Journal of Elementology ISSN 1644-2296

Cieślik I., Migdał W., Topolska K., Gambuś F., Szczurowska K., Cieślik E. 2018.
Changes in the content of heavy metals (Pb, Cd, Hg, As, Ni, Cr) in freshwater
fish after processing – the consumer’s exposure.
J. Elem., 23(1): 247-259. DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2017.22.2.1436

ORIGINAL PAPER

CHANGES IN THE CONTENT OF HEAVY METALS

(Pb, Cd, Hg, As, Ni, Cr) IN FRESHWATER FISH
AFTER PROCESSING – THE CONSUMER’S
EXPOSURE

Iwona Cieślik1, Władysław Migdał1, Kinga Topolska2,

Florian Gambuś3, Katarzyna Szczurowska3, Ewa Cieślik2
Department of Animal Product Technology
1

2
Malopolska Centre of Food Monitoring
3
Department of Agricultural and Environmental Chemistry
University of Agriculture in Krakow

Abstract

Fish is a desirable component of a diet because of its high nutritive value and sensory qualities.
However, fish consumption is still low in many countries. The aim of this study was to assess
the content of Pb, Cd, Hg, As, Ni and Cr in the meat of freshwater fish and quantitative chan-
ges after processing (smoking or marinating). Moreover, the exposure of consumers to heavy
metals by eating a portion (100 g) of the examined products was estimated as well as the safe
amounts (comparing to the maximum limit - ML and as the Benchmark Dose Lover Confidence
limits – BMDL) of processed fish for two population groups. The research material consisted
of 3 species, i.e. common carp (Cyprinus carpio), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykkis) and
northern pike (Esox lucius). The content of heavy metals (except for mercury) was determined
in samples of fresh as well as processed fish, using inductively coupled plasma optical emission
spectrometry (ICP-OES). In turn, for the determination of mercury, an AMA-254 Advanced
Mercury Analyzer was used. Nickel and chromium in all the samples were below limits of detec-
tion. The study revealed a relatively safe content (below MLs) of heavy metals in almost all fish
samples, except for the cadmium concentration in fresh and smoked common carp as well as in
marinated rainbow trout. The calculated intakes of these contaminants through consumption of
one portion of the examined fish products were all below BMDLs and Tolerable Weekly Intakes
(PTWI or TWI).

Keywords: heavy metals, freshwater fish, technological processes.

Iwona Cieslik Ph.D. Department of Animal Product Technology, University of Agriculture in

Krakow, Balicka Str. 122, 30-149 Krakow, Poland, e-mail: [email protected]
248

INTRODUCTION

Fish is a desirable component of a diet because of both its high nutritive

value and sensory qualities. However, fish consumption is still low in many
countries. In 2015, the average annual fish consumption in Poland was 12.5 kg
per capita (almost 50% of the average per capita fish consumption in the
EU), with pollock (among saltwater species) and carp (among freshwater
species) being most popular (Ruciński 2016). Fish may contain several chemi-
cal contaminants, including heavy metals, and cause a threat to the safety of
consumers (Buňka et al. 2013). Therefore, their systematic monitoring is rec-
ommended and required by the EU authorities (Efsa 2007). The presence of
heavy metals in food products is the consequence of environmental
contamination of soil and air (plant products), feeding animals with contami-
nated feed (animal products), acquisition of polluted waters (fish), and other
sources (technological water, utensils, pots, etc.) (Vicarova et al. 2014). Many
studies (Łuszczek-Trojnar et al. 2011, Vilizzi, Tarkan 2016) have included the
determination of heavy metals in fish but they were carried out on fresh fish.
Meanwhile, due to the fact that freshwater fish are not customarily eaten
fresh, there is a need for determination of heavy metal levels in fish products.
During thermal processing, as well as causing loss of weight and water, the
application of heat accelerates protein degradation and therefore chemical
contaminants may also be affected by the heat applied (Tawfik 2013). Smo-
king is traditionally used for fish preservation all over the world (Ayejuyo
et al. 2013). Marinating involves covering fish with vinegar marinade with
spices, and it guarantees good microbial quality for several months (Cieślik
et al. 2017).
Heavy metals are metallic elements with relatively high density compa-
red to water. Taking into consideration the fact that heaviness and toxicity
are inter-related, heavy metals also include metalloids (arsenic), which can
induce toxicity at a low level of exposure. These contaminants can cause
serious human health problems (Soliman 2015). They affect the organism in
two ways; first is the disruption of normal cell processes that leads to toxicity,
and the second one is bioaccumulation (Vinodhini, Navayanan 2008, Vilizzi,
Tarkan 2016). Among heavy metals, cadmium, lead, mercury, arsenic, nickel
and chromium are of particular concern (European Communities 2008,
Vilizzi, Tarkan 2016).
The aim of this study was to assess the content of heavy metals (Pb, Cd,
As, Hg, Ni and Cr) in the muscle tissue of three freshwater fish (common
carp, rainbow trout and northern pike), either fresh or after two different
processing methods: smoking or marinating. The exposure of consumers to
heavy metals by eating a portion of the examined products was also estima-
ted as well as the safe amount of processed fish for children and adults.
 249

