Nutrition science · B2B procurement · EU label claims · 2026
Frozen Mackerel Omega-3 —
EPA, DHA and the B2B Specification
Mackerel is among the richest commercial sources of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA) available at scale. This is not a marketing claim — it is a measurable biochemical characteristic that varies by species, fishing date, and processing method. This guide covers the actual EPA and DHA concentrations by mackerel species and origin, how those concentrations survive freezing, storage and cooking, what EU Regulation 1924/2006 authorises buyers to claim on finished products, and how B2B buyers across foodservice, retail and institutional channels use omega-3 data commercially.
EPA+DHA at a glance — peak season per 100g whole fish
S. scombrus Norway Oct
2,000–3,500 mgS. scombrus Iceland Oct
1,800–3,000 mgS. japonicus Japan Oct–Dec
1,200–2,200 mgS. australasicus Australia Mar–Jun
1,000–1,800 mgS. scombrus Morocco Oct–Jan
400–900 mgS. japonicus Peru (year-round)
350–700 mgT. capensis Namibia Mar–May
300–600 mgT. trachurus Morocco Oct–Nov
150–400 mgR. kanagurta India (peak)
200–500 mgS. commerson (all origins)
80–200 mgSoxhlet fat + HPLC fatty acid profile basis. Always require lot certificate.
Section 1
EPA vs DHA — Two Different Fatty Acids, Two Different Commercial Arguments
The omega-3 fatty acids in mackerel are not a single molecule. "Omega-3" is a family designation based on the position of the first carbon-carbon double bond from the methyl end of the fatty acid chain. In mackerel, the commercially and nutritionally relevant omega-3s are exclusively the long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids EPA and DHA — not the short-chain ALA (alpha-linolenic acid) found in plant sources such as flaxseed or rapeseed oil.
EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid, C20:5n-3) has a 20-carbon chain with five double bonds. DHA (docosahexaenoic acid, C22:6n-3) has a 22-carbon chain with six double bonds. Both are synthesised by marine phytoplankton and concentrated up the food chain — mackerel accumulate them by feeding on zooplankton and small crustaceans that have themselves fed on phytoplankton. This trophic accumulation is why marine fish are the primary dietary source of EPA and DHA; the human body can convert plant-derived ALA to EPA and DHA but the conversion efficiency is below 10% in most individuals.
In frozen Atlantic mackerel from peak-season Norwegian origins, EPA and DHA together constitute approximately 25–35% of total fatty acids at peak fat season. The ratio within that fraction typically runs approximately 35–40% EPA and 55–65% DHA by weight — so a mackerel at 25% total fat carrying 30% of fatty acids as EPA+DHA contains roughly 2,500mg EPA+DHA per 100g of whole fish, of which approximately 900–1,000mg is EPA and 1,400–1,600mg is DHA.
This DHA-dominant ratio is consistent across mackerel species and seasons — the DHA:EPA ratio widens slightly in leaner fish (more DHA proportionally than EPA in the residual lipid fraction) and narrows in high-fat peak-season fish where EPA accumulates more rapidly during the feeding season. For B2B buyers, this ratio matters because DHA-specific claims (infant nutrition, maternal health) require higher DHA absolute content than general EPA+DHA claims.
| Property | EPA (C20:5n-3) | DHA (C22:6n-3) |
|---|---|---|
| Chain / double bonds | 20 carbons, 5 double bonds | 22 carbons, 6 double bonds |
| Primary body role | Anti-inflammatory prostaglandin precursor; cardiovascular health | Structural component of brain, retina and sperm; cognitive development |
| % of total omega-3 in peak mackerel | 35–40% of EPA+DHA fraction | 55–65% of EPA+DHA fraction |
| EU authorised claim threshold | 250mg EPA+DHA/day (combined claim) | 200mg DHA/day for brain/vision; 250mg EPA+DHA for heart (combined) |
| Primary B2B markets using this | Cardiovascular retail, institutional foodservice, supplement brands sourcing whole fish | Infant formula ingredient (DHA-specific), maternal nutrition, premium retail with brain health positioning |
| Relative oxidative susceptibility | High (5 double bonds) | Very high (6 double bonds) — DHA oxidises faster than EPA under equivalent conditions |
ALA is not EPA or DHA — why "plant omega-3" cannot substitute mackerel
Plant-derived omega-3 (ALA from flaxseed, chia, walnuts) is chemically different from EPA and DHA. The human body converts ALA to EPA at approximately 5–8% efficiency and to DHA at under 0.5%. The EU health claims authorised for omega-3 apply specifically to EPA and DHA — not to ALA. A product claiming "high omega-3" using only ALA sources cannot carry the same EFSA-backed heart health claim as a product based on mackerel or other marine EPA+DHA sources.
