Battling Fish Fraud With DNA Testing

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Battling Fish Fraud With DNA Testing

Posted by samzenpus on Friday March 23, 2012 @06:44AM from the these-are-not-the-eels-you-are-looking-for dept.

itwbennett writes "High demand, high prices, and nearly identical cheaper alternatives is a recipe for fraud. Eel fraud, that is. This has led Japanese researchers to develop a method to cheaply and quickly batch-test DNA by taking small tissue samples from thousands of eels. 'If a non-local eel is found in a batch, more tests will be performed to find the guilty foreigner.'"

16 of 63 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Not just Eel by halfEvilTech · 2012-03-23 06:50 · Score: 2, Informative

This seems to be a growing problem in both fish markets and sushi shops. Shops are trying to sell off one type of fish as another that looks and tastes similiar. Other issues come from labeling as wild caught vs farm raised.
Take salmon for example. Wild caught will stay pink as it cooks where farm raised will not. But they look the same when raw.
1. Re:Not just Eel by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-03-23 07:04 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Hmmm, if the bad guys sell a piece of a more common fish passing it off as a rarer (sometimes endangered) species, is it necessarily 100% wrong? Doesn't it decrease the price of the rarer fish, thus decreasing the drive of fishermen to hunt it? It's not like the people eating it would die from different taste. (But what do I know, being a man of simple tastes...)
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
2. Re:Not just Eel by Misanthrope · 2012-03-23 07:05 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  That's not true, the color comes from the same pigment astaxanthin. The amount in the feed determines the color and can be tailored by the farm. Admittedly farmed salmon is horrible and is a bit like raising lions for food...
3. Re:Not just Eel by seifried · 2012-03-23 07:25 · Score: 2
  
  Yes it is wrong, it's called fraud. There may also be health concerns, e.g. allergies.
4. Re:Not just Eel by rtaylor · 2012-03-23 07:34 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  In Japan the opposite was happening just as frequently. The endangered accidentally caught fish was being sold as a commonly available fish.
  
  --
  Rod Taylor
MP sketch reloaded by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-03-23 06:51 · Score: 3, Funny

"My hovercraft is full of eels."
"DNA testing proves you're lying."
(being led away in handcuffs) "It's a fair cop."

--
Ezekiel 23:20
1. Re:MP sketch reloaded by noh8rz3 · 2012-03-23 07:05 · Score: 2
  
  the "foreigner" is a non-domestic eel. syas nothing about the importation source or who is doing it.
DNA testing for fish? by Anne_Nonymous · 2012-03-23 06:52 · Score: 5, Funny

Seems like an eel-conceived idea to me.
1. Re:DNA testing for fish? by ddd0004 · 2012-03-23 06:56 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Ugh.
  You know they never tell you about the downside of being literate. You just have to find out by reading a joke like that.
Re:Good for Japan by what2123 · 2012-03-23 07:01 · Score: 4, Insightful

While I don't disagree with you points about the FDA-Bullshit and it's ability to fail tremendously the past 5 years, I really think you're off-base completely one-siding it to a "Republican" problem. It's an American problem, which includes the Dems, Repubs, Greens or whatever-you-have-it. The real problem is that both sides know you will "fight" for a side so that you keep ignoring the transfer of power from citizens to that of boards and cronies of the elected few.
Re:BJs by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-23 07:03 · Score: 2, Funny

New headline: DNA Tested By BJs
Dumb Consumers? by crow · 2012-03-23 07:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

This sounds a lot like fraud in the wine business, where a relatively cheap wine is relabeled as an expensive wine.
Both in the fish market, and in the wine market, taste tests show that consumers generally can't tell the difference. If consumers were smart, they would have chosen the cheaper product in the first place. However, consumers are often more concerned about the image of the product than the product itself, so they buy the effectively identical more expensive product.
Yes, the fraud is wrong, but I can't say I feel that horrible about it, as the consumer is still effectively getting what they pay for--something expensive that tastes just like something cheap. Perhaps the resources would be better spent worrying about crimes with real victims.
1. Re:Dumb Consumers? by Guppy · 2012-03-23 07:48 · Score: 2
  
  Both in the fish market, and in the wine market, taste tests show that consumers generally can't tell the difference. If consumers were smart, they would have chosen the cheaper product in the first place.
  
  And not only would they have saved money, they might have gotten less mercury as well. More expensive species of fish tend to be on higher trophic levels.
2. Re:Dumb Consumers? by St.Creed · 2012-03-23 11:58 · Score: 2
  
  IN this particular case, it's very likely the fraudulent fish is the one that's best for the environment :/
  
  --
  Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
Nearly identical cheaper alternatives? by morphotomy · 2