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Research material
The research material consisted of 3 fish species, farmed in the Carp
Valley (Zator, Malopolska, Poland), i.e. common carp (Cyprinus carpio) –
Carp of Zator, rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykkis), and northern pike
(Esox lucius). A total of 6 fish from each species were collected. The age of
common carp was 2 years, and its weight was 1.5-2.0 kg; the age of rainbow
trout was 0.5 years and its weight was 0.5-1.0 kg; the pike’s age was 3 years
and its weight was 2-3 kg. The specimens were killed, washed, gutted,
cleaned and divided into parts. The samples were stored at -80°C until ana-
lyzed. The fish were also used to prepare smoked (common carp, rainbow
trout, northern pike) and marinated (common carp, rainbow trout) products,
according to traditional recipes. Prior to smoking, the samples were cured in
spices and stored at 4-8°C for 12 hours. Next, they were subjected to warm
smoking (4-6 h, smoke from fruit tree wood and alder wood in the last stage).
In turn, the marinating process (vinegar and water in the ratio 1:3, sugar,
mustard seed, bay leaf, allspice and slices of vegetables) was preceded
by deep-frying in rapeseed oil (until golden brown). Fish smoking as well
as preparation of marinated products were described in detail previously
(Cieślik et al. 2017).

Chemical analyses
A total of 18 samples of fresh fish (3 species) and 15 samples of fish
products (smoked or marinated) were determined. The content of Pb, Cd, As,
Ni and Cr was determined by the spectrometric method according to internal
laboratory procedures. Prior to analysis, material was freeze-dried using an
Alpha 1-2 LD Plus freeze dryer (Martin Christ, Germany). The process was
carried out at a temp. of -40°C and pressure of 0.2 mbar until constant mass
was obtained. A freeze-dried sample in the amount of 0.5 g was added to 5
ml of nitric acid (65%, Suprapur, Merck, Germany) and 1 ml hydrochloric
(30% Suprapur, Merck, Germany). Wet mineralization was performed in a
microwave system Multiwave 3000 (Anton Paar, Graz, Austria) under
following conditions: power of 800 W, reaching time of 10 min, holding time
of 20 min, ventilation time of 15 min. Next, the heavy metal levels were
measured using a spectrometer ICP-OES 7300 DualView (Perkin Elmer,
USA), at the following wavelengths: Pb 220.353 nm, Cd 228.802 nm,
As 188.979 nm, Ni 231.604 nm and Cr 267.716 nm. The detection limits
were: Pb – 0.042 mg L-1, Cd – 0.0027 mg L-1, As – 86 µg L-1, Ni – 0.0105 µg L-1
and Cr – 0.0071 mg L-1. Quality of analyses was ensured by making a paral-
lel analysis of Certified Reference Material IAEA-407 (Fish Homogenate).
The recovery for the applied method was: Pb – 104.59%, Cd – 94.71%,
As – 98.55%, Ni – 94.56% and Cr – 97.26%. The analysis of Hg was per-
250

formed on an AMA-254 Advanced Mercury Analyzer (Spectro-Lab, Łomianki,

Poland) at 254 nm wavelength, according to Costley et al. (2000). The limit
of detection for the Hg content was 0.01 ng. All chemical analyses were per-
formed in triple replications.

