Identification of Goose, Mule Duck, Chicken, Turkey, and Swine in Foie Gras by Species-Specific Polymerase Chain Reaction

Abstract

A specific Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) has been developed for the identification of goose (Anser anser), mule duck (Anas platyrhynchos x Cairina moschata), chicken (Gallus gallus), turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), and swine (Sus scrofa domesticus) in foie gras. A forward common primer was designed on a conserved DNA sequence in the mitochondrial 12S ribosomal RNA gene (rRNA), and reverse primers were designed to hybridize on species-specific DNA sequences of each species considered. The different sizes of the species-specific amplicons, separated by agarose gel electrophoresis, allowed clear identification of goose, mule duck, chicken, turkey, and swine in foie gras. Analysis of experimental mixtures demonstrated that the detection limit of the assay was approximately 1% for each species analyzed. This genetic marker can be very useful for the accurate identification of these species, avoiding mislabeling or fraudulent species substitution in foie gras.

Identification of Different Animal Species in Meat and Meat Products: Trends and Advances

“…Species-specific primers targeting 12S and 16 rRNA were applied for detection of some animal species like deer and some ruminant animals in meat products by Ha et al (2006). Mule duck was identified by the primer sets of 12S and 5S ribosomal RNA, and a-actin genes (Rodriguez et al 2001(Rodriguez et al , 2003a(Rodriguez et al , 2003b(Rodriguez et al and 2004.…”

A nuclear DNA-based species determination and DNA quantification assay for common poultry species

“…Since mtDNA occurs in high copy numbers in each cell and is able to withstand degradation and environmental challenges, it is well suited for use in food authentication assays. MtDNA assays have already been developed and used for species testing in food safety management and fraudulence using both end-point PCR and qPCR techniques (Dooley et al 2004;Köppel et al 2009;Woolfe and Primrose 2004;Dalmasso et al 2004;Zha et al 2010;Rodriguez et al 2003;Fumiere et al 2006;Eugster et al 2009;Tanabe et al 2007). Despite mtDNA's durability (Hajibabaei et al 2007), nuclear loci are more advantageous for DNA quantification because the diploid (instead of multiple) copy number Walker et al 2004) makes it more predictive of nuclear DNA profiling success and more relevant to identity testing and sample traceability than multi-copy and/or non-nuclear markers (Alonso et al 2004;Timken et al 2005).…”

“…The integration of species determination and nuclear DNA quantification into a single assay will streamline downstream genotyping analysis, and improve the quality of the DNA profiles while conserving reagents (Evans et al 2007;Lindquist et al 2011;Kanthaswamy et al 2012). Many of the DNA-based food authentication assays are multiplexed end-point PCR assays (Dalmasso et al 2004;Zha et al 2010;Ghovvati et al 2009;Rodriguez et al 2003). A majority of these protocols require subsequent steps such as restriction enzyme digestion or gel electrophoresis for species identification after PCR.…”

Biological Identifications Through DNA Barcodes

“…Many of the other regions studied are also located in the mtDNA. The coding regions for 12S and 16S ribosomal RNA [8][9][10], and the noncoding D-loop region [7,11,12] have shown their potential to be the targets for the species test.…”