Detection of Illegal Addition of Formaldehyde
to Fresh Fish
Dusadee TUMun, Sombat Kanont, Mayuree Chaiyawat and Nongnuch Raksakulthai
ABSTRACT
The formaldehyde content of fresh fish in Bangkok markets
was very low in chub mackerel, rake-gilled mackerel (ReM)
and Indo-Pacific king mackerel (below 1.0 mg/kg) but higher
in silver pomfret (1.5 mg/kg). It was concluded that the
formaldehyde content depended on the species of fish (P <
0.01). Formaldehyde increased from 0.50 to 1.4 mg/kg dur-
ingfrozen storage of ReM at -20"C whilst in lizard fish (LF)
it increased from 16.8 to 42.5 mg/kg after six months. In
ReM and LF, dipped in differentconcentrationsofformalde-
hyde solution for 10 minutes, the analysed concentrations
correlated well with the concentrations used (r = 0.9955for
ReM and 0.9904 for LF).
The predicted equations were:
Formaldehyde in ReM (mg/kg) = 0.8185 + 0.0067x (1)
Formaldehyde in LF (mg/kg) = 18.5170 + 0.0097x
(2)
where x = formaldehyde concentration in diluted formalde-
hyde solution used (mL/L).
Sensory evaluation indicated that formaldehyde could be
detected in ReM and LF dipped in solutions containing
more than 500 and 2000 mL/L formaldehyde, respectively.
The judges could perceive a formaldehyde smell from cooked
fish only immediately after cooking if more than 1000 mL/L
of formaldehyde solution was applied. In addition, the tex-
ture of those cooked samples was harder and tougher than the
controls.
INTRODUCTION
The Thailand Ministry of Public Health Regulations
No. 93 (1985) prohibit the use of formaldehyde, forma-
lin and paraformaldehvde in foods. The Division of
Food Analysis, Depar~ent of Medical Sciences, Minis-
try of Public Health has developed a formaldehyde
analysis kit with a sensitivity of 0.5 - 1 mL/L (Anon,
1992). It was reported that formaldehyde was found in
fresh fish sold in markets in Thailand. A sanitary check
in Tokyo fish market in 1961 (Amano and Yamada,
1965) led to the discovery that Gadoid fish could pro-
duce formaldehyde and dimethylamine (DMA) from
trimethvlamine oxide (TMAO) during chilled or frozen
storage:
. .. ..
Ms Tunhun 15a lecturer m Smgh Bun Agrzcultural Colle ge, Singh
..
Bun, ThazIand. '. deceased.
Mr Kanant 15 Mrs Chalyawat and Dr
RaksakuIthai are Assistant Professors in the Faculty of Fisheries,
Kasetsart University, Bangkok 10900, Thailand.
74
Bremner and Snell (1978) later extended these observa-
tions to the Macruridae and Saurida species. The reac-
tion causes textural toughness in fish muscle due to the
denaturation of proteins by formaldehyde (Ang and
Hultin, 1989). The objectives of this work were to
survey the formaldehyde content of fresh fish sold in
Bangkhen and Chatuchak areas and to determine
whether the detected and analysed formaldehyde was
added or naturally formed.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sampling and data analysis
Four species of marine fish: chub mackerel (Rastreliger
brachysomus Bleeker), rake-gilled mackerel (Rastreliger
kanagurta Cuvier), Indo-Pacific king mackerel
(Scomberomonls guttatus Bloch & Schneider) and silver
pomfret (Pampus argenteus Euphrasem) were bought
from t):1eMarketing Organization for Farmers (MOF),
Bangkhen, Amomphan and Saphan Mai markets in
Bangkok once a week for 10 weeks. Three replications
of each sample were analysed for formaldeyhde con-
tent m the edIble portlOn according to Ng (1987). The
data were statIstIcally ana lysed using factorial analysis
(4 x 4, fish species x buying places) analysis of variance
(ANOYA) and Duncan's new multiple range test using
the Banana Stat Pack programme version 3.0.
Rake-gilled mackerel (RGM), 10-12 fish/kg and lizard
fish (LF, Saurida sp.), 6-8 fish/kg from the fish landing
place in Rayong Province were sampled and kept fro-
zen at -20°C for six months. The samples were analysed
for formaldehyde content every 2 weeks.
~art of the same lot of RGM was dipped in 0, 100, 250,
~OOand 1000 mL/L formaldehyde solution for 10 mins.
The LF was dIpped m 0, 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 mL/
L formaldehyde for 10 mms and analysed for formal-
dehyde. Sensory evaluatlOn usmg mutIple comparison
test wIth 10 laboratory panels was also conducted
accordmg to Larmond (1977). The judges were asked to
score the formaldehyde smell compared to a reference
sample (R) wIth no added formaldehyde. Samples with
less formaldehyde smell than R were scored from 1-4,
the same smell as R was scored 5 and stronger smells
than R scored 6-9. The correlation between the analysed
.
formaldehyde an d coneen tfa tIOns 0 f forrna ld eve
h .I d 50-
.
Juhan used wer: determined using regress~on analysis.
Sensory evaluation scores were analysed usmg ANOY A
ASEAN Food Journal Vol. 11, No.2, 1996
in CRD for one way classification using the Banana Stat The formaldehyde content of silver pomfret was sig-
Pack Programme version 3.0. nificantly higher than in the other species studied.