Calculations
The results were compared with the current limit content of heavy me-
tals in fish and fish products, included in Commission Regulation (EC) No
629/2008, of 2 July 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 setting
maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuff (European Commu-
nities 2008).
Additionally, the content of examined heavy metals was compared with:
–– Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake (PTWI) of 25 µg kg-1 b.w./week for
lead, 7 µg kg-1 b.w./week for cadmium and 1.6 µg kg-1 b.w./week
for total mercury;
–– Tolerable Weekly Intake (TWI) of 2,5 µg kg-1 b.w. for cadmium;
–– Benchmark Dose Lower Confidence Limit (BMDL) for lead:
33 BMDL01 for children (neurotoxicity) – 0.50 mg kg-1 b.w./day;
33 BMDL10 for adults (nephrotoxicity) – 0.63 mg kg-1 b.w./day;
33 BMDL01 for adults (cardiovascular disorders) – 1.50 mg kg-1 b.w./day;
–– Benchmark Dose Lower Confidence Limit BMDL for mercury:
33 BMDL0.5 for adults (imunotoxicity) – 0.01 µg kg-1 b.w./day;
33 BMDL10 for adults (nephrotoxicity) – 0.06 µg kg-1 b.w./day;
–– Benchmark Dose Lower Confidence Limit BMDL for arsenic:
33 BMDL0.5 for adults (carcinogenic) – 3.00 µg kg-1 b.w./day.
The calculations were performed for adults (assuming 70 kg b.w.) and
children (assuming 35 kg b.w.) (Staszowska et al. 2013).

Statistical analysis of the results

The statistical analysis was carried out using analysis of variance (one
-way ANOVA). Normality of the results and homogeneity of variance were
calculated using the Shapiro-Wilk test. The post-hoc Tukey’s Honestly Signi-
ficant Difference test was used for determining the statistically significant
differences between fresh fish (in dependence of a species) and after the pro-
cess (for each fish species). Differences with the significance of a = 0.05 were
considered statistically significant. All calculations and figures were made
using Statistica ver. 12.0 software.
 251

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The content of heavy metals in fish and fish products

The concentration of lead in fresh common carp was 0.031 mg kg-1 on
average (Figure 1a). According to the literature, many factors can influence

Fig. 1. The content of Pb (a) and Cd (b) in fish and fish products (mg kg-1) in comparison
to the Maximum Levels (ML): MLPb – 0.300 (mg kg-1), MLCd – 0.050 (mg kg-1); A, B, C – mean
values followed by the same letter are not significantly different (a = 0.05) – the differentiating
factor: fish species; a b c – mean values followed by the same letter are not significantly
different (a = 0.05) – the differentiating factor: technological process

fish metal uptake, i.e. age, size, feeding behavior and living environment (El
-Moselhy et al. 2014). The levels of Pb measured in fish products varied from
0.011 mg kg-1 (in smoked pike and trout) to 0.232 mg kg-1 (in marinated trout),
but no sample exceeded the maximum level (ML) of 0.30 mg kg-1 set by Com-
mission Regulation No 629/2008 (Figure 1a). A drop in the concentration of
heavy metals in samples after thermal treatment, attributed to the heat effect,
was observed in fish meat by Eboh et al. (2006) as well as Kobia et al. (2016).
Heavy metals could be converted to other compounds (Kobia et al. 2016).
The process of marinating led to a 5-fold increase in the Pb concentra-
tion in samples of rainbow trout (Figure 1a). This increase could be due to
252

