Maybe it's a typical adulterated "formula" fish meal.

Quality detection of domestic fish meal Amino acid name authority 1 detection authority 2 detection of aspartic acid 5.63 5.48 threonine 2.53 2.80 serine 2.46 2.36 glutamic acid 8.58 7.76 glycine 4.18 3.70 alanine 4.13 3.94 cystine 0.59 valine 3.08 3.28 methionine 1.68 1.77 isoleucine 2.43 2.68 Leucine 4.78 4.64 tyrosine 2.15 2.24 phenylalanine 2.46 2.74 lysine 4.79 4.76 ammonia 0.90 histidine 1.51 2.32 arginine 3.38 3.81 proline 2.16 2.30 total amino acids 56.52 56.58 crude protein 62.14 62.14 AA/CP91.0 91.1 VBN160134 examination showed no abnormality- Explain: the above indicators are sent to two domestic authoritative organizations for testing of the same sample. It was always thought that flaws could be found through the detection of amino acids, and the results of the authorities could be trusted. However, the above domestic fish meal mixed with a large amount of hydrolyzed feather meal (has been determined), through the above test indicators, I really do not see anything wrong, and the quality control confidence established over the past 10 years has also been lost. Peer, can you give me some advice? thank you! From the above amino acid analysis, the quality of fishmeal is good, if fake fishmeal, the technology is first-class; if mixed with hydrolyzed feather meal, why is cystine not high? Looking forward to it. -- it feels that the cost of making fake fishmeal is also high-- counterfeiting is easy, but it is difficult to detect fake fish meal. It's a great fake to make amino acids like real fishmeal. This post was finally edited by glory143 at 16:54 on 2009-7-14. If you have a liquid chromatography, you can mix fish meal according to your indicators. Is it so difficult? The difficulty lies in finding suitable counterfeiting raw materials. Now there are so many amino acid monomers and all kinds of cheap raw materials that if you can get raw materials, you can easily fake and identify adulteration. It doesn't make much sense to just look at amino acids (for strong counterfeiters). Or be real protein? Digestibility is reliable-if that's the case. I think it can not be called false, after all, the cost is also to be considered-since the domestic fish meal mixed with a large amount of hydrolyzed feather meal is mixed with a large amount of hydrolyzed feather meal, it can not be seen by microscopic examination. If you can see it, it is also used for the determination of amino acids? -burning with feather powder, and then smelling it, you can generally judge! -- you can simply wash the sample with water for a short time and determine the liquid nitrogen content. If it is too high, it may be a large amount of soluble nitrogen and monomer amino acids. Even formulated fish meal, if there are no toxic and harmful substances, can also be used, as long as there is an advantage. Is there something wrong with the cystine test? Did you do oxidative hydrolysis? The results of cystine determined after routine hydrolysis can not be used. Gbsyyx in 2009-7-15 08:44 to add the following content heard that feather powder after expansion adulteration, microscopic detection can not be detected, can only be identified by cystine content.