Section 2
EPA and DHA Concentrations by Mackerel Species — Full Data
Omega-3 content in mackerel is directly proportional to total fat content. Because fat content in frozen mackerel varies by species, origin and season, EPA and DHA concentrations vary by the same amplitude. The data below express EPA+DHA as mg per 100g of whole fish (as consumed), at lean season and peak season, for each commercially traded mackerel species.
EPA+DHA range — mg per 100g whole fish, lean season to peak season
Atlantic mackerel
S. scombrus Norway
Atlantic mackerel
S. scombrus Iceland
Pacific mackerel
S. japonicus Japan (Pacific coast)
Blue mackerel
S. australasicus Australia
Atlantic mackerel
S. scombrus Morocco
Pacific mackerel
S. japonicus Peru
Cape horse mackerel
T. capensis Namibia
Atlantic horse mackerel
T. trachurus Morocco
Indian mackerel
R. kanagurta India
Spanish mackerel
S. commerson (all)
| Species | Total fat (peak) | EPA peak (mg/100g) | DHA peak (mg/100g) | EPA+DHA lean (mg/100g) | EPA+DHA peak (mg/100g) | EU "source of omega-3" threshold met at peak? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S. scombrus Norway Oct | 20–28% | 800–1,300 | 1,200–2,200 | 200–400 | 2,000–3,500 | ✓ Yes — by large margin at all fat levels above 10% |
| S. scombrus Iceland Sep–Oct | 18–24% | 700–1,100 | 1,100–1,900 | 300–500 | 1,800–3,000 | ✓ Yes |
| S. japonicus Japan (Pacific coast) Oct–Dec | 16–22% | 400–800 | 800–1,400 | 250–450 | 1,200–2,200 | ✓ Yes |
| S. australasicus Australia Mar–Jun | 14–20% | 350–600 | 650–1,200 | 200–350 | 1,000–1,800 | ✓ Yes |
| S. scombrus Morocco May–Aug (lean) | 6–10% | 100–200 | 150–300 | 250–500 (Oct–Jan) | 250–500 (Oct–Jan peak) | ◑ Seasonal — yes in Oct–Jan, marginal in lean season |
| T. capensis Namibia (peak) | 10–14% | 120–250 | 180–350 | 100–200 | 300–600 | ◑ At peak — insufficient in lean season for labelling |
| S. commerson (all origins) | 2–5% | 30–80 | 50–120 | 60–200 (minimal variation) | 80–200 | ✗ No — white-flesh species, insufficient EPA+DHA for omega-3 claims |
Section 3
Seasonal Variation in Omega-3 — Why the Same Species Can Range 5× in EPA+DHA
The omega-3 content of frozen mackerel is not a fixed nutritional characteristic — it is a dynamic variable that follows the same annual lipid cycle described in the mackerel fat content specification guide. Because EPA and DHA are stored as triglycerides in the dark muscle tissue and subcutaneous layer, their concentration rises and falls in direct proportion to total fat content. A frozen Atlantic mackerel supplier providing October Norwegian catch at 22% fat will deliver a product with approximately 2,500–3,000mg EPA+DHA per 100g. The same supplier providing June product at 6% fat delivers approximately 300–500mg EPA+DHA per 100g — a 5–8× difference in the quantity buyers are paying for.
This amplitude is unique among commercially traded protein sources. Farmed salmon — the most common comparison — varies from approximately 1,200mg to 2,500mg EPA+DHA per 100g depending on feed composition, but does not follow a seasonal cycle with a predictable trough. Wild salmon varies seasonally but within a narrower band. Mackerel's peak-to-trough range of 300–3,500mg EPA+DHA per 100g means that the same species and origin specification, if not tied to a fat content minimum, can deliver nutritional content varying by an order of magnitude depending on fishing date.
