h p r o d u c t s  meat a l t e r n a t e s a n d t h e N u x a l k for  lower  the  94  the was meat  (p<0.001),  dairy  products  d i f f e r e n c e between  p r o d u c t s i n terms o f t h e  zinc.  no  the  I.N.Q.  CHAPTER V I DISCUSSION _I  NUTRIENT COMPOSITION The  present  study found  a wide range o f v a l u e s  n u t r i e n t s analyzed i n t h e Nuxalk Higashi the  (1962)  proximate  composition  a n d Mann  samples.  Stansby  (1962),  (1958) a l l r e p o r t g r e a t v a r i a t i o n  composition,  of f i s h .  fish  f o r the  vitamin composition,  Stansby  and  (1962) comments t h a t  in  mineral proximate  c o m p o s i t i o n can v a r y immensely, even between i n d i v i d u a l s o f t h e same  species  composition  of f i s h ,  so t h a t average v a l u e s  o f t e n have v e r y l i t t l e  v a l u e s w o u l d be more u s e f u l . Tables a  for  proximate  m e a n i n g and t h a t r a n g e s  The r a n g e s  of values presented i n  6 and 8 o f t h i s s t u d y , however, r e p r e s e n t t h e range  s m a l l number o f s a m p l e s .  of  I n some c a s e s  over  ( m i n e r a l s and  some  v i t a m i n s ) t h e range i s g i v e n over t h r e e samples o n l y . The  greatest  content  of  difference  the  variation fish.  between  the  is  Stansby  r e p o r t e d t o be (1962)  highest  and l o w e s t  content i n c e r t a i n species of f i s h . was  only  values  and  were  the minerals  content  of  theo i l 300  the  samples.  high  fold  for  In the present study  seen i n t h e v i t a m i n s (sodium  a  values  a 2 t o 7 f o l d d i f f e r e n c e between t h e  for lipid  variations  reports  in  and  o i l  there low  The  greatest  ( v i t a m i n E and  thiamin)  and c o p p e r ) .  A number o f f a c t o r s h a v e b e e n f o u n d 95  to a f f e c t the nutrient  composition fish, the  of  fish.  the section of the f i s h fish.  Food  important factor the  These i n c l u d e t h e f o o d i n t a k e  season  intake  1962).  Season o f t h e year activity  study  were  spawning for  in a  A l l the f i s h time  available  sampled i n t h i s  period,  during  m i g r a t i o n so t h e s e two f a c t o r s w e r e p r o b a b l y  possible from  i n salmon  i n t h e i r spawning m i g r a t i o n .  short  a l l t h e f i s h h a r v e s t e d from exceptions  the i n l e t  (Table 5 ) .  w o u l d be t h e c o h o w h i c h  t h e r i v e r on A u g u s t 2 4 ,  by  i s feeding i n at  i n terms o f t h e foods  of the f i s h .  harvested  most  This i s governed i n p a r t  occur  i s important  level  the  T h e s e two f a c t o r s a r e i m p o r t a n t  because o f t h e changes which  and  i s considered  o f t h e y e a r and t h e a r e a t h e f i s h  the time of h a r v e s t .  the  s a m p l e d and t h e g e n e t i c makeup o f  of the f i s h  (Stansby  of  1983,  were  the  similar The two harvested  as t h e y were f u r t h e r  along  on t h e s p a w n i n g m i g r a t i o n r o u t e t h a n t h o s e c a u g h t i n t h e i n l e t . The  area  reached  i n t h e spawning m i g r a t i o n .  Kukuez in  of harvest i s important  (1962) a n d S t a n s b y  i n terms o f  Duncan and  entered  fresh  f r e s h water fresh  and,  water,  samples from mouth  of  distance  water  so  Major  (1958) ,  over the d u r a t i o n  changes o c c u r once t h e f i s h  due t o p h y s i o l o g i c a l  i n salmon,  adaptations  c e s s a t i o n o f f e e d i n g on  t h a t s t o r e s a r e c a l l e d upon.  to  be  Although  small,  The two  t h e changes o c c u r r i n g i n  they c o u l d account  96  f o r some  of have the  entering  t h e r i v e r were h a r v e s t e d w i t h i n f o u r m i l e s o f  the r i v e r . may  Tarr  point  (1962) h a v e a l l r e p o r t e d d i f f e r e n c e s  v a r i o u s n u t r i e n t components o f f i s h ,  the spawning m i g r a t i o n .  the  of  coho the this the  v a r i a t i o n i n t h e v a l u e s f o r t h e coho. analyzed f o r minerals, and  v i t a m i n s A,  Two o f t h e t h r e e D,  E, t h i a m i n ,  n i a c i n f o r t h e c o h o s l u q came f r o m  and,  t h e r e f o r e t h e mean v a l u e s w i l l  caught  the r i v e r  riboflavin  caught  be skewed t o w a r d  the  and  i n l e t harvested The  fish  the r i v e r  f i s h w h i l e t h e mean v a l u e s f o r t h e r e m a i n i n g  in  samples  nutrients  s l u q r e p r e s e n t a more e v e n d i s t r i b u t i o n b e t w e e n  river  fish.  section of the f i s h  sampled i s i m p o r t a n t because  the  c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e f i s h v a r i e s a l o n g t h e l e n g t h o f t h e f i s h and in  the  different tissues.  Mann  c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e head s e c t i o n , of  S p r i n g salmon  weight, the  toward from  from  secton.  found  from  the t a i l ,  the t a i l The (Stansby,  of o i l decreased  1962).  salmon a l o n g t h e l a t e r a l  c a n be s i m i l a r t o t h e l i v e r  content  of  from  g  s e c t i o n and  Braekkan  Stansby  (1962)  t h e head s e c t i o n t o  of protein increased.  a l s o changes w i t h  1962; B r a e k k e n ,  vitamins.  3.3  while thiamin varied  (0^ gorbuscha),  s e c t i o n while the percentage composition  from  toward  108 ug i n t h e m i d s e c t i o n t o 46 ug i n t h e  I n p i n k salmon  the percentage  section  0.9 g  105 ug i n t h e m i d s e c t i o n t o 219 ug i n t h e t a i l  tail  of  and t a i l  t h e h e a d and f a t v a r i e d  t h e h e a d t o 8.4 g t o w a r d  nutrient  On t h e b a s i s o f 100 g w e t  t h a t the ash content v a r i e d  t o 2.5 g t o w a r d  riboflavin varied  in  midsection,  (0^ tschawytscha).  he f o u n d  tail  (1958) s t u d i e d t h e  the  tissue  The d a r k m u s c l e  studied.  (which  occurs  l i n e and i n a l a y e r below t h e s k i n ) i n composition, especially  (1962)  reports that  the  d a r k m u s c l e c a n be 10 t i m e s g r e a t e r t h a n  97  B  i n terms vitamin that  of  light  muscle.  tissue  in  moisture, muscle  Stansby  pink  (1962) c o m p a r e d l i g h t a n d d a r k  salmon  protein  and  (0^ ash  gorbuscha)  and  found  were s l i g h t l y l o w e r i n  b u t t h e f a t c o n t e n t was c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r  muscle  that  the  the  dark  (12.5%  in  d a r k m u s c l e c o m p a r e d t o 2.1% i n l i g h t m u s c l e ) . In  this  study,  canned, barbequed the  individual  individual taken  of  The amount o f d a r k m u s c l e however,  f o r some o f t h e v a r i a t i o n  sockeye were  sections of included  as t h e samples size.  This  seen i n t h e v i t a m i n  could  seen  play  a  major  role  in  i n t h e samples a n a l y z e d i n  the  this  in were  could content  samples were a l l h a r v e s t e d from t h e i n l e t  i n l e t where t h e s e f i s h were c a u g h t  degree  study.  a l l b u t two o f t h e c o h o u s e d i n t h e s t u d y .  often  licences"  fishermen family  (a  t o use t h e i r consumption  licence  of  (Labouchere Channel)  is  enabling  the  reserved f o r commercial f i s h i n g ) .  