Identification of freshwater fish commercially labelled “perch” by isoelectric focusing and two-dimensional electrophoresis

Berrini, A.; Tepedino, Valentina; Borromeo, V.; Secchi, C.

doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.04.007

Cited by 52 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Chromatographic and electrophoretic techniques have proved to be useful in food components identification (Berrini, Tepedino, Borromeo, & Secchi, 2006;Mackie et al, 2000;Mayer, 2005). However, although they are considerable value in certain instances, these methods are not convenient for routine sample analyses because they are relatively costly, time consuming, and complex to perform.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of food authenticity by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of food authenticity by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In 2002, Chen and Hwang [23] compared extracts obtained from sarcoplasmic, myofibrillar, SDS-soluble, and urea-soluble proteins by sodium dodecyl sulfatepolyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) with Coomassie blue/silver double staining for species identification of puffer fish. An inappropriate labeling of several fish species, commercially sold under the general label "perch," was revealed using Isoelectric Focusing (IEF) and two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) for the correct fish identification [24]. Moreover, two-dimensional electrophoresis (2-DE) associated with one-dimensional electrophoresis (1-DE) was used to discriminate wild-type from farmed cod muscle fillets under different modality of fish production [25].…”

Section: Biological Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview on Untargeted Methods to Combat Food Frauds: A Focus on Fishery Products

Fiorino

Garino

Arlorio

et al. 2018

Journal of Food Quality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Authenticity and traceability of food products are of primary importance at all levels of the production process, from raw materials to finished products. Authentication is also a key aspect for accurate labeling of food, which is required to help consumers in selecting appropriate types of food products. With the aim of guaranteeing the authenticity of foods, various methodological approaches have been devised over the past years, mainly based on either targeted or untargeted analyses. In this review, a brief overview of current analytical methods tailored to authenticity studies, with special regard to fishery products, is provided. Focus is placed on untargeted methods that are attracting the interest of the analytical community thanks to their rapidity and high throughput; such methods enable a fast collection of "fingerprinting signals" referred to each authentic food, subsequently stored into large database for the construction of specific information repositories. In the present case, methods capable of detecting fish adulteration/substitution and involving sensory, physicochemical, DNA-based, chromatographic, and spectroscopic measurements, combined with chemometric tools, are illustrated and commented on.

show abstract

“…Electrophoretic, chromatographic and immunological methods of protein analysis have been pushed to the background due to the greater stability and higher information content of DNA [16]. However, isoelectric focusing (IEF) of sarcoplasmic proteins is still in use as a rapid, low-cost and reliable screening method for the identification of raw or breaded fish products [17][18][19][20][21]. Recently, proteomics (twodimensional electrophoresis combined with mass spectroscopy) has been used as an additional tool for fish species identification, e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%