The Department of Food Gastronomy and Food Hygiene is part of the Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences at Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), which is located at 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.
The Department of Food Gastronomy and Food Hygiene is part of the Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences at Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), which is located at 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.
The department of functional foods, ecological foods, and commodities is part of the Faculty of Human Nutrition and Consumer Sciences at Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), which is located at 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.
The department of food engineering and process management is part of the faculty of food sciences at Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS), which is located at 02-787 Warsaw, Poland.
Sous-vide (57 °C, 20 min and 63 °C, 80 min) and traditional methods (steam cooking, roasting) were used to compare the effects of heat treatment on the quality of salmon. They checked the color and texture of the salmon, as well as the yield and sensory quality (sensory profile and consumer liking). Salmon processed with the sous-vide method was characterized by a statistically significantly (p ≤ 0. 05) higher yield and water content than the samples prepared by steaming and roasting. Statistically higher (p ≤ 0. 5) It was said that consumers liked salmon that was cooked at higher temperatures (63 °C, 80 minutes) more than salmon that was cooked at lower temperatures (57 °C, 20 minutes). Parameters of the sous-vide processing (57 °C, 20 min) have a negative effect on salmon quality. Researchers found that as the process temperature and time went up, the intensity of the taste and smell of cooked fish went up, while the intensity of the raw fish’s juiciness, tenderness, and softness went down. The color of salmon also changed. We suggest the following steps for cooking salmon using the sous-vide method based on the results: 63 °C for 80 minutes
The sous-vide method is when you cook food in head-stable vacuumed pouches while controlling the temperature and time. “Sous-vide products, which can be raw materials or a mix of raw materials and semi-finished products, are heated at low temperatures, usually between 65 and 95 °C for a long time [1]. At first, scientists were interested in it because they thought it could be used to make food safer by extending the shelf life of products through pasteurization. The sous-vide method was also used as a method of cooking in the previous decade [2,3].
The sous-vide method makes fish look fresh and natural, but if the temperature is too high, the fish loses some of its flavor. Even though the recommended temperature range for sous-vide fish processing is between 60 and 80 °C for 20 to 40 minutes, [1], in practice, a lower temperature (40–60 °C) is used. Traditional heat treatment methods are performed to reach core temperature of about 55–65 °C. Some authors say that the core temperature should not go above 40 °C to get the best texture and flavor [2]. This method is called “novel sous-vide” (low temperature, short time), and it has its enthusiasts [4]. Low process parameters improve flavor, make the product more juicy, and lower its thermal shrinkage. However, they also cause the core to look raw, have a different level of doneness, and can be microbiologically dangerous [5]. According to Nieva-Echevarria et al. [6], the volatile compounds profile of sea bass cooked with the sous-vide method was the same as that of sea bass cooked with the steamed method.
Feel is a big part of quality when it comes to fish, so process temperature seems to be the most important factor. Temperature also determines microbiological stability of fish during storage under refrigeration conditions. One example is that cooking fish at 70 °C may make it taste better and improve its texture, but it may not be enough to keep it safe when stored for a long time [7,8]. Several authors have looked into how different things, like adding flavors (spices, lemon juice, sauces), using complicated techniques, and storing fish [1,2,4,5,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22] and seafood [8,23,24,25,26,27] cooked with the sous-vide method affect how good the food tastes. Only a few studies focused on salmon [1,2,11,17,18,20,22,26].
Previous studies mostly looked at how this method can be used to prepare and store food in a cool environment, as well as how well it affects the microbiological quality of the food. Because sous-vide is becoming more popular as a way for restaurants to cook, some studies have tried to find out how the process affects the taste of dishes that haven’t been stored. These studies have looked at shellfish [2,8,14,15,16,24,25] or fish from the area (whiting, bonito, carp, tuna). Studies have not been done to compare the sensory profile and hedonic response of fish cooked using the sous-vide method to fish cooked in the traditional way. So far, the sous-vide method for storing products and extending their shelf life has been used. Today, the method is also used as a sensory-motivated cooking method. In modern food service, where zero-waste cooking and food waste are becoming more and more important, it can be used instead of the old ways of cooking.