native  inlet  which  the  N o r t h B e n t i c k Arm a n d t h e Dean C h a n n e l . i n t e r b r e e d a n d , t h e r e f o r e , may d i f f e r  98  commercial fish  i s normally  In t h i s area several "runs"  s a l m o n p a s s on t h e i r way t o s p a w n i n g r i v e r s  evidence (McKervill,  on "day  gear t o o b t a i n  of  Anecdotal  The  The a r e a  commercial f i s h i n g from  of  ( T a b l e 5) a s  u s e d b y n a t i v e c o m m e r c i a l f i s h e r m e n when f i s h i n g  fishing  not  and  the samples.  variation  for  fish.  t h e b a s i s o f w e i g h t n o t measured  Genetics  the  sockeye  s o c k e y e were t a k e n from d i f f e r e n t  samples c o u l d v a r y ,  on  account  o n l y t h e samples f o r canned  emptying  These  "runs"  into do  genetically.  1 9 6 7 ) , i n d i c a t e s t h a t some  sockeye  runs  congregate  (most  prior  notably  to  i ti s very  the  River  run),  If this  make  that f i s h harvested  In  this  study  the runs,  a t the beginning than the  a t t h e end o f t h e s e a s o n and t h e r e f o r e c o u l d  genetically.  will  i s t r u e o f a l l salmon  s e a s o n w o u l d be f r o m a d i f f e r e n t p o p u l a t i o n  harvested  the  likely  Adams  e n t e r i n g f r e s h w a t e r and t h e n  s p a w n i n g r u n "en masse". then  the  more f i s h w e r e h a r v e s t e d  season r a t h e r than over t h e e n t i r e season;  of fish  differ late  therefore,  in the  r e s u l t s may be skewed t o w a r d t h a t segment o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n  as  a whole. At b e s t , only  a  Bella  the r e s u l t s of t h i s  fraction  study  are representative  of  o f t h e s o c k e y e and c o h o p o p u l a t i o n s  of  the  C o o l a w a t e r s h e d b e c a u s e s a m p l i n g was r e s t r i c t e d  to  one  year c l a s s .  Sockeye g e n e r a l l y r u n on a f o u r t o s i x y e a r c y c l e ,  while  r u n on a t h r e e  coho  Trim, 1979). of  t o four year c y c l e  and o n e - t h i r d t o o n e - q u a r t e r o f  c o h o p o p u l a t i o n was a v a i l a b l e f o r s a m p l i n g . is  c o u l d be g e n e t i c of  r e s t r i c t e d between t h e  determine the n u t r i e n t composition  this  is  year  Further  classes  based  (1958).  as  there  composition  s t u d i e s a r e needed t o  among y e a r c l a s s e s .  were s i m i l a r t o t h o s e r e p o r t e d  (1962) a n d Mann  the  addition,  summarize, t h e wide range i n n u t r i e n t v a l u e s  study  Higashi  In  d i f f e r e n c e s which could a f f e c t the  the d i f f e r e n t year c l a s s e s .  To  and  I n 1983, t h e r e f o r e , o n l y o n e - q u a r t e r t o o n e - s i x t h  the sockeye p o p u l a t i o n  interbreeding  (Childerose  by S t a n s b y  The r a n g e i n v a l u e s  o n a s m a l l number o f s a m p l e s w h i c h may,  seen  in  (1962) , reported  due t o t h e  area of  and  t i m i n g of sampling  be w e i g h t e d  the p o p u l a t i o n under study.  determine  whether  these  toward  small  segments  Further study i s r e q u i r e d  values  are  representative  to  of  the  p o p u l a t i o n as a w h o l e . In  comparing the n u t r i e n t values of the Nuxalk  published values, the  published  cannot  methods Both  range. and  major problems are encountered.  v a l u e s do n o t i n c l u d e r a n g e s  determine  published  two  the  Secondly,  d e s c r i p t i o n s of the  composition of f i s h .  s p e c i f i c p r e p a r a t i o n method a n a l y z e d not  a v a i l a b l e f o r comparison.  for  preparations  traditional  A and  values. zero  which  Often  values. variation  data  for  the  i n the present study,  was  t e c h n i q u e s were used.  Nuxalk  For i n s t a n c e , b r o i l e d air-dried  The  v a l u e s r e p o r t e d h e r e was  the  salmon  coho compared  in  the  to  from  samples from  content  the  zero t o t h i r t e e n per cent i n sockeye  amounts o f c a r b o h y d r a t e ( J a c q u o t 1962)  In g e n e r a l ,  fish  - approximately  0.3  values  carbohydrate  p u b l i s h e d values g i v e the carbohydrate  n i n e t e e n per cent f o r coho.  average  values  m i g h t be c o n s i d e r e d c o m p a r a b l e t o  w h i l e the values f o r the Nuxalk  small  the  k'nuum.  study ranged to  published  major d i f f e r e n c e between the p u b l i s h e d n u t r i e n t  the  one  preparation  In t h i s case p u b l i s h e d  c o m p a r e d t o b a r b e q u e d s a l m o n and  s l u q and  so  whether the experimental v a l u e s are w i t h i n  samples are not g i v e n w i t h the  in  First,  of v a l u e s  these p o i n t s are important g i v e n the degree of  possible  was  samples t o  as  present and  zero  contain very per cent  on  a l t h o u g h the dark muscle can c o n t a i n  up  100  to  1 per cent  (Ikeda, 1979).  The  v a l u e s i n the p r e s e n t  study,  therefore, are extremely high. Carbohydrate definition,  was  means  that  moisture, protein, carbohydrate. of  measured  by  l i p i d o r ash measurements w i l l  components w i l l  does  Moisture  may  constant weight.  bound  in  ( B l i g h and  extracting  bound  lipids  system  used  lipids  which l i e at  also  be  n o t be  the  be  a l s o be  D y e r , 1959)  and  are  and  be  the  present  in  dried  to  underestimated carbohydrates  i s more e f f i c i e n t  but  not The  taken ash  lost.  in  ether  protein  bound  layer  or  with  the  content  may  as v o l a t i l e compounds s u c h as s o d i u m may  are  methanol/chloroform  ( H a r r i s 1962)  n o t be m e a s u r e d .  underestimated potassium  The  any  true  because  s o l u b l e i n the c h l o r o f o r m  interface  layer w i l l  chlorides,  lipids  than the e t h y l ether/petroleum  i n o t h e r methods may  can  as  The  necessarily  be u n d e r e s t i m a t e d  membranes.  system  chloroform  a s h and  are combined w i t h p r o t e i n s or  extraction  the  a f f e c t the c a l c u l a t i o n .  l i p i d c o n t e n t may  cell  in  i n determining  protein,  by  be c o u n t e d  e v e n a f t e r t h e s a m p l e has b e e n  The  b e c a u s e some l i p i d s  which  error  n o t measure bound w a t e r w h i c h amounts  which  included  the standard techniques i s not  significant  and  difference,  component n o t  t h a t a l l the moisture,  ( H a r r i s , 1962). assay  any  by  I t a l s o means t h a t any  the proximate  assumption  determined  alkali-  As a r e s u l t  of  these u n d e r e s t i m a t i o n s the c a r b o h y d r a t e v a l u e of the samples i s probably  an  overestimate. .  Methods  measuring  d i r e c t l y w o u l d g i v e a more r e l i a b l e v a l u e .  101  carbohydrate  The from a  energy  values,  i n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y were  t h e c a r b o h y d r a t e , p r o t e i n and l i p i d  values determined.  r e s u l t the values are subject to error,  use  of  values  the carbohydrate  If  particularly  the  are  the  r e s u l t o f an u n d e r e s t i m a t e  or  the  ash  content presence  underestimate  underestimated.  I f the carbohydrate of the l i p i d The  high  mean  the  or  due  t h e energy  value  s t u d y was l e s s t h a n t h e t h r e e p u b l i s h e d  values  Church,  1 9 8 0 ; B a i l e y , 1942) w e r e w i t h i n t h e r a n g e f o u n d  to  be  of  two o f t h e t h r e e v a l u e s  content o f t h e barbequed Nuxalk  on t h e s e two s e t s o f c o m p a r i s o n s  the  content  high of  (Pennington  t h e r e f o r e assumed t h a t t h e y w e r e  comparable t o t h a t of t h e b r o i l e d  Based  be  Nuxalk  7 ) , however,  mean e n e r g y  will  f o r canned  (Table  The  to the  value w i l l  i n this  I t was  moisture  value  sockeye  study.  