n rumental C lour orting of
aw Salmon In Preparation
r Canning. Results of Trial
In Commercial Canneries
by
N. TOMLINSON, P. J. SCHMIDT. E. G.
R.M.CUTHBERT
BAKER &
FISHERIES AND MARINE SERVICE
SERVICE DES P~CHES ET DES SCIENCES DE LA MER
TECHNICAL REPORT No.
RAPPORT TECHNIQUE N°
484
1975
1+
Environment
Canada
Environnement
Canada
Fisheries
and Marine
Service
Service des peches
el des sciences
de la mer
Technical Reports
Technical Reports are research documents that are of sufficient importance to
be preserved, but which for some reason are not appropriate for primary scientific
publication. Inquiries concerning any particular Report should be directed to the
issuing establishment.
Rapports Techniques
Les rapports techniques sont des documents de recherche qui revetent une assez
grande importance pour etre conserves mais qui, pour une raison ou pour une autre,
ne conviennent pas a une publication scientifique prioritaire. Pour toute demande
de renseignements concernant un rapport particulier, i1 faut s'adresser au service
responsable.
·
,
D.epartment of the Environment
Ministere de l' Environnement
Fisheries and Marine Service
Service des Peches et des Sciences de la mer
Research and Development Directorate
Direction de la Recherche et
TECHNICAL REPORT No. 484
D~veloppement
RAPPORT TECHNIQ.uE NO. 484
num~ros
1-456 dans cette
s~rie
(Numbers 1-456 in this series were
(Les
furent
issued as Technical Reports of the
utilis~s
Fisheries Research Board of Canada.
des recherches sur les pecheries du Canada.
The series name was changed with
Le nom de la serie fut
report number 457)
numero 457)
conune Rapports Techniques de l'office
chang~
avec Ie rapport
INSTRUMENTAL COLOR SORTING OF RAW SALMON IN PREPARATION
FOR CANNING.
BY
RESULTS OF TRIALS IN COMMERCIAL CANNERIES
N. TOMI-INSON, P.J. SCHMIDT, E.G. BAKER
Fisheries and Marine Service,
Vancouver Laboratory,
Vancouver, B.C.
AND
R.M. CUTHBERT
British Columbia Research,
Vancouver, B.C.
This is the eighteenth Technical
Ceci est Ie dix-huit Rapport de la
Report from the Research and
Direction de la Recherche et Developpement,
Development Directorate
Laboratoire de Vancouver
Vancouver Laboratory,
Vancouver, (C.-B)
B.C.
1974
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
ABSTRACT
I NTRODUCT ION
2
IN-PLANT EVALUATION OF SALMON COLOR SORTER
2
Instrument serviceability
Instrument operation
COLOR SORTING
Plant A results
Plant B results
2
2-3
3
4
5
QUANTITATIVE INTERPRETATION OF IN-PLANT RESULTS
5-6
SUMMARY OF IN-PLANT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6
EXPERIMENTAL WORK AT THE VANCOUVER LABORATORY,
FISHERIES AND MARINE SERVICE
7
Relation between color sorter setting and
color grade of canned product.
The setting of the instrument for least error
in sorting.
Cause of sorting errors.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7-8
7-8
8
8-9
REFERENCES
10
TABLES
11-20
1
ABSTRACT
Two manually operated instruments for the sorting of raw salmon
to the eventual color of their canned processed flesh have
been given extensive trials in two commercial plants canning sockeye
salmon.
accord~ng
The instruments stood up well to commercial operating conditions,
and observations were made regarding the performance of operators and
the accuracy of the instruments.
Operators acquired the necessary skill within a few hours, but
fatigue and/or boredom during operation necessitated frequent relief
if accuracy was to be maintained. Sorting rates varied between 30 and
40 fish per minute and instrumental sorting was somewhat more effective
than visual sorting.
The relation ship between the setting adjustment of the instrument
and the color grade of the sorted fish after being processed was established and the optimum setting for use in sorting sockeye salmon was
determined. At least until experience has been gained with a number
of instruments, it would be advisable to establish the appropriate
setting for use with each new instrument, by means of a procedure outlined, before it is placed in service.