For B2B buyers building omega-3 content claims into product labelling, this variability is the most important procurement risk. A finished product label stating "good source of omega-3" based on a peak-season Norwegian mackerel specification will be accurate in October–November but potentially false on a June Moroccan mackerel input. The legal obligation to ensure the label claim is accurate for the specific lot used in production — not just the species specification — falls on the food business operator.
EPA+DHA per 100g — Scomber scombrus by month and origin
300–800 mg
Norway
200–500 mg
Morocco
200–600 mg
Norway
200–450 mg
Morocco
150–350 mg
Norway
200–400 mg
Morocco
250–600 mg
Norway
200–400 mg
Morocco
500–1,200 mg
Norway
250–500 mg
Morocco
800–1,800 mg
Norway
300–600 mg
Morocco
1,500–3,000 mg
Norway
400–900 mg
Morocco
1,400–2,800 mg
Norway
350–800 mg
Morocco
800–1,800 mg
Norway
300–600 mg
Morocco
Procurement implication
If your product label or buyer specification requires a minimum EPA+DHA level, tie the procurement specification to a minimum Soxhlet fat percentage — not just to origin or species. At 18% minimum fat on S. scombrus, EPA+DHA will consistently exceed 1,400mg/100g on the whole fish. At 10% fat, it will be 600–800mg/100g — still useful, but not at the same nutritional positioning level.
Section 4
How Freezing, Storage and Cold Chain Affect EPA and DHA
The common assumption that freezing degrades omega-3 content is incorrect for properly managed frozen mackerel. EPA and DHA are chemically stable at −18°C — the fatty acid molecules remain intact and do not degrade through the freezing or thawing cycle itself. What degrades EPA and DHA is oxidation, and the rate of oxidation is determined by three variables: temperature, oxygen exposure, and the presence of pro-oxidant compounds (haem iron from dark muscle tissue).
Studies on IQF frozen Scomber scombrus stored at −18°C with 12% glazing for 12 months show less than 8–10% reduction in EPA+DHA compared to the fresh baseline. At 18 months, the reduction is typically 12–18%. The practical conclusion: frozen mackerel stored within specification is nutritionally equivalent to fresh for EPA+DHA purposes. The quality degradation from suboptimal cold chain is far more significant than the inherent effect of freezing.
The oxidative degradation of EPA and DHA follows the same mechanism described in the mackerel histamine and cold chain control guide: polyunsaturated fatty acids react with molecular oxygen to form hydroperoxides (primary oxidation products, measured as Peroxide Value) which then decompose to aldehydes and ketones (secondary oxidation products, measured as TBARS and anisidine value). The specific degradation of EPA and DHA can be quantified by GC-FID or GC-MS fatty acid profile analysis on the frozen sample versus the fresh baseline.
EPA+DHA retention — IQF S. scombrus at −18°C, 12% glazing
100% baseline
~2% loss — within analytical variance
~5% loss — negligible for nutritional labelling
~10% loss — still well within labelling tolerance
~17% loss — check TBARS; still viable for EU label claims
~32% loss — significant degradation; not suitable for premium claims
~55% loss — product likely rancid; not suitable for human consumption claims
Glazing and omega-3 retention
Glazing acts as an oxygen barrier on IQF mackerel surfaces. Minimum 12% glazing is required for adequate omega-3 protection during 12-month storage. For tropical transit exceeding 20 days or markets with variable cold chain, specify minimum 15% glazing. High-fat mackerel (above 18% fat) should be consumed within 18 months to prevent excessive EPA+DHA oxidation — even at compliant storage temperatures.
Section 5
Cooking and Processing — EPA+DHA Losses by Method
Cooking does not destroy omega-3 in the way that heat destroys vitamins or denatures histamine-forming bacteria. The losses that occur during cooking are primarily physical (fat drip loss) and oxidative (thermal oxidation at high temperatures). The smoked mackerel paradox — where omega-3 per 100g is higher in the finished smoked product than in the raw material — is the most commercially important example.
