Literature DB >> 30444869

A glimpse into the genetic diversity of the Peruvian seafood sector: Unveiling species substitution, mislabeling and trade of threatened species.

Alan Marín1, José Serna1, Christian Robles1, Beder Ramírez2, Lorenzo E Reyes-Flores3, Eliana Zelada-Mázmela3, Giovanna Sotil4, Ruben Alfaro5.   

Abstract

Peru is one of the world's leading fishing nations and its seafood industry relies on the trade of a vast variety of aquatic resources, playing a key role in the country's socio-economic development. DNA barcoding has become of paramount importance for systematics, conservation, and seafood traceability, complementing or even surpassing conventional identification methods when target organisms show similar morphology during the early life stages, have recently diverged, or have undergone processing. Aiming to increase our knowledge of the species diversity available across the Peruvian supply chain (from fish landing sites to markets and restaurants), we applied full and mini-barcoding approaches targeting three mitochondrial genes (COI, 16S, and 12S) and the control region to identify samples purchased at retailers from six departments along the north-central Peruvian coast. DNA barcodes from 131 samples were assigned to 55 species (plus five genus-level taxa) comprising 47 families, 24 orders, and six classes including Actinopterygii (45.03%), Chondrichthyes (36.64%), Bivalvia (6.87%), Cephalopoda (6.11%), Malacostraca (3.82%), and Gastropoda (1.53%). The identified samples included commercially important pelagic (anchovy, bonito, dolphinfish) and demersal (hake, smooth-hound, Peruvian rock seabass, croaker) fish species. Our results unveiled the marketing of protected and threatened species such as whale shark, Atlantic white marlin, smooth hammerhead (some specimens collected during closed season), shortfin mako, and pelagic thresher sharks. A total of 35 samples (26.72%) were mislabeled, including tilapia labeled as wild marine fish, dolphinfish and hake labeled as grouper, and different shark species sold as "smooth-hounds". The present study highlights the necessity of implementing traceability and monitoring programs along the entire seafood supply chain using molecular tools to enhance sustainability efforts and ensure consumer choice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30444869      PMCID: PMC6239289          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0206596

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


Introduction

Peru is a major fishing country with rich marine biodiversity. About 1070 fish [1], 1018 molluscan [2], and 320 crustacean species [3] have been described from the Peruvian marine ecosystem, which is dominated by the cold nutrient-rich waters of the Humboldt Current [4]. The highly productive Peruvian upwelling system supports not only the world’s largest fishery for Peruvian anchovy (Engraulis ringens) [5, 6], but also other important planktivorous fish species (e.g., jack mackerel Trachurus murphyi) and their predators (e.g., bonito Sarda chiliensis, dolphinfish Coryphaena hippurus), which are valuable artisanal fishery resources [4]. The fishery sector plays a key role in the nation’s socio-economic growth with most artisanal production consumed directly through local markets [4]. In 2016, Peru was the fifth biggest producer of marine capture fisheries in the world, with a total production of 3.7 million tonnes [7]. Most (75%) of that production was due to anchovy catches, but high catches of other species such as Pacific chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus), jumbo flying squid (Dosidicus gigas), and South Pacific hake (Merluccius gayi), were also reported [8]. Furthermore, Peru has favorable conditions for fishery and aquaculture activities considering its 3080 km coastline, and 12000 lakes and lagoons [6, 9]. Peruvian aquaculture production makes up only 2% of the total seafood sector [9], and the main species include whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei), Peruvian scallop (Argopecten purpuratus), rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), and Amazon fish paiche (Arapaima gigas) [9]. Fish consumption in Peru has increased in recent years. According to FAO statistics [10], the average annual per capita consumption of fish during 2013–15 was 21.8 kg, which was the highest in Latin America and the Caribbean. This increase was due in part to fish consumption campaigns launched by the Peruvian government [11]. The significant increase of fish consumption added to the depletion of marine resources and a high demand for quality seafood products, partially due to the growing number of Peruvian seafood restaurants (locally known as “cebicherias”), make this country’s sector a fertile area for mislabeling of species that are expensive, scarce or out of season. Seafood fraud and species substitutions occur regularly in this sector and represent a global issue. Proper identification of food species is now a main concern not only for governments and companies, but also for consumers due to economic, regulatory, health and religious reasons [12]. However, conventional fish identification methods, based on morphological traits using field guides and taxonomic keys, may lead to misidentification when applied to morphologically similar or recently diverged species and can be utilized only when the full body is available. Mislabeling can happen at any point in the supply chain, from fisher to retailer; thus, determining how substitutions occur is complicated [13]. In a comprehensive analysis by Pardo et al. [14], which included 51 peer-reviewed seafood articles published from 2010 to 2015 and comprising 4500 samples, the average rate of reported misdescriptions was 30%. This is where the discriminatory power of DNA based tools can be successfully applied for seafood authentication, even if all morphological characters are gone after processing and cooking. The most frequently used genetic marker for metazoan identification through DNA barcoding is a partial fragment (∼650 bp) located at the 5ʹ end of the mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) gene. It has been successfully used to correctly identify different fresh and processed seafood samples [15]. Furthermore, in October 2011, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) formally adopted DNA barcoding as the primary method for seafood identification [16]. The universal primers designed by Folmer et al. [17] are one of the most commonly used for the amplification of the “barcode COI region”; however these have failed to amplify PCR products from different marine organisms such as fishes, crabs, echinoderms, decapods, and scallops [18] (and references therein). Therefore new barcoding primer sets targeting more specific groups [19], as well as alternative mitochondrial genes such as cytochrome b, 12S rRNA, and 16S rRNA have been tested in different marine organisms [20, 21]. Another problem that challenges the amplification of full-length DNA barcoding fragment size (∼650 bp) is when dealing with samples that have been through extreme conditions such as high temperature and pressure in canning or cooking processes. Heat exposure and high pressure degrade large molecular weight genomic DNA to shorter size fragments mainly through enzymatic degradation, depurination, and hydrolysis, and sometimes highly degraded samples might display breaks or artifactual mutations [22]. To overcome this issue, shorter (100–200 bp) PCR fragments within the full-length barcode region (known as mini-barcoding markers) have proved to be an effective species identification tool when using degraded target DNA [23]. In spite of the increasing need to enforce regulations aiming for sustainable seafood industry and effective control of the trade of endangered species, few initiatives have been undertaken to evaluate the utility of molecular markers for authenticating products available from seafood retailers in South America. Most of those studies have surveyed single groups of Amazonian and Atlantic fish species from Brazil, including catfish and sawfish from supermarkets and fish markets [24, 25], Amazonian fish from local harbors and markets [26, 27], croaker filets from supplier companies [28], characiforms from street markets [29], and sharks from supermarkets [30]. From the South Pacific coast, reports include studies on Chilean species of commercial mollusks [31], commercial crabs from local markets [32], and salmon from supermarkets [33], while sharks from Peruvian fish landing sites [34] have also been reported. Considering the scarcity of data regarding the authentication of seafood products in the Peruvian market and aiming to increase our knowledge of the species diversity along the supply chain from fish landing sites to markets and restaurants, this study assessed the utility of full and mini-barcoding markers for identifying a variety of local and imported fish and shellfish products in the seafood sector. Additionally, we evaluated the accuracy of fish labels and described the conservation status and current regulatory framework related to the threatened species detected in this study.

Materials and methods

Sample collection

A total of 143 national and imported seafood samples were collected from July 2016 to March 2018, covering a wide range of presentations including fresh, refrigerated, frozen, canned, dried, cooked, packed, dehydrated, marinated, fish burger, and fish roe. They included 48 samples from restaurants (RT), 29 from supermarket chains (SMC), 24 from markets (MK), 22 from fish landing sites (FLS), 12 from multimarket (MM), seven from wholesale fish market (WFM), and one from a grocery store (GS). Samples were collected along the north-central Peruvian coast in different cities from six departments namely Tumbes (TU, n = 26), Piura (PI, n = 3), Lambayeque (LA, n = 5), La Libertad (LL, n = 48), Ancash (AN, n = 25), and Lima (LI, n = 36). Sampling localities were chosen due to the more diverse marine ichthyofauna present in the north than in the south [6]. Packages and labels from all packed items were kept for further examination. For samples collected from restaurants, we checked menus and asked the wait staff twice about the name of the marine species served to confirm each seafood type. In some instances, when the wait staff was not well informed, we requested information directly from the restaurant manager or chef. When possible, we targeted high priced menu-listings, which are more prone to be substituted by cheaper species. In most cases, we took pictures of the menu list and served dishes.

DNA extraction, PCR amplification, and sequencing

DNA extraction

A small section of muscle was excised from the inner part of all collected samples, except for samples SF2, SF27, SF73, and SF74 from which a piece of dorsal fin was collected. Tissues were rinsed with distilled water and preserved in 99% ethanol at -20°C for further DNA analysis. Genomic DNA was isolated using the cetyl-trimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) precipitation method [35] for muscle tissues and the standard phenol-chloroform protocol [36] for fin tissue samples. To rehydrate the tissue and to remove contaminants, the processed samples were soaked in distilled water prior to DNA extraction.

Full barcoding PCR amplification

Aiming to identify the largest number of seafood species that came from a variety of retailers and processors including a wide range of taxonomic groups, 10 different primer sets were utilized including FB from the mitochondrial COI and 16S rRNA genes, and the control region, and MB from the COI and 12S rRNA genes (Table 1). PCR amplifications for the COI gene were carried out using Folmer primers LCO1490/HCO2198 [17] for fishes and invertebrates, FishF1/FishR1 [37] and “cocktail” [38] primer sets for fishes, and a degenerated version of Folmer primers COIF-ALT/COIR-ALT designed for Veneridae [39] was used for surf clams. For scallop samples, we used the Pectinidae family-specific primer set Pect16BC [18], targeting the 5’ end of the mitochondrial 16S rRNA gene. For marlin samples, we used the primer set A/G [40], flanking the complete mitochondrial control region. All primer sets used in this study are listed in Table 1.
Table 1

PCR primer sets used in the amplification of samples analyzed in this study.

Gene/RegionPrimer nameDirectionSequence (5’-3’)Ta (°C)Target groupSource
COILCO1490ForwardGGTCAACAAATCATAAAGATATTGG45–54Universal[17]
HCO2198ReverseTAAACTTCAGGGTGACCAAAAAATCA
FishF1ForwardTCAACCAACCACAAAGACATTGGCAC50–54Fish[37]
FishR1ReverseTAGACTTCTGGGTGGCCAAAGAATCA
Fish_miniA_F_tForwardCACGACGTTGTAAAACGACACIAAICAIAAAGAYATYGGC46Fish (mini-barcoding)[23]
Fish_miniA_R_tReverseGGATAACAATTTCACACAGGAARAAAATYATAACRAAIGCRTGIGC
Fish_miniD_F_tForwardCACGACGTTGTAAAACGACGGIACIGGITGRACIGTITAYCCYCC50Fish (mini-barcoding)[23]
Fish_miniD_R_tReverseGGATAACAATTTCACACAGGGTRATICCIGCIGCIAGIAC
Fish_miniE_F_tForwardCACGACGTTGTAAAACGACACYAAICAYAAAGAYATIGGCAC46Fish (mini-barcoding)[23]
Fish_miniE_R_tReverseGGATAACAATTTCACACAGGCTTATRTTRTTTATICGIGGRAAIGC
VF2_t1ForwardTGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTCAACCAACCACAAAGACATTGGCAC50–52Fish[38]
FishF2_t1ForwardTGTAAAACGACGGCCAGTCGACTAATCATAAAGATATCGGCAC
FishR2_t1ReverseCAGGAAACAGCTATGACACTTCAGGGTGACCGAAGAATCAGAA
FR1d_t1ReverseCAGGAAACAGCTATGACACCTCAGGGTGTCCGAARAAYCARAA
COIF-ALTForwardACAAATCAYAARGAYATYGG46Venus Clams[39]
COIR-ALTReverseTTCAGGRTGNCCRAARAAYCA
16SPect16BCFForwardCGTACCTTTTGCATCATGG60Scallops[18]
Pect16BCRReverseGCGTAATCCGTCTTGACAGT
12SMiFish-U-FForwardTCGTCGGCAGCGTCAGATGTGTATAAGAGACAGGTGTCGGTAAAACTCGTGCCAGC69.6–50(TD)Fish (mini-barcoding)[21]
MiFish-U-RReverseGTCTCGTGGGCTCGGAGATGTGTATAAGAGACAGCATAGTGGGGTATCTAATCCCAGTTTG
CONTROL REGIONAForwardTTCCACCTCTAACTCCCAAAGCTAG54Teleosts[40]
GReverseCGTCGGATCCCATCTTCAGTGTTATGCTT

