Multi-instrument Evaluation of a Real-time PCR Assay for Identification of Atlantic Salmon: a Case Study on the Use of a Pre-packaged Kit for Rapid Seafood Species Identification

Protecting the seafood supply chain from species substitution is critical for economic, health, and conservation reasons. DNA-based methods represent an effective means to detect species substitution, but current methods can be time consuming or costly, and require specialized instruments and operators. Real-time PCR provides an alternative that can be performed quickly, and in some cases even on-site. The use of commercial kits reduces the expertise required by the operator and therefore increases accessibility to testing. This potentially increases the likelihood of adoption into the supply chain, but only if the kits are robust across multiple operators, instruments, and samples. In this study, the InstantID™ Atlantic salmon kits were tested on a variety of instruments with market samples of fresh, frozen, smoked, and canned Atlantic salmon. Results were repeatable across all samples and instruments tested. This kit, and others like it that have undergone appropriate evaluation, represents a means for expanded access to testing for industry or regulators to screen seafood for species authenticity. Portable equipment can bring testing on-site, further reducing analysis time.

[1]  Y. Kartavtsev,et al.  Fish product mislabeling identified in the Russian far east using DNA barcoding , 2017 .

[2]  V. Ostry,et al.  Sea fish fraud? A confirmation of Gadoid species food labelling , 2017 .

[3]  Sylvain Charlebois,et al.  Food Fraud and Risk Perception: Awareness in Canada and Projected Trust on Risk-Mitigating Agents , 2017 .

[4]  M. N. S. Azizah,et al.  Detection of mislabelled seafood products in Malaysia by DNA barcoding: Improving transparency in food market , 2016 .

[5]  A. Galimberti,et al.  DNA barcoding as a new tool for food traceability , 2013 .

[6]  K. Shao,et al.  DNA barcode identification of fish products in Taiwan: Government-commissioned authentication cases , 2016 .

[7]  D. Cawthorn,et al.  Deceit with decapods? Evaluating labelling accuracy of crustacean products in South Africa , 2017 .

[8]  D. Cawthorn,et al.  Global trade statistics lack granularity to inform traceability and management of diverse and high-value fishes , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[9]  S. Mariani,et al.  Low mislabeling rates indicate marked improvements in European seafood market operations , 2015 .

[10]  Sara M. Handy,et al.  Interlaboratory evaluation of a real-time multiplex polymerase chain reaction method for identification of salmon and trout species in commercial products. , 2011, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[11]  Sara M. Handy,et al.  A single-laboratory validated method for the generation of DNA barcodes for the identification of fish for regulatory compliance. , 2011, Journal of AOAC International.

[12]  K. Crandall,et al.  DNA Barcoding analysis of seafood accuracy in Washington, D.C. restaurants , 2017, PeerJ.

[13]  D. Guedes,et al.  Nationwide Brazilian governmental forensic programme reveals seafood mislabelling trends and rates using DNA barcoding , 2017 .

[14]  王丽华,et al.  国际生命条形码计划—DNA Barcoding , 2009 .

[15]  E. Garcia-Vazquez,et al.  Economy matters: A study of mislabeling in salmon products from two regions, Alaska and Canada (Northwest of America) and Asturias (Northwest of Spain) , 2017 .

[16]  Whole Genome Amplification Provides Suitable Control DNA for Use in DNA Barcoding Applications. , 2017, Biopreservation and biobanking.