| Method | Temp / time | Fat loss mechanism | EPA+DHA retention (vs raw) | B2B implication |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hot smoking | 160–180°C, 2–3h | Water evaporation concentrates fat. Some drip loss but less than grilling. Net effect: fat % in smoked product is higher than raw. | ~110–130% per 100g vs raw (concentration effect) | Smoked mackerel contains more EPA+DHA per 100g than the raw input — a premium nutritional positioning argument for smoked mackerel B2B buyers. Analyse finished smoked product for label claims, not raw material alone. |
| Steaming / poaching | 100°C, 8–12 min | Minimal fat drip. Aqueous cooking retains lipid within the flesh. Low thermal oxidation at moderate temperatures. | 85–95% | Best retention of any cooking method. Recommended for foodservice programmes where omega-3 content is a key selling point. |
| Baking (foil-wrapped) | 180°C, 20–25 min | Fat retained within foil package. Some localised thermal oxidation at high temps but foil limits oxygen exposure. | 80–92% | Good retention. Consumer communication can cite high omega-3 content with confidence. |
| Pan frying | 175–185°C, 4–6 min/side | Some fat renders into cooking oil. Localised skin-contact thermal oxidation. Moderate drip loss from subcutaneous layer. | 65–80% | Still nutritionally significant. Majority of EPA+DHA retained despite some thermal oxidation. |
| Grilling (open rack) | 200–220°C, 6–8 min/side | Significant fat drip loss as subcutaneous layer melts. High surface temperature increases thermal oxidation rate. Approximately 20–30% total fat loss on grilling. | 55–70% | Highest loss of any common method. Still provides significant EPA+DHA per portion — a 150g grilled mackerel at 65% retention of a 20%-fat Norwegian input still delivers ~1,000mg EPA+DHA. |
| Canning (retort) | 121°C, 20–30 min at pressure | Fat retained within the can (including brine/oil). Thermal oxidation at high temperature partially offset by sealed anaerobic can environment. In-can fat contributes to final EPA+DHA. | 75–90% (depending on fill medium) | Canned mackerel in brine retains more EPA+DHA than canned in tomato sauce (antioxidant effect). If the consumer drains the brine, some EPA+DHA is discarded with it. Label claims should be based on drained product analysis. |
Section 6
Mackerel vs Other Omega-3 Sources — The Commercial Comparison
The B2B omega-3 argument for mackerel is most compelling when compared to competing sources at equivalent price points. These comparisons are relevant to food manufacturers, foodservice buyers, and institutional procurement teams evaluating multiple ingredients.
| Source | EPA+DHA per 100g | Price relative to mackerel | EPA+DHA per $ (relative) | B2B competitive position |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Frozen Atlantic mackerel (Norway Oct, 20% fat) | 2,000–2,800 mg | Reference | Reference (highest) | Best EPA+DHA value per cost unit at peak season. Widely available, scalable volumes. |
| Farmed Atlantic salmon (typical) | 1,500–2,500 mg | ~2–3× mackerel CIF price | ~50–60% of mackerel | Premium consumer positioning but worse omega-3 value per cost. Mackerel wins on cost-per-mg-EPA+DHA. |
| Sardines (canned, drained) | 900–1,800 mg | ~70–90% of mackerel (similar pelagic) | ~80–90% of mackerel | Close competitor. Peak mackerel has higher EPA+DHA but sardine consistency is greater (less seasonal variation). |
| Herring (frozen, peak season) | 1,200–2,000 mg | ~70–85% of mackerel | ~85–95% of mackerel | Equivalent pelagic omega-3 profile. Consumer recognition lower than mackerel in MENA and Asian markets. |
| Skipjack tuna (canned, light) | 200–600 mg | ~1.5–2× mackerel | ~15–25% of mackerel | Major consumer brand but far inferior omega-3 source. Cannot carry equivalent EPA+DHA health claims at standard portion. |
| Omega-3 fish oil capsule (1g capsule, ~30% EPA+DHA) | 300mg per capsule | ~5–10× mackerel per mg EPA+DHA | ~10–20% of mackerel | Whole frozen mackerel provides equivalent EPA+DHA at a fraction of the cost of supplements, with additional protein, minerals and fat-soluble vitamins. Compelling B2B argument for food vs supplement positioning. |
Section 7
EU Health Claims Under Regulation 1924/2006 — What Is Authorised and What Is Not
In the EU, health claims on food products require scientific substantiation assessed by EFSA and must be listed in the EU Register of Authorised Nutrition and Health Claims. The following authorised claims are directly relevant to frozen mackerel products.
Authorised claim — heart function
"EPA and DHA contribute to the normal function of the heart."