Primer tails (adapters) are highlighted in bold when present. TD touchdown PCR

Primer tails (adapters) are highlighted in bold when present. TD touchdown PCR PCR reactions were performed in a TurboCycler Blue-Ray (BioTech, Taipei, Taiwan), a ProFlex PCR System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) or a Veriti 96 Well thermal cycler (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA) using Maximo Taq DNA Polymerase 2X-preMix (GeneOn GmbH, Nurnberg, Germany), HotStarTaq Plus Master Mix (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) or Maximo Taq DNA Polymerase (GeneOn GmbH, Nurnberg, Germany). Most PCR amplifications using either Folmer or FishF1/FishR1 primer sets were performed using the following protocol: 1–2 μl of genomic DNA, 10 μl of Maximo Taq DNA Polymerase 2X-preMix (GeneOn GmbH, Nurnberg, Germany), 0.5 μM each primer, in 20 μl of total volume. Thermocycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation for 5 min at 95°C, followed by 35 cycles of denaturation for 30 s at 95°C, annealing for 40 s at 54°C (FishF1/FishR1) or at 45°C (Folmer), and extension for 1 min at 72°C, followed by a final extension for 10 min at 72°C. Master mix and PCR protocols using the other two abovementioned PCR kits are detailed in S1 Table. The PCR amplification using the “cocktail” primer set was performed with the HotStarTaq Plus Master Mix (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) using PCR conditions described previously [38] with slight modifications: 38 amplification cycles and annealing temperature from 50 to 52°C (see S1 Table). Primer sets COIF-ALT/COIR-ALT and A/G (control region) were amplified with HotStarTaq Plus Master Mix (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) and the amplification protocols are also detailed in S1 Table. The Pectinidae primer set Pect16BC was amplified following the amplification protocol described in Marín et al. [18]. All PCR products were electrophoresed in a 1.5% agarose gel and visualized under UV light.

Mini-barcoding PCR amplification

Samples that failed PCR amplification with COI “full barcoding” (hereafter FB) primer sets were amplified using three mini-barcoding (hereafter MB) primer sets, namely Mini_SH-A, Mini_SH-D, and Mini_SH-E [23]. PCR amplification reactions were the same as described above. PCR amplification conditions were as follows: initial denaturation for 5 min at 94°C, followed by 35 cycles of denaturation for 30 s at 94°C, annealing for 30 s at 46°C (Mini_SH-A and Mini_SH-E) or at 50°C (Mini_SH-D), and extension for 30 s at 72°C, followed by a final extension for 10 min at 72°C. In addition, a primer set namely MiFish-U [21] designed for fish metabarcoding environmental DNA (eDNA) that targets a small fragment (163–185 bp) of the hypervariable region of the 12S rRNA gene was used as an MB marker. PCR protocols for MB sets Mini_SH-A, Mini_SH-D, Mini_SH-E, and MiFish-U using HotStarTaq Plus Master Mix (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) are detailed in S1 Table.

Sequencing

Positive amplification products were sequenced in both directions at Macrogen Inc. sequencing facilities (Korea) on an ABI 3730xl Genetic Analyzer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) and at the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics of IMARPE (Peru) on an ABI 3500 (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Sequencing primers for all markers used in this study are indicated in S1 Table.

Data analyses

All DNA sequencing electropherograms were manually checked and edited by removing ambiguous base calling and adapter “tail” sequences (when necessary) using MEGA 7 software [41]. Complementary strand sequences were aligned so that a contiguous consensus was obtained for each sample. To avoid the inclusion of putative nuclear copies of COI gene sequences (NUMTs), sequences were manually checked for indels and premature stop codons. Identification of DNA sequences at species level was accomplished using both the Barcode of Life Data System (BOLD, http://www.boldsystems.org) selecting “species level barcode records” database and the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) on the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI, http://www.blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Blast.cgi) identification engine (BLASTn, highly similar sequences “megablast”). Since records deposited only in the BOLD database have been validated for both the DNA sequence and specimen data, we used this repository as our final criteria for identifying seafood species. Only sequences with a similarity index ≥98% were considered a valid match [42]. In cases of ambiguous results obtained from NCBI and BOLD databases, further phylogenetic analysis including DNA sequences from both databases was performed using the Neighbor-Joining (NJ) method with Kimura 2-parameter model (K2P) [43] and 1000 bootstrap replicates using MEGA 7 software, and the Bayesian analysis inference (BI) using MrBayes 3.2.6 [44]. The level of substitution saturation for COI datasets was evaluated using DAMBE 6 [45]. We used jModelTest 2 [46] under the Akaike and Bayesian information criterion (AIC and BIC) to find the best-fit model of evolution. Two runs were performed simultaneously, each with four Markov chains. The analyses were run for one or five million generations with sampling every 100 generations. The first 25% of the sampled trees were discarded as burn-in. Obtained phylogenetic trees were drawn using FigTree 1.4.2 program (http://tree.bio.ed.ac.uk/software/figtree/). The species names obtained by barcoding analyses were then compared to the corresponding common/market names included in the “List of main species from artisanal fish landings during 2017” (hereafter “FISHLANDINGS-2017 list”), kindly provided by the Artisanal Fishery Office at IMARPE, and also compared with the fish common names presented in Chirichigno and Cornejo (2001) [4]. Acceptable English market names were searched within the FDA Seafood List accessible from https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fdcc/index.cfm?set=seafoodlist. Accepted marine scientific names were checked in The World Register of Marine Species (WORMS, available at http://www.marinespecies.org) and FishBase (available at http://www.fishbase.de) databases. For batoid classification, we followed the nomenclature proposed in Last et al. [47]. Furthermore, we checked the conservation status for each genetically identified species at the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN Red List of Threatened Species) publically available from http://www.iucnredlist.org.

Results and discussion

Molecular identification performance

This report represents the first intensive effort to accurately identify a wide range of commercial seafood products across the Peruvian supply chain (from harvest to consumption) using molecular markers. Overall, 137 PCR products were obtained, which represents a PCR success rate of 96%. Unsuccessful PCR amplifications resulted from canned and cooked samples, most likely due to DNA degradation or inhibitors presented in the processed food. We would like to emphasize that our protocols identified all “cebiche” samples (n = 16) collected from restaurants. Cebiche is the Peruvian national dish and by far the most popular and the pride of the citizens of Peru (see Fig 1E), where seafood is marinated with lime, which could affect the effectiveness of DNA isolation challenging downstream applications.
Fig 1

Representative pictures of sampling sites analyzed in this study.

a. Fish Landing Site (FLS): guitarfish; b. Market (MK): Pacific menhaden; c. Supermarket chain (SMC); d. Multimarket (MM); e to i. Restaurant (RT): e. marinated seafood “cebiche”, f. spicy shellfish cream “picante de mariscos”, g. grilled octopus, h. fish and shellfish in “parihuela” soup, and i. fried Peruvian grunt.

Representative pictures of sampling sites analyzed in this study.

a. Fish Landing Site (FLS): guitarfish; b. Market (MK): Pacific menhaden; c. Supermarket chain (SMC); d. Multimarket (MM); e to i. Restaurant (RT): e. marinated seafood “cebiche”, f. spicy shellfish cream “picante de mariscos”, g. grilled octopus, h. fish and shellfish in “parihuela” soup, and i. fried Peruvian grunt. A total of 131 of the 137 amplified PCR products resulted in high quality sequencing electropherograms (sequencing success rate 96%), enabling proper seafood identification of 121 (92.37%) and 10 (7.63%) samples to species and genus level respectively. Of the 131 DNA sequences, 128 samples (97.71%) showed sequence identity greater than the threshold value (≥98%). However, because of either unresolved taxonomy or short variability of the COI gene among congeners, 13 samples (including octopus, marlin, smooth-hound, tilapia, and tuna specimens) matched with more than one species within 98% identity cutoff. Phylogenetic analyses for octopus, marlin, and smooth-hound samples are described below in subsections “Restaurants”, S1 Appendix, and S2 Appendix, respectively. Only three samples (SF42, SF44, and SF117) fell below the species-level identification cutoff (due to lack of reference sequences) and consequently, only a genus level identification was possible. Three (SF117, SF119, and SF128) of the 115 specimens identified with FB (COI) did not match to any records in the BOLD database.

Mini-barcoding efficiency

The efficiency of all the MB primers tested in this study is presented in S2 Table. Species identities within the range of 98–100% for NCBI and 98.2–100% for BOLD databases were obtained in 15 tested fish samples, of which 14 could not be amplified with FB markers. Most of those included canned and cooked samples from SMCs and RTs such as fish fritters, tortilla, fried, and steamed. A canned tuna sample (SF68) was successfully amplified and sequenced by MB, but BLAST analysis showed multiple Thunnus species (T. atlanticus, T. orientalis, and T. albacares) matching at 98% identity. A low genetic distance among those tuna species hampers a species level identification through DNA barcoding, consequently multilocus approaches based on control region with ITS1 [48] and 12S with ND5 markers [21] have been recommended. Among the three tested MB primer sets from Shokralla et al. [23], the primer sets SH-A and SH-E showed the highest PCR amplification (63% and 77% respectively) and sequencing success rates (100% and 90% respectively). All three primer sets (SH-A, SH-D, and SH-E) showed high sequence identity (above 98%, S2 Table), which allowed a correct identification of eight bony fishes, one shark, and one devil ray species. A shark filet (SF76) was identified only to the genus level due to lack of reference sequence. Interestingly, this study added elasmobranch species to the performance test of these MB primers with promising results, however, we tested only a limited number of shark and devil ray species. Further analyses using a wider range of elasmobranch species are needed to find out the efficacy of those MB primers in the identification of members of this fish group. Mini-barcoding primer sets SH-A, SH-D, and SH-E failed to amplify one canned herring sample SF77 (Marine Stewardship Council -MSC- certified). Therefore, we tested an additional primer set MiFish-U targeting a small fragment of the 12S rRNA gene [21]. This primer set showed a high performance by identifying sample SF77 as Clupea harengus with 100% identity (NCBI database), confirming its correct label information. Using the same primer set, a second canned sample (SF96) was also tested and identified as Sardina pilchardus with 100% identity (NCBI database). Sample SF96 was also identified with primer sets SH-A and SH-E with sequence similarities of 99.22% and 99.56%, respectively, in the BOLD database. Our results indicate that the primer set MiFish-U designed by Miya et al. [21] can be considered an alternative potential MB marker for the identification of canned fish samples. Overall, the MB approach applied in this study revealed four cases of misbranding, which are shown in S3 Table.

Species diversity

Even though our sampling was performed in a relatively small number of retailers, which included 21 RTs, eight MKs, seven stores from four SMCs, six FLSs, one WFM, one GS, and one MM, a highly diversified fauna including both marine (93.44%) and freshwater (6.56%) species was found over the 20-month sampling period. We identified 55 species (plus five genus-level taxa) covering 47 families, 24 orders, and six classes including Actinopterygii (45.03%), Chondrichthyes (36.64%), Bivalvia (6.87%), Cephalopoda (6.11%), Malacostraca (3.82%), and Gastropoda (1.53%) (Table 2). The most diverse group was Perciformes represented by 12 families, 16 genera, and 16 species, followed by Myliobatiformes with five families, six genera, and six species. All seafood DNA sequences obtained in this study have been deposited in GenBank/EMBL/DDBJ databases with accession numbers from MH194422 to MH194552 and from MK070511 to MK070524 (Table 3).
Table 2

Taxonomic classification of seafood diversity identified in this study.

