Mislabeling of Commercial Atlantic Cod (Gadus Morhua) Products in Spain Joshua Helgoe University of South Carolina
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of South Carolina Scholar Commons Theses and Dissertations 2016 Mislabeling Of Commercial Atlantic Cod (Gadus Morhua) Products In Spain Joshua Helgoe University of South Carolina Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd Part of the Marine Biology Commons, and the Other Life Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Helgoe, J.(2016). Mislabeling Of Commercial Atlantic Cod (Gadus Morhua) Products In Spain. (Master's thesis). Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.sc.edu/etd/3828 This Open Access Thesis is brought to you by Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MISLABELING OF COMMERCIAL ATLANTIC COD (GADUS MORHUA) PRODUCTS IN SPAIN by Joshua Helgoe Bachelor of Science University of South Carolina, 2015 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Science in Marine Science College of Arts and Sciences University of South Carolina 2016 Accepted by: Joseph Quattro, Director of Thesis David Wethey, Reader Joe Jones, Reader Lacy Ford, Senior Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies © Copyright by Joshua Helgoe, 2016 All Rights Reserved ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge everybody in Dr. Quattro’s lab who helped me throughout this entire project including Mark Roberts, Katrina Hounchell, Kate Levasseur, Emma De Neff, Justin Lewandowsky, and Muhammed Alqatani. I would like to acknowledge the Walker Institute and the Magellan Scholar Program for their generous funding of this project. iii ABSTRACT The mislabeling of commercial fish products is a pervasive, worldwide problem. Most consumers of seafood are unaware this issue directly affects them and can even have negative impacts on their health. Mislabeling occurs when a product’s label is inconsistent with its content. Although mislabeling can be unintentional, deliberate mislabeling is a more common trend to increase profits and/or bypass fishing regulations - a form of economic fraud. Unfortunately, oversight, enforcement, and research are vastly insufficient in relation to the global scale of the problem. In order to add to the small knowledge base on European mislabeling rates, determine if overfished or harmful species have been sold, spread consumer awareness, and hold the industry accountable, tissue samples from everyday commercial products and restaurant servings labeled as Atlantic cod (bacalao in Spanish) were confirmed as containing cod via DNA sequence- based ‘barcoding’. Atlantic cod samples (n=546) were collected and characterized genetically from supermarkets, markets, and restaurants from eight cities (Madrid, Salamanca, Santiago de Compostela, Bilbao, Barcelona, Valencia, Granada, and Seville) throughout Spain. The DNA barcoding process used a universal PCR-based assay of the mitochondrial Cytochrome Oxidase-I (COI) and 16s locus using standard primer sequences and PCR conditions that are part of the Fish Barcode of Life initiative. Results indicate a 6.4% mislabeling rate (35/546) with no real statistical evidence of distinct geographic patterns of mislabeling. Common ling (Molva molva), haddock iv (Melanogrammus aeglefinus), saithe (Pollachius virens), and Alaskan pollock (Gadus chalocogrammus) were the most common substitutes, while Nile perch (Lates niloticus) and Vietnamese catfish (Pangasianodon hypopthalmus) were the most taxonomically dissimilar substitutes. These results are compared to other similar studies assaying fish products in the European Union and elsewhere. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iii Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv List of tables ..................................................................................................................... viii List of figures ..................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1: Background ........................................................................................................1 1.1 DNA Barcoding ...................................................................................................3 1.2 Related Mislabeling Research ..............................................................................5 1.3 Threat to Public Health ........................................................................................8 1.4 IUU Fishing ........................................................................................................10 1.5 Economic Cost of Mislabeling ...........................................................................11 1.6 Disguising Mislabeled Fish ................................................................................13 1.7 Labeling Regulations ..........................................................................................15 1.8 Spain and Cod ....................................................................................................16 Chapter 2: Hypotheses .......................................................................................................20 2.1 Expected Trends in Mislabeling .........................................................................20 2.2 Expected Substitutions .......................................................................................20 Chapter 3: Materials and methods .....................................................................................21 3.1 Sample Collection ..............................................................................................21 3.2 DNA Isolation and Sequencing ..........................................................................29 vi 3.3 DNA Barcoding ..................................................................................................31 3.4 Retesting with 16s ..............................................................................................32 3.5 Geographic Analysis ..........................................................................................33 Chapter 4: Results ..............................................................................................................34 4.1 Mislabeling by City ............................................................................................34 4.2 Mislabeling by Product Type .............................................................................35 4.3 Mislabeling by Location Purchased ...................................................................40 4.4 Substituted Species Relatedness .........................................................................41 4.5 Mislabeled Sample Data .....................................................................................43 Chapter 5: Discussion ........................................................................................................47 5.1 Characteristics of Spanish Cod Mislabeling ......................................................48 5.2 Substituted Species .............................................................................................51 5.3 Geographic Analysis ..........................................................................................53 5.4 Who is at Fault? ..................................................................................................53 5.5 Broader Context .................................................................................................54 Chapter 6: Conclusion........................................................................................................56 References ..........................................................................................................................59 Appendix A: Complete Sample Data .................................................................................69 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Samples collected by city ..................................................................................22 Table 3.2 Samples collected by location purchased ..........................................................23 Table 3.3 Samples collected by product type ....................................................................24 Table 4.1 City summary data .............................................................................................34 Table 4.2 Product type summary data................................................................................35 Table 4.3 Samples sequenced by product type for each city .............................................37 Table 4.4 Samples mislabeled by product type for each city ............................................37 Table 4.5 Mislabeling rate by product type for each city ..................................................38 Table 4.6 Location of purchase summary data ..................................................................40 Table 4.7 Samples sequenced by location of purchase for each city .................................40 Table 4.8 Samples mislabeled by location of purchase for each city ................................41 Table 4.9 Mislabeling rate by location of purchase for each city ......................................41 Table 4.10 Relatedness of substituted species ...................................................................42 Table 4.11