i n the  values are the r e s u l t of  v a l u e s t h e energy  energy  As  carbohydrate  of  c o n t e n t o f t h e samples  o f o t h e r non c a l o r i c b y p r o d u c t s  be o v e r e s t i m a t e d . an  values.  calculated  carbohydrate  appears  (Table  7).  i t appears t h a t t h e use  values i n determining  t h e samples has n o t  i n this  comparable.  samples  sockeye  and  substantially  the  energy  affected  that  calculation.  It with  the  published in  i sdifficult  t o compare t h e p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s f o r c o h o  values determined  i n the present study  because  the  v a l u e s do n o t i n d i c a t e w h e t h e r t h e s k i n i s i n c l u d e d  the estimation.  A layer of f a ti s associated with the skin  s o i t s i n c l u s i o n c a n make a s u b s t a n t i a l d i f f e r e n c e t o t h e l i p i d content  o f t h e samples.  In the present study,  102  the skin  was  included  i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f a l l t h e samples except  the  sluq.  These p r e p a r a t i o n s a r e o f t e n used i n soups and stews where skin  i s included.  When b a r b e q u e d s a l m o n i s e a t e n  after preparation, of  flesh  and  observation)  so  that  chewed  the  or  sucked  layer of f a t  consumed a n d t h e r e f o r e a d d s t o t h e e n e r g y The lower  total  than  frozen  (Table  storage.  determinations  does  not  folate  were  samples  held  studies  on  which  at  available  neutral  studied.  pH  to light.  in freezing.  coho  comparable included  lower  product.  pantothenate  light,  than  one  and  included  Schroeder  year  though,  ( H a r r i s , 1975).  heat, Some  pantothenic i n terms  (1971)  of  reported  i n r a w s a l m o n was l o s t  i n the present  the published  then i t would  study.  c a l c i u m v a l u e s f o r t h e canned Nuxalk were  during  general  I f t h i s i s t r u e f o r f o l a t e as w e l l  e x p l a i n t h e low v a l u e s found  were  f o l a t e s i n foods  a p p e a r s t o be more s t a b l e t h a n f o l a c i n  t h a t 45 p e r c e n t o f t h e p a n t o t h e n i c a c i d  raw  losses  and  In  oxidation,  t h e e f f e c t o f f r e e z i n g have  o x i d a t i o n and s e n s i t i v i t y  The  to  f o r folate  or acid  i s  f o r comparable  frozen for approximately  to  skin  preparations  The e f f e c t o f f r e e z i n g on  i s susceptible  the  value of the f i s h .  T h i s may be due  appear t o have been  particularly  acid  7).  The  prior to analysis.  values  clean  (investigator's  under  f o l a t e values i n the Nuxalk  the published  preparations  immediately  the s k i n i s not eaten but i s scraped  sometimes  the  sockeye values  and t h e for  the  I n t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y t h e bones were  not  i n t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e canned salmon w h i l e they  103  were  in  the p u b l i s h e d v a l u e s .  values was  f o r raw  done  on  published  steaks,  sodium  samples  published sodium  coho i n c l u d e d bones, which  content  in  values  levels  particularly  could  account  the  o f b o t h t h e raw  present  study  of the c o r r e s p o n d i n g  i n the prepared  solution.  The  sodium  samples i s c o n s i d e r a b l y h i g h e r samples same may  could  i f the  for  work  the  higher  due  to the  the  raw  to  the  comparable  products.  Nuxalk products  The  higher  a r e due  to  the  e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or i n  content  of  the  prepared  k'nuum  for  same c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f b r i n e .  l a c k o f s k i n on t h e  s l u q samples.  the sluq  than t h a t of the prepared  even though b o t h s e t s of samples were soaked  l e n g t h of time i n the be  published  s o c k e y e and  were  amount o f s a l t added i n p r e p a r a t i o n , brine  the  values.  The coho  I t i s possible that  the This  The  skin  i n t e r f e r e w i t h the d i f f u s i o n of sodium i n t o the f l e s h  of  t h e k'nuum s a m p l e s . Other Nuxalk  differences  samples  and  between the n u t r i e n t  the p u b l i s h e d values  values  are probably  for due  the to  d i f f e r e n c e s i n p r e p a r a t i o n m e t h o d s , s e c t i o n s s a m p l e d , amount o f dark  flesh  versus  light flesh  i n the  v a r i a t i o n found between f i s h of the II  EFFECT OF Few  nutrient  the  general  same s p e c i e s .  PROCESSING  significant values  corresponding  s a m p l e and  raw  for  differences the  processed  samples i n t h i s  104  were  found  Nuxalk  study.  One  between  samples  and  major f a c t o r  the the was  t h a t t h e comparisons raw  samples  freezing  and  w e r e a c t u a l l y made b e t w e e n s t o r e d , f r o z e n ,  stored,  process i t s e l f  generally Changes  frozen,  processed  samples.  can a f f e c t n u t r i e n t s ,  although i t i s  considered the least destructive processing t h a t occur d u r i n g f r e e z i n g which  i n c l u d e damage t o c e l l  The  method.  can a f f e c t  nutrients  structures, concentration of  solutes i n  t h e r e m a i n i n g l i q u i d w a t e r , a n d a r e - o r i e n t a t i o n o f enzymes a n d their per  s u b s t r a t e s (Lovern, 1962). cent of t o t a l  5-10  per  C. a b o u t 10-15  m o i s t u r e i s a v a i l a b l e as l i q u i d water  c e n t i s a v a i l a b l e as l i q u i d water  (Dyer a n d D i n g l e , water  A t -10 d e g r e e s  1961;  Lovern,  f o r enzymes t o be a c t i v e ,  1962).  while  a t -20 d e g r e e s This i s  so e n z y m a t i c  C.  sufficient  degradation  may  continue t o occur a f t e r f r e e z i n g .  The r a w s a m p l e s may be more  susceptible  than the processed  to  enzymatic  activity  b e c a u s e t h e p r o c e s s i n g may i n a c t i v a t e o r d e n a t u r e thus  decreasing  effect  or  stopping their  action.  the  A  Moisture  was  decreased  samples  significantly  in  t h e s l u q samples,  the  canned,  and t h e  k'nuum  sockeye  samples.  The  were  not  l o w enough t o s t o p b a c t e r i a l  sluq  a n d k'nuum p r e p a r a t i o n s w o u l d r e q u i r e f u r t h e r  average  may  nutrients.  barbequed  for  samples,  enzymes,  differential  o f f r e e z i n g between t h e raw and p r o c e s s e d  mask t h e e f f e c t s o f p r o c e s s i n g on c e r t a i n  samples  values f o rmoisture f o r these growth,  products  therefore the processing  storage, i . e . canning or f r e e z i n g . The  sodium  c o n t e n t o f b o t h t h e canned  canned barbequed sockeye  sockeye  increased significantly  c o n t e n t o f t h e canned sockeye.  and t h e  as d i d t h e a s h  T h i s i n c r e a s e c a n be r e l a t e d t o 105  the a d d i t i o n of s a l t d i r e c t l y to these products i n The  niacin  increase  significantly  samples.  Fennema  storage  on  apparent All  of the canned sockeye over  (1975),  nutrients,  increase  three  chops  content  the content  i n a review  c i t e s three  lamb  chops.  