This study’s goal was to compare the taste, color, and texture of sous-vide salmon cooked with different settings (novel sous-vide, different pasteurization dose) to salmon cooked in traditional ways (steaming and roasting).
Salmon is one of the most popular and delicious fish to cook at home However, one thing that often catches home cooks by surprise is how much salmon shrinks during the cooking process Knowing how much to expect salmon to reduce in size and weight will help you buy the right quantity and portion your dishes properly after cooking.
In this comprehensive guide, we’ll cover everything you need to know about salmon shrinkage so your fillets turn out picture-perfect every time.
Overview of Salmon Shrinkage
Salmon shrinks as it cooks due to the loss of moisture and fat. When heat is applied to salmon, the proteins clump together and squeeze out the liquids inside. Fat also renders out during cooking.
The general rule of thumb is that salmon will shrink by around 20-30% during cooking. However the exact amount of shrinkage depends on several factors
- Cooking method
- Temperature
- Thickness and cut of salmon
- Wild vs farmed salmon
Below, we’ll take a deeper look at how each of these factors impacts salmon shrinkage so you know what to expect
Cooking Method Matters
The cooking technique you use significantly affects how much salmon shrinks. When you use higher heat or cook for longer, you tend to lose more moisture:
-
Grilling, broiling, or pan searing: These quick, high-heat methods cause less shrinkage – about 20% – since salmon cooks fast while retaining its juices.
-
Baking, poaching, or smoking: Salmon shrinks more, about 25 to 30 percent, when cooked more slowly and in direct heat. This happens because the water evaporates over time.
-
Curing: Wet curing or brining before cooking helps salmon retain moisture, reducing shrinkage. Dry curing draws out moisture so expect slightly higher shrinkage around 25%.
So for minimal shrinkage, go with fast high-heat cooking techniques. For larger yields, poach, bake, or smoke your salmon.
Cook Temperature Impacts Shrinkage
Cooking salmon at higher temperatures increases moisture loss and protein coagulation. Here’s how various temperature ranges impact salmon shrinkage:
-
Low temp (120°F to 150°F) – Smoking or sous vide cooking at lower temps leads to minimal shrinkage of 15-20%. The salmon gently cooks while retaining its natural juices.
-
Medium temp (150°F to 200°F) – Baking, grilling or roasting in this range results in a moderate 20-25% reduction in size.
-
High temp (200°F+) – Cooking salmon above 200°F via broiling or grilling causes the most moisture loss and 30% or more of shrinkage.
For best results, target the low to medium temperature range. Higher temps will yield slightly smaller fillets as more moisture evaporates.
Thickness And Cut
Thicker salmon cuts shrink less than thin pieces when cooked. Why? Thicker cuts have less surface area relative to their volume, so less moisture can evaporate during cooking.
Here’s how different thicknesses tend to shrink:
-
Thin salmon fillets (<1 inch) – Up to 30% shrinkage
-
Thick fillets (1-2 inches) – Around 20-25% reduction
-
Whole salmon sides – Typically only 15-20% shrinkage
You can minimize shrinkage by purchasing thick salmon cuts or cooking fillets stacked or rolled together. Individual thin fillets will shrink more.
Wild Vs Farmed Salmon
Wild salmon tends to shrink less during cooking compared to farmed Atlantic salmon. Here’s why:
-
Lower fat content – Less natural fat renders out of wild salmon when cooking.
-
More muscle – The muscular flesh of wild salmon retains its shape better.
-
Tighter protein – Wild salmon proteins denature less, keeping moisture in.
You can expect about a 5% difference in shrinkage:
- Wild salmon: 20% shrinkage
- Farmed salmon: 25% shrinkage
So if shrinkage is a concern, choose wild-caught varieties like sockeye, coho, or king salmon.