Conservation status was retrieved from IUCN Red List. IUCN abbreviations: NE Not Evaluated, DD Data Deficient, LC Least Concern, NT Near Threatened, VU Vulnerable, EN Endangered. n: sample size. Identification to the genus level (ID% or Similarity% <98) is highlighted in bold.

Seafood typeClassOrderFamilyScientific nameCommon nameEnglish/SpanishIUCNnRetailer (sample code)
FishActinopterygii AtheriniformesAtherinopsidaeOdontesthes regia (Humboldt, 1821)Peruvian Silverside/PejerreyLC2RT-LI (SF97, SF129)
ClupeiformesClupeidaeClupea harengus* Linnaeus, 1758Atlantic Herring/ArenqueLC1SMC-LI (SF77)
Ethmidium maculatum (Valenciennes, 1847)Pacific Menhaden/MacheteDD2MK-LI (SF73, SF74)
Sardina pilchardus* (Walbaum, 1792)European Pilchard/Sardina EuropeaLC2SMC-LI (SF93, SF96)
EngraulidaeEngraulis ringens Jenyns, 1842Anchovy/AnchovetaLC4SMC-LL (SF69, SF70)SMC-AN (SF116)MM-LI (SF92)
GadiformesMerluccidaeMerluccius gayi (Guichenot, 1848)South Pacific Hake/MerluzaDD1RT-LL (SF7)
LampriformesLampridaeLampris guttatus (Brünnich, 1788)Opah, Moonfish/Pez LunaLC1MM-LI (SF84)
PerciformesCarangidaeSeriola rivoliana Valenciennes, 1833Almaco Jack/FortunoLC1RT-LI (SF125)
Centrolophidae Schedophilus haedrichi Chirichigno F., 1973Mocosa Ruff/Cojinoba Mocosa, Ojo de UvaLC2MK-LL (SF2)RT-LL (SF25)
CichlidaeOreochromis sp.Tilapia/Tilapia-2MM-LI (SF88, SF89)
CoryphaenidaeCoryphaena hippurus Linnaeus, 1758Dolphinfish/PericoLC10FLS-TU (SF28)SMC-AN (SF114)SMC-LI (SF91)MM-LI (SF90)RT-LL (SF17, SF23)RT-LI (SF99, SF100, SF121, SF130)
HaemulidaeAnisotremus interruptus (Gill, 1862)Burrito Grunt/Sargo, Chita DoradaLC1MK-LL (SF27)
Anisotremus scapularis (Tschudi, 1846)Peruvian Grunt/ChitaLC4MK-AN (SF105)RT-LL (SF22), RT-PI (SF79)RT-AN (SF101)
IstiophoridaeKajikia albida* (Poey, 1860)Atlantic White Marlin/Merlín BlancoVU1MM-LI (SF131)
Kajikia audax (Philippi, 1887)Striped Marlin/Merlín RayadoNT1FLS-TU (SF65)
LabrisomidaeLabrisomus philippii (Steindachner, 1866)Chalapo Clinid/TrambolloLC1RT-LI (SF98)
SciaenidaeCheilotrema fasciatum Tschudi, 1846Arnillo Drum/BurroNE1MK-AN (SF106)
Cynoscion praedatorius (Jordan & Gilbert, 1889)Boccone Weakfish/Corvina BoconaDD1RT-LL (SF26)
Paralonchurus peruanus (Steindachner, 1875)Peruvian Croaker/SucoLC1RT-LL (SF21)
ScombridaeSarda chiliensis (Cuvier, 1832)Pacific Bonito/BonitoLC1RT-LI (SF94)
Thunnus sp.Tuna/Atún-1GS-LL (SF68)
SerranidaeMycteroperca xenarcha Jordan, 1888Broomtail Grouper/Mero NegroLC1RT-LI (SF122)
Paralabrax humeralis (Valenciennes, 1828)Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaDD3RT-AN (SF103, SF120)RT-PI (SF78)
SphyraenidaeSphyraena ensis Jordan & Gilbert, 1882Barracuda/Barracuda, PicudaLC1MM-LI (SF126)
XiphiidaeXiphias gladius Linnaeus, 1758Swordfish/Pez EspadaLC4FLS-TU (SF45)MK-LL (SF11)RT-LL (SF8, SF9)
PleuronectiformesParalichthyidaeEtropus ectenes Jordan, 1889Sole Flounder/LenguadoLC2RT-LL (SF3, SF4)
SalmoniformesSalmonidaeOncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum, 1792)Rainbow Trout/Trucha Arco IrisNE1SMC-AN (SF108)
Salmo salar* Linnaeus, 1758Atlantic Salmon/SalmónLC1MM-LI (SF95)
ScorpaeniformesTriglidaePrionotus stephanophrys Lockington, 1881Lumpfish Searobin/Cabrilla VoladoraLC2MK-AN (SF110)RT-AN (SF71)
SiluriformesPangasiidaePangasianodon hypophthalmus* (Sauvage, 1878)Striped Pangasius, Swai/BasaEN3SMC-AN (SF111, SF113)SMC-LI (SF87)
SharksChondrichthyesCarcharhiniformesCarcharhinidaePrionace glauca (Linnaeus, 1758)Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulNT5MK-LA (SF63)SMC-LL (SF59, SF60)RT-LL (SF19, SF20)
SphyrnidaeSphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus, 1758)Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloVU9FLS-TU (SF66, SF83)WFM-LL (SF50-SF54)MK-LL (SF10)RT-LL (SF1)
TriakidaeMustelus lunulatus Jordan & Gilbert, 1882Sicklefin Smooth-hound/TolloLC1SMC-LI (SF75)
Mustelus sp.Smooth-hound/Tollo-4WFM-LL (SF56)SMC-LL (SF57)SMC-LI (SF76)MM-LI (SF85)
LamniformesAlopiidaeAlopias pelagicus Nakamura, 1935Pelagic Thresher Shark/Tiburón Zorro PelágicoVU3WFM-LL (SF55)MK-TU (SF35)MK-LL (SF12)
LamnidaeIsurus oxyrinchus Rafinesque, 1810Shortfin Mako Shark/Tiburón DiamanteVU1MM-LI (SF86)
OrectolobiformesRhincodontidaeRhincodon typus Smith, 1828Whale Shark/Tiburón BallenaEN1FLS-TU (SF46)
Rays and their relativesMyliobatiformesAetobatidaeAetobatus laticeps Gill, 1865Pacific Spotted Eagle Ray/Raya PintadaNE1FLS-TU (SF49)
DasyatidaeHypanus dipterurus (Jordan & Gilbert, 1880)Diamond Stingray/Raya Látigo, Batana, BateaDD1FLS-TU (SF33)
Pteroplatytrygon violacea (Bonaparte, 1832)Pelagic Stingray/Raya Negra, Raya Látigo ColudaLC1FLS-TU (SF37)
GymnuridaeGymnura sp.Butterfly Ray/Raya Mariposa-2FLS-TU (SF42, SF44)
MobulidaeMobula mobular (Bonnaterre, 1788)Giant Devil Ray/MantaEN**10FLS-TU (SF30, SF32, SF34, SF36, SF48)MK-TU (SF31, SF40, SF43)MK-LA (SF61)RT-LL (SF18)
MyliobatidaeMyliobatis chilensis Philippi, 1892Chilean Eagle Ray/Raya ÁguilaDD4MK-LA (SF62, SF64)MK-LL (SF29)SMC-LL (SF58)
Myliobatis longirostris Applegate & Fitch, 1964Longnose Eagle Ray/Raya PicudaNT1FLS-TU (SF41)
RajiformesArhynchobatidaeSympterygia brevicaudata (Cope, 1877)Shorttail Fanskate/PastelilloDD1FLS-TU (SF47)
RhinopristiformesRhinobatidaePseudobatos planiceps (Garman, 1880)Pacific Guitarfish/Pez GuitarraDD1FLS-TU (SF39)
TorpediniformesNarcinidaeNarcine entemedor Jordan & Starks, 1895Giant Electric Ray/Raya EléctricaDD2FLS-TU (SF38, SF67)
Shellfish
CrustaceansMalacostracaDecapoda CancridaeRomaleon setosum (Molina, 1782)Hairy Crab/Cangrejo PeludoNE1SMC-AN (SF115)
PenaeidaeMetapenaeus dobsoni* (Miers, 1878)Kadal Shrimp/LangostinoNE1SMC-LL (SF82)
Penaeus vannamei Boone, 1931Whiteleg Shrimp/LangostinoNE2SMC-AN (SF107)RT-LL (SF16)
PlatyxanthidaePlatyxanthus orbignyi (H. Milne Edwards & Lucas, 1843)Crab/Cangrejo VioláceoNE1RT-LL (SF24)
MollusksBivalviaArcidaArcidaeAnadara tuberculosa (G.B. Sowerby I, 1833)Mangrove Cockle/Concha NegraNE1RT-LL (SF15)
CardiidaDonacidaeDonax obesulus Reeve, 1854Surf Clam/Maruchita, PalabritaNE2MK-AN (SF119)MM-LI (SF128)
SemelidaeSemele sp.Clam/Almeja-1MK-AN (SF117)
SolecurtidaeTagelus dombeii (Lamarck, 1818)Jackknife Clam/NavajuelaNE3MK-AN (SF118)MM-LI (SF127)RT-AN (SF102)
PectinidaPectinidaeArgopecten purpuratus (Lamarck, 1819)Peruvian Scallop/Concha de AbanicoNE2RT-LL (SF13)RT-LI (SF123)
CephalopodaMyopsidaLoliginidaeDoryteuthis (Amerigo) gahi (d’Orbigny, 1835)Patagonian Squid/Calamar ComúnNE1RT-PI (SF80)
OctopodaOctopodidaeOctopus mimus Gould, 1852Gould Octopus/Pulpo ComúnNE4RT-LL (SF14)RT-AN (SF81)RT-LI (SF72, SF124)
OegopsidaOmmastrephidaeDosidicus gigas (d’Orbigny [in 1834–1847], 1835)Humboldt Squid/Pota, Calamar GiganteDD3SMC-AN (SF112)RT-LL (SF5, SF6)
GastropodaNeogastropodaMuricidaeThaisella chocolata (Duclos, 1832)Sea Snail/CaracolNE2MK-AN (SF109)RT-AN (SF104)
Total6244755 species131

Retailer categories: FLS Fish Landing Site, WFM Wholesale Fish Market, MK Market, GS Grocery Store, SMC SuperMarket Chain, MM MultiMarket, RT Restaurant

Locations: TU Tumbes, PI Piura, LA Lambayeque, LL La Libertad, AN Ancash, and LI Lima

* Species detected in imported products

** Awaiting reassessment due to synonymization with M. japanica

Table 3

Species identification results of the 131 samples collected through the supply chain of the Peruvian fishery sector using full (FB) and mini-barcoding (MB), results are based in NCBI and BOLD databases.