Niacin  ( H a r r i s , 1975), being  over  wide  range  enzymatically. degradation in  the  increase  free  left  total  these cases, be  which  have o c c u r r e d  -beef  i s one  Nuxalk  of  showed  samples  i n the  can  more  intact.  stable  be  light  degraded enzymatic  samples  while,  This would g i v e the appearance of with be  i n v o l v e d i n the  s l u q s a m p l e s and  the degradation  the an  canning. increases  pantothenate i n the barbequed samples,  greater  pork  and  studied,  f r o z e n raw  an  storage.  steaks,  the  i t  frozen  t h e enzymes w e r e i n a c t i v a t e d and  s i m i l a r m e c h a n i s m may  would  studies  to  sockeye  of the e f f e c t s of  however  i n the n i a c i n content  and  raw  s t a b l e to both heat  pH,  the  v i t a m i n D i n both the  the  in  canned samples,  n i a c i n was  A  In  may  found  i n n i a c i n a f t e r s i x months f r o z e n  vitamins a  was  of the  s t u d i e s i n v o l v e d meat p r o d u c t s  and  processing.  i n the  t h e k'nuum  and  the  samples.  In  f r e e z i n g o f t h e raw  sample  and  freezing  of  p r o c e s s e d s a m p l e t o g i v e t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f an  increase  in  the n u t r i e n t . sockeye  The  samples  (1962)  reports  frozen  raw  attributes  than t h a t i n the processing  in  increase  may  in lipids  a l s o be  due  that l i p o l y s i s  fish  than  this  to  raw the  to t h i s  can  fish  i n the canned phenomenon.  occur at a f a s t e r kept  in  cold  "freeze-concentration" 106  barbequed Lovern rate  in  storage,  he  which  can  i n c r e a s e t h e a c t i v i t y o f enzymes. in  the  barbequed  s a m p l e s and  The  decrease  i n vitamin  f r e e f o l a t e i n the s l u q  w e r e e x p e c t e d as t h e s e v i t a m i n s a r e u n s t a b l e t o a i r , heat  ( H a r r i s , 1975).  What was  u n u s u a l was  e f f e c t o f f r e e z i n g on t h e n u t r i e n t s i n t h e raw The  i n c r e a s e i n the f r e e pantothenate  the  k'nuum  the  raw  s a m p l e s may  sample.  pantothenate of  the  over  the  minerals  is  findings  be due  to the  samples.  to greater degradation  in  no  increase  in  be due A  the to a  total release  combination  i n c r e a s e i n t h e manganese c o n t e n t o f t h e s l u q corresponding  raw  samples i s  samples  interesting  in  that  are g e n e r a l l y s t a b l e i n p r o c e s s i n g u n l e s s leached out ( H a r r i s , 1975).  The  sluq  i s s t r u n g on d u r i n g s m o k i n g .  water  from B e l l a Coola would  m i n e r a l may  used  i n the  have been added brine  solution,  A mineral analysis  be u s e f u l  summary t h e r e w e r e few  i n future  may  have  b e e n a f f e c t e d by t h e  t h e raw fact  of  the the  studies.  significant differences  t h e n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t o f t h e p r o c e s s e d and findings  of  a l s o be a t w o r k .  a s h o r smoke i n t h e s m o k i n g p r o c e s s o r f r o m t h e s t i c k s  In  and  and  i n processing.  the product through the water  the  light  i n both the s l u q  i n t h e s a m p l e s , h o w e v e r , i t may  of the product to  there  bound p a n t o t h e n a t e  f a c t o r s may The  As  a l s o be due  samples  that these  d i d n o t o c c u r i n t h e o t h e r p r e p a r a t i o n s w h i c h may  E  between  samples. that  a l l  The the  s a m p l e s - raw and p r o c e s s e d - w e r e f r o z e n f o r a p e r i o d o f t i m e . Loss of n u t r i e n t s from both groups  107  o f s a m p l e s may  not have been  equal  as  p r o c e s s i n g may  still  be a b l e t o a c t i n t h e raw  needed t o determine techniques Ill  samples.  results  Canadian Nuxalk  would  Further s t u d i e s are  the e f f e c t of t r a d i t i o n a l  native processing  that  the  (R.N.I.)  for  women 24-49 y e a r s o l d p r o v i d e d by a " s e r v i n g " o f  the  of  of  the  of  study  thiamin,  riboflavin  and  niacin for  salmon p r o d u c t s  commercial  T h e r e w e r e no  of  t h e R.N.I.  e i t h e r o f t h e two  groups.  s e r v i n g s i z e s and  may  individuals In  in this  1981,  approximately average  an  provided  group  p r o v i d e d by  provided  T h e s e f i n d i n g s a r e b a s e d on  per  the  not r e l a t e to the a c t u a l  by  standard  serving size for  group. Nation  t h r e e t i m e s t h a t o f t h e p r o v i n c e o f B.C.  Boland  was  significant differences in  f o r i r o n or z i n c  approximately  and  one-half t h a t of the  was the  province  (1974) c o n s i d e r e d t h e n a t i v e f o o d c a t c h t o  income supplement w h i c h , $105  the v i t a m i n s  this  t h a n was  a  significantly  t h e unemployment r a t e o f t h e N u x a l k  i n c o m e was  as a w h o l e .  A  f o r c a l c i u m , and  p r o v i d e d by t h e N u x a l k  percentage  Intake  p r o t e i n foods.  o f t h e R.N.I.  products.  indicate  a t l e a s t e q u a l t o t h a t p r o v i d e d by  the commercial  greater percentage D,  present  t h e Recommended N u t r i e n t  s a l m o n p r o d u c t s was  "serving"  be  which  alone.  percentage  the  enzymes  EVALUATION OF NUTRIENT QUALITY The  A,  have d e s t r o y e d  person  at the time  per year,  v a l u e of the e q u i v a l e n t commercial  b a s e d on  catch at that  over the e n t i r e reserve p o p u l a t i o n . 108  of  his the  report, wholesale  time,  spread  I f the n a t i v e food  fishery  is  being  compare  considered  the n u t r i t i o n a l  traditional which  i n economic terms, benefits per  i t i s important dollar  value  of the  foods t o t h a t o f t h e commercially a v a i l a b l e  foods  may s u b s t i t u t e f o r them. When  percentage  compared  on t h e b a s i s o f e q u a l  dollar  o f t h e R.N.I, p r o v i d e d b y t h e N u x a l k  value,  salmon  a t l e a s t equal t o t h a t o f t h e commercial  products f o r  the  nutrients  zinc.  studied,  commercial  products  percentage  of  individual  groups  salmon meat  percentage  and  o f t h e R.N.I.  the study.  the  Nuxalk of the  significantly  greater  f o r i r o n t h a n d i d one d o l l a r ' s One d o l l a r ' s w o r t h  worth  of the cured greater  f o r z i n c t h a n t h e same v a l u e o f t h e  value o f t h e Nuxalk  salmon p r o d u c t s  f i s h o r f i s h p r o d u c t s was i l l e g a l As a r e s u l t ,  determined  using  discussed  earlier.  with food f i s h . there  f o r the  worth  by t h e f r e e exchange o f t h e s e p r o d u c t s  food  the  samples.  dollar  determined native  by  t h a t one d o l l a r ' s  salmon samples.  salmon  The  . i t was f o u n d  t o that provided  the dairy products provided a s i g n i f i c a n t l y  percentage Nuxalk  When  provided per d o l l a r value  compared  o f t h e R.N.I.  and  a l l  i n t o s p e c i f i c groups and t h e  c u r e d meats g r o u p p r o v i d e d a  of t h e Nuxalk meat  iron  were b r o k e n  t h e R.N.I,  samples, and  except  the  products  was  fact,  to  as  was  not  selling  a t the time  of  t h e v a l u e o f t h e s a l m o n p r o d u c t s was  the wholesale price of The N u x a l k  commercial  fish  as  p e o p l e do n o t a s s o c i a t e a c o s t  They p e r c e i v e t h e f i s h  as b e i n g f r e e a n d , i n  i s no d i r e c t c a s h o u t l a y f o r them. 109  In  an  area  where  ready  c a s h c a n be  where  annual  incomes  l i m i t e d a s i t m i g h t be are low,  consideration i n determining Two  additional  comparison. determined  First, by  this could  "cost"  Some and  tails  o f s a l m o n and  soups  and  stews  ( K u h n l e i n , 1981)  amount d i s c a r d e d i s l o w e r and be  correspondingly  percentage  of  products.  