Average Salmon Shrinkage Percentages
Here are typical salmon shrinkage percentages based on cooking method, thickness, cut, and other factors:
| Cooking Method | Expected Shrink % |
|---|---|
| Grilling or broiling | 15-20% |
| Pan searing | 20% |
| Baking | 25% |
| Poaching | 25-30% |
| Smoking | 15-25% |
| Thickness | Expected Shrink % |
|---|---|
| <1 inch fillet | 25-30% |
| 1-2 inch fillet | 20-25% |
| Whole side | 15-20% |
| Type | Expected Shrink % |
|---|---|
| Wild salmon | 15-20% |
| Farmed salmon | 20-25% |
So on average, expect farmed salmon fillets to shrink 25% during cooking. Wild salmon and other cuts or cooking methods may shrink 15-30%.
Calculating Shrinkage When Cooking Salmon
Now that you know what to expect, here’s how to calculate and plan for salmon shrinkage when cooking:
1. Weigh raw salmon
First, weigh your salmon prior to cooking. This is the starting weight.
2. Estimate % shrinkage
Next, estimate the % shrinkage based on the factors above.
For example, 25% for farmed salmon fillets baked in the oven.
3. Calculate final cooked weight
Take the starting weight and multiply it by the remaining percentage:
Starting weight x (100% – Estimated shrink %)
So for 1 lb salmon with 25% estimated shrinkage:
1 lb x (100% – 25%) = 1 lb x 75% = 0.75 lbs final cooked weight
This lets you predict the final cooked size and plan your portions accordingly!
Tips to Minimize Shrinkage
If you want to maximize the yield when cooking salmon, here are some tips to reduce shrinkage:
- Buy thick, center-cut fillets over thin tail sections
- Cook fillets stacked or rolled vs single thin pieces
- Choose wild salmon varieties
- Grill or broil using high heat
- Brine salmon before cooking
- Avoid overcooking – use a meat thermometer
With the right technique, you can reduce salmon shrinkage and get the most out of this amazing fish!
Frequently Asked Questions
Let’s answer some common questions about salmon shrinkage:
How much does a 1 lb salmon fillet shrink?
A 1 lb farmed salmon fillet will shrink by about 0.25 lbs or 25% during cooking. So the final cooked weight will be around 0.75 lbs. Wild salmon may shrink slightly less around 20%.
Why does salmon shrink so much when cooked?
Salmon shrinks during cooking as its proteins denature, forcing moisture out of the flesh. Fat also renders out. Methods like grilling or smoking enhance this moisture loss.
Does salmon shrink when baked?
Yes, baking salmon causes it to shrink due to the gradual moisture loss in the oven. Expect a thick fillet to shrink by 20-25% and a thin fillet up to 30% when baked.
Does poached salmon shrink?
Poaching leads to 25-30% salmon shrinkage. The extended exposure to moist heat causes the proteins to break down and squeeze liquids out slowly over time.
Should I buy extra salmon to account for shrinkage?
It’s a good idea to buy about 25% more raw salmon than your target cooked portion sizes. This provides a buffer so you have enough after shrinking.
Can I reduce salmon shrinkage?
Yes! Buy thick cuts, cook at high temps, and avoid overcooking. Brining also helps. Freezing raw salmon before cooking can damage proteins and lead to less shrinkage as well.
Conclusion
Understanding how much salmon shrinks is an important part of preparing it perfectly. Keep these factors and percentages in mind, and you’ll never have to wonder how much salmon to buy or cook again!