CodeSampling dateLabeled or declared as (English/Spanish)PresentationRetailerLocationNCBIBOLDCommon NameEnglish/SpanishPrimer/Marker(Full-Mini barcode)GenBank accession numberMisla-beled
Species nameID (%)Species name(Accepted)Simila-rity (%)
SF12016.07.20Smooth-hound/TolloFish frittersRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Sphyrna zygaena99Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194422YES
SF22016.07.21Mocosa Ruff/Ojo de UvaWhole bodyMarketTrujillo (LL)Icichthys lockingtoni96Schedophilus haedrichi99.44Mocosa Ruff/Cojinoba Mocosa, Ojo de UvaSH-E/COI (MB)MH194423NO
SF32016.07.22Flounder/LenguadoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Etropus crossotus88Etropus ectenes100Sole Flounder/Lengueta, LenguadoFolm/COI (FB)MH194424NO
SF42016.07.22Flounder/LenguadoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Etropus crossotus88Etropus ectenes100Sole Flounder/Lengueta, LenguadoFolm/COI (FB)MH194425NO
SF52016.07.22Humboldt Squid/PotaMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Dosidicus gigas100Dosidicus gigas100Humboldt Squid/Calamar Gigante, PotaFolm/COI (FB)MH194426NO
SF62016.07.22Humboldt Squid/PotaMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Dosidicus gigas100Dosidicus gigas100Humboldt Squid/Calamar Gigante, PotaFolm/COI (FB)MH194427NO
SF72016.07.24Grouper/MeroMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantHuanchaco (LL)Merluccius gayi100Merluccius gayi100South Pacific Hake/MerluzaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194428YES
SF82016.07.24Grape-eye Seabass/Ojo de UvaFish frittersRestaurantHuanchaco (LL)Xiphias gladius100Xiphias gladius100Swordfish/Pez EspadaSH-D/COI (MB)MH194429YES
SF92016.07.24Grape-eye Seabass/Ojo de UvaFish frittersRestaurantHuanchaco (LL)Xiphias gladiusXiphias gladius100100Xiphias gladiusXiphias gladius100100Swordfish/Pez EspadaSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194430MK070512YES
SF102016.07.25Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headless, no caudal finMarketTrujillo (LL)Sphyrna zygaenaSphyrna zygaena100100Sphyrna zygaenaSphyrna zygaena100100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194431MK070513YES
SF112016.07.25Swordfish/Pez EspadaFresh, headless, finlessMarketTrujillo (LL)Xiphias gladius100Xiphias gladius100Swordfish/Pez EspadaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194432NO
SF122016.07.25Smooth-hound/TolloFresh, headless, finlessMarketTrujillo (LL)Alopias pelagicus100Alopias pelagicus100Pelagic Thresher Shark/Tiburón Zorro PelágicoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194433YES
SF132016.07.27Peruvian Scallop/Concha de AbanicoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Argopecten purpuratus99NO MATCH-Peruvian Scallop/Concha de AbanicoPect16/16S (FB)MH194434NO
SF142016.07.27Octopus/PulpoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Octopus mimus, O. hubbsorum100Octopus hubbsorum100Hubb’s Octopus/Pulpo VerdeFolm/COI (FB)MH194435NO
SF152016.07.27Mangrove Cockle/Concha NegraMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Anadara tuberculosa99Anadara tuberculosa98Mangrove Cockle/Concha NegraFolm/COI (FB)MH194436NO
SF162016.07.27Shrimp/LangostinoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantTrujillo (LL)Litopenaeus vannamei100Litopenaeus vannamei(Penaeus vannamei)100Whiteleg Shrimp/LangostinoFolm/COI (FB)MH194437NO
SF172016.08.02Grouper/MeroSteamed, filet “sudado”RestaurantHuanchaco (LL)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194438YES
SF182016.08.03Ray/RayaTortillaRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Mobula mobular, M. japanicaM. japanica, M. mobular100100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194439MK070514YES
SF192016.08.05Smooth-hound/TolloFish frittersRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Prionace glauca100Prionace glauca100Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulFolm/COI (FB)MH194440YES
SF202016.08.05Smooth-hound/TolloFish frittersRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Prionace glauca100Prionace glauca100Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulFolm/COI (FB)MH194441YES
SF212016.08.10Croaker/SucoSteamed, whole bodyRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Paralonchurus peruanus100Paralonchurus peruanus100Peruvian Croaker/SucoSH-D/COI (MB)MH194442NO
SF222016.08.11Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFried, whole body, with garlic sauceRestaurantMoche (LL)Anisotremus scapularis100Anisotremus scapularis100Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194443NO
SF232016.08.11Corvina/CorvinaMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantMoche (LL)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFolm/COI (FB)MH194444YES
SF242016.08.14Crab/CangrejoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantSalaverry (LL)Platyxanthus orbignyi100Platyxanthus orbignyi100Purple Crab/Cangrejo VioláceoFolm/COI (FB)MH194445NO
SF252016.08.19Corvina/CorvinaSteamed, filet “sudado”RestaurantHuanchaco (LL)Schedophilus labyrinthicus94Schedophilus haedrichi100Mocosa Ruff/Cojinoba MocosaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194446YES
SF262016.08.21Corvina/CorvinaFriedRestaurantTrujillo (LL)Cynoscion praedatorius100Cynoscion praedatorius100Boccone Weakfish/Corvina BoconaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194447NO
SF272016.09.07Burrito Grunt/Sargo DoradoFresh, whole bodyMarketTrujillo (LL)Anisotremus interruptusAnisotremus interruptus9999Anisotremus interruptusAnisotremus interruptus100100Burrito Grunt/Chita Dorada, Sargo DoradoSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194448MK070515NO
SF282016.11.13Dolphinfish/PericoFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteLa Cruz (TU)Coryphaena hippurus100Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194449NO
SF292016.12.08Manta/MantaDried curedMarketTrujillo (LL)Myliobatis chilensis99Myliobatis chilensis99.85Chilean Eagle Ray/Raya ÁguilaFolm/COI (FB)MH194450YES
SF302017.01.23Black Manta/Mantarraya NegraFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteLa Cruz (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194451NO
SF312017.01.23Manta Ray/MantarrayaFresh filetMarketTumbes (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194452NO
SF322017.01.23Manta Ray/MantarrayaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteLa Cruz (TU)Mobula japanicaM. mobularM. japanica, M. mobular10099Mobula japanica (M. mobular)Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)Folm/COI (FB)MH194453MK070516NO
SF332017.01.24Batea Ray/BateaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteAcapulco (TU)Dasyatis brevis96Dasyatis dipterura(Hypanus dipterurus)100Diamond Stingray/Batana, Batea, Raya LátigoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194454NO
SF342017.01.24Manta/MantaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteZorritos (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194455NO
SF352017.01.24Shortfin Mako/Tollo DiamanteFresh filetMarketZorritos (TU)Alopias pelagicus100Alopias pelagicus100Pelagic Thresher Shark/Tiburón Zorro PelágicoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194456YES
SF362017.01.24Manta/MantaFresh finsFish landing siteCancas (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194457NO
SF372017.01.24Black Stingray/Raya Coluda NegraFresh, whole bodyFish landing sitePunta Mero (TU)Pteroplatytrygon violacea99Pteroplatytrygon violacea100Pelagic Stingray/Raya Negra, Raya Látigo ColudaFolm/COI (FB)MH194458NO
SF382017.01.24Electric Ray/Raya EléctricaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteAcapulco (TU)Narcine entemedorNarcine entemedor9999Narcine entemedorNarcine entemedor100100Giant Electric Ray/Raya EléctricaFISH1/COI (FB)Folm/COI (FB)MH194459MK070517NO
SF392017.01.24Guitarfish/Pez GuitarraFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteAcapulco (TU)Rhinobatos glaucostigma97Pseudobatos planiceps100Pacific Guitarfish/Pez GuitarraFolm/COI (FB)MH194460NO
SF402017.01.24Manta Ray/MantarrayaFresh filetMarketZorritos (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194461NO
SF412017.01.24Stingray/Raya ColudaFresh, whole bodyFish landing sitePunta Mero (TU)Aetobatus narinari95Myliobatis longirostris98.74Longnose Eagle Ray/Raya PicudaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194462NO
SF422017.01.24Butterfly Ray/TuyoFresh filetFish landing siteAcapulco (TU)Gymnura micrura87*Gymnura marmorata97.65California Butterfly Ray/Raya Tuyo, Raya MariposaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194463NO
SF432017.01.24Manta/MantaFresh filetMarketZorritos (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194464NO
SF442017.01.24Butterfly Ray/Raya Tuyo, Raya MariposaFresh, whole bodyFish landing sitePunta Sal (TU)Gymnura micrura87*Gymnura marmorata97.7California Butterfly Ray/Raya Tuyo, Raya MariposaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194465NO
SF452017.01.24Swordfish/Pez EspadaFresh, headlessFish landing siteZorritos (TU)Xiphias gladius99Xiphias gladius100Swordfish/Pez EspadaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194466NO
SF462017.01.24Whale Shark/Tiburón BallenaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteAcapulco (TU)Rhincodon typus100Rhincodon typus100Whale Shark/Tiburón BallenaFolm/COI (FB)MH194467NO
SF472017.01.25Witch Skate/Raya BrujaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Sympterygia brevicaudata99Sympterygia brevicaudata100Shorttail Fanskate/PastelilloFolm/COI (FB)MH194468YES
SF482017.01.25Manta/MantaFresh, finsFish landing siteCancas (TU)Mobula japanica, M. mobular100Mobula japanica(M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194469NO
SF492017.01.25Spotted Ray/Raya PintadaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Aetobatus narinari99Aetobatus narinari(Aetobatus laticeps)100Pacific Spotted Eagle Ray/Raya PintadaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194470NO
SF502017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Sphyrna zygaena99Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194471YES
SF512017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Sphyrna zygaena100Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194472YES
SF522017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Sphyrna zygaena100Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194473YES
SF532017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Sphyrna zygaena100Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194474YES
SF542017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Sphyrna zygaena100Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194475YES
SF552017.01.28Thresher Shark/Tollo ZorroFresh, headlessWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Alopias pelagicus99Alopias pelagicus100Pelagic Thresher Shark/Tiburón Zorro PelágicoFolm/COI (FB)MH194476NO
SF562017.01.28Smooth-hound/Tollo MamitaFresh filetWholesale fish marketBuenos Aires (LL)Mustelus henlei98**Mustelus henlei98.55Brown Smooth-hound/TolloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194477NO
SF572017.01.31Smooth-hound/TolloRefrigerated filetSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Mustelus henlei, M. canis98**Mustelus henlei98.45Brown Smooth-hound/TolloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194478NO
SF582017.01.31Guitarfish/Pez GuitarraRefrigerated filetSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Myliobatis chilensis100Myliobatis chilensis100Chilean Eagle Ray/Raya ÁguilaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194479YES
SF592017.01.31Blue Shark/Tollo AzulFrozen filetSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Prionace glauca99Prionace glauca100Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulFolm/COI (FB)MH194480NO
SF602017.01.31Shark/TiburónRefrigerated filetSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Prionace glauca100Prionace glauca100Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulFolm/COI (FB)MH194481NO
SF612017.02.01Manta/MantaDriedMarketChiclayo (LA)Mobula japanica, M. mobular99Mobula japanica (M. mobular)100Spinetail Devil Ray/MantaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194482NO
SF622017.02.01Smooth-hound/TolloFresh filetMarketChiclayo (LA)Myliobatis chilensis99Myliobatis chilensis99.83Chilean Eagle Ray/Raya ÁguilaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194483YES
SF632017.02.01Smooth-hound/TolloDriedMarketChiclayo (LA)Prionace glauca100Prionace glauca100Blue Shark/Tiburón AzulFolm/COI (FB)MH194484YES
SF642017.02.01Ray/RayaDriedMarketChiclayo (LA)Myliobatis chilensis99Myliobatis chilensis99.85Chilean EagleRay/Raya ÁguilaFolm/COI (FB)MH194485NO
SF652017.02.01Marlin/MerlínFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Tetrapturus audaxTetrapturus audax9999Kajikia audaxNO MATCH100-Striped Marlin/Merlín RayadoFISH1/COI (FB)CR-AG/CR (FB)MH194486MK070523NO