,
"
RESUME
Deux appareils, actionnes manuellement et servant au tri du saumon
cru en fonction de la couleur eventuelle de la chair une fois mise en
conserve, ont fait l'objet d'essais exhaustifs dans deux conserveries
commerciales de saumon rouge.
Les appareils se sont bien adaptes aux conditions d'exploitation
industrielle, et des observations ont ete faites quant au rendement des
operateurs et a la prec ision des appareils.
Les operateurs ont acquis la maitrise necessaire en quelques heures,
mais la fatigue ou l'ennui survenant au cours de travail ont necessite
de frequents remplacements afin que puisse se maintenir Ie degre de precision voulu. La vitesse du tri a varie entre 30 et 40 poissons a la minute;
Ie tri instrumental etait un peu plus efficace que Ie tri visuel.
On a establi la relation entre Ie reglage de l'appareilet la qualite
de la couleur du poisson trie, apres Ie traitement, ainsi que Ie reglage
optimal pour Ie tri du saumon rouge. II serait preferable d'etalonner
chaque nouvel appareil, a l'aide de la procedure decrite, avant de Ie
mettre en service, du mains tant que l'on n'aura pas acquis de l'experience
avec un certain nombre d 'appareils.
- 2 -
I NTRODUCT ION
The Fisheries Research Board program to develop an instrumental
means of color sorting salmon culminated in 1972 in the production by
B,C. Research of two fully operational, manually operated instruments.
Figure 1 provides an exterior view of the assembled "Salmon Color
Monitor". The case dimensions are: length 28 inches, width 21 inches,
and height 17 1/2 inches. The hand-held fiber-optics color probe and
the color Sort indicator lamp are seen as features external to the
case. Figure 2 provides a view of the interior of the case with the
top removed. The capped ports seen on the left provide access to all
controls including the color sort set-point adjustment and meter. In
operation, a table with a cleated conveyor belt carries the fish through
a rotary incisor which makes a shallow cut in the flesh near the tail.
The belt then carries the fish to an operator who inserts the hand-held
probe briefly in the incision and segregates the fish into pales and
brights according to the indication provided by the instrument's indicator lamp. A more detailed description of the instrument, its operation, and an account of its development have been published previously
(Schmidt and Idler, 1958; Schmidt and Cuthbert, 1969; 1971).
The instruments were placed in the canning plants of two member
companies of the Fisheries Association of B.C. for evaluation under
commercial operating conditions during the 1972 salmon canning season.
Certain findings pointed to the need for further experimental work
which \'las performed in 1973.
IN-PLANT EVALUATION OF SALMON COLOR SORTER
Instrument Serviceability
Breakdowns in color sorting attributable to instrument failure
were nil. This serviceability record testifies to the adequacy of the
instrument's design and, in particular, to its robustness for cannery
environment and hazards.
Instrument Operation
After only a few hours experience, new operators acquired the
skill for manipulating the probe. The maintenance of high accuracy
was found to depend on the operator's ability to remain alert and
conscientious. Thus, for large cannery runs of consistently 'bright'
colored salmon, it was found advantageous to relieve probe operators
on a frequent basis. It is desirable that the indicator light up on
those fish being sorted that are in the minority (e.g., for fish preponderantly bright, the indicator should light up for pale fish).
- 2a -
Figure 1. Salmon color monitor
Figure 2. Salmon color monitor - case top removed.
- 3 -
The attainment of optimum color sorting rates with accuracy is
contingent upon proper incisor operation; for satisfactory probe performance the incisions in the salmon must be clean, non-ragged, of
adequate depth, correctly located and oriented . The incisor should have
the following features:
a.
Blade should operate in a narrow gap in the conveyor
belt cleat to provide optimum support of salmon
during incision;
b.
Direction of rotation of the blade periphery should
be opposite to that of movement of the belt;
c.
Incisor elevation adjustment should be automatic to
yield incisions of consistent backbone depth.
While sorting rates reported ranged between 20 and 40 fish/min,
with most between 30 and 40, higher rates might be achieved on sockeye
and coho over 2 lbs in weight. The small size and relative softness
of pink salmon (as observed in 1972) may prevent their ~olor probing
at suitable rates with the existing equipment.