5. Instrumental Color and Texture Measurements
Instrumental color measurements were made using a spectrophotometer (CM-2300d, Konica-Minolta GmbH, Langenhagen, Germany). The equipment was set up for standard illuminate D65 (10° observer angle) and a standard white reflector plate was used to calibrate it (Minolta Technical Note 1994). The measurement was performed in three replications in raw salmon and after heat treatment. Results were expressed as L* (lightness), a* (redness/greenness), and b* (yellowness/blueness) in the CIE Lab system. To find the differences (Φ) between two given coordinates, the colorimetric values of the raw material samples were subtracted from the values of the samples that had been heated. The values of color parameters were calculated using the following formulas:
Saturation delta chroma (ΔC) = √((Δa*)2 + (Δb*)2)
The chroma with (Intensity of color) C* = √[(a*)2 + (b*)2]
The value of total color difference ΔE*ab = √[(ΔL*)2 + (Δa*)2 + (Δb*)2]
The texture parameters were measured using Texture Analyser TA-XT2 (Stable Micro Systems Ltd. , Godalming, UK) after thermal treatment and calibration to room temperature at 23 °C. Due to the complexity of the salmon muscle structure, two shearing tests were performed. The first one was done on a sample of a salmon cube with side 2 and a Warner-Bratzler (HDP/BS) shear force attachment. 5 ± 0. 05 cm. The test parameters were as follows: pre-speed test 1 mm/s, speed test 1. 0 mm/s, distance of deformation is 20 mm. For the second test, the Craft blade (A/CKB) was used on a single myoseptum that was 2 inches wide and 2 inches long. 5 ± 0. 05 cm and thickness of 0. 5 ± 0. 02 cm. The test parameters were as follows: pre-speed test 0. 5 mm/s, speed test 0. 5 mm/s, distance of cutting 5 mm. In both tests, the force–distance measurements were performed in 10 repetitions. The maximum cutting force (as a maximum peak force) was found to be a measure of hardness, and the work of shear was found to be the total positive area under the curve. Data were analyzed using Texture Expert software version 1. 19 for Windows (Stable Micro Systems Ltd, Godalming, UK).
The Shapiro-Wilk test was performed to verify the normality of distribution. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for normal data distribution (sensory profile, yield, and water content). The Kruskal-Wallis test was performed for abnormal data distribution (consumer assessment). The statistical package STATISTICA software version 13 was used to find the correlation coefficient based on Pearson’s formula and Spearman’s rho. 1 PL (StatSoft, Krakow, Poland). Principal Component Analysis (PCA), as described by Borgognone et al., was used to figure out what the sensory results meant. [35].
3. Effect of Various Heat Treatment Methods on Sensory Profiles
Together with the rise in process parameters, SV57 The salmon SV63 (63 °C, 80 min) smelled and tasted a lot like cooked fish, and they were just as strong or stronger than the steamed and roasted samples (SP100 and RP180). It only differed significantly (p ≤ 0. 05) in lower intensity of cooked fish odor (5. 8 c. u. —conventional unit) and higher juiciness (6. 7 c. u. ). Out of the salmon made the old-fashioned way (SP100 and RP180), the SV57 sous-vide method (57 °C, 20 min) had the most varied sensory profile.
No significant differences (p > 0. 05) between the samples that were tested in terms of the strength of the smell and taste of raw fish or seaside, fish fat, muddy or musty smell, “other” (not clearly defined by the panelists) smell and taste, salty taste, and fatty taste. The highest overall quality (7. 8) was of steamed salmon (SP100), which differed significantly (p ≤ 0. 05) from the sous-vide sample prepared at 57 °C (6. 9 c. u. ) but did not differ (p > 0. 05) from other samples (sous-vide (SV63) and roasting (RP180)). According to the panelists, there were no differences in the intensity of the salmon color between the roasted and SV63 samples. This was also shown by the instrumental measurements.