SF662017.02.02Hammerhead Shark/Tollo MartilloFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Sphyrna zygaena100Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFolm/COI (FB)MH194487NO
SF672017.02.09Electric Ray/Raya EléctricaFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Narcine entemedor99Narcine entemedor100Giant Electric Ray/Raya EléctricaFolm/COI (FB)MH194488NO
SF682017.04.24Tuna/AtúnCanned, in vegetable oilGrocery storeTrujillo (LL)*Thunnus atlanticus, T. orientalis, T. albacares98NO MATCH-Tuna/AtúnSH-A/COI (MB)MH194489NO
SF692017.04.30Peruvian Sardine/Sardina Peruana, Anchoveta***egraulis ringensCanned, in vegetable oilSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Engraulis ringensEngraulis ringens100100Engraulis ringensEngraulis ringens100100Anchovy/AnchovetaSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194490MK070518NO
SF702017.04.30Peruvian Sardine/Sardina Peruana, Anchoveta***egraulis ringensCanned, in vegetable oilSupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Engraulis ringensEngraulis ringens100100Engraulis ringensEngraulis ringens100100Anchovy/AnchovetaSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MH194491MK070519NO
SF712017.05.20Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaFish frittersRestaurantChimbote (AN)Prionotus stephanophrys99Prionotus stephanophrys99.69Lumpfish Searobin/Falso Volador, Cabrilla VoladoraFISH1/COI (FB)MH194492YES
SF722017.06.08Octopus/PulpoGrilledRestaurantMiraflores (LI)Octopus mimus, O. hubbsorum100Octopus mimus100Gould Octopus/Pulpo ComúnFolm/COI (FB)MH194493NO
SF732017.06.09Pacific Menhaden/MacheteFresh, whole bodyMarketChorrillos (LI)Ethmidium maculatum99Ethmidium maculatum100Pacific Menhaden/MacheteFolm/COI (FB)MH194494NO
SF742017.06.09Pacific Menhaden/MacheteFresh, whole bodyMarketChorrillos (LI)Ethmidium maculatum99Ethmidium maculatum99.13Pacific Menhaden/MacheteFolm/COI (FB)MH194495NO
SF752017.06.09Smooth-hound/Tollo de LecheRefrigerated filetSupermarket chainLa Molina (LI)Mustelus lunulatus99Mustelus lunulatus100Sicklefin Smooth-hound/TolloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194496NO
SF762017.06.09Smooth-hound/Tollo de LecheRefrigerated filetSupermarket chainLa Molina (LI)*Mustelus henlei, M. californicusMustelus henlei9898*Mustelus henlei, M. intermedius*Mustelus canis, M. henlei98.498.2Brown Smooth-hound/TolloSH-A/COI (MB)SH-E/COI (MB)MH194497MK070520NO
SF772017.06.10Herring/ArenqueClupea harengusCanned. With asparagus sauce.MSC certifiedImported from GermanySupermarket chainLa Molina (LI)Clupea harengus100NO MATCH-Atlantic Herring/ArenqueMiFish/12S (MB)MH194498NO
SF782017.10.14Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaFish frittersRestaurantSechura (PI)Paralabrax humeralis99Paralabrax humeralis100Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaFolm/COI (FB)MH194499NO
SF792017.10.14Peruvian Grunt/ChitaSteamed, whole bodyRestaurantSechura (PI)Anisotremus scapularis100Anisotremus scapularis100Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194500NO
SF802017.10.14Squid/CalamarSteamed, ringsRestaurantSechura (PI)Doryteuthis gahi99Doryteuthis gahi(Doryteuthis (Amerigo) gahi)99.54Patagonian Squid/Calamar ComúnFolm/COI (FB)MH194501NO
SF812017.11.09Octopus/PulpoBoiled, in olive sauceRestaurantHuarmey (AN)Octopus mimus, O. hubbsorum99Octopus mimus100Gould Octopus/Pulpo ComúnFolm/COI (FB)MH194502NO
SF822017.11.15Shrimp/LangostinoInstant noodle soup. Imported from USASupermarket chainTrujillo (LL)Metapenaeus dobsoni99Metapenaeus dobsoni99.35Kadal Shrimp/LangostinoFolm/COI (FB)MH194503NO
SF832017.12.01Hammerhead Shark/Tollo MartilloFresh, whole bodyFish landing siteCancas (TU)Sphyrna zygaena99Sphyrna zygaena100Smooth Hammerhead/Tiburón MartilloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194504NO
SF842017.12.17Moonfish/Pez LunaFresh filetMultimarketCallao (LI)Lampris guttatus100Lampris guttatus100Opah, Moonfish/Pez LunaCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194505NO
SF852017.12.17Smooth-hound/Tollo de LecheFresh filetMultimarketCallao (LI)Mustelus henlei, M. canis98**Mustelus henlei98.15Brown Smooth-hound/TolloCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194506NO
SF862017.12.17Shortfin Mako/Tollo DiamanteFresh filetMultimarketCallao (LI)Isurus oxyrinchus100Isurus oxyrinchus100Shortfin Mako/Tiburón DiamanteCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194507NO
SF872017.12.17BasaPangasius hypophthalmusFilet (vacuum packed). Imported from VietnamSupermarket chainCallao (LI)Pangasianodon hypophthalmus100Pangasianodon hypophthalmus100Striped Pangasius, Swai/BasaCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194508NO
SF882017.12.17Sand-Perch/Camotillo, CarajitoFresh filetMultimarketCallao (LI)Oreochromis niloticus, O. aureus99*Oreochromis niloticus, O. aureus100Tilapia/TilapiaCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194509YES
SF892017.12.17Tilapia/TilapiaFilet (vacuum packed)MultimarketCallao (LI)Oreochromis mossambicus, O. niloticus100*Oreochromis mossambicus, O. niloticus100Tilapia/TilapiaCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194510NO
SF902017.12.17Dolphinfish/PericoFish roeMultimarketCallao (LI)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus99.85Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194511NO
SF912017.12.17Dolphinfish/PericoCoryphaena hippurusFish burgerSupermarket chainCallao (LI)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194512NO
SF922017.12.17Peruvian Sardine and Giant Squid/Sardina Peruana y Calamar GiganteEngraulis ringens and Dosidicus gigasBurgerMultimarketCallao (LI)Engraulis ringens100Engraulis ringens100Anchovy/AnchovetaCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194513NO
SF932017.12.17Atlantic Sardine/Sardinas Pilchards del Atlántico NorteCanned. In spicy sauce. Imported from Chile. Made in MoroccoSupermarket chainCallao (LI)Sardina pilchardus100Sardina pilchardus100European Pilchard/Sardina EuropeaSH-A/COI (MB)MH194514NO
SF942017.12.17Bonito/BonitoFried filetRestaurantCallao (LI)Sarda chiliensis100Sarda chiliensis100Pacific Bonito/BonitoCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194515NO
SF952017.12.17Salmon/SalmónFilet (vacuum packed)MultimarketCallao (LI)Salmo salar100Salmo salar100Atlantic Salmon/SalmónFISH1/COI (FB)MH194516NO
SF962018.01.08Atlantic Sardine/Sardinas del AtlánticoSardina pilchardusCanned. With lemon and olive oil. Imported from SpainSupermarket chain. Delivery systemCallao (LI)Sardina pilchardusSardina pilchardusSardina pilchardus9999100Sardina pilchardusSardina pilchardusNO MATCH99.5699.22-European Pilchard/Sardina EuropeaSH-E/COI (MB)SH-A/COI (MB)MiFish/12S (MB)MH194517MK070521MK070522NO
SF972018.01.12Peruvian Silverside/PejerreyFried filet, sandwichRestaurantCallao (LI)Odontesthes regia99Odontesthes regia99.84Peruvian Silverside/PejerreyCOI-3/COI (FB)MH194518NO
SF982018.01.17Blenny/ TrambolloWhole body, in parihuela sauceRestaurantCallao (LI)Labrisomus philippii100Labrisomus philippii100Chalapo Clinid/TrambolloFISH1/COI (FB)MH194519NO
SF992018.01.17Sailfish/Pez VelaFilet with Menier sauceRestaurantCallao (LI)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194520YES
SF1002018.01.17Sailfish/Pez VelaDeep fried filetRestaurantCallao (LI)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194521YES
SF1012018.01.17Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFried, whole body, with creamy spicy seafood sauceRestaurantChimbote (AN)Anisotremus scapularis100Anisotremus scapularis100Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194522NO
SF1022018.01.17Chiton/BarquilloMarinated “cebiche”. SlicedRestaurantChimbote (AN)Tagelus dombeii94Tagelus dombeii99.83Jackknife Clam/NavajuelaFolm/COI (FB)MH194523YES
SF1032018.01.17Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantChimbote (AN)Paralabrax humeralis99Paralabrax humeralis99.69Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194524NO
SF1042018.01.17Sea Snail/CaracolMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantChimbote (AN)Thais chocolata98Thaisella chocolata99.25Sea Snail/CaracolFolm/COI (FB)MH194525NO
SF1052018.01.17Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFresh, whole bodyMarketChimbote (AN)Anisotremus scapularis99Anisotremus scapularis100Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194526NO
SF1062018.01.17Peruvian Grunt/ChitaFresh, whole bodyMarketChimbote (AN)Cheilotrema saturnum93Cheilotrema fasciatum99.85Arnillo Drum/BurroFISH1/COI (FB)MH194527YES
SF1072018.01.17Shrimp/LangostinoFresh, headlessSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Litopenaeus vannamei100Litopenaeus vannamei(Penaeus vannamei)100Whiteleg Shrimp/LangostinoFolm/COI (FB)MH194528NO
SF1082018.01.17Trout/TruchaFresh, whole bodySupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Oncorhynchus mykiss100Oncorhynchus mykiss100Rainbow Trout/Trucha Arco IrisFISH1/COI (FB)MH194529NO
SF1092018.01.17Seafood MixFresh, cut in small piecesMarketChimbote (AN)Thais chocolata98Thaisella chocolata99.32Sea Snail/CaracolFolm/COI (FB)MH194530NO
SF1102018.01.17Lumpfish Searobin/Cabrilla VoladoraFresh, cut in small piecesMarketChimbote (AN)Prionotus stephanophrys100Prionotus stephanophrys100Lumpfish Searobin/Cabrilla VoladoraFolm/COI (FB)MH194531NO
SF1112018.01.17Basa/BasaFrozen filetSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Pangasianodon hypophthalmus99Pangasianodon hypophthalmus100Striped Pangasius, Swai/BasaFolm/COI (FB)MH194532NO
SF1122018.01.17Seafood MixFrozen, cut in small piecesSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Dosidicus gigas99Dosidicus gigas100Humboldt Squid/Calamar Gigante, PotaFolm/COI (FB)MH194533NO
SF1132018.01.17BasaPangasius hypophthalmusFilet (vacuum packed). Imported from VietnamSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Pangasianodon hypophthalmus99Pangasianodon hypophthalmus100Striped Pangasius, Swai/BasaFolm/COI (FB)MH194534NO
SF1142018.01.17Dolphinfish/PericoCoryphaena hippurusFish burgerSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFolm/COI (FB)MH194535NO
SF1152018.01.17Crab Meat/Pulpa de CangrejoCancer setosusFrozen meatSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Romaleon polyodon100Romaleon polyodon (R. setosum)100Hairy Crab/Cangrejo PeludoFolm/COI (FB)MH194536NO
SF1162018.01.17Peruvian Sardine and Giant Squid/Sardina Peruana y Calamar GiganteEngraulis ringens and Dosidicus gigasBurgerSupermarket chainChimbote (AN)Engraulis ringens100Engraulis ringens100Anchovy/AnchovetaFolm/COI (FB)MH194537NO
SF1172018.01.23Clam/AlmejaFresh, whole bodyMarketChimbote (AN)*Semele solida92NO MATCH-Clam/AlmejaFolm/COI (FB)MH194538NO
SF1182018.01.23Surf Clam/MachaFresh, cut in small piecesMarketChimbote (AN)Tagelus dombeii94Tagelus dombeii99.47Jackknife Clam/NavajuelaFolm/COI (FB)MH194539YES
SF1192018.01.23Surf Clam/MaruchitaFresh, whole bodyMarketChimbote (AN)Donax obesulus99NO MATCH-Surf Clam/Maruchita, PalabritaFolm/COI (FB)MH194540NO
SF1202018.02.06Sand-Perch/CamotilloMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantChimbote (AN)Paralabrax humeralis100Paralabrax humeralis100Peruvian Rock Seabass/CabrillaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194541YES
SF1212018.02.10Sailfish/Pez VelaFried filet, with creamy spicy seafood sauceRestaurantCallao (LI)Coryphaena hippurus99Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194542YES
SF1222018.02.17Grouper/MeroFish meat in Parihuela sauceRestaurantSan Isidro (LI)Mycteroperca microlepis94Mycteroperca xenarcha100Broomtail Grouper/Mero NegroFISH1/COI (FB)MH194543NO
SF1232018.02.17Peruvian Scallop/Concha de AbanicoSeafood riceRestaurantSan Isidro (LI)Argopecten purpuratus99NO MATCH-Peruvian Scallop/Concha de AbanicoPect16/16S (FB)MH194544NO
SF1242018.02.17Octopus/PulpoSeafood riceRestaurantSan Isidro (LI)Octopus hubbsorum, O. mimus99Octopus mimus100Gould Octopus/Pulpo ComúnFolm/COI (FB)MH194545NO
SF1252018.02.19Almaco Jack/FortunoMarinated “cebiche”RestaurantMiraflores (LI)Seriola rivoliana99Seriola rivoliana99.82Almaco Jack/FortunoFISH1/COI (FB)MH194546NO
SF1262018.02.20Barracuda/Picuda NorteñaFresh, whole bodyMultimarketCallao (LI)Sphyraena ensis100Sphyraena ensis100Barracuda/PicudaFISH1/COI (FB)MH194547NO
SF1272018.02.26Surf Clam/MachaBoiled tonguesMultimarketCallao (LI)Tagelus dombeii94Tagelus dombeii100Jackknife Clam/NavajuelaCOI-ALT/COI (FB)MH194548YES
SF1282018.02.26Surf Clam/PalabritaWhole body. SaltedMultimarketCallao (LI)Donax obesulus100NO MATCH-Surf Clam/Maruchita, PalabritaFolm/COI (FB)MH194549NO
SF1292018.03.03Peruvian Silverside/PejerreyFresh filet with chiliRestaurantMiraflores (LI)Odontesthes regia99Odontesthes regia100Peruvian Silverside/PejerreyFISH1/COI (FB)MH194550NO
SF1302018.03.03Cachema Weakfish/CharelaStir-friedRestaurantMiraflores (LI)Coryphaena hippurus100Coryphaena hippurus100Dolphinfish/Perico, DoradoFISH1/COI (FB)MK070511YES
SF1312018.03.18Sailfish/Pez VelaFrozen filetMultimarketCallao (LI)Kajikia albidaKajikia albida9999Kajikia albidaNO MATCH100-Atlantic White Marlin/Merlín BlancoFISH1/COI (FB)CR-AG/CR (FB)MH194551MK070524YES

