Effects of Storage Time and Thawing Method on Selected Nutrients in Whole Fish for Zoo Animal Nutrition

Piscivores in human care receive whole fish that were frozen, stored and thawed before feeding. Nutrient losses have been documented, but exact changes during storage and with different thawing methods are unknown. Primarily, it was hypothesized that frozen fish lose different vitamins and trace minerals during a storage period of six months. Secondly, that different thawing methods have a significant influence on the degree of vitamin loss. Three fish species, herring (Clupeus harengus), mackerel (Scomber scombrus) and capelin (Mallotus villosus) were analyzed at four time points within a storage period of 6 months at −20 °C. At each time point, three thawing methods were applied: thawing in a refrigerator (R), thawing at room temperature (RT), and thawing under running water (RW). The following nutrients were analyzed: vitamin A, B1, D3 and E, iron (Fe), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn) and selenium (Se). The statistical method used was a linear mixed effect model. Cu was below detection limits in all analyzed samples, vitamin B1 in most analyzed herring (44/48 samples) and capelin (in 25/36 samples), respectively. In addition, the vitamin D3 concentration was also below detection limits in half of the capelin samples (18/36). No concentration changes of Fe (p = 0.616), Zn (p = 0.686) or Se (p = 0.148) were observed during a storage period of six months, in contrast to a significant decrease in vitamin A (p = 0.019), D3 (p = 0.034) and E (p = 0.003) concentrations. Thawing fish with different thawing methods did not result in concentration changes of Fe (p = 0.821), Zn (p = 0.549) or Se (p = 0.633), but in a significant concentration change of vitamin A (p = 0.002). It is essential to supplement vitamins B1 and E in diets containing whole fish to avoid deficiencies in piscivorous species, and care should be taken not to store fish longer than six months, due to the depletion of vitamins A, D3 and E

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power