Secondly,  determined  in  relatively  easy.  may  the  R.N.I,  July  A  study  for  the  used i n the d i e t  was  amount  (Mcllwraith, smoke  the  to  f o r use  in  I f this practise occurs,  the  s a l t the backbones,  the  " c o s t " of the Nuxalk  less.  This  would  met  per d o l l a r  products  improve  value  when t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t o  t o w e a t h e r , and  for  the these  the  was  valley  is  products  the p r i c e of the  products  increase. of the n u t r i t i o n a l  that approximately  above  the  dietary  value  this  the c o s t of the commercial products  found  s t a t u s of the  30 p e r c e n t  95th c e n t i l e f o r weight  Moody, 1984) .  foods.  products  I n w i n t e r , t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f some  be r e s t r i c t e d due  a v a i l a b l e may  important  i n considering  members o f t h e c o m m u n i t y c o n t i n u e  heads  would  Coola,  t o g i v e the c o s t per e d i b l e p o r t i o n .  T r a d i t i o n a l l y t h e e n t i r e f i s h was 1948).  an  of the Nuxalk  a d j u s t i n g the wholesale  discarded i n preparation,  be  the n u t r i e n t value of these  p o i n t s are important the  in Bella  In a d d i t i o n ,  Nuxalk  people  o f t h e a d u l t s s t u d i e d were for height  an e a r l i e r  study  (Kuhnlein  and  indicated  that  i n t a k e s o f a d u l t women on t h e r e s e r v e w e r e low f o r many  nutrients t h i a m i n and  including niacin.  calcium,  vitamin  I t i s important, 110  A,  vitamin  therefore,  D, to  iron, identify  n u t r i e n t dense foods f o r t h i s p o p u l a t i o n . Recently,  many  quantitatively,  attempts  a "nutritious"  have food  been  made  to  ( G u t h r i e , 1977) f o r u s e i n  b o t h n u t r i t i o n e d u c a t i o n and i n d i e t a r y e v a l u a t i o n . of N u t r i e n t Q u a l i t y used  (I.N.Q.)  calculated  Ratio  (N.C.B.R.)  traditional 1980). given  The I n d e x  ( S o r e n s e n a n d H a n s e n , 1975) c a n be  t o e v a l u a t e s i n g l e foods as w e l l as  ratio  define,  entire  diets.  i s t h e same a s t h e N u t r i e n t C a l o r i e (Guthrie,  1977) w h i c h was u s e d  foods o f t h e North Dakota  Indians  This r a t i o r e l a t e s the percentage  to  The  Benefit evaluate  (Toma a n d C u r r y ,  o f t h e R.N.I.  n u t r i e n t met b y a f o o d t o t h e p e r c e n t a g e  of  for a  the  energy  caloric  value  requirement provided. When (I.N.Q.), salmon  compared  on  the percentage  samples  the basis  of  o f t h e R.N.I.  equal  p r o v i d e d by t h e N u x a l k  was a t l e a s t e q u a l t o t h a t o f  the  commercial  p r o d u c t s f o r a l l t h e n u t r i e n t s s t u d i e d e x c e p t c a l c i u m and i r o n . When t h e c o m p a r i s o n products  was r e p e a t e d a f t e r d i v i d i n g t h e  i n t o s p e c i f i c groups  commercial  i t was f o u n d t h a t t h e p e r c e n t a g e  o f t h e R.N.I.  for calcium provided i n relation to the calories  provided  significantly  products, Nuxalk  was  except  meat a l t e r n a t e s ,  salmon samples.  provided  in  significantly commercial samples.  higher  relation  i n a l l the  than t h a t p r o v i d e d by t h e  The p e r c e n t a g e to  the  o f t h e R.N.I.  calories  h i g h e r i n t h e meat p r o d u c t s ,  fish  than  that  commercial  provided  by  for iron  provided  cured  was  meats,  the Nuxalk  and  salmon  The  l o w p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e R.N.I.  relation may  to the c a l o r i e s  be due  The  f o r calcium provided i n  i n t h e Nuxalk samples  canned  to  commercial canned  a level  The  f i s h product.  use as  of  F i s h bones a r e a (Kuhnlein,  some r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e f o u n d  cooking milk if  milk  traditional  native  be  Lee,  D a i r y products such small  amounts  lower i n l a c t o s e  a r e l o w c o s t a l t e r n a t i v e s w h i c h may  be  The  tolerated,  by o t h e r means."  s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e R.N.I.  i r o n p r o v i d e d by t h e c o m m e r c i a l f i s h p r o d u c t s may variations  in  representative that  they  fish.  could  studies  be due  involving  sample o f t h e N u x a l k salmon p r o d u c t s  terms of i r o n c o n t e n t . supplemented  Further  are comparable  fish  provide  a  t o the commercial f i s h  In the t r a d i t i o n a l  cost  alternative  to the  a  more  may  show  d i e t game w o u l d  to  as for  products  on o c c a s i o n ( M c l l w r a i t h , 1948) , low  in than  F i s h t e n d t o be l o w e r i n i r o n t h a n meat p r o d u c t s s u c h beef.  a  Indians  ( L e i c h t e r and  powder w h i c h c a n be u s e d i n  c a l c i u m n e e d s c a n n o t be met  the  1984a).  that  1977) .  and y o g u r t w h i c h i s c u l t u r e d and  itself  to  d a i r y p r o d u c t s i n t h i s p o p u l a t i o n may  E l l e s t a d - S a y e d and H a w o r t h ,  skim  Nuxalk  comparable  e x h i b i t a h i g h degree of l a c t o s e i n t o l e r a n c e  as  samples.  sockeye would p r o b a b l y  t h a t w o u l d be  source of calcium i n the Nuxalk d i e t  1971;  study  the r a t i o of c a l c i u m t o c a l o r i e s found i n the sockeye  problem  this  t o t h e bones b e i n g o m i t t e d from t h e canned  i n c l u s i o n o f t h e bones i n t h e canned  increase  in  and  commercial  in have  still meat  p r o d u c t s , s u b j e c t t o a v a i l a b i l i t y o f game and a c c e s s t o h u n t i n g .  112  Other would  be  sources of m i n e r a l s a v a i l a b l e t o the Nuxalk root  foods  springbank clover as c a l c i u m and  such  as  the  (Kuhnlein et a l . ,  i r o n may  pacific 1982b).  silverweed The  and  m i n e r a l s such  n o t be as r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e t o t h e b o d y  as t h o s e f o u n d i n d a i r y p r o d u c t s and meats b u t t h e plant  people  traditional  f o o d s c a n make a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n o f m i n e r a l s t o  the d i e t  (Kuhnlein et a l . ,  m i n e r a l s found i n the  1982b) w h i c h c o u l d s u p p l e m e n t t h o s e  fish.  113  CHAPTER V I I CONCLUSION The  Nuxalk  commercial vitamins  fish  products A,  D,  samples  compare  thiamin,  riboflavin,  t h e R . N . I , met p e r s t a n d a r d provided  R.N.I.  with  i n terms o f n u t r i e n t s s t u d i e d  m i n e r a l s i r o n , c a l c i u m and z i n c .  studied  favorably  and  - protein,  niacin,  and t h e  I n terms o f t h e percentage o f  s e r v i n g , t h e Nuxalk salmon  significantly  the  greater  products  percentages  ( f o r C a n a d i a n women 24-49 y e a r s o f age)  of the  f o r calcium,  v i t a m i n A, v i t a m i n D, t h i a m i n , r e b o f l a v i n a n d n i a c i n . On  a dollar  t o d o l l a r b a s i s t h e c o m m e r c i a l meat a n d c u r e d  meat p r o d u c t s , a n d t h e c o m m e r c i a l c u r e d meat a n d d a i r y provided a greater percentage 24-49  years  respectively. commercial products the  cured  f o r C a n a d i a n women  f o r the nutrients  iron  c o n s i d e r i n g t h e a c t u a l cash  and  outlay f o r the  compared t o t h e salmon p r o d u c t s  Nation,  t h e salmon  g i v e n t h e low annual  incomes  of  fish  and  o f t h e R.N.I^  dairy  for iron.  products  provide  a  f o r c a l c i u m and t h e commercial  meats a n d f i s h p r o d u c t s  t h e R.N.I.  reserve  o f Canada, 1981).  