Fish traceability: Guessing the origin of fish from a seafood market using fish scale shape

Assignment of Gilthead Seabream Sparus aurata to Its Origin through Scale Shape and Microchemistry Composition: Management Implications for Aquaculture Escapees

“…Landmark-based geometric morphometrics (GM). The total dataset was used for GM analysis based on seven-landmark configuration, following the Ibáñez [13] landmark digitalization scheme ( Figure 2). Shape variation was analysed in the software MorphoJ 2.03b [19] using a full Procrustes fit to remove variation in scale, position and orientation.…”

“…New genomic approaches have enabled resolutions of population structure, allowing for the detection of selectively important genes useful for better stock management of commercially valuable species [10]. On other hand, phenotypic features such as body morphology, otolith or scale shape have been widely used in the identification and discrimination of fish populations [11][12][13][14]. Fish scales, as the most accessible structure with the advantages of non-lethal sampling and relative ease of sample handling, have shown high accuracy in discriminating between wild and farmed sea bream and sea bass [15,16] when external characteristics were examined.…”

Do the Fish Scales Shape of Mugil curema Reflect the Genetic Structure Using Microsatellites Markers and the Mexican Marine Ecoregions Classification?

“…Variation in shape in M. curema has been considered to reliably trace fish populations by applying geometric morphometric methods to one fish scale per specimen. Results have shown that fish scale shape clearly separates specimens of different localities (Ibáñez et al, 2007;Ibáñez and O'Higgins, 2011;Ibáñez, 2015). In general, fish scale shape is to a significant extent species-specific and helps determine stock membership (Ibáñez et al, 2007;Garduño-Paz et al, 2010).…”

28 years of traceability management: trends, bottlenecks and opportunities

“…From this set, 13 were general and addressed the food sector without any type of specifications. The remaining case studies were specific: chocolate (Saltini and Akkerman, 2012;Acierno et al, 2017), farming (Bertolini et al, 2006), agrifood (Gandino et al, 2009;Hobbs, 2004;Zhang et al, 2010), fruit and vegetable (Rábade and Alfaro, 2006;Pakurar, 2015), aquaculture (Parreño-Marchante et al, 2014;Parenreng et al, 2016;Zhang et al, 2017;Cawthorn and Mariani, 2017) and seafood (Donnelly and Olsen, 2012;Karlsen and Olsen, 2011;Ibáñez, 2015;Dien Vo et al, 2016). Studies in industries different from the food industry dealt with fashion (Guercinia and Runfola, 2009;Gobbi and Massa, 2015), solid waste management (Gnoni et al, 2013), forestry (Saikouk and Spalanzani, 2016), blood supply (Bentahar et al, 2016) and automotive (Sohal, 1997).…”