COLOR SORTI NG
Color sort-ing trials were perfonned by cannery personnel and data
were recorded on forms supplied.
Setting up of the instrumental demarcation line between pale and
bright fish was left to the cannery personnel. This simply involved
the turning of a dial on the instrument, the settings selected falling
in the range between 260 and 350. These numbers are arbitrary scale
divisions, the higher the number the greater the proportion of pale
fish that will be sorted as bright; the lower the number the greater
the proportion of bright fish that will be sorted as pale. The two
instruments were found to be similar in operation and equally sensitive.
Processed samples from each trial canned in routines common to
the processing plant were taken to the Vancouver Laboratory, Fisheries
and Marine Service, where "a" readings (a measure of redness of the
processed flesh) were made with a Gardner Color Difference meter.
These readings were converted to Fish Inspection Laboratory (FIL)
salmon color grades 1 to 7, grade 1 being the least red. Grades 1 and
2 were designated pale. Samples taken from each trial lot usually consisted of 24 cans, similar to, but usually exceeding, the number taken
by Inspection Service in their regular practice.
Results were recorded separately for three catch areas:
Fraser River, and Johnstone Strait-West Coast-San Juan.
Central,
- 4 -
Pl ant A Results
Nineteen instrumental and eight visual sorting trials, in which
data were recorded, vlere condtlcted vJith sockeye salmon. The instrument
was used additionally in normal canning operations. The results are
tabulated in Tables 1 to 7.
A higher percentage of pale fish were found among fish from the
Central area by instrumental (7.4%) than by visual (5.6 %) sorting
(Table 1): As about 50% of both groups of pale fish were FIL 1 's
and 2's according to color grading of the canned samples (Table 2),
this seems to indicate better separation of pale fish by the instrumental method. This view is strengthened by the fact that 8.7% pale
fish were segregated instrumentally from a group of previously visually
sorted "bright" Central fish, of which more than half (4.7%) were found
to fall within FIL grades 1 and 2 (Table 3b).
It should be noted that examination of canned bright Central fish
from both the visually sorted and instrumentally re-sorted fish failed
to detect the presence of any FIL 1 's or 2's (Table 3b), although it
is certain some were present in the visually sorted brights (see above).
This finding points up the caution that must be exercised in interpreting
data from the examination of canned samples from bright fish. If only
a small percentage of FIL l's or 2's vlere present among bright fish there
is little likelihood that they would be detected in the small proportion
of canned samples examined in most trials. On the other hand, the data
from examination of canned pale fish, for which the proportion of samples
taken was usually very much larger, can be regarded as being considerably
more reliable. Hov/ever, as a small number of FIL 1 's and 2's were found
in certain other samples of canned brights sorted by either means, it
;s evident neither sorting method is infallible (Tables 2,4,6).
Turning now to the sorting of sockeye from the Fraser and from
Johnstone Strait-West Coast-San Juan, in contrast to the results with
Central area fish, it was found that visual sorting yielded a higher
percentage of pale fish than did instrumental sorting (Table 1). This
difference between the two methods seems to be traceable to a tendency
for the visual operator to include a somewhat higher proportion of FIL
grades 3 to 7 in the pale fish than did the instrument, particulariy
when the fish being sorted include very few FIL 1 's and 2's, as may
occur with Fraser and Johnstone Strait-West Coast-San Juan sockeye
(more frequently the former). There also appears to be a distinct
tendency for the visual operator to place a larger proportion of grades
4-7 in the pales than does the instrument (Tables 2, 5, 6). It seems
- 5 -
probable this tendency will vary in intensity with the operator and
with ~is or her degree of fatigue or boredom. The data from instrumental
re-sorting of visual brights (Table 3a) from the West Coast indicates
better sorting of pale sockeye from this area by visual means than
occurred with those from the Central area.
The effect of different settings of the instrument on the
demarcation between pales and brights is recorded in Table 7. The
' effect is apparently far from regular, and it seems the most satisfactory
setting for use with sockeye has not been established. It would be desirable to investigate this aspect further. Thi s could be done by re-examining, at a series of instrument settings, a fairly large number of sockeye
with a wide range of color intensities, then processing at least one can
from each fish for color grading in the laboratory.