t h e b a s i s o f equal c a l o r i c value t h e commercial meat,  zinc,  be a b e t t e r v a l u e f o r many o f t h e members o f  (Census  percentage cured  In  may s t i l l  residents  age  products  Nuxalk  On  of  o f t h e R.N.I.  products  meat, greater meat,  provided a greater percentage of  F i s h products  114  a r e g e n e r a l l y low i n i r o n  i n comparison lower  t o meat p r o d u c t s so one w o u l d e x p e c t them t o  than  meat  products  in  providing  Encouraging  the  traditional  p r e p a r a t i o n s c o u l d improve  the t r a d i t i o n a l The the  and  other  the c a l c i u m content  of  diet.  variation  i n n u t r i e n t v a l u e s of the f i s h products  and  s m a l l number o f s a m p l e s l i m i t s t h e c o n c l u s i o n s w h i c h ' c o u l d  whole.  Further  differences different  in year  work  is  needed  classes  In terms of n u t r i t i o n use  of t r a d i t i o n a l  bones  sources  of  determine  both  and  the  affects  of  should minerals  s t a t u s i n t h i s group. and  - especially zinc  identified.  115  the among  content.  e d u c a t i o n programs,  be e m p h a s i z e d  as  traditional  encouraging  s a l m o n p r o d u c t s c o u l d be an e f f e c t i v e  improving n u t r i t i o n a l  fish  to  f i s h products  n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t of the salmon p r o d u c t s  p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n i q u e s on n u t r i e n t  of  nutrient.  use o f f i s h bones from canned f i s h  be d r a w n a b o u t t h e n u t r i e n t c o n t e n t o f N u x a l k a  this  rank  other and  The good, iron  the  means  use o f  the  low-cost should  be  BIBLIOGRAPHY American  Home E c o n o m i c s A s s o c i a t i o n . 1980. Handbook o f f o o d preparation. 8th edition. AHEA, W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.  Association of O f f i c i a l A n a l y t i c a l Chemists. 1980. O f f i c i a l methods of analysis. 13th edition. A.O.A.C., Washington,D.C. Armstrong, J . 1980. Food h a b i t s and n u t r i t i o n a l s t a t u s o f Canadian Indian c h i l d r e n : A p r e l i m i n a r y r e p o r t . Fed. P r o c . 39 (3) : 551 A 1 5 0 0 . Bailey,  Baker,  Barr,  Behar,  B.E. 1942. N u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n o f salmon p r o d u c t s . Progress Reports. F i s h e r i e s Research Board o f Canada, P a c i f i c C o a s t S t a t i o n s , pp 9. H. a n d F r a n k 0. 1 9 6 7 . A m i c r o b i o l o g i c a l assay f o r folate activity. i n The vitamins: Chemistry, physiology, pathology, methods v o l . I l l . 2nd edition. Gyorgy, P. a n d P e a r s o n , W.N., e d s . A c a d e m i c P r e s s , New Y o r k a n d L o n d o n , pp 2 4 3 . S . I . a n d K u h n l e i n , H.V. 1985. High d e n s i t y l i p o p r o t e i n and total serum c h o l e s t e r o l l e v e l s i n a group of British Columbia n a t i v e I n d i a n s . N u t r i t i o n Research 5: 8 2 7 . M. 1976. European d i e t s v s . P o l i c y : 432.  B e l l a C o o l a Museum A s s o c . 1979. Mimeographed m a n u s c r i p t . Bellan,  R.C. 1976. P r i n c i p l e s economy. 5th edition. Toronto.  traditional  foods.  B e l l a Coola Touring  Food Guide.  o f economics and t h e C a n a d i a n McGraw-Hill Ryerson Ltd.  Best,  S.C. a n d G e r r a r d , J.W. 1 9 5 9 . P i n e House (Saskatchewan) nutrition project. J_^ C d n . Med. A s s o c . 8 1 : 9 1 5 .  Best,  S . C , G e r r a r d , J.W. , I r w i n , A . C , K e r r , D. , F l a n a g a n , M. and B l a c k , M. 1961. The P i n e House (Saskatchewan) . n u t r i t i o n p r o j e c t I I . J_^ C d n . Med. A s s o c . 8 5 : 4 1 2 .  Birkbeck,  Bligh,  J . A . , L e e , M., M y e r s , G.S., a n d A l f r e d , B.M. 1 9 7 1 . Nutritional status of B r i t i s h Columbia Indians I I . Anthropometric measurements, physical and d e n t a l examinations a t A h o u s a t a n d Anaham. Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 62: 403.  E.G. a n d D y e r , W.J. 1959. A r a p i d method o f lipid e x t r a c t i o n and p u r i f i c a t i o n . Cdn. J . 116  total Bioc.  and B i o p h y s . 3 7 :  911.  Boland,  J . P . 1974. The s o c i o - e c o n o m i c i m p o r t a n c e o f f i s h e r y resources to the B e l l a Coola v a l l e y . Technical Report Series No.PAC/T-74-12 NOB/ECON 7-74 Northern O p e r a t i o n s B r a n c h , P a c i f i c R e g i o n , Environment Canada, F i s h e r i e s and M a r i n e S e r v i c e , Ottawa.  Braekkan,  O.R. 1962. B - v i t a m i n s i n f i s h and s h e l l f i s h . i n Fish i n nutrition Heen, E. a n d K r e u z e r , R. e d s . F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . L o n d o n , pg 1 3 2 .  Brody,  H. 1981. Vancouver.  Maps  and  Bureau o f N u t r i t i o n a l S c i e n c e s . Indian survey report. W e l f a r e , Ottawa. Bureau  Douglas  and  Mclntyre  1975. N u t r i t i o n Canada; Dept. of National Health  The and  of Nutritional Sciences. 1976. Food consumption patterns report. A report from N u t r i t i o n Canada. H e a l t h P r o t e c t i o n B r a n c h , Dept. o f N a t i o n a l H e a l t h and W e l f a r e , Ottawa.  Calloway,  Census  Dreams.  D.H., Giauque, R.D., and C o s t a , F.M. 1 9 7 4 . The s u p e r i o r m i n e r a l c o n t e n t o f some A m e r i c a n I n d i a n f o o d s in comparison t o f e d e r a l l y donated counterpart commodities. E c o l . F d . a n d N u t r . 3_: 2 0 3 .  o f Canada. 1981. Enumeration a r e a m i c r o f i s c h e . from S t a t i s t i c s Canada.  Available  Chatfield, C. 1954. Food composition tables - minerals v i t a m i n s - f o r i n t e r n a t i o n a l u s e . FAO, Rome.  and  Childerose, R . J . a n d T r i m , M. 1979. P a c i f i c salmon and steelhead trout. D o u g l a s and M c l n t y r e , V a n c o u v e r a n d Toronto. Coodin,  F . J . , D i l l i n g , L.A. and H a w o r t h , J . C . 1 9 7 5 . The C r o s s Lake study. i n Nutrition i n Indian and Eskimo Children, R e p o r t o f t h e 2nd C a n a d i a n R o s s C o n f e r e n c e on Paediatric Research. Haworth, J.C. e d . , Ross L a b o r a t o r i e s , M o n t r e a l pp 62.  Corrigan,  C. 1 9 4 6 . Scurvy i n a Cree I n d i a n . A s s o c . 54: 3 8 0 .  Cutting,  C.L. 1965. Smoking. i n Fish as f o o d vol I I I . B o r g s t r o m , G. e d . A c a d e m i c P r e s s , New Y o r k and L o n d o n pp 5 5 .  Daun,  H. 1975. nutrients.  Effects Part I:  J^_ Cdn. Med.  of processing by a d d i t i v e s on Effects of s a l t i n g , c u r i n g and 117  in Nutritional s m o k i n g on n u t r i e n t s o f f l e s h f o o d s e v a l u a t i o n of food processing. 2nd e d i t i o n . H a r r i s , R.S. a n d K a r m a s , E. e d s . The A v i P u b l i s h i n g Co. I n c . W e s t p o r t , C o n n , pp 3 5 5 . Desai,  I.D. a n d L e e , M. 1971. N u t r i t i o n a l s t a t u s o f B r i t i s h Columbia Indians I I I . Biochemical s t u d i e s a t Ahousat and Anaham r e s e r v e s . C d n . J . P u b l . H e a l t h 62; 5 2 6 .  