Suitability of Indigenous Aluminium Cans as an Alternative to Tin Cans for Fish Canning and Process Time Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LIST Of PLATES Plate.l.Overpressure autoclave.Plate.2.Food Texture Analyzer.Plate.3.(a), Empty aluminium cans.(b), Cutting tools for aluminium cans.Plate.4.(a).Different types of thermocouples.(b), Aluminium cans fitted with thermocouple.Plate.5.Aluminium cans after processing INTRODUCTIONAluminium container offers tremendous opportunities to take care of the packaging needs of the food-based industries like canned fish products.Besides the natural advantages like lightweight and corrosion resistance, the most Important merit of aluminium is its recyclability.The present study was undertaken with the following objectives in mind.~To find an alternative container to tin cans for fish canning.~To reduce the cost of production of canned fish by using indigenously manufactured aluminium cans.~To study the suitability of aluminium cans for heat processing of fish in various media.~To standardize the heat penetration characteristics (Fo value and cook value) and process time of various canned fish products in aluminium cans ~To find out the shelf life of various canned fish products processed in aluminium cans. 2. STATUS OF CANNING INDUSTRY STATUS OF CANNING INDUSTRYTill the close of 1960 export of Indian marine products mainly consisted of dried items like dried fish, dried shrimp, shark fins, fish maws etc.The frozen items entered in the export basket in 1953 in negligible quantities.From 1961, the export of dried marine products was on decline and exports of processed items in were making steady"progress.With the devaluation of Indian currency in 1966, the frozen and canned items registered a significant rise.These items continued to dominate the trade.Markets for Indian products spread fast to developed countries from the traditional buyers in developing countries.Before 1960, the markets for Indian marine products were largely confined to neighboring countries like Srilanka, Myanmar, Singapore etc.This position continued as long as dried items dominated exports from India.When the frozen and canned items increasingly figured in our exports, the sophisticated affluent markets like USA, France, Australia, Canada, Japan etc become important buyers.Processing units with modern machinery for freezing and canning came up at all important centers to process and pack for exports.Over the years, the frozen seafood markets for Indian marine products have witnessed changes.The USA was the principal buyer for our frozen shrimp for a long time but after 1977, Japan emerged as the principal buyer for frozen shrimp followed by the Western European countries.In the nineties South East Asian countries emerged as another important market due to the import liberalization in these countries. Canning Industry in India-The past:First canning factory in India was established in the year 1911 at a place called Chaliyam in the present Kozhikode district of Kerala.This had to be wound up after operation for about one and a half decades for several reasons like non 5 availability of cheap containers, poor and uninterrupted supply of raw material, high processing costs and inability to compete with better quality imported products.The industry.was later revived in India in the late fifties, mainly intended for canning of prawns for the export market.Export of this commodity started in the year 1959 which after touching the highest record of 2,200 tonnes worth Rs.52.4 million in 1973, recorded a step fall due to the very same reason Y' that caused the closing down of the fist fish canning factory in the country.Thus the fish canning Industry in India is almost a dead industry. Major Products ExportedAmong the canned marine products exported from India, shrimp was the most imported item.The other canned items are canned crabmeat, canned clam, canned tuna and canned fish.When offered in international trade, Indian shrimp are commercially classified according to different grade.The most common are: Super jumbo Jumbo Large Medium Small Tiny 6 <10 pcsj125 gm 10-13 pcsj125 gm 13-20 pcsj125 gm 21-34 pcsj125 gm 35-53 pcsj125 gm >53 pcsj125 gm ' temperature 1 --Cool< value
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".