In addition, one sample from each treatment was Formaldehyde content during frozen storage
wrapped in aluminium foil and steamed. The judges
were asked to unwrap the cooked samples and smell The formaldehyde content of RGM and LF increased
them immediately to detect formaldehyde smell. with storage (Fig. 1). The initial formaldehyde contents
were 0.5 mg/kg in RGM and 16.8 mg/kg in LF. After
Analysis of formaldehyde content 6 months at -20'C. the formaldehyde contents were 1.4
in RGM and 42.5 mg/kg in LF.
20 mL of 5% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) was added to 5
g of minced meat in a 50-mL beaker, homogenised and The formaldehyde contents in the two species were
kept at ambient temperature for 30 mins. The mixture significantly different (P<O.Ol). The major factor affect-
was filtered through Whatman filter paper No. 41. 10 ing formaldehyde content was storage time. It could be
mL of 5% TCA was added to the residue, homogenised concluded that LF is a formaldehyde producing spe-
and filtered again. The filtrate was combined and ad- cies. Apparently, the longer the storage time, the higher
justed with 1 Nor 0.1 N KOH to pH 6.0 - 6.5, then the the physical damage by denaturation of the protein.
volume made up with distilled water to 50 mL. 3 mL of After 18-22 weeks, the texture was tougher. The drip
neutralised filtrate was taken and 3 mL of Nash's was very high in thawed fish after 6 months' storage.
reagent (150 g ammonium acetate, 2 mL acetylacetone,
3 mL acetic acid and distilled water to 1 L) was added
and mixed wel!. The solution was placed in a water
bath at 60'C for 15 minutes, then cooled in running
water prior to measurement of absorbance at 412 nm.
Approximately 1000 mL/L of standard formaldehyde
solution was prepared for the curve calibration (Ng,
1987).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Formaldehyde content of fresh fish

The lowest formaldehyde content in fresh fish was 0.2

mg/kg in Indo-Pacific king mackerel from Saphan Mai
and the highest 2.6 mg/kg in silver pomfret from
Bangkhen (Table 1).

The Ai'\:OVA result showed that the major factor affect-

ing formaldehyde content was the fish species (P <
0.01). The market place has no effect on formaldehyde
content.

