Salmon vs. Tuna Size


by cepheid
Tags: salmon, size, tuna
cepheid
cepheid is offline
#1
Mar19-12, 06:24 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
cepheid's Avatar
P: 5,198
I tried to make the thread title sound vaguely scientific, but the moderators can move this to General Discussion if they prefer. I didn't know where to put it. It's a dumb question about fish.

I'm wondering why is that a can of salmon (specifically Sockeye salmon from Alaska) includes a great deal of skin and bones, including vertebrae, whereas a can of tuna (specifically Albacore tuna) includes just the meat and nothing else.

My working "common-sense" hypothesis has been that since the tuna is a much bigger fish, it's easier to take out a chunk of flesh that's big enough for a can without having to cross any bones or edges of the body. For the salmon, I assume that to get enough meat for a can, you basically have to include an entire cross-section, skin, vertebrae, and all.

I looked it up, and Albacore tuna have an average length of 1.4 m vs. 0.35 m for Sockeye salmon, so my hypothesis seems plausible. Also the body of the salmon seems much narrower than the tuna. I was wondering if anyone who knows anything about fish could confirm or refute my explanation?

And don't ask me what my favourite fish is. I'm not falling for that again...
Phys.Org News Partner Biology news on Phys.org
Humpback protections downgrade clears way for pipeline
Researchers discover the most effective animal signal strategies
Maine baby lobster decline could end high catches
Evo
Evo is offline
#2
Mar22-12, 11:48 AM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 25,959
Salmon bones become soft when cooked and are delicious. Many people also like the skin.

Why are there bones & skin in my can of Traditional Salmon?

"Traditional" refers to the process by which salmon has been packed for many years, that is the whole body of the fish including the bones and skin is placed in the can. The high heat sterilization process softens the bones and skin to the point where they can be easily mashed and blended into salads, casseroles and other delicious dishes. Chicken of the Sea also produces salmon in a skinless and boneless pack for those consumers who prefer it without the skin and bones.
You are right that size is also an issue.

http://chickenofthesea.com/faq.aspx
cepheid
cepheid is offline
#3
Mar22-12, 08:26 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
cepheid's Avatar
P: 5,198
Quote Quote by Evo View Post
Salmon bones become soft when cooked and are delicious. Many people also like the skin.



You are right that size is also an issue.

http://chickenofthesea.com/faq.aspx
Thanks for taking the time to respond.

tal444
tal444 is offline
#4
Mar25-12, 12:28 PM
P: 157

Salmon vs. Tuna Size


I would also like to mention the fact that salmon, especially sockeye, is generally more expensive than tuna.
B.Spinoza
B.Spinoza is offline
#5
Apr14-12, 06:48 AM
P: 12
Big fish = bigger fillets (although some fish are more bony as you know)

Size does matter.

Rich (keen fisher)


Register to reply

Related Discussions
swimming salmon Introductory Physics Homework 4
Need help with salmon problem Introductory Physics Homework 8
canned tuna smells bad General Discussion 18
Leaping Salmon Introductory Physics Homework 2