| Attribute | Heat Treatment Method (n = 30) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sous-Vide Method | Roasting en Papillote (RP180, 23 min) | Steaming (SP100, 16 min) | ||
| 57 °C, 20 min (SV57) | 63 °C, 80 min (SV63) | |||
| Intensity (0–10 c.u.) x¯ ± SE | ||||
| cooked fish odor | 3.6 a ± 0.4 | 5.8 b ± 0.3 | 6.8 c ± 0.3 | 7 c ± 0.3 |
| raw fish/seaside odor | 2.6 a ± 0.4 | 2.8 a ± 0.3 | 2.7 a ± 0.3 | 3.5 a ± 0.5 |
| fish oil odor | 2 a ± 0.3 | 2.9 a ± 0.4 | 2.9 a ± 0.3 | 3.1 a ± 0.4 |
| roasty odor | 1.7 b ± 0.3 | 2.1 b ± 0.4 | 3.1 a ± 0.3 | 2.5 a,b ± 0.2 |
| muddy/ musty odor | 1.2 a ± 0.2 | 1.5 a ± 0.3 | 1.3 a ± 0.2 | 1.1 a ± 0.2 |
| ‘other’ odor | 0.3 a ± 0.1 | 0.3 a ± 0.1 | 0.4 a ± 0.1 | 0.6 a ± 0.3 |
| salmon color intensity | 4.8 a ± 0.4 | 3 b ± 0.2 | 3.6 b ± 0.4 | 2 c ± 0.2 |
| intensity of cellular juice and fat leakage | 5.8 a ± 0.4 | 2.7 b ± 0.4 | 1.4 c ± 0.2 | 1.9 b,c ± 0.3 |
| fragmentation ability (to myoseptum) | 3.9 a ± 0.4 | 6.7 b ± 0.3 | 6.1 b ± 0.4 | 7.1 b ± 0.4 |
| hardness | 1.6 a ± 0.2 | 2.7 b ± 0.3 | 3.6 b,c ± 04 | 4.2 c ± 0.4 |
| juiciness | 7.6 a ± 0.3 | 6.7 a ± 0.3 | 5.2 b ± 0.4 | 5.6 b ± 0.3 |
| cooked fish flavor | 6.3 a ± 0.4 | 6.5 a,b ± 0.3 | 7.4 b ± 0.3 | 7.3 b ± 0.3 |
| raw fish flavor | 2.9 a ± 0.5 | 1 a ± 0.2 | 0.9 a ± 0.1 | 1.2 a ± 0.2 |
| roasted fish flavor | 1.9 a ± 0.3 | 3.4 b ± 0.4 | 3.8 b ± 0.4 | 3.6 b ± 0.4 |
| salty taste | 1.4 a ± 0.3 | 1.4 a ± 0.2 | 1.3 a ± 0.2 | 1.2 a ± 0.2 |
| fatty flavor | 3.7 a ± 0.4 | 3.5 a ± 0.5 | 3.4 a ± 0.4 | 2.6 a ± 0.4 |
| ‘other’ flavor | 0.7 a ± 0.2 | 0.5 a ± 0.1 | 0.6 a ± 0.2 | 0.4 a ± 0.1 |
| overall quality | 6.9 a ± 0.2 | 7.3 a,b ± 0.2 | 7.3 a,b ± 0.2 | 7.8 b ± 0.2 |
In both cases, the same amount of heat was used to pasteurize the fillet, and aluminum foil or vacuum packaging bags were used to keep it from coming into contact with air and the heating medium. The decrease in juiciness of salmon samples correlates positively with yield (r = 0. 48, p ≤ 0. 05), while hardness correlates (r = 0. 84, p ≤ 0. 05) with the water content in the samples.
The first two principal components of PCA explained 95. 3% of the total variance between samples ( ). In general, the length of the vectors showed that cooked salmon samples were mostly different in terms of texture and color. The ability to fragment was most negatively linked to salmon color, fatty flavor, and “other flavor.” This is shown by the fact that these traits were located on the opposite side of the plot origin. The intensity of salmon color was positively correlated with intensity of fatty and “other” flavor. The PCA results showed that the strength of the roasted fish flavor was not related to the color of the salmon. This is because the angles (α = 90°) between those vectors are not the same.
The sensory profiles of salmon cooked with the sous-vide method SV63 and the steamed method (SP100) were similar, as shown by the fact that the samples were placed in the same quadrant. It was found that both samples had lower levels of raw fish and fish fat smells and were harder and easier to break up than the SV57 sample (,).
High intensity of cooked and roasted tastes and smells is linked to the sensory quality of salmon roasted en papilotte (RP180). One of the main differences between sous-vide salmon (SV57) and the other types was that the fish had a different texture. e. There was more cellular juice and fat leakage, and the fruit was very juicy. It was also very juicy and not hard. Additionally, compared to other samples, it had a darker shade of salmon color and stronger notes of raw fish flavor. The fillet’s higher juiciness and intense salmon color are both good sensory qualities, but they don’t mean that the fish has been cooked, which is why the sample the sensory panel looked at was of lower overall quality.