* Identification to the genus level (ID% or Similarity% <98)

** Identification to the genus level after phylogenetic analysis

*** A misspelled scientific name was written on label

Locations: TU Tumbes, PI Piura, LA Lambayeque, LL La Libertad, AN Ancash, and LI Lima

Primer sets: FISH1: FishF1 and FishR1 [37], Folm: LCO1490 and HCO2198 [17], SH-A: Fish_miniA_F_t and Fish_miniA_R_t [23], SH-D: Fish_miniD_F_t and Fish_miniD_R_t [23], SH-E: Fish_miniE_F_t and Fish_miniE_R_t [23], Pect16: Pect16BCF and Pect16BCR [18], COI-3: “cocktail” primer set VF2_t1, FishF2_t1, FishR2_t1, and Fr1d_t1 [38], MiFish: MiFish-U-F and MiFish-U-R [21], COI-ALT: COIF-ALT and COIR-ALT [39], CR-AG: A and G [40]

Marker: COI cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, 16S ribosomal RNA, 12S ribosomal RNA, CR control region

FB: full barcode, MB: mini-barcode

Taxonomic classification of seafood diversity identified in this study.

Conservation status was retrieved from IUCN Red List. IUCN abbreviations: NE Not Evaluated, DD Data Deficient, LC Least Concern, NT Near Threatened, VU Vulnerable, EN Endangered. n: sample size. Identification to the genus level (ID% or Similarity% <98) is highlighted in bold. Retailer categories: FLS Fish Landing Site, WFM Wholesale Fish Market, MK Market, GS Grocery Store, SMC SuperMarket Chain, MM MultiMarket, RT Restaurant Locations: TU Tumbes, PI Piura, LA Lambayeque, LL La Libertad, AN Ancash, and LI Lima * Species detected in imported products ** Awaiting reassessment due to synonymization with M. japanica * Identification to the genus level (ID% or Similarity% <98) ** Identification to the genus level after phylogenetic analysis *** A misspelled scientific name was written on label Locations: TU Tumbes, PI Piura, LA Lambayeque, LL La Libertad, AN Ancash, and LI Lima Primer sets: FISH1: FishF1 and FishR1 [37], Folm: LCO1490 and HCO2198 [17], SH-A: Fish_miniA_F_t and Fish_miniA_R_t [23], SH-D: Fish_miniD_F_t and Fish_miniD_R_t [23], SH-E: Fish_miniE_F_t and Fish_miniE_R_t [23], Pect16: Pect16BCF and Pect16BCR [18], COI-3: “cocktail” primer set VF2_t1, FishF2_t1, FishR2_t1, and Fr1d_t1 [38], MiFish: MiFish-U-F and MiFish-U-R [21], COI-ALT: COIF-ALT and COIR-ALT [39], CR-AG: A and G [40] Marker: COI cytochrome c oxidase subunit I, 16S ribosomal RNA, 12S ribosomal RNA, CR control region FB: full barcode, MB: mini-barcode

Fish landing sites, wholesale fish markets, and markets

A total of 51 samples were identified from FLSs (n = 21), WFM (n = 7) and MKs (n = 23), represented mainly by batoids (72%), sharks (100%), and bony fishes (35%), respectively (see S1 Fig). Among batoid specimens (rays and their relatives) collected from FLSs (n = 15) and MKs (n = 7), including one Chilean eagle ray specimen labeled as smooth-hound, we identified nine species belonging to seven families: Aetobatidae, Arhynchobatidae, Dasyatidae, Mobulidae, Myliobatidae, Narcinidae, and Rhinobatidae (Table 2); and one genus (Gymnura sp.) from Gymnuridae (see S3 Appendix). Three (Hypanus dipterurus, Myliobatis longirostris, and Sympterygia brevicaudata) of the nine identified species collected from different FLSs in TU (collection date January 2017) were not found in recent landing reports (from January 2014 to July 2018) from Tumbes (C. Luque, personal communication). Besides, the sample identified as shorttail fanskate S. brevicaudata (SF47, BOLD similarity 100%) was labeled as witch skate Rostroraja velezi; the latter species was included in landing records from Tumbes (C. Luque, personal communication). These findings highlight the necessity for implementation of periodic genetic monitoring programs across landing sites to support fisheries management and conservation efforts of batoid species. In 2016, total “ray” landings from Peru reached 2440 metric tonnes (MT), with 72.34% of this production (1765 MT) destined to the domestic fresh fish market, while the remaining was used for cured fish production [8]. The giant devil ray M. mobular (Myliobatiformes: Mobulidae), which is the most landed mobulid species in northern Peru [49], was also the most abundant batoid and only mobulid species detected in this study, being found in three FLSs (n = 5), three MKs (n = 4), and one RT (n = 1). In Peru, the genus Mobula comprises five species including M. birostris (formerly Manta birostris), M. tarapacana, M. mobular (formerly M. japanica [47]), M. thurstoni, and M. munkiana [50]. Predominantly gillnets are used by small-scale and industrial fisheries to target mobulids, but they are also caught as bycatch in the tuna purse seine fishery [49]. In spite of their commercial value, conservation concerns, and promising management and conservation efforts targeting chondrichthyan species (i.e., PAN Tiburón-Perú and a law prohibiting M. birostris fishery, see S4 Appendix and S5 Appendix), there have not been any molecular studies on Peruvian marine rays. Our results could be used to better understand the diversity of commercially important rays, providing baseline data for further genetic studies necessary to design and implement conservation actions. The smooth hammerhead Sphyrna zygaena (Carcharhiniformes: Sphyrnidae), which is the third most commonly landed shark species in Peru [51], was found at the three retailer categories described in this section (FLS, WFM, and MK), where it was usually labeled as thresher shark. S4 Table shows all identified samples grouped by retailer category and seafood type. Nine samples were identified as S. zygaena with MB and FB (BOLD similarity 100%). Of particular concern was the detection of six specimens collected during closed season (January 1 to March 10, RM N° 008-2016-PRODUCE), including five headless samples (SF50 to SF54 from WFM-LL) labeled as thresher sharks (Alopias sp.) and one sample (SF66 from FLS-TU) landed as whole body. Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing can be profitable due to the high demand for overexploited and protected species, and low risk of getting caught or being punished, especially when it takes place in countries where enforcement is weak [52]. Sphyrna zygaena is categorized as “Vulnerable” by the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Regrettably, the shark fishery in Peru is poorly regulated and monitored, mainly because fisheries managers put more effort in controlling small pelagic resources which dominate the fishing industry [34]. Other interesting findings at FLSs were the landings of one whale shark specimen (SF46) Rhincodon typus (Orectolobiformes: Rhincodontidae) and one sample (SF65) identified as striped marlin Kajikia audax (Perciformes: Istiophoridae), both as whole bodies. The commercial fishing of both species has been banned by the Peruvian government (see text in S4 Appendix and S6 Appendix). The whale shark DNA sequence obtained herein represents the first publically available nucleotide sequence of R. typus (GenBank accession number MH194467) caught in Peruvian waters, which could be useful for further comparative studies, therefore the specimen tissue and DNA from sample SF46 are available upon request. Among bony fishes (class Actinopterygii) collected from MKs, the economically valuable genus Anisotremus (Perciformes: Haemulidae) was represented by two species: the Peruvian grunt A. scapularis and the burrito grunt A. interruptus. In one MK from Ancash, we bought a bag containing 10 fish specimens labeled as “Peruvian grunt”, however one specimen was larger and darker than the others. Molecular analysis showed that the “dark grunt” (SF106) was actually arnillo drum Cheilotrema fasciatum (family Sciaenidae), which strongly resemble grunts in appearance but is of lower economic value. Another sample (SF105) from the same bag was identified as the Peruvian grunt A. scapularis. Apparently, the arnillo drum, larger in size, was put there to increase the total product weight.