'
One set of samplt~s of canned coho was submitted for laboratory
examination. Two hundred fish had been sorted at an instrument setting
of 370, and 50 cans prepared from brights were graded in the laboratory.
FIL l's and 2's constituted 20% of the -sample. It seem,s likely the
setting of 370 was too high.
Attempts to sort pink salmon were unsuccessful. The small size
and softness of this species apparently interfered with the presentation
of the fish to the probe to the extent that sorting was rendered
inaccurate.
Plant B Results
For various reasons, only three instrumental sorting trials were
conducted with sockeye, and no comparative visual sorting was done.
Of 30 cans of instrumentally sorted brights submitted, none were
FIL lis, 2 1 s or 3 1 s. Of 30 cans of pales, 60% were FIL l's and 2's;
10% 3 s; and 30% 4's to 7's. The instrumental setting used was 280.
1
Attempts to sort pink salmon were unsuccessful.
QUANTITATIVE INTERPRETATION OF IN-PLANT RESULTS
Sockeye from the Central area present a particular problem from
the point of view of color because they include a relatively large
proportion of fish with undesirably pale flesh "in comparison with sockeye
from other areas, and, therefore, may be regarded as being of inferior
quality if unsorted.
While there is clearly considerable variation in the color
- 6 -
composition of different lots of sockeye from the Central area, some
approximation of the quantitative significance of the results of the
present work can be attempted. If the fish were visually sorted it
could result in 32 ~ more pale fish being included in the brights than
. if instrumental sorting were used; that is, Table 1 shows only 5.6 ~
pale by visual means compared to 7.4% by instrumental means, or a 1.8%
difference, which is an error of 32% (1.8/5.6 x 100) in the visual
procedure. However, since the pale fish sorted by either means contained 50% FIL grades 3 to 7 (Table 2) the additional pale fish removed
by instrumental sorting was in fact 50% of 1.8% or 0.9% of the total
catch. In addition, the pale fish remaining in Central brights after
visual sorting can be at least as high as 4.7 % (Tables 3a and 3b).
It should be noted, however, that instrumental re-sorting of these
visually sorted brights resulted in the inclusion of 4% of the lot
. with the pales, whereas they had been originally sorted as bright, and
were in fact FIL grades 3 to 7. The mean loss of FIL grades 3 to 7 in
instrumentally sorted Central pales was 5% of all the fish sorted, in
comparison with 4.7% for visually sorted fish.
Sockeye from the Fraser and from Johnstone Strait-\·Jest-Coast.-San
Juan do not present as serious a color problem, as indicated above, but
fish with undesirably pale flesh do occur. If color sorting of these
fish were to be undertaken, it appears that instrumental sorting is
slightly more efficient in the segregating of pale fish, than is visual
sorting (see Tables 2 and 3a). In addition, visual sorting appears to
be accompanied by a variable, somev/hat greater loss of bright fish with
the pales, particularly with those from the Fraser. The variability in
these data is so great, however, that quantitative interpretation in
this instance might well be misleading.
Thus, for Johnstone Strait-West Coast-San Juan fish instrumentally
sorted, trial lots of canned pales contained a range of 53.8 to 87.5%
FIL grades 3 to 7 (mean for 4 lots 69.4); visually sorted, 37.5 to 91.7%
FIL grades 3 to 7 (mean for 3 lots 72.6%) (Table 6); for Fraser fish,
instrumentally sorted, 70.8 to 95.8% FIL grades 3 to 7 (mean for 3
lots 84.7%); visually sorted, 100% FIL grades 3 to 7 (Table 5). The
percent of the trial lots examined that graded FIL 3 to 7 and were lost
in the segregated pales fell in the following ranges: Johnstone StraitWest Coast-San Juan, instrumental sorting 0. 86 to 2.0%; visual, 0.8 to
6.3% Fraser, instrumental, 1.7 to 4.7%; visual 1.5 to 16.7%.
SUMMARY OF IN-PLANT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1.
The two instruments stoo d up well to use under commercial operating conditions. No instrument failures occurred.
- 7 -
.2.
3.
. 4.