the ingredients used in marinating. According to Tawfik (2013), spices may

contain high levels of lead. Krejpcio et al. (2007) reported a Pb content in
black grainy pepper at 0.32 mg kg-1, and in dried garlic – at 0.53 mg kg-1.
These author also determined the concentration of lead in dried onion (0.44 mg
kg-1) as well as in allspice (0.29 mg kg-1). In the study of Darko et al. (2014),
garlic contained 1.0 mg kg-1 of lead. All the spices and seasonings mentioned
above were present in the recipes for smoked or marinated fish products
examined in this study. Therefore, the increase in the Pb content might have
resulted partially from the accumulation of Pb in spices through air pollu-
tion, inclusion or absorption at a mill during grinding, etc. (Inam et al. 2013).
It was also reported that cooking methods (i.e. frying) can change the levels
of toxic metals through various means, including the evaporation of water
and volatile components, solubilization of the element and also by metal
binding to other macronutrients present in the food (Kobia et al. 2016).
The cadmium content in the examined fresh fish differed significantly
and ranged from 0.032 mg kg-1 (in northern pike) to 0.119 mg kg-1 (in com-
mon carp) – Figure 1b. It is to emphasize that the concentration of cadmium
in common carp was higher than ML set by Commission Regulation
No 629/2008. The differences between the fish species might be due to feed-
ing habits or place of habitation (open water or bottom of a pond) of the
examined fish species. The processing method had a significant impact on
the Cd concentration in the examined fish species, except for northern pike
and rainbow trout (smoking) – Figure 1b. It was observed that the process-
ing of common carp (both smoking and marinating) led to a decrease in
cadmium, whereas marinating of rainbow trout caused a 2-fold rise (P < 0.05)
in the concentration of this heavy metal, above ML. In the opinion of
Diaconescu et al. (2012), this increase may be related to evaporation that
occurs during frying process. A higher level of Cd in fried and then marinated
trout (as compared to the fresh material) could be also an effect of the addi-
tion of spices, breading (breadcrumbs and flour), frying in rapeseed oil, and
also the adding of vinegar marinade (sugar, spices and slices of vegetables).
Ibrahim et al. (2012) reported a cadmium concentration in black pepper at
0.046 mg kg-1. In the study of Krejpcio et al. (2007), dried garlic contained
0.04 mg kg-1, whereas dried onion – 0.05 mg kg-1 and allspice – 0.03 mg kg-1
of Cd. As regards smoking, Şirelli et al. (2006) reported lower (0.011 mg kg-1)
cadmium concentrations in vacuum packaged smoked rainbow trout.
As shown in Figure 2a, the average concentration of mercury in the
muscles of fresh fish was the highest (P < 0.05) in common carp (0.055 mg kg-1).
Processing of fish caused significant changes in the Hg content. Smoking led
to a significant increase in mercury in rainbow trout (almost 2-fold) and pike
(almost 3-fold) – Figure 2a. This might be attributed to fat drainage or water
loss during smoking (Ayejuyo et al. 2013). In turn, a marked decrease in the
Hg content was observed only in marinated carp samples (from 0.06 mg kg-1
to 0.011 mg kg-1) – Figure 2a. Polak-Juszczak (2010) examined the content of
mercury in different fish products and reported the Hg content (0.05-0.07 mg kg-1)
 253

Fig. 2. The content of Hg (a) and As (b) in fresh fish and fish products (mg kg-1):
A, B, C – mean values followed by the same letter are not significantly different (a = 0.05)
the differentiating factor: fish species; a b c – mean values followed by the same letter
are not significantly different (a = 0.05) – the differentiating factor: technological process

in smoked as well as in marinated varieties. Tkaczewska and Migdał (2012)

showed that a mercury level in rainbow trout from Malopolska province was
0.02 mg kg-1.
The arsenic concentration in fresh fish was found to differ significantly
between the species, in the range from 0.025 mg kg-1 (common carp) to
0.305 mg kg-1 (rainbow trout) – Figure 2b. Processing of fish led to changes
in the As content. Smoking decreased As levels in all the samples except for
carp. The lowest values of arsenic were found in marinated fish, with the
biggest decrease (10-fold) noticed for rainbow trout (Figure 2b).
To sum up, heavy metal concentrations were found to decrease in common
carp samples in the sequence Cd>Hg>Pb>As in fresh fish, Cd>Hg>As>Pb in
smoked fish and Cd>Pb>As>Hg in carp. In the study of Majnoni et al. (2013)
on metal concentrations in tissues of common carp and silver carp from the
Zarival Wetland, this sequence for fresh fish was Pb>Hg>Ni>Cd.
254