ASEAN Food Journal Vol. 11, No.2, 1996

Ang and Hultin (1989) reported that increased formal-
dehyde formation caused insolubility of protein due to
denaturation. Ames and Poulter (1982) also reported
the TMAO content in LF was high and DMA formed
from TMAO could be used as a freshness index.
Dipping of fish in formaldehyde solution
The formaldehyde content of the sampled fish meat is
shown in Table 2.
The formaldehyde content in the fish meat was low
compared to the concentration of formaldehyde used,
especially in RGM. However, the analysed value de-
pended on the concentration used. The correlation equa-
tions for the analysed formaldehyde contents and the
concentrations of formaldehyde solution were:
The analysed formaldehyde content showed that in
four species it was similar to RGM. Consequently, the
first equation could be apphed for the determmahon of
concentration of formaldehyde solution used. Among
the four species tested, only silver pomfret was calcu-
lated to have a formaldehyde content of 1.5 mg/kg
with x = 102.6 mL/L. Therefore, this species of fish
might have been dipped in 100 mL/L formaldehyde
solution.
76
However, formaldehyde was not detected in the water
in the container in which the fish was bought. Since ice
was used during selling, the negative test might be due
to dilution of the water with melted ice.
Sensory evaluation
The average formaldehyde smell scores in RGM dipped
in 100, 250, 500 and 1000 mL/L were 5.0, 5.18, 6.27 and
7.09, respectively (Table 3). The judges could not detect
the difference in samples dipped in solution with 100-
250 mL/L but could detect samples dipped in stronger
formaldehyde solutions.
The average scores of formaldehyde smell in LF dipped
in 500, 1000, 2000 and 4000 mL/L formaldehyde were
6.5, 6.4, 7.8 and 8.2, respectively. The judges could
detect formaldehyde in samples dipped in 2000 mL/L
or more of formaldehyde.
The ANOVA of the smell scores showed significant
difference for RGM and LF (Tables 3 and 4).
The judges could not detect any difference in physical
appearance in samples with or without formaldehyde
dipping. Immediately after cooking, a formaldehyde
smell could be detected in RGM and LF dipped in 1000
mL/L formaldehyde solution. After cooling, the form-
aldehyde smell could not be detected but the judges
noted that the texture of the 1000 mL/L formaldehyde
dipped sample was tougher than the control or samples
dipped in less than 500 mL/L formaldehyde.
ASEAN Food Journal Yol. 11, No.2, 1996
CONCLUSIONS
. LF is a natural formaldehyde producing spebes.
Formaldehyde production can occur even at -20°C.
Formaldehyde in LF can cause denaturation of
proteins and consequently a negative effect on the
texture of fish.
. Formaldehyde production in chub mackerel RGM,
Indo-Pacific king mackerel and silver pomfret was
not pronounced. The formaldehyde content of fish
sold in Bangkok markets was very low.
. Formaldehyde might
pomfret at 100 mLIL.
have been used in silver
. Sensory evaluation as a test of whether formalde-
hyde had been used was very difficult, unless the
concentration exceeded 500 mL/L. The formalde-
hyde smell could not be detected if fish was kept in
ice or iced-water for a long time.
. Since the analysis of formaldehyde is not compli-
cated, the value of formaldehyde content together
with a predicted equation can precisely judge
whether formaldehyde has been used, even though
the value may be very low.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was funded by the Kasetsart University
Research and Development Institute. The authors would
like to thank the Department of Medical Sciences for
providing the formaldehyde analysis kit.
ASEAN Food Journal Vol. 11, No.2, 1996
REFERENCES
Amano, K. and Yamada, K. The biological formation of
formaldehyde in cod flesh. Kreuzer R (Ed.). The
Technology of Fish Utilization. London: Fishing
News (Books) Ltd., 1965. 73-78.
Ames, G.R and Poulter, RG. Frozen storage life of
tropical fish species. EA.O. Fisheries Report No.
137, 1982. 155-157.
Ang, ).E and Hultin, RO. Denaturation of cod myosin
during freezing after modification with formalde-
hyde. ). Food Sci. 54: 814-818; 1989.
Anon. Formalin in seafood soaking water. Bangkok
Business. 18 August 1992 (in Thai).
Bremner, H.A. and Snell, P).I. Chemical and taster
panel tests on the mechanically separated flesh of
six tropical fish species. Indo-Pacific Fishery
Commision. Proceedings Symposium on Fish Utlli-
zation Technology and Marketing in the IPFC Re-
gion, FAa Bangkok, 1978. 288-302.
Larmond, E. Laboratory methods for sensory evalua-
tion of food. Research Branch, Dept. of Agriculture,
Canada. Publication 1637, 1977.
Ng, C.S. Determination of formaldehyde in fish meat
using Nash's reagent. Hasegawa, H. (Ed.). Labora-
tory Manual on Analytical Methods and Procedores
for Fish and Fish Products. Marine Fisheries Re-
search Dept., Southeast Asian Fisheries Develop-
ment Center, Singapore. 1987. B.5. 1-5.4.
77