.Operators acquired the necessary manipulative skill within a
few hours, but under some conditions must be changed frequently,
if accuracy i.s to be maintained.
The proper incising of fish is essenti al to accurate sorting.
Conditions of proper operation of the incisor are described .
The indicator should light up to indicate those fish being
separated which are in the minority (e.g. , for fish preponderantly
bright, it should light for pale fish).
5.
The majority of sorting rates observed in practice were in the
range of 30 to 40 fish per minute.
6.
Instrumental sorting of Central area sockeye segregated a greater
proportion of pale fish (about 32% more) than did visual sorting,
and was a little more effective than visual sorting in segregating
pale fish in trials with fish from the Fraser and Johnstone StraitWest Coast-San Juan.
7.
There was a tendency (variable) for the visual sorter to include
a higher proportion of brighter sockeye in the pales than did
the instrument, the effect being most clearly marked with Fraser
sockeye.
8.
The optimum setting of the instrument for use in sorting sockeye
has not been established. Further work on this aspect of operation
is needed.
9.
Preliminary attempts to sort coho salmon appear promising, but
more work is needed .
10 . . Attempts to sort pink salmon were unsuccessful.
EXPERIMENTAL vJORK AT THE VANCOUVER LABORATORY, FISHERIES AND MARINE SERVICE
Relation between color sorter setting and color grade of canned product
The setting of the instrument for least error in ·sorting
In view of the obvious uncertainty existing with respect to the
setting of the instrument for use in the color sorting of salmon, work
was undertaken to establish the relation between the setting and the
color grades of the sorted fish after being processed.
Two hundred sixty-seven sockeye salmon selected visually to contain
a somewhat higher than usual proportion of pale fish were obtained at
various times during August, 1973. The fish were sorted at instrument
~
8 -
settings of 220, 230, 240, 260, 280, 300, 320, 340 and 360, each fish,
therefore, being run through the sorter 9 times. A sample was then
cut from each fish, canned and processed, after which its Fish Inspection
Laboratory (FIL) color grade \'ias determined as described above. Color
grades 1 a~d 2 ar~ considered to be pale, 4 to 7 bright, and 3, being
on the dividing line, may correctly be either pale or bright. The
results are tabulated 'in Tables 8 and 9.
The smallest overall error in sorting, 4%, occurred at a setting
of 240 (Table 9). At this setting (Table 8), 2 fish sorted bright
graded FIL 1 (pale) and 5 sorted bright graded FIL 2 (also pale), whereas
3 fish sorted pale graded FIL 4 (bright) and 1 sorted pale graded FIL
5 (also bright), for an error of 9.1 % in the sorting of pale fish and
2.6% in bright fish (Table 9).At 240, all grade 6 and 7 fish were
correctly sorted bright (Table 8).
At settings above and below 240 the overall sorting error increased
progressively, with the error in the sorting of bright fish increasing
with a decrease in setting, that in the sorting of pale fish decreasing
with a decrease in setting. It appears clear from these results obtained
under unhurried Laboratory conditions that some degree of error is
unavoidable, and that complete elimination of error in sorting either
pale or bright fish by adjustment of the instrument setting would
introduce unacceptably large error in the sorting of the other,
At least until experience is obtained with a number of instruments,
it would be advisable to establish the appropriate setting for use with
each new instrument, by means of a procedure such as that outlined, as
a safeguard against possible instrument to instrument variation before
it is placed in service.
I
Cause of sorting errors
There are two sources of error attributable to the operator that
can occur in the sorting of bright fish with the manually operated
instrument. If the probe is placed in contact with bone, even if the
bone is beneath a thin layer of flesh, a bright fish will be sorted pale.
Also, if the probe is not placed in firm contact with the flesh, a bright
fish can be sorted pale. In addition, apparent error may arise if a fish
is not uniformly colored in all parts of its flesh. The idea that sockeye
with particularly soft flesh might be difficult to sort accurately was
examined, but proved to be without foundation.
SUMMARY OF EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1.
The relation between color sorter setting and the color grade
of sockeye salmon canned after being sorted has been examined.