Conditions for use: The claim may only be used for food that provides at least 40mg of combined EPA+DHA per 100g AND the claim refers to a food that provides at least 250mg EPA+DHA per day in a reasonable daily consumption amount.
Application to mackerel: A 100g serving of peak-season Norwegian Scomber scombrus (20% fat) provides approximately 2,000–2,800mg EPA+DHA — 8–11× the threshold. The claim is easily met by any serving of high-fat mackerel. Even lean-season Moroccan mackerel at 8% fat provides approximately 300–500mg EPA+DHA per 100g serving — still above the 250mg daily threshold.
Label format required: The claim must be accompanied by information that the beneficial effect is obtained with a daily intake of 250mg of EPA and DHA.
Authorised claim — brain function
"DHA contributes to the normal function of the brain."
Conditions for use: The claim may only be used for food which provides at least 40mg DHA per 100g AND the claim refers to a food that provides at least 250mg DHA per day.
Application to mackerel: This is a DHA-specific claim. At peak season, Norwegian S. scombrus provides approximately 1,200–2,200mg DHA per 100g — well above threshold. This claim cannot be used for Scomberomorus commerson (Spanish mackerel), which provides insufficient DHA due to low total fat content.
Authorised claim — vision
"DHA contributes to the maintenance of normal vision."
Conditions for use: Same as brain function claim — 40mg DHA per 100g and 250mg DHA per day in reasonable daily consumption.
Nutrition claims — "source of" and "high in" omega-3
"Source of omega-3 fatty acids" / "High in omega-3 fatty acids"
"Source of": Product must contain at least 40mg EPA+DHA per 100g AND per 100kcal.
"High in": Product must contain at least 80mg EPA+DHA per 100g AND per 100kcal.
Practical note: These are nutrition claims under Annex to Regulation 1924/2006. They do not require the daily intake reference in the same way health claims do. A 100g serving of any Scomber mackerel above 5% fat will qualify as "high in omega-3" — the threshold is extremely accessible for oily mackerel species.
Claims that are NOT authorised in the EU
The EU Register does not authorise health claims for omega-3 fatty acids related to: reducing risk of cardiovascular disease (disease risk reduction claims are not authorised for EPA+DHA at the food level), improving depression or mood, reducing inflammation, or improving cholesterol levels. These claims — commonly seen in supplement marketing — are not permitted on food labels in the EU. B2B buyers adding mackerel to functional food products should limit claims to the authorised list above. Claims referencing "fighting heart disease" or "reducing inflammation" on mackerel products are non-compliant with Regulation 1924/2006.
Section 8
How B2B Buyers Use Omega-3 Data — Six Commercial Channels
The omega-3 content of frozen mackerel is commercially relevant across six distinct B2B channels, each with a different mechanism for converting EPA+DHA content into margin or competitive advantage.
Channel 01
EU and UK retail — health claim on packaging
Retailers sourcing frozen Atlantic mackerel whole round for private label smoked mackerel can carry EU-authorised health claims on the finished product. The omega-3 content argument supports premium shelf positioning over non-oily fish alternatives. Requirement: finished product analysis (not just raw material), with EPA+DHA data matching the label claim for each production lot. Season-dependent — lean-season Moroccan input may not support the same claim as peak Norwegian input.
Channel 02
Eastern European smoked mackerel — premium raw material argument
Polish and Ukrainian smoking plants processing Norwegian mackerel supplier autumn peak season 400–600g whole round use the omega-3 content of the finished smoked product as a retail differentiation argument against cheaper non-oily fish. The smoked mackerel paradox (EPA+DHA concentration in smoked product exceeds raw material per 100g due to water loss) provides a commercially compelling nutritional argument. Plants that specify minimum fat content in purchase orders are also implicitly specifying minimum omega-3 content.
Channel 03
GCC and MENA hospitality — nutritional menu claim
Premium hotels and institutional caterers in the GCC sourcing frozen Spanish mackerel kingfish Scomberomorus commerson for menu applications should note that Scomberomorus is a white-flesh species with insufficient EPA+DHA for omega-3 label claims. For hospitality buyers who need omega-3 positioning, frozen Indian mackerel Rastrelliger kanagurta supplier GCC or frozen Pacific mackerel Scomber japonicus Japan origin provides the combination of cultural familiarity and omega-3 nutritional content that Scomberomorus cannot deliver.