Meanwhile, the concentrations of the examined metals in rainbow trout

followed the sequence of As>Cd>Pb>Hg (for fresh fish), As>Hg>Cd>Pb (for
smoked fish) and Pb>Cd>As>Hg (for marinated fish). The sequence of heavy
metals with respect to their levels in northern pike samples was
As>Pb>Cd>Hg and As>Hg> Cd>Pb, for fresh and smoked fish, respectively.
Simultaneously, nickel and chromium was below the limit of detection
(LOD) - both in fresh and processed fishes. Meanwhile, Kenšová et al. (2010)
determined higher chromium concentrations in non-predatory fish, and the
highest concentrations were found in bream and carp (muscle, liver and gills).
Heavy metal concentrations in the tissue of freshwater fish may vary
considerably across different studies, possibly due to differences in metal
concentrations and chemical characteristics of water from which the fish
were sampled, ecological needs, metabolism and feeding patterns of fish, and
also the season when the studies were carried out. What is particularly im-
portant is that a food product can become contaminated during a thermal
treatment, which occurs in the processes of food preparation and manufactu-
re, like roasting, baking or frying (Ayejuyo et al. 2013). Thus, the awareness
of consumers is crucial.

Human exposure
The threat posed by the examined heavy metals to consumer health was
analyzed based on their Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intakes. With regard
to PTWI (Table 1), one can conclude that in the presence of lead as a conta-
minant, an adult weighing 70 kg can consume 87.50 kg of smoked and mari-
nated common carp, 175.0 kg of smoked rainbow trout and 7.609 kg of mari-
nated rainbow trout, 175.0 kg of smoked northern pike, on a weekly basis.
In the case of cadmium, an adult can consume 7.000 kg of smoked common
carp and 12.25 kg of marinated common carp, 9.800 kg of smoked rainbow
Table 1
Amount of fish products (kg) containing the PTWIa (in male adult weighing 70 kg)
of the examined heavy metals

Northern
Common carp Rainbow trout
pike
Heavy metal

PTWIa PTWIb
marinated**

marinated**

(µg kg-1) (µg)

smoked**

smoked**

smoked**
fresh *

fresh *
fresh*

Pb 58.33 87.50 87.50 43.75 175.0 7.609 43.75 175.0 25.00 1750
Cd 4.083 7.000 12.25 12.25 9.800 6.125 16.33 16.33 7.000 490.0
Hg 1.867 2.240 11.20 5.600 2.240 5.600 5.600 1.600 1.600 112.0c
a
PTWI – Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake, b in a male adult weighing 70 kg, c methylmer-
cury content – assumed that total mercury occurred as methylmercury
 255

trout and 6.125 kg of marinated rainbow trout, as well as 16.33 kg of smoked

northern pike. Whereas if mercury is the contaminant, the consumption
of just 2.240 kg of smoked carp, 11.2 kg of marinated carp, 2.240 kg of smo-
ked rainbow trout, 5.600 kg of marinated trout, as well as 1.600 kg of
smoked northern pike weekly is permitted (Table 1). For comparison, Usydus
et al. (2009) in the study on fish products available on the Polish market,
showed more than a six-fold larger allowable portion of smoked trout
(62.8 kg) with regard to cadmium. In the case of mercury, the values
for smoked trout were similar (2.5 kg) to those obtained in this study.
As regards marinated fish, these authors (Usydus et al. 2009) estimated that
an allowed weekly amount of fried mackerel in vinegar is 2.1 kg, whereas a
permitted portion of marinated common carp and rainbow trout is 11.2 kg
and 5.6 kg, respectively.
Taking into consideration the fact that the European Food Safety Autho-
rity’s Panel on contaminants in the food chain has set a reduced tolerable
weekly intake for cadmium of 2.5 µg kg-1 b.w. (based on an analysis of new data;
Efsa 2009), %TWIs were calculated for all processed fish, and they were
(in the decreasing order): 4.57% (marinated trout), 3.89% (smoked carp),
2.51% (smoked trout), 2.43% (marinated carp) and 1.91% (smoked pike).
In order to estimate the risk associated with the supply of heavy metals
in 1 portion (100 g) of fish, percentages of the Benchmark Dose Lower Con-
fidence Limits for a child (when appropriate) and an adult were also presen-
ted (Table 2). In the case of Pb, a 100 g portion of fish product will cover the
6.080% (smoked pike) to 132.3% (marinated trout) of BMDL01 for child and
from 2.413% to 52.52% (as regards BMDL10) as well as from 1.013% to
22.06% (considering BMDL01). For a child, a safe amount of marinated trout
should not exceed 75 g, and for an adult – 190 g (BMDL10) or 450 g
(BMDL01). In the case of smoked carp, a safe portion size is 795 g, 2000 g
and 4772 g, respectively. In the case of mercury, a portion weighing 100 g
will cover from 0.143% (marinated carp) to 1.000% (smoked pike) of BMDL0.5
as well as from 0.024% to 0.167% BMDL10 (Table 3). As regards arsenic, a
100 g portion will cover from 0.710% (marinated carp) to 11.09% (smoked
trout) of BMDL0.5 for adult (Table 3). Thus, a safe portion of the products
mentioned above is 14 000 g and 900 g, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Regarding fresh material, the statistical analysis showed significant dif-