9
For the particular instrument used, a setting of 240 resulted
in sorting with the lowest overall error, 4%. At least until
experience is obtained with a number of instruments, it would
be advisable to establish the appropriate setting for use with
each ,new instrument before it is placed in service. This can
be done by following the procedure outlined.
2.
There is a small sorting error inherent in the operation of the
instrument, but in practice this is less than that observed in
visual sorting.
3.
There are two sources of error attributable to the operator of
the manually operated instrument. If the probe is placed in
contact with bone, a bright fish will be sorted as pale. If
the probe is not placed in firm contact with the flesh a bright
fish may be sorted as pale. Apparent error may arise if a fish
is not uniformly colored in all parts of its flesh.
4.
Instrument settings used in the commercial trails were obviously
set (by accident or design) in a manner which would include fish
in the bright category which were not truly bright; that is, all
settings used were above 260 (Table 9).
5.
Simple automation of the present system involving only one sampling
with a single-probe sensor per whole fish might be expected to
increase the error over that reported here for manual operation.
However, automation of in-can sorting with a multiple-probe' sensor
head (already developed) could be expected to provide more accurate
sorting, as a fish would be subjected to many more samplings, the
fles~ in each can being examined by a sensor consisting of 6
se~arate probes spaced evenly about a 2" diameter circle.
- 10 -
. REFERENCES
Schmidt, P.J., and D.R. Idler. 1958. Predicting the color of
canned sockeye salmon from the color of the raw flesh.
Food Techno1 .,12,44-48.
Schmidt, P.J., and R.M. Cuthbert. 1969. Color sorting of raw
Salmon Ibid., 23, 98-100.
1971. Color sorting of Pacific
Salmon. In Fish inspection and quality control. Ed. R. Kreuzer
Fishing News (Books) Ltd., London, England. 104-107.
- 11 -
Ta b1e 1
Instrumental and Visual Sorting of Sockeye Salmon
,
Source of Fish
Area
Fish sorted instrumentally
No. of
%
pale
fish
Fish sorted visually
No. of
%
pale
fish
Central
10,588
7.4
5,602
5.6
Fraser
2,971
1.2
2,753
2.5
Johnstone Strait)
West Coast
)
San Juan
)
8,763
4.0
6,262*
5.5*
* Two lots involved, one of 5,442 fish with 4.0% pales; the other 820
fish with 18.2% pales. However, of the latter pales only 8.3% were
found to be FIL grade 1 and 2 by examination of the canned product
(i.e., 0.24% of the 820).
- 12 -
Table 2
Surrrnary of actua1FIL color grades of sockeye
canned after instrumental and visual sorting*
Source of Fish
Area
Instrumentally sorted fish
Visually sorted fish
No. of FIL grades( % of cans) No. of FILgrades( % of cans)
4,5,6,7
1,2 · 3
cans
cans
1 ,2
4,5,6,7
3
Fish sorted bright
Centra 1
144
2. 1
2.8
Fraser
96
0
0
Johnstone Strait)
)146
West Coast,
)
San Juan ·
0
2.7
0.8
TOTALS
Fish sorted
386
95. 1
144
0
2.8
97.2
48
0
0
100.0
97.3
84
3.6
3.6
92.8
2. 1
97. 1
276
1.1
2.4
96.5
50.5 19.3
30.3
2. 1
97.9
100
~ale
Centra 1
133
. 49.6 19.5
30.9
119
Fraser
72
15.3 18.0
66.7
48
Johnstone Strait)
) 98
West Coast;
)
San Juan
30.,6 24.5
44.9
73
27.4 13.7
58.9
35.3 20.8
43.9
240
33.3 14.3
52.4
TOTALS
*
303
0
For detailed data for nurrbers of fish, instrument sett"ings, FIL grades
etc . , please see Table 4 for Central area; 5 for Frasep; and 6 for
Johnstone Strait-West Coast-San Juan.
- 13 -
Table 3a
Instrumental resorting of sockeye
previously visually sorted as bright
Source of fish.
area
Number of
fish*
% pale +
% bright
Centra 1
2,834
91. 3
8.7 (4.7)
West Coast
5,224
98.9
1.1 (0,.4)
* 218 pale fish (i.e. 4.0% of the total, of which 52.2l were actually
pale according to examination of canned samples, see Table 3b) had
been separated visually from the West Coast fish, but the number of
pales separated from the Central fish was not recorded.