Grocery store, supermarket chains, and multimarket

A total of 35 samples were identified from SMCs (n = 22), MM (n = 12), and a GS (n = 1), (S4 Table). The only sample collected from GS was a canned tuna (SF68) identified as Thunnus sp. The most abundant group detected in both SMCs and MM was Actinopterygii with 55% and 66%, respectively (S1 Fig). Among the samples collected from SMCs and MM, the Peruvian anchovy E. ringens (canned and fish burger presentations), dolphinfish C. hippurus (fish burger and fish roe presentations), and Humboldt squid D. gigas (seafood mix presentation) represented some of the most important species from landings for direct human consumption during the year 2016 [8]. Two canned anchovy products (SF69 and SF70, SMC at LL) labeled as “Peruvian sardine” were identified as E. ringens. In 2009, the Ministry of Production of Peru, aiming to promote internal consumption of anchovy as well as to conquer new international markets, adopted the name “Peruvian sardines” for processed (i.e., canned) Peruvian anchovies [53]. This marketing strategy is due to the fact that in the international market, sardine is usually in higher demand than anchovy [54]. However, the presence of the local sardine species Sardinops sagax also known as “Peruvian sardine” [55] may cause confusion among local consumers. Imported items, representing both farmed and wild species, were found only in SMC and MM retailers. During 2017, Peru imported 145344 MT of seafood products valued at US$306 million; frozen and canned products accounted for 70% of the total [56]. We authenticated nine imported seafood products belonging to six species from five orders including Perciformes (Kajikia albida, frozen filet n = 1), Clupeiformes (Sardina pilchardus and Clupea harengus, canned n = 3), Salmoniformes (Salmo salar, vacuum packed filet n = 1), Siluriformes (Pangasianodon hypophthalmus, frozen and vacuum packed filets n = 3), and Decapoda (Metapenaeus dobsoni, instant noodle soup n = 1). In 2015, Chilean port authorities detected a shipment (valued at US$19 million) from Callao (Peru) of 37200 cans of Pacific menhaden (Ethmidium maculatum) labeled as horse mackerel (Trachurus murphyi) [57]. In this regard, the use of DNA-based technologies for seafood authentication is imperative to ensure proper label information, not only for domestic and imported products but also for Peruvian exports. Interestingly, in one supermarket from Lima, we found different imported canned products carrying the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) blue ecolabel. The MSC is an international non-profit organization that sets a standard (MSC Fishery Standard) used to assess sustainable fisheries all over the world. Currently, there are no Peruvian fisheries holding MSC certification or undergoing full assessment. In 2015, a molecular barcoding test of a total of 256 MSC labeled products (from 16 countries, covering 13 fish species) performed by an independent laboratory revealed that 99.6% were correctly labeled [58]. Herein, we were able to verify the correct species information from one MSC certified canned herring sample imported from Germany and labeled as Clupea harengus (SF77, bought in SMC-LI) using the 12S rRNA gene eDNA metabarcoding primer set MiFish-U designed by Miya et al. [21]. We detected only one case of mislabeling in an SMC (from LL) in which a filet sample labeled as guitarfish (SF58) was determined to actually be Chilean eagle ray M. chilensis (BOLD similarity 100%). However, it is difficult to determine whether it was an intentional case of mislabeling due to the fact that SMCs usually rely on wholesale seafood distributors. It is important to mention that SMCs employ trained personnel and safety protocols including the application of cold chain management systems, thus preserving food quality and ensuring food safety. However, the aforementioned practices make SMC seafood products more expensive than those of popular MKs; sometimes the price difference is as high as 300% [59]. Three smooth-hound filet samples (SF56, SF57, and SF85) were first identified as Mustelus henlei (BOLD similarity 98.15–98.55%). However, NJ and BI phylogenetic analyses (Fig A in S2 Appendix) clustered those samples in a unique clade with high nodal support. Therefore, samples SF56, SF57, and SF85 were assigned to Mustelus sp. Another smooth-hound filet sample (SF75, SMC-LI) was identified as Mustelus lunulatus (BOLD similarity 100%). In Peru, smooth-hounds (Mustelus spp.), houndsharks (Triakis spp.), and catsharks (Schroederichthys spp.) are usually reported under the same common name “tollo” ([34], FISHLANDING-2017 list). Peruvian shark landing statistics at species level include only three Mustelus species: M. whitneyi, M. mento, and M. dorsalis [51]. A reduced frequency in landing occurrences, combined with low taxonomic resolution at landing sites and a poorly regulated and monitored fishery [34], may have been masking or “diluting” the presence of M. lunulatus from landing reports. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that sample SF75 was imported from Ecuador (where M. lunulatus also occurs), which is an important source of shark imports to Peru [51]. Inaccurate identification of morphologically similar species in combination with poor taxonomic resolution of fisheries landing reports and the application of inaccurate names will not only cause considerable economic impacts but also lead to undesired consequences for fishery management [60] including local population depletion. M. lunulatus is not included in the “Identification guide to commercially important sharks from Peru” [61], which is a field guide for identifying most frequent shark species in landings of artisanal fisheries of Peru. In this regard, government fishery officers must undergo training in detecting not only main commercial species but also the ones that are infrequently landed. Field identification guides should consider including the “less commercial” species. One surprising result was the mislabeling of tilapia Oreochromis sp. as “sand-perch” (SF88, collected from MM, see Fig 1D). Passing off cheap farmed tilapia as more expensive wild fish has been reported in previous studies [62, 63]. During 2013, frozen imports of tilapia from China accounted for more than 50% of total domestic market sales [64]. China is Peru’s biggest trade partner, with investments exceeding US$14.00 billion [65]. A Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Peru and China was signed on April 28, 2009, and entered into force on March 1, 2010 [66] bringing valuable opportunities for Peruvian entrepreneurs to go through Chinese markets duty-free. Unfortunately, imported Chinese tilapia enters the Peruvian market at significantly lower prices than locally produced ones [64]. Shellfish accounted for 18% of SMC samples, comprising three crustacean (14%) (M. dobsoni, P. vannamei, and Romaleon setosum), and one mollusk (4%) species (Humboldt squid D. gigas). Only mollusks (17%) were collected from MM, represented by two bivalve species (Tagelus dombeii and Donax obesulus). Two shucked shellfish samples (SF118 from MK-AN and SF127 from MM-LI) labeled as surf clam “macha” (Mesodesma donacium) were identified as jackknife clam T. dombeii (BOLD similarity 99.47–100%). Peruvian populations of the surf clam M. donacium have been depleted and its fishery abruptly collapsed, mainly due to the combined effects of unregulated overexploitation and adverse climatic events (El Niño/Southern Oscillation-ENSO) [67]. As evidenced by our results, the great demand that still exists for this bivalve species makes this resource vulnerable to substitution by other species in different Peruvian cities.

Restaurants

The results of the present study provide a snapshot of species availability in some seafood restaurants. Forty-five samples were identified covering 15 bony fishes, nine shellfish, three sharks, and one batoid species (S4 Table). Within the bony fishes, which represented 60% of restaurant samples (S1 Fig), we identified high market-value species such as flounder (Paralichthyidae), grunts (Haemulidae), and grouper and seabass (Serranidae). In Peru, groupers (Epinephelus spp. and Mycteroperca spp.) and grape-eye seabass (Hemilutjanus macrophthalmos) are considered “luxury” seafood species and in high demand, which makes them more prone not only to overexploitation but also to substitution by cheaper ones. Two restaurant samples (SF7 and SF17) labeled as grouper were identified as South Pacific hake M. gayi and dolphinfish C. hippurus, respectively. Similarly, two samples (SF8 and SF9) labeled as grape-eye seabass were found to be swordfish Xiphias gladius. When mislabeling occurs on board or at landing, the error continues along the food chain to the consumer [68]. Consequently, final seafood retailers such as restaurants are more vulnerable to receive mislabeled products. Herein, 17 (38%) of the 45 identified samples bought from 21 restaurants across 10 different districts were molecularly identified as different species to those declared by the restaurant staff or menu list (S3 Table). Similar substitution levels (from 26 to 50%) of samples collected in restaurants have been reported in other studies [13, 69, 70]. We want to emphasize, however, that mislabeling should not always be considered as fraud. Instead, it could be the result of species misidentification, due to the confusion generated by the use of different vernacular names in different regions or countries, or when mistakes occur during product information management by mid-chain players. Fortunately, many restaurateurs view seafood sustainability as a requisite for future viability, and some remarkable initiatives have been undertaken by Peruvian chefs engaging directly with artisanal fishers [71, 72]. Our results revealed that in cases of mislabeling, the species most commonly used as a replacement was dolphinfish (C. hippurus), which was served as grouper (SF17), corvine (SF23), sailfish (SF99, SF100, SF121), and cachema weakfish (SF130) in five different restaurants from La Libertad and Lima. The fact that dolphinfish meat is being used in some restaurants to replace other “white flesh” species including corvine drum was reported in a previous study [73] based on visual inspections (R. Gozzer, personal communication). The dolphinfish’s white flesh makes this species a potential substitute for others high-priced species. Peru is the main producer of dolphinfish with estimated landings accounting for more than 50% of global catches [73]. Peruvian dolphinfish fishery is targeted exclusively by the artisanal fleet, representing one of the nation’s most important artisanal fishery; however it is poorly regulated with high levels of informality along its supply chain [73]. Eight shellfish species including mollusks (octopuses, squids, scallops, mangrove cockle, and sea snail) and crustaceans (crab and shrimp) were identified from restaurant samples (S4 Table). Two species (whiteleg shrimp P. vannamei and Peruvian scallop A. purpuratus) account for most of Peruvian mariculture production [8]. Both are well known and widely accepted by consumers, becoming a target product for most seafood restaurants. In Peru, shrimp production has been growing steadily at about 10 percent annually since 2008 [56]. In 2017, shrimp production reached 26768 MT, of which 80% (21400 MT, valued at US$164.1 million) was exported [56]. On the other hand, Peruvian scallop production has decreased significantly from 67694 MT in 2013 to 13137 MT in 2017. An estimated 3300 MT (valued at US$54.3 million) was exported in 2017 [56]. The decline in scallop production was driven mainly by the “coastal El Niño”, which affected up to 98% of production in northern Peru during 2016–17 [74]. This drop in Peruvian scallop production has affected not only the domestic market but also global scallop trade [75]. Another valuable shellfish species is the Gould octopus Octopus mimus (Octopoda: Octopodidae), which supports an important artisanal fishery in Peru. Landing estimates were 5405 MT in 2016 [8]. A genetic study has suggested the possible conspecificity between O. mimus and the Hubb’s octopus O. hubbsorum [76]. The distribution of O. mimus is believed to be restricted from northern Peru to Chile, whereas O. hubbsorum is found from the Gulf of California to Oaxaca in Mexico [76]. However, some molecular studies have reported the presence of O. mimus in Central America and Ecuador [76, 77] (and references therein). We analyzed four octopus samples collected from RTs in LL, AN, and LI. Barcoding results matched samples SF72, SF81, and SF124 to O. mimus and sample SF14 to O. hubbsorum (BOLD similarity 100%). Our phylogenetic results (Fig 2) showed congruent topologies between BI and NJ trees, with samples SF72, SF81, and SF124 clustered within the O. mimus subclade (BA posterior probability 95%, NJ bootstrap support 77%) with a maximum of 0.2% (K2P) within-cluster divergence, while SF14 was within the O. hubbsorum subclade (BA posterior probability 97%, NJ bootstrap support 45%) showing a maximum within-cluster divergence of 0.3% (K2P). The minimum genetic distance (K2P) between both subclades was 0.7%. Interestingly, sample SF14 shares the same haplotype with the O. mimus specimen reported in Ecuador (GenBank accession KT335830) [77]. Data mined from customs information imports from the National Customs Superintendency of Peru (SUNAT) (http://www.aduanet.gob.pe/cl-ad-itconsultadwh/ieITS01Alias?accion=consultar&CG_consulta=2), showed that recent octopus imports were represented only by O. mimus from Chile (from 2014 to 2017) and O. vulgaris from the Philippines in 2014. Thus, without further evidence of O. hubbsorum imports or a recent range expansion towards the South Pacific, we assigned sample SF14 to Octopus mimus. Further studies must be carried out to solve the taxonomic status of the economically important O. mimus, which is still under debate.
Fig 2

Phylogenetic tree based on Bayesian inference (BI) and Neighbor-Joining (NJ) for the identification of samples SF14, SF72, SF81, and SF124 Octopus mimus.

Phylogenetic tree based on COI barcode sequences (576 bp) from samples SF14, SF72, SF81, and SF124 (Octopus mimus, this study) and other Octopus reference sequences available in BOLD and NCBI. Sample SF14 is highlighted in blue and shaded in yellow. Samples SF72, SF81, and SF124 are highlighted in green and shaded in orange. Bayesian consensus tree was inferred with five million generations under the GTR+I+G substitution model. NJ tree was constructed with 1000 bootstrap replicates under the Kimura-2-parameter (K2P) model. Nodal supports for Bayesian inference posterior probabilities and bootstrap values for NJ analysis (highlighted in bold) above 45% are shown. Samples from this study include identification code and GenBank accession numbers. Reference sequence labels include BOLD process ID and GenBank accession numbers. Vampire squid Vampyroteuthis infernalis and North Atlantic octopus Bathypolypus arcticus were used as outgroup.

Phylogenetic tree based on Bayesian inference (BI) and Neighbor-Joining (NJ) for the identification of samples SF14, SF72, SF81, and SF124 Octopus mimus.

Phylogenetic tree based on COI barcode sequences (576 bp) from samples SF14, SF72, SF81, and SF124 (Octopus mimus, this study) and other Octopus reference sequences available in BOLD and NCBI. Sample SF14 is highlighted in blue and shaded in yellow. Samples SF72, SF81, and SF124 are highlighted in green and shaded in orange. Bayesian consensus tree was inferred with five million generations under the GTR+I+G substitution model. NJ tree was constructed with 1000 bootstrap replicates under the Kimura-2-parameter (K2P) model. Nodal supports for Bayesian inference posterior probabilities and bootstrap values for NJ analysis (highlighted in bold) above 45% are shown. Samples from this study include identification code and GenBank accession numbers. Reference sequence labels include BOLD process ID and GenBank accession numbers. Vampire squid Vampyroteuthis infernalis and North Atlantic octopus Bathypolypus arcticus were used as outgroup.