Desai,  I.D. a n d L e e , M. 1974a. N u t r i t i o n a l s t a t u s o f C a n a d i a n Indians I. Biochemical s t u d i e s a t Upper L i a r d and Ross R i v e r , t h e Yukon T e r r i t o r y . Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 65: 369.  Desai,  I.D. a n d L e e M. 1974b. V i t a m i n E s t a t u s o f I n d i a n s o f w e s t e r n C a n a d a . Cdn J . P u b l . H e a l t h 65: 1 9 1 .  Dewey K.G. 1979. Commentary: A g r i c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t , and n u t r i t i o n . E c o l . o f F d . a n d N u t r . J8: 265. Dong,  diet  A. and F e e n y , M.C. 1968. The n u t r i e n t i n t a k e o f I n d i a n and n o n - I n d i a n s c h o o l c h i l d r e n . Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 59: 115.  Doughty,  J . 1979. Commentary: Danger o f r e d u c i n g t h e r a n g e of food choice i n developing c o u n t r i e s . E c o l . of Fd. and N u t r . 8: 275.  Draper,  H.H. 1 9 7 7 . The a b o r i g i n a l E s k i m o d i e t i n modern perspective. A m e r i c a n A n t h r o p o l o g i s t 79: 309.  Duncan,  D.W. and T a r r , H.L.A. 1958. B i o c h e m i c a l s t u d i e s on Sockeye salmon d u r i n g spawning m i g r a t i o n I I I . Changes in p r o t e i n and n o n - p r o t e i n nitrogen fractions i n muscles o f m i g a t i n g Sockeye salmon. Can. J . B i o c h . P h y s i o l 36: 7 9 9 .  Duncan,  I. a n d S c o t t , E.M. 1 9 7 2 . A l a s k a n I n d i a n s and E s k i m o s . 867.  Dyer,  Lactose i n t o l e r a n c e i n Am. J . C l i n . N u t r . 25:  W.J. a n d D i n g l e , J.R. 1 9 6 1 . F i s h p r o t e i n s w i t h s p e c i a l reference to freezing. i n F i s h as food v o l JE. B o r g s t r o m , G. e d . A c a d e m i c P r e s s , New Y o r k a n d L o n d o n , pp 2 7 5 .  Ellestad-Sayed, J . J . and H a w o r t h , c o n s u m p t i o n and m a l a b s o r p t i o n J . C l i n . N u t r . 3 0 : 698.  J . C. 1 9 7 7 . D i s a c c h a r i d e i n C a n a d i a n I n d i a n s . Am.  Ellestad-Sayed, J . J . , Haworth, J . C , C o o d i n , F . J . and D i l l i n g L.A. 1981. Growth and n u t r i t i o n o f p r e s c h o o l I n d i a n c h i l d r e n i n Manitoba I I . N u t r i e n t i n t a k e s . Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 72: 127. 118  Fennema,  0. 1975. Effects of freeze preservation on nutrients. in Nutritional evaluation of food processing. 2nd e d i t i o n . H a r r i s , R.S. a n d K a r m a s , E. eds. The A v i P u b l i s h i n g Co. I n c . , W e s t p o r t , Conn.  Fukumoto,  H.E. a n d C h a n g , G.W. 1982. Manual s a l i c y l a t e hypochlorite procedure f o r determination o f amonia in Kjeldahl digests. A s s o c . O f f . A n a l . Chem. 6 5 : 1076.  Guthrie,  H.A. 1977. Concept o f a n u t r i t i o u s D i e t e t . A s s o c . 7 1 ; 14.  food.  Am.  H a r r i s , R.S. 1 9 6 2 . R e l i a b i l i t y o f n u t r i e n t a n a l y s e s and f o o d tables. Am. J . C l i n . N u t r . 1 1 ; 3 7 7 . Harris,  Health  R.S. 1 9 7 5 . G e n e r a l discussion on t h e s t a b i l i t y o f nutrients. in Nutritional evaluation of food processing. 2nd e d i t i o n . H a r r i s , R.S. a n d Karmas E. e d s . The A v i P u b l i s h i n g C o . I n c . , W e s t p o r t , C o n n , pp 1. and W e l f a r e Canada. 1979. N u t r i e n t Value o f Some Common F o o d s . Health S e r v i c e s and P r o m o t i o n Branch and H e a l t h P r o t e c t i o n B r a n c h , O t t a w a .  Heller,  CA. and S c o t t , E.M. 1967. The A l a s k a Dietary S u r v e y 1 9 5 6 - 1 9 6 1 . U.S. D e p t . H e a l t h , E d u c a t i o n , a n d Welfare Public Health Service Publication No. 9 9 9 AH-2, W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.  Herbert,  V. a n d B e r t i n o , J.R. 1 9 6 7 . F o l i c a c i d . i n The Vitamins: Chemistry, Physiology, Pathology, Methods V o l . V I I . 2nd e d i t i o n . G y o r g y , P.and P e a r s o n , W.N. eds. Academic Press, New York and L o n d o n , pp 2 4 5 .  Higashi,  H. 1 9 6 2 . R e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n i q u e s and t h e amount o f v i t a m i n s a n d m i n e r a l s i n p r o c e s s e d fish. i n F i s h i n n u t r i t i o n . Heen, E. a n d K r e u z e r , R. eds. F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . , L o n d o n , pp 1 2 5 .  Hoffer,  J . , R u e d y , J . a n d V e r d i e r , P. 1 9 8 1 . N u t r i t i o n a l s t a t u s o f Quebec I n d i a n s . Am. J . C l i n . N u t r . 34: 2784.  Hoppner,  K. 1971. Free s t r a i n e d baby f o o d s . 4: 5 1 .  and t o t a l folate activity i n Can. I n s t . Food S c i . T e c h n o l . J .  Hoppner,  K., L a m p i , B., a n d P e r r i n , D.E. 1 9 7 2 . The f r e e and total folate activity i n foods available on the C a n a d i a n m a r k e t . Can. I n s t . Food S c i . T e c h n o l . J . 5: 60.  119  Hoppner,  K., M c L a u g h l a n , J.M., S h a h , B.G., Thompson, J . N . , B e a r e - R o g e r s , J . , E l l e s t a d - S a y e d , J . a n d S c h a e f e r , 0. 1978. N u t r i e n t l e v e l s o f some f o o d s o f E s k i m o s from A r c t i c B a y , N.W.T., C a n a d a . C__. D i e t e t . A s s o c . 73: 257. A  m  >  Ikeda,  S. 1979. Other organic components and i n o r g a n i c components. in Advances i n fish science and technology. Papers presented at the Jubilee Conference of t h e Torry Research Station, Aberdeen, Scotland, 23-27 J u n e , 1 9 7 9 . C o n n e l l , J . J . e d . F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . Farnham S u r r e y , E n g l a n d . pp 1 1 1 .  Jacquot,  R. 1 9 6 2 . O r g a n i c constituents of f i s h and o t h e r aquatic animal foods. i n Fish as f o o d Vol I I . Borgstrom, G. e d . Academic P r e s s , New Y o r k a n d L o n d o n , pp 1 4 5 .  Kuhnlein,  H.V. 1981. N u t r i e n t c o m p o s i t i o n and use o f n a t i v e Indian traditional foods. Final project report, Health and Welfare Canada, Health Promotion D i r e c t o r a t e , Ottawa.  Kuhnlein,  H.V. foods.  Kuhnlein,  H.V. 1984b. Use a n d t a s t e a p p r e c i a t i o n of traditional s e a f o o d s by t h r e e g e n e r a t i o n s of Nuxalk women. F e d . P r o c . 4 3 ; 9 9 1 .  Kuhnlein,  H.V., C h a n , A.C., Thompson, J . N . a n d N a k a i , 1982a. O o l i g a n grease: A n u t r i t i o u s f a t used native people of coastal B r i t i s h Columbia. E t h n o b i o l . 2: 154.  Kuhnlein,  H.V. a n d Moody, S.A. 1 9 8 4 . Nuxalk nutritional status: Studies on a n t h o p o m e t r y , iron a n d gammag l u t a m y l t r a n s f e r a s e (GGT). Cdn. F e d , o f B i o l . Soc. P r o c . 27: 89.  Kuhnlein,  H.V., Turner, N . J . and K l u c k n e r , P.D. 1982b. Nutritional s i g n i f i c a n c e o f two i n p o r t a n t r o o t foods (Springbank c l o v e r and P a c i f i c s i l v e r w e e d ) used by n a t i v e p e o p l e on t h e c o a s t o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . Ecol. o f F d . a n d N u t r . 1 2 : 89.  Kukuez,  J.T. 1962. E f f e c t s of biological factors, (sex, seasonal races, spawning m i g r a t i o n s ) on f a t , p r o t e i n and water, their d i s t r i b u t i o n i n Sea T r o u t (Salmo trutta L.). in Fish i n nutrition. H e e n , E. a n d Kreuzer, R. e d s . F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . London, pp 76.  