ferences in lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic content, dependently on a
fish species. In turn, among processed fish, marinating led to a 5-fold increase
in Pb and a 2-fold enhancement of the Cd concentration as well as a 10-fold
drop noticed for As in the samples of rainbow trout. Smoking led to a signi-
ficant rise in the mercury level of rainbow trout (almost 2-fold) and pike
 256

Fresh pike
Fresh pike

Fresh carp
Fresh carp

Fresh trout
Fresh trout

Smoked pike
Smoked pike

Smoked carp
Smoked carp

Smoked trout
Smoked trout

Sample
Sample

Marinated carp
Marinated carp

Marinated trout
Marinated trout
Mean dose of Hg in 100 g Mean dose of Pb in 100 g of meat

0.007
0.002
0.002
0.005
0.002
0.001
0.005
0.006
of meat (mg 100 g-1)

1.064
3.533
23.16
1.100
3.821
2.111
2.197
3.077
(µg 100 g-1)

BMDL0.5 for adult of body weight BDML01 for child of body weight
35 kg

0.700
70 kg (mg/adult/day)

17.50
(µg/child/day)
Intake of Hg from a portion of 100 Intake of Pb from a portion of 100 g
g of fish by child of body weight of fish by child of body weight 35 kg

1.000
0.286
0.286
0.714
0.286
0.143
0.714
0.856
6.080
20.19
132.3
6.286
21.83
12.06
12.56
17.58
35 kg (%BMDL0.5) (%BMDL01)

BMDL10 for adult of body weight BMDL10 for adult of body weight

4.200
70 kg (mg/adult/day) 70 kg

44.10
(µg/adult/day)

Intake of Hg from a portion

of 100 g of fish by child of body Intake of Pb with a portion of 100 g

0.167
0.048
0.048
0.119
0.048
0.024
0.119
0.143
of fish by adult of body weight 70 kg

2.413
8.001
52.52
2.494
8.664
4.787
4.982
6.977

weight 35 kg (%BMDL10)
(%BMDL10)

Mean dose of As in 100 g

12.60
17.14
3.461
23.29
30.46
1.490
3.474
2.483
of meat (µg 100 g-1) BMDL01 for adult (µg/person/day)

BMDL values for Hg and As with one portion (100 g) of fish

105.0

BMDL0.5 for adult of body weight Intake of Pb with a portion of 100 g

210.0
70 kg (µg/adult/day) of fish by adult of body weight 70 kg
BMDL values for lead, as the intake of Pb and Cd with one portion (100 g) of fish

1.013
3.365
22.06
1.048
3.639
2.010
2.092
2.930

(%BMDL01)

Intake of As with a portion

of 100 g of fish by adult of body Mean dose of Cd in 100 g

6.000
8.162
1.648
11.09
14.50
0.710
1.654
1.182
3.334
3.203
8.000
4.402
3.805
4.261
6.801
11.85

weight 70 kg (%BMDL0.5) of meat (µg 100 g-1)