Channel 04
West Africa — affordable omega-3 protein argument
In West African markets where frozen mackerel bulk supplier Africa CIF Lomé Tema Abidjan is a primary affordable protein source, the omega-3 argument operates at a population nutrition level rather than a consumer label claim level. Even lean-season Moroccan mackerel or Peruvian jack mackerel at 5–8% fat provides significantly more EPA+DHA per kilogram than competing protein sources (chicken, legumes). Institutional buyers (school feeding programmes, NGO procurement) increasingly include this in nutritional scoring for tender evaluation.
Channel 05
Japan and Korea — fatty acid profile specification
Japanese and Korean buyers of frozen mackerel from Japan peak fat season October Kesennuma saba specify fatty acid profiles — not just total fat content — for premium sashimi and retail applications. A GC-FID analysis confirming EPA+DHA ratio, absence of significant oxidation products, and minimum DHA content is standard in premium Japanese procurement. Buyers who can provide fatty acid profile certificates alongside Soxhlet fat and histamine certificates access the premium pricing tier that generic "high fat" specifications do not.
Channel 06
Counter-seasonal supply — Q2 omega-3 gap
Frozen blue mackerel Scomber australasicus Australia New Zealand IQF supplier is the only commercially available high-fat Scomber in Q2 (March–June, austral autumn). For food manufacturers who need consistent omega-3 claims year-round on mackerel-based products, Australian blue mackerel closes the supply gap when Norwegian and Icelandic mackerel is in post-spawning lean phase (April–June, 2–8% fat, 150–400mg EPA+DHA/100g — often insufficient for premium claims). The counter-seasonal argument for Australian mackerel is nutritional as much as it is logistical.
Frequently Asked Questions
- How much omega-3 does frozen mackerel contain compared to other fish?
- Peak-season Norwegian Scomber scombrus provides 2,000–3,500mg EPA+DHA per 100g — among the highest of any commercial fish species. Farmed salmon provides 1,500–2,500mg, sardines 900–1,800mg, skipjack tuna 200–600mg. The critical variable for mackerel is seasonal variation: lean-season mackerel can fall to 300–500mg EPA+DHA — below sardine levels — while peak-season mackerel exceeds all other commercial species.
- Does freezing reduce the omega-3 content of mackerel?
- Properly managed freezing does not significantly reduce omega-3. EPA and DHA are chemically stable at −18°C. IQF mackerel stored 12 months at −18°C with adequate glazing (≥12%) shows less than 10% EPA+DHA loss versus fresh. The loss mechanism is oxidation — driven by temperature abuse, insufficient glazing, or excessive storage duration. Freezing itself is not the problem; cold chain management is.
- Can a B2B buyer make omega-3 health claims on products containing frozen mackerel?
- In the EU, authorised claims include: "EPA and DHA contribute to the normal function of the heart" (≥40mg EPA+DHA per 100g, ≥250mg per daily serving), "DHA contributes to normal brain function" and "DHA contributes to normal vision" (≥40mg DHA per 100g, ≥250mg DHA daily). These require finished product analysis — not just raw material specification. Claims about reducing heart disease risk or reducing inflammation are not authorised under EU Regulation 1924/2006.
- What is the difference between EPA and DHA in mackerel, and which matters more commercially?
- In mackerel, DHA typically accounts for 55–65% of the EPA+DHA fraction. EPA matters more for cardiovascular positioning and anti-inflammatory functions; DHA is critical for brain development, infant formula, and vision claims. Both are retained equally well under proper cold chain. For general B2B positioning, combined EPA+DHA is the relevant metric. For infant nutrition or DHA-specific claims, verify DHA content separately via fatty acid profile analysis.
- Does cooking reduce the omega-3 content of mackerel?
- Cooking reduces omega-3 through fat drip loss and thermal oxidation, not chemical destruction. Steaming and baking in foil retains 85–95% of EPA+DHA. Pan-frying retains 65–80%. Grilling retains 55–70% (fat drip loss). Hot smoking — counterintuitively — concentrates EPA+DHA per 100g because water loss concentrates the remaining lipid fraction: smoked mackerel contains approximately 110–130% of the raw material EPA+DHA per 100g. Label claims must be based on analysis of the finished product, not the raw frozen mackerel.
Ready to source frozen mackerel?
Send your specs and get a competitive quote within 24h.