1984a. Traditional and c o n t e m p o r a r y N u t r i t i o n R e s e a r c h £: 789.  120  Nuxalk  S. by J.  Lee,  M.,  R e y b u r n , R., and C a r r o w , A. 1971. Nutritional status of B r i t i s h Columbia Indians I . Dietary studies at A h o u s a t and Anaham r e s e r v e s . Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 62: 285.  Leichter,  J. and Lee, M. 1971. Canadian west c o a s t I n d i a n s . 809.  Lactose intolerance in Am. J . D i g e s t . P i s . 16:  Lovern,  J.A. 1962. The l i p i d s o f f i s h and c h a n g e s o c c u r r i n g in them d u r i n g p r o c e s s i n g and s t o r a g e . i n Fish in nutrition. Heen, E. and K r e u z e r , R. e d s . F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . L o n d o n , pp 86.  Mcllwraith, T.F. 1948. The B e l l a C o o l a I n d i a n s V o l . J. and I I . U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , Toronto. McKervill, H.W. 1967. The L t d . S i d n e y , B.C.  salmon p e o p l e .  Gray's  Publishing  M c Q u a k e r , N.R. 1976. Chemical A n a l y s i s of Waters, Wastewaters, Sediments, and Biological Materials. 2nd edition, Province of British Columbia, Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Laboratory, Vancouver. McQuaker,  N.R., Brown, D.F. and K l u c k n e r , P.D. 1979a. Digestion o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a t e r i a l s f o r A n a l y s i s by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission S p e c t r o m e t r y . A n a l . Chem. 51; 1082.  McQuaker,  N.R., K l u c k n e r , P.D., and C h a n g , G.N. 1979b. Calibration of an I n d u c t i v e l y C o u p l e d Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectrometer for the Analysis of E n v i r o n m e n t a l M a t e r i a l s . A n a l . Chem 51; 888.  Mann,  Moore,  G.V., Scott, E.M., H u r s h , L.M., H e l l e r , C.A., Youmans, J.B., C o n s o l a z i o , C.F., Bridgforth, E.B., Russell, A.L. and Silverman, M. 1962. The health and nutritional s t a t u s of Alaskan Eskimos. A survey of the I n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l C o m m i t t e e on Nutrition for N a t i o n a l D e f e n s e - 1958. Am. J . C l i n . N u t r 1 1 ; 31. P.E., Kruse, H.O., T i s d a l l , F.F. and C o r r i g a n , R.S.C. 1946. M e d i c a l s u r v e y o r n u t r i t i o n among t h e n o r t h e r n M a n i t o b a I n d i a n s . J_L. Cdn. Med. A s s o c . 54 : 223.  Pennington, J.A.T. and Church, H.N. 1980. Food V a l u e s of Portions Commonly U s e d . 13th Edition, Lippincott, Phildelphia. Rivera,  T. 1949. D i e t of a food g a t h e r i n g people chemical analysis of s a l m o n and saskatoons. Indians of the urban northwest. Smith, M.W. Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, Toronto. 121  with in ed.  Robbins,  L.G. 1984. The revised Agriculture Canada nutritious food basket. Food M a r k e t Commentary 6^: 30.  Robson,  J.R.K. 1 9 7 6 . C h a n g i n g food habits i n developing countries. E c o l . o f F d . a n d N u t r . 4^: 2 5 1 .  Robson,  J.R.K. and Wadsworth, G.R. 1977. H e a l t h and nutritional status of primitive populations. Ecol of F d . a n d N u t r . 6: 1 8 7 .  Sarwar,  G., S h a h , B.G., Mongeau,R., a n d H o p p n e r , K. 1 9 8 5 . Nucleic acid, fiber and n u t r i e n t composition of i n a c t i v e d r i e d food yeast products. Food S c i . 5 0 : 353.  Schaefer,  0. 1975. Food resources and c h a n g i n g dietary p a t t e r n s o f t h e Eskimo c h i l d . i n N u t r i t i o n i n Indian and E s k i m o C h i l d r e n , R e p o r t o f t h e 2nd C a n a d i a n Ross C o n f e r e n c e on P a e d i a t r i c R e s e a r c h . Haworth, J.C. e d . R o s s L a b o r a t o r i e s , M o n t r e a l pp 4.  Schaefer,  O. 1977. Changing d i e t a r y p a t t e r n s i n t h e C a n a d i a n north: H e a l t h , s o c i a l and economic c o n s e q u e n c e s . J . Cdn. D i e t e t . A s s o c . 3 8 : 1 7 .  Schaefer,  0. Timmermans, J.F.W., E a t o n , R.D.P. a n d M a t t h e w s , A. R. 1980. General a n d n u t r i t i o n a l h e a l t h i n two Eskimo populations at different stages of acculturation. Cdn. J . P u b l . H e a l t h 71: 397.  Schroeder, H.A. 1971. L o s s e s o f v i t a m i n s and t r a c e m i n e r a l s resulting from p r o c e s s i n g and p r e s e r v i n g o f f o o d s . Am. J . C l i n . N u t r . 24: 5 6 2 . Smith,  M.C. 1975. Food resources and c h a n g i n g dietary patterns of the Canadian Indian c h i l d . i n Nutrition of I n d i a n and Eskimo c h i l d r e n , R e p o r t o f t h e 2nd Canadian Ross conference on p a e d i a t r i c research. H a w o r t h , J . C . e d . R o s s L a b o r a t o r i e s , M o n t r e a l , pp 1 2 .  Sorenson,  A.W., quality.  Stansby,  M.E. 1962. P r o x i m a t e c o m p o s i t i o n o f f i s h . i n Fish in Nutrition. H e e n , E. a n d K r e u z e r , R. e d s . F i s h i n g News (Books) L t d . L o n d o n , pp 5 5 .  Stepien,  Y.Z. 1 9 7 8 . "Food p a t t e r n s , s h o p p i n g h a b i t s a n d f o o d beliefs o f I n d i a n f a m i l i e s on s e l e c t e d i s o l a t e d a n d non-isolated r e s e r v e s i n B.C." M.Sc. T h e s i s i n Human Nutrition, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, B. C., u n p u b l i s h e d .  and Hansen, R.G. Jj_ N u t r . E d . 7_: 5 3 .  122  1975.  Index  of  food  Tarr,  H.L.A. 1962. Changes in nutritive value through processing procedures. i n Fish as food Vol I I . B o r g s t r o m , G. e d . A c a d e m i c P r e s s , New Y o r k and L o n d o n , pp 235.  Terrell,  M.E. edition.  1979. Professional Food Preparation. J o h n W i l e y and S o n s , P h i l a d e l p h i a .  2nd  Thompson, J.N., E r d o d y , P . , M a x w e l l , W.B., and M u r r a y , T . K . 1978. The Flourometric Determination of V i t a m i n A in Dairy Products. Health and W e l f a r e Canada Amended B u l l . VT-5, O t t a w a . Thompson,  J.N., H a t i n a , G., Maxwell, W.B., and D u v a l , S. 1982. High performance liquid chromotographic determination of v i t a m i n D in fortified milks, m a r g a r i n e and i n f a n t f o r m u l a s . J ^ Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 65: 624.  Thompson,  J.N. and Hatina, G. 1979. Determination of t o c o p h e r o l s and t o c o - t r i e n o l s i n f o o d s and t i s s u e s by high performance liquid chromotography. J_^_ L i q u i d C h r o m o t o g r a p h y 2: 327.  Thurston,  CE. 1958. Sodium and potassium content of species of f i s h . J_^ Am. D i e t e t . A s s o c . 34: 396.  Toma, Vivian,  R.B. and C u r r y , M.L. 1980. North Dakota t r a d i t i o n a l foods. J . Am. D i e t e t . A s s o c . 76:  34  Indians' 589.  R.P., McMillan, C , M o o r e , P.E., Robertson, E.C, Sebrell, W.H., Tisdall, F.F. and Mcintosh, W.G. 1948. The nutrition and h e a l t h of the James Bay Indian. Cdn. Med. A s s o c . 59: 505,  Watt,  B.K. and Merrill, A. L. 1963. Composition of foods...raw, processed, prepared. U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Agricultural Handbook 8 (rev), W a s h i n g t o n , D.C. pp 161.  Zook,  E.G., McArthur, M.J., Pantothenic Acid in USDA, W a s h i n g t o n , D.C.  Zottola,  and Toepfer, E.W. Foods. USDA Handbook  1956. 97,  E.A., Wagner, M.K. and Z o l t a i , P.T. 1983. C o m p o s i t i o n and m i c r o b i o l o g y of some n a t i v e A l a s k a n preserved foods. J . Food P r o t e c t i o n 46: 441.  123  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0096715/manifest

Comment

Related Items