Table 3
Table 2
 257

(almost 3-fold) and to a decrease in the As levels in all the samples except
for carp. It was stated that the examined processing methods caused a signi-
ficant increase in the concentrations of most metals compared to those of the
fresh samples. However, these technological practices also caused a decrease
in the concentrations of heavy metals in some fish types. This finding could
be attributed to the inter-play between the size of a processed fish, oil uptake,
water loss, and metal evaporation during the processing.
The calculated intakes of the examined heavy metals (consumption of
100 g fish portion) were below the BMDLs and Tolerable Weekly Intakes
(PTWI or TWI). Simultaneously, nickel and chromium were below limits of
detection in all samples.
The practical application of this study is to enhance the consumer’s
knowledge about heavy metals content in freshwater fish species after diffe-
rent ways of processing, both more popular like smoking and less common
like marinating.

REFERENCES
Ayejuyo O.O., Obijiofor R., Osundiya M.O. 2013. Levels of PAHs and potentially toxic metals in
three species of fresh and smoked fish consumed in Lagos, Nigeria. IOSR J. Appl. Chem.,
5(6): 30-35.
Buňka F., Budinský P., Zimáková B., Merhaut M., Flasarová R., Pachlová V., Kubán V., Buňková L.
2013 Biogenic amines occurrence in fish meat sampled from restaurants in region of the
Czech Republic. Food Control, 31: 49-52.
Cieślik I., Migdał W., Topolska k., Gambuś F., Szczurowska K., Cieślik E. 2017. Changes in
macro- and microelements in freshwater fish during food processing. J. Elem., 22(2): 453-462.
DOI: 10.5601/jelem.2016.21.1.1128
Costley C.T., Mossop K.F., Dean J.R., Garden L.M., Marshall J., Carroll J. 2000. Determina-
tion of mercury in environmental and biological samples using pyrolysis atomic absorption
spectrometry with gold amalgamation. Anal. Chim. Acta, 405: 179-183. DOI: 10.1016/
S0003-2670(99)00742-4
Darko B., Ayim I., Voegborlo R. B. 2014. Heavy metal content in mixed and unmixed seasonings
on the Ghanaian market. Afr. J. Food Sci., 8(1): 14-19. DOI: 10.5897/AJFS2013.1107
Diaconescu C., Urdes L., Diaconescu S., Popa D. 2012. Effects of cooking methods on the heavy
metal concentrations in the fish meat originating from different areas of the Danube River.
Scientific Papers, Ser. D, Animal Science, 55: 265-267.
Eboh L., Mepba H.D., Ekpo M.B. 2006. Heavy metal contaminants and processing effects on the
composition, storage stability and fatty acid profiles of five common commercially available
fish species in Oron Local Government, Nigeria. Food Chem., 97(3): 490-497. DOI: 10.1016/
j.foodchem.2005.05.041
EFSA 2007. Definition and description of “emergings risks” within the EFSA’s mandate. http://
www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/escoemriskdefinition.pdf .
EFSA 2009. Cadmium in food. scientific opinion of the panel on contaminants in the Food Chain.
The EFSA J., 980: 1-139. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2009.980
El-Moselhy K.M., Othman A.I., Abd El-Azem H., El-Metwally M.E.A. 2014. Bioaccumulation
of heavy metals in some tissues of fish in the Red Sea, Egypt. Egypt. J. Basic Appl. Sci., 1:
97-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejbas.2014.06.001
European Communities 2008. Commission Regulation (EC) No 629/2008, of 2 July 2008 amen-
258

