144 U. S. BUREAU OF FISHERIES. 
H. M. Loomis, formerly chief of the Seattle food and drug inspec- 
tion laboratory, Bureau of Chemistry, United States Department of 
Agriculture, reports as follows on analyses of both canned and fresh 
Pacific salmon made at this laboratory.* 
CANNED SALMON (1911 PACK.) 4 
Ammoniacal 
eine! nitrogen. 
y : 
Sample. Water. ether (Nob 25) Total NaCl. 
extract. 6 ae : Richard-| Alcohol 
son vapor 
method. | method, 
PL a nS 
Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. 
62. 44 15. 17 20. 25 2.50 0. 79 0. 0403 
No. 1. Puget Sound sockeye.... 0. 0348 
No. 2. Puget Sound sockeyve.... 61. 84 13. 74 21.77 2.73 1,10 . 0437 . 0410 
No. 3. Alaska medium red...... 69. 97 7.81 20. 40 2. 58 1.09 - 04965" |t to ccseene 
Nov4)) Alaskajchum 222-72 522-ee 73. 48 2.88 21. 33 2. 57 .83 . 0563 . 0557 
No. 5. Alaska pink or hump- 
backs sere chet sc 8a. 74.12 4.75 19. 75 1,98 - 50 ©0404 ie eae 
Non6p-alaskaired seo eee socee 70. 88 5, 26 21. 79 2.35 . 64 30455, || oc Saeed 
FRESH SALMON (CAUGHT MAY 7, 1912), EDIBLE PORTIONS. 
Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent.| Per cent.| Per cent.| Per cent. | Per cent. 
Puget Sound sockeye........--- 67. 48 8. 86 22, 24 US SOG eee emetise 0. 0121 0.0205 
TNO BN GEO Wiss ieletete sale teeter r=iate 67. 89 9. 39 21. 80 SOO) | creiteisieieies 0135 - 0218 
@ Each sample is average of two or morecans. Allsamples, except No. 2, are old form 1-pound tall cans. 
No. 2 is 3-pound flat cans. 
b Represents the fat. 
¢ Represents the salt. 
ANALYSES OF CANNED SALMON BY SOUTH DAKOTA AUTHORITIES. 
In 1916 the South Dakota Food and Drug Department analyzed a 
considerable number of samples of canned salmon for the purpose of 
determining, if possible, whether interior grades of the fish were sub- 
stituted for the better grades, and for the further purpose of discover- 
ing some means of identifying the different types of salmon by 
chemical analysis. 
Thirty-three samples of commercial canned salmon, including 30 different brands, 
were analyzed. Thirteen of these were labeled as belonging to the sockeye class, 
five to the coho, six to the humpback, and one to the chum. Five samples were not 
labeled as to variety. One sample was labeled ‘Salmon Steaks” and two samples 
were labeled ‘‘ Fresh Alaska.’? The last eight samples, because they were not labeled 
to show the common name of the fish contained in the can, were in violation of the 
F. I. D. No. 105 referred to above. 
All of the cans but one were labeled to show the net weight of fish in the can. Six- 
teen per cent of them contained less than the declared amount of contents, but the 
reatest shortage was but 3.1 per cent of the declared weight, while the greatest excess 
in weight was 18.7 per cent of the declared weight. ‘The weight is usually stated 
considerably under the actual amount of the contents. 
The amount of liquid in the cans is an important factor to consider in computing 
the value of the contents. The free liquor in the cans examined varied widely from 
3.95 per cent in sample number 15-209, labeled salmon steaks, to 26.54 per cent in 
sample number 15-63, which was not labeled as to variety. As a rule, the largest 
amount of free liquor is found in the lower priced grades, but there are exceptions, 
notably number 15-70, which contained 24.14 per cent of free liquor. 
It will be noticed from the results given in the table that the amount of total moisture 
varies inversely as the amount of fat (called ether extract in the table). That is, 
salmon containing an excessive amount of moisture contains little fat, but those sam- 
ples which contain the lower amounts of moisture contain the largest amounts of fat. 
The protein content seems to be fairly constant in all samples, the average amount 
a Salmon Canning Industry of North America. BY H. M. Loomis. Original communications, 
Eighth International Congress of Applied Chemistry, Washington and New York, Sept. 4 to 13, 1912, 
Vol. XVIII, pp. 239-245. The Rumford Press, Concord, N. H. 
— 