+
Bracketed values are actual % pale (FIL 1 and 2) calculated from
color grading of canned samples,
Table 3b
Actual color grades of sockeye canned after being sorted
and of visual brights after being resorted instrumenta11~*
visua11~
Source of
fish area
Central
.Sorting or
Resorting Class
Method
Visual
Instrumt 11
West
Coast
Vi sua 1
Ins trumt 11
Bright
Pale
Bright
Pale
Bright
Pale
Bright
Pale
* Same fish as Table 3a.
West Coast, 279.
Number
of
cans
FIL color grade (% of cans)
24
24
24
24
12
24 .
12
24
0
0
0
0 4.2 41.6 54.2
41.7 12.5 12.5 8.3 12.5 4.2 8.3
0
0 4.2 4.2 16.7 4.2 8.3
33.3 20.8 12.5 4.2 16.7 4.2 8.3
0
0 8.3 16.7 16.7 25.0 33.3
29.2 33.3 29.2 8.3 0
0
0
0
0 8.3 16.7 8.3 . 33.3 33.3
0
8.3 29.2 16.7 33.3 12.5
0
2
3
4
5
Sorter set point: Central 265 to 280;
6
7
- 14 -
Table 4
Actual FIL grades of sockeye canned after
instrumental and visual sorting - Central area,
% of fish
sorted
No. of
fish
Instrument
Setting
No. of
Cans
FIL grades (No. of
2
3
4
5
cans~
6
7
Fish sorted bright
Instrumental sorting
92.8
88.9
94.8
*91.3
90.0
98
1964
2447
1356
1875
63
98'
260-270
279
285-300
290-300
325
350
24
24
24
24
24
24
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
2
1
144
1
1
a
1
a
2
2
2
4
5
6
4
5
5
4
7
3
6
4
18
15
8
13
10
13
4
7
24
29
77
a
a
3
2
2
a
3
7
3
5
10
7
10
11
19
10
7
1
1
2
a
a
Visual sorting
93.5
96.7
93.8
92.3
676
2192
695
1728
(2834)
Fish sorted
24
24
24
24
24
24
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
144
a
24
24
24
24
26
11
3
6
6
1
3
a
a
2
4
7
3
1
a
4
9
18
42
71
4
5
a
3
1
1
1
5
2
3
3
5
2
7
3
1
6
1
6
12
3
4
6
4
5
3
4
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
25
41
26
21
14
4
2
a
1
a
11
13
~a1e
Instrumental sorting
7.2
11 . 1
5.2
8.7
10.0
2.0
153
305
74
178
7
2
260-270
279
285-300
290-300
325
350
133
6
11
a
(Table continued on following page)
- 15 -
Table 4 {continued)
Actual FIL grades of sockeye canned after
instrumental and visual sorting - Central area
FIL grades (No. of cans)
% of fi sh
sorted
No. of
fish
Instrument No. of
Setting
cans
2·
3
4
5
6
7
2
7
2
3
5
3
2
2
2
.2
1
0
1
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
18
10
4
4
Fish sorted Qale
Vi s ua 1 sortirig
6.5
3.3
6.2
7.7
47
46
144
24
(none)
23
24
24
24
11
5
2
12
10
3
5
3
4
10
4
3
119
37
23
23
9
* Plant staff reported too may visual pales in electronic brights"
If
in this lot, but none were detected in the canned samples submitted.
For the next trial, instrumental setting of 260-270 was selected
which appeared to move the demarcation point further up the FIL
scale with the results, as far as the canned samples were concerned,
of reducing th~ proportion of 4 s and 5 s in the bright and increasing
the proportion of 6 s and 7 s in the pales.