ding Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in
foodstuff. Official Journal of the European Communities, 5: 6-9. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/
legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2008.173.01.0006.01.ENG&toc=OJ:L:2008:173:TOC
Ibrahim G.I., Hassan L.M., Baban S.O., Fadhil S.S. 2012. Effect of heavy metal content of some
common spices available in local markets in Erbil City on human consumption. Raf. J. Sci.,
23(3): 106-114.
Inam F. , Deo S., Narkhede N. 2013. Analysis of minerals and heavy metals in some spices col-
lected from local market. IOSR J. Pharm. Biol. Sci., 8(2): 40-43.
Kobia J., Emikpe B.O., Asare D.A., Asenso T.N., Yeboah R., Jarikre T.A., Jagun-Jubril A. 2016.
Effects of different cooking methods on heavy metals level in fresh and smoked game meat.
J. Food Process. Technol., 7(9): 617. DOI: 10.4172/2157-7110.1000617
Kenšová R., Celechovska O., Doubravova J., Svobodova Z. 2010. Concentrations of metals in tissues
of fish from the Vestonice reservoir. Acta Vet. Brno, 79(2): 335-345. DOI: 10.2754/
avb201079020335
Krejpcio Z., Król E., Sionkowski S. 2007. Evaluation of heavy metals contents in spices and
herbs available on the Polish market. Pol. J. Environ. Stud., 16(1): 97-100.
Łuszczek-Trojnar E., Drąg-Kozak E., Popek W. 2011. Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in several
carp tissues of carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) originating from the farming ponds with the water
of Rudawa river. Ochr. Środ. Zas. Nat., 47: 112-120. (in Polish)
Majnoni F., Mansouri B., Rezaei M.R., Hamidian A.H. 2013. Metal concentration in tissues
of Common crap, Cyprinus carpio and Silver crap, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix from
Zarivar wetland, western Iran. Arch. Pol. Fish., 21: 11-18. DOI: 10.2478/aopf-2013-0002
Polak-Juszczak L. 2010. Mercury in fish and fish products. An evaluation of threats to consumer
health. Oceanol. Hydrobiol. Stud., 39(1): 93-103.
Ruciński P. 2016. Fish and seafood market in Poland. USDA Forein Agriculture Service Global
Agriculture Informational Network, 9/16/2015, Warsaw.https://gain.fas.usda.gov/
Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Fish%20and%20Seafood%20Market%20in%20Poland._
Warsaw_Poland_9-16-2015.pdf
Şirelli U.T., Göncüoğlu M., Yıldırım Y., Gücükoğlu A., Çakmak Ö. 2006. Assessment of heavy
metals (Cadmium and Lead) in Vacuum packaged smoked fish species (mackerel, Salmo
salar and Oncorhynhus mykiss) marketed in Ankara (Turkey) E.U. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci.,
23(3-4): 353-356.
Soliman N.F.E. 2015. Metals contents in spices and herbs available on the Egyptian market:
Assessment of potential human health risk. The Open Conf. Proc. J., 6: 24-29.
Staszowska A., Skałecki P., Florek M., Litwińczuk A. 2013. Influence of species and living envi-
ronment of fish on concentration of Lead and its estimated intake from muscle tissue.
Zywn.-Nauk. Technol. Ja., 6(91): 60-68. (in Polish)
Tawfik M.S. 2013. Impact of different cooking processes on proximate metals composition of fish
and shrimp. J. Food Technol., 11(4-6): 95-102. DOI: 10.3923/jftech.2013.95.102.
Tkaczewska J., Migdał W. 2012. Comparison of slaughter yield, contents of basic nutrients and
levels of heavy metals in muscles of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) originating from
various regions in Poland. Zywn.-Nauk. Technol. Ja., 84(5): 177-186. (in Polish)
Usydus Z., Szlinder-Richert J., Polak-Juszczak L., Komar K., Adamczyk M., Malesa-Ciecwierz M.,
Ruczynska W. 2009. Fish products available in Polish market – Assessment of the nutritive
value and human exposure to dioxins and other contaminants. Chemosphere, 74: 1420-1428.
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.12.023
Vicarova P., Kleckerova A., Docekalova H., Pelcova P. 2014. Heavy metals in the common carp
(Cyprinus carpio L.) from two reservoirs in the Czech Republic. Czech J. Food Sci., 34(5):
422-428. DOI: 10.17221/100/2016-CJFS
 259

Vilizzi L., Tarkan A.S. 2016. Bioaccumulation of metals in common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.)
from water bodies of Anatolia (Turkey): a review with implications for fisheries and human
food consumption. Environ. Monit. Assess., 188:242. DOI 10.1007/s10661-016-5248-9
Vinodhini R., Navayanan M. 2008. Bioaccumulation of heavy metal in organs of fresh water fish
Cyprius capio (Common carp). Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 5(2): 178-182. DOI: 10.1007/
BF03326011