Mislabeling

Overall, 35 (26.72%) out of the 131 identified samples were found to be mislabeled, the majority came from markets and restaurants. As expected, most (94.28%) of the misrepresented samples were processed or cooked, where morphological features had been altered or removed. Mislabeled samples included 15 bony fishes (42.86%), 13 sharks (37.14%), four batoids (11.43%), and three mollusk (8.57%) specimens. S3 Table summarizes all mislabeled samples detected in each retailer category. Except for grocery store (GS), where only one sample was collected, we detected at least one mislabeling in each sampling site: FLS (n = 1, 4.76%), WFM (n = 5, 71.42%), MK (n = 8, 34.78%), SMC (n = 1, 4.54%), MM (n = 3, 25%), and RT (n = 17, 37.77%). However, it must be mentioned that sample sizes from WFM (n = 7) and GS (n = 1) were not representative, which prevented us from making any meaningful inferences on mislabeling rates from those retailer categories. Nevertheless, our results could be used as a starting point to identify the major mislabeled species and the most common substitute species, as well as high priority stages for species substitution control along the supply chain. For example, among chondrichthyans, the most used species was the Chilean eagle ray M. chilensis, which was incorrectly labeled as manta (SF29-MK), guitarfish (SF58-SMC), and smooth-hound (SF62-MK). A high mislabeling rate (54.17%) was found among all shark samples (n = 24) collected across six different stages of the supply chain, with a total of 13 mislabeling cases involving two “Vulnerable” (S. zygaena and A. pelagicus) and one “Near Threatened” (Prionace glauca) species. This result could be a consequence of inaccurate species identification practices at early stages of the supply chain coupled with weak enforcement of shark regulations within the seafood sector. In Peru, the shark fishery is poorly monitored, worsened by the superficial taxonomic identification at landing sites across the country [34]. The bony fish most commonly used to replace other species was dolphinfish C. hippurus, which was served as grouper, corvine, sailfish, and cachema weakfish in six cases involving restaurant samples. Our results indicate that mislabeling is a common issue within the Peruvian seafood sector. Markets and restaurants accounted for the most cases of mislabeling, making those retailer categories potential candidates to be considered as priority control stages. However, further studies covering wider geographical areas with larger sample sizes from each supply chain stage are needed to support our mislabeling results. The use of the same common name for different species or a single species having different vernacular names even within the same region or country is a common issue in seafood labeling [78]. In Peru, seafood commercial names used for more than one species include “mero” (e.g., groupers Epinephelus spp., Mycteroperca spp., Alphestes spp.), “lenguado” (e.g., flounders Paralichthys spp., Etropus spp.), “tollo” (e.g., smooth-hounds Mustelus spp., Triakis spp., catsharks Schroederichthys spp.), “ojo de uva” (i.e., grape-eye seabass Hemilutjanus macrophthalmos and mocosa ruff Schedophilus haedrichi), “almeja” (e.g., clams Semele spp., Gari spp.), and “barquillo” (e.g., Chiton spp., Acanthopleura spp.), just to mention a few. Despite this large number, few efforts have been made to regulate the application of standardized Peruvian commercial fish names [79]. To standardize the nomenclature used for seafood products, official guides with acceptable market names were published by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1988 [80] and the European Union (EU) in 2001 [81]. To avoid ambiguities with accepted market names within the Peruvian seafood sector, the creation of an official standardized list of commercial fish names is strongly encouraged.

Conservation status and regulatory framework

A revision of the conservation status using the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species [82] showed that among all identified species, four samples belonged to species classified as “Endangered”: R. typus (n = 1) and P. hypophthalmus (n = 3); 13 shark and one marlin samples came from four species classified as “Vulnerable”: S. zygaena (n = 9), Isurus oxyrinchus (n = 1), A. pelagicus (n = 3), and K. albida (n = 1); and seven samples came from three species listed as “Near Threatened”: K. audax (n = 1), P. glauca (n = 5), and M. longirostris (n = 1). We should mention that the Endangered P. hypophthalmus production come from large-scale farms. The remaining identified samples to the species level (n = 86, 65.65%) correspond to species listed as “Least Concern” (n = 44), “Not Evaluated” (n = 23), and “Data Deficient” (n = 19). As aforementioned, M. japanica and M. mobular belong to the same species [47], with nomenclatural priority given to M. mobular [83]. Mobula japanica was considered a wide-ranging circumtropical species assessed as “Near Threatened”, whereas M. mobular was considered a Mediterranean endemic with a Red List Assessment of “Endangered” [84]. The lumping of both species represents a change in “taxonomic concept” requiring a reassessment for the Red List, which is scheduled as part of the Global Shark Trend’s pelagic species project in 2018 [84]. In Peru, the Ministry of Production (PRODUCE) through its Vice-ministry of Fisheries is the entity responsible for the establishment and application of fisheries management regulations. The legal framework that regulates fishing activities aiming to ensure preservation and the sustainable exploitation of the aquatic resources comprises the General Fisheries Act (DL N° 25977), its Regulations on the General Fisheries Act (DS N° 012-2001-PRODUCE, modified by DS N° 015-2007-PRODUCE), and the Control Regulation and Sanction of the Fishing and Aquaculture Activities (DS N° 017-2017-PRODUCE). A summary of the most important and recent regulations related to the three threatened species groups detected in this study (i.e., sharks, mobulids, and istiophorids) is presented in S4 Appendix, S5 Appendix, and S6 Appendix. The regulatory framework related to labeling of manufactured products detected herein is described in S7 Appendix.

Conclusions

This study represents the first attempt to assess the biodiversity present across different stages of the Peruvian supply chain using full and mini DNA barcoding, providing baseline data on the incidence of major mislabeled and the most common substitute species within the Peruvian seafood sector. Our results showed that full and mini-barcoding approaches are reliable and useful tools for species diversity determination, authentication and mislabeling detection of seafood products traded in the Peruvian market, which includes a wide range of taxonomic groups. A current drawback is the lack of barcoding reference sequences of some economically important Peruvian seafood species including smooth-hounds M. dorsalis and M. whitneyi, and butterfly ray Gymnura afuerae. In this light, the generation of a comprehensive Peruvian seafood barcoding library based on a mass genetic profiling of seafood biodiversity will be helpful to overcome these disadvantages. A major effort on seafood traceability must be undertaken by governmental agencies, fishery policy makers, and scientists to protect treasured marine species such as those on the IUCN Red List (e.g., endangered whale shark and vulnerable hammerhead shark) and to detect illegal fishing during closed seasons. The molecular evidence presented in this study suggests that illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing activities are occurring in some areas of the Peruvian seafood sector as well as fraudulent actions within the supply chain. Peruvian artisanal fisheries lack of basic information for their proper management, with no good records on commercial fisheries landings, and no proper monitoring of seafood along the supply chain [73]. Albeit illegal incidental or opportunistic catches of threatened marine species have been already reported by Peruvian governmental inspectors and researchers, that is, however, only the tip of the iceberg, compared with what is really slipping through the net. Action plans for implementing standard and emerging DNA technologies, including rapid molecular detection techniques and environmental DNA (eDNA) to monitor endangered and heavily exploited species must be a priority concern. To strengthen traceability, strict enforcement of fish inspection programs based on DNA barcoding throughout the seafood industry and retailers must be conducted by government agencies. DNA barcoding will help to prevent and combat illegal or “pirate” fishing, especially in a mega-diverse country with high fish consumption such as Peru.

PCR mix composition and amplification conditions for full and mini-barcoding primer sets using two different commercial master mix brands.

PCR and sequencing primers are indicated. (XLSX) Click here for additional data file.

PCR and sequencing efficiency of mini-barcoding primers.

PCR Polymerase chain reaction, SEQ Sequencing, P Positive result, N Negative result, MB mini-barcoding, FB fullbarcoding. (XLSX) Click here for additional data file.

Summary list of all mislabeled samples.

Mislabeled samples are grouped by retailer category and location. (XLSX) Click here for additional data file.

Molecular identification of 131 seafood samples.

Samples are grouped by origin (retailer category) seafood type, and retailer location. Samples code highlighted in bold and denoted with an asterisk (*) correspond to mislabeled samples. English/Spanish ("declared as"), identification results from BLAST and BOLD analysis, GenBank accession numbers and nucleotide consensus sequences generated in this study are given for each sample. Genera highlighted in bold correspond to samples identified to the genus level. (XLSX) Click here for additional data file.

Pie charts depicting percentage of seafood type contributions in each retailer category.

Wholesale fish markets (WFM, n = 7, only shark samples) and grocery store (GS, n = 1, tuna sample) categories are not included. (PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Phylogenetic identification results of samples SF65 striped marlin Kajikia audax and SF131 Atlantic white marlin K. albida.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Phylogenetic identification results of samples SF56, SF57, and SF85 smooth-hound Mustelus sp.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Phylogenetic identification results of samples SF42 and SF44 butterfly ray Gymnura sp.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Conservation status and regulatory framework of sharks.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Conservation status and regulatory framework of mobulids.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Conservation status and regulatory framework of istiophorids.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.

Regulatory framework related to labeling of manufactured products.

(PDF) Click here for additional data file.
  23 in total

1.  Fish species substitution and misnaming in South Africa: An economic, safety and sustainability conundrum revisited.

Authors:  Donna-Mareè Cawthorn; John Duncan; Chris Kastern; Junaid Francis; Louwrens C Hoffman
Journal:  Food Chem       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 7.514

2.  Shark mislabeling threatens biodiversity.

Authors:  Hugo Bornatowski; Raul Rennó Braga; Jean Ricardo Simões Vitule
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  DNA barcoding Australia's fish species.

Authors:  Robert D Ward; Tyler S Zemlak; Bronwyn H Innes; Peter R Last; Paul D N Hebert
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2005-10-29       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  A simple method for estimating evolutionary rates of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences.

Authors:  M Kimura
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  1980-12       Impact factor: 2.395

5.  Authentication of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using real-time PCR.

Authors:  Beatriz Herrero; Juan M Vieites; Montserrat Espiñeira
Journal:  Food Chem       Date:  2011-01-25       Impact factor: 7.514

6.  Comparative performance of the 16S rRNA gene in DNA barcoding of amphibians.

Authors:  Miguel Vences; Meike Thomas; Arie van der Meijden; Ylenia Chiari; David R Vieites
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2005-03-16       Impact factor: 3.172

7.  Enhanced primers for amplification of DNA barcodes from a broad range of marine metazoans.

Authors:  Jorge Lobo; Pedro M Costa; Marcos A L Teixeira; Maria S G Ferreira; Maria H Costa; Filipe O Costa
Journal:  BMC Ecol       Date:  2013-09-10       Impact factor: 2.964

8.  Shark fisheries in the Southeast Pacific: A 61-year analysis from Peru.

Authors:  Adriana Gonzalez-Pestana; Carlos Kouri J; Ximena Velez-Zuazo
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2014-07-21

9.  Tuna Species Substitution in the Spanish Commercial Chain: A Knock-On Effect.

Authors:  Ana Gordoa; Gustavo Carreras; Nuria Sanz; Jordi Viñas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  DAMBE6: New Tools for Microbial Genomics, Phylogenetics, and Molecular Evolution.

Authors:  Xuhua Xia
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 2.645

View more
  2 in total

1.  Mislabelling and high mercury content hampers the efforts of market-based seafood initiatives in Peru.

Authors:  Daniella Biffi; Andrea López-Mobilia; Shaleyla Kelez; Dean A Williams; Matthew M Chumchal; Molly Weinburgh
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 4.379

2.  DNA barcoding reveals global and local influences on patterns of mislabeling and substitution in the trade of fish in Mexico.

Authors:  Adrian Munguia-Vega; Renata Terrazas-Tapia; Jose F Dominguez-Contreras; Mariana Reyna-Fabian; Pedro Zapata-Morales
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-14       Impact factor: 3.752

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.