1
1
1
1
16 -
Table 5
Actua 1 FIL grades of sockeye canned after
instrumental and visual sorting - Fraser area
% of fish
sorted
No. of
fish
Instrument
Setting
FIL grades (No. of cans)
2
3
4
5
6
No.of
cans
7
Fish sorted bright
Instrumental sorting
99. 1
98.2
97.2
100
1319
1194
797
820
275
279-300
290
300
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
·0
0
19
22
14
24
96
0
0
O·
0
6
11
79
24
24
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
4
4
18
18
48
0
0
0
2
2
8
36
24
24
24
0
1
5
1
2
2
1
7
5
9
6
3
3
6
0
4
2
2
0
7
72
6
5
13
18
9
8
13
24
24
0
0
0
0
0
1
5
4
7
8
9
2
3
9
.48
0
0
1
9
15
11
12
24
24
24
24
3
1
7
Visual sorti ng
99.2
93.7
1917
768
Fish sorted Qale
I nstrumenta 1 sorting
0.9
1.8
2.9
12
22
23
275
279-300
290
6
Visual sorting
0.8
6.3
16
52
- 17 -
Table 6
Actual FIL grades of sockeye canned after
instrumental and visual sorting - Johnstone Strait-West-Coast~San Juan
% of fish
sorted
No. of
fish
Instrument
Setting
FIL grades (No. of cans)
2
3
4
7
5
6
No. of
cans
Fish sorted bright
Instrumental sorting
94.8
97.7
98.3
94.6
100
2482
801
1534
2993
600
279
292
295-300
300
350
11
5
5
8
5
10
12
23
10
26
33
73
1
0
2
0
2
2
0
1
2
4
7
5
3
4
6
8
4
14
2
3
5
18
21
34
6
24
24
24
24
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
1
2
4
146
0
0
4
12
24
24
24
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
3
5
3
2
5
11
16
11
Visual sorting
96.0
84.6
5224
694
84
Fish
so~ted
6
10
Ea1e
Instrumental sorting
5.2
2.3
1.7
5.4
136
19
27
171
279
292
295-300
300
24
24
26
24
1
4
1
6
5
8
2
4
4
8
8
3
6
4
8
3
2
2
1
4
0
3
1
1
0
0
98
9
21
24
21
13
8
2
24
24
(none)
25
7
1
8
1
7
1
2
4
0
6
0
7
0
4
1
2
2
3
2
6
9
73
9
11
10
9
8
13
13
3
Visual sorting
4.0
18.2
218
126
- 18 -
Table 7
Apparent demarcation point (or range) between pale and bright sockeye
obtained in instrumental sorting at different instrumental settings.*
Source of fish area
Instrument
Setting
Apparent demarcation
point (or range)
FIL grade
Central
260-270
279
285-300
290-300
325
350
6
5
4
5
4-5
4
Johnstone Strait-West CoastSan Juan
279
292
295-300
300
350
4-5
5-6
5
4-5
3-4
275
279
290
5-7
6
5-7
Fraser
* As determined by visual inspection of the data of Tables 4 to 6.
- 19 -
Table 8
Relation between color sorter setting and F..I.L. color grade
of sorted sockeye salmon when subsequently processed
Color Sorter Setting*
F~I.L.
Color +
Grade
220
230
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
Total
Number
of Fish
Number of fish*
1
1
0
1
3
16
4
4
10
1
40
2
2
1
2
3
12
5
11
1
·0
37
3
6
4
2
5
11
4
2
0
0
34
4
15
7
4
0
0
0
29
5
29
8
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
39
6
38
4
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
7
38
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
44
1
267
* At anyone of the sorter settings indicated, all the numbers of fish
listed at that and lower settings are sorted as bright; all those
listed at higher settings, as pale, e.g. at a setting of 240, grade
1 fish were sorted bright, 38 pale.
+ Of canned, processed fish.
- 20 -
Tab 1e 9
Error (%) in the sorting of sockeye salmon at
different ~ettin9s of the salmon color sorter
Color sorter
setting
*
% error in sorting*
Bright fish
Pale fish
Overall
220
23.1
3.9
15.7
230
7.7
5.2
6.7
240
2.6
9. 1
4.0
260
1.9
16.9
6.0
280
0.6
53.3
15.7
300
0
64.9
18.7
320
0
84.4
24.3
340
0
98.7
28.5
360
0
100.0
28.8
Calculated from data of Table 8. F.I.L. color grade 3 fish
omitted from calculation of bright and pale fish as, being on
the dividing line between bright and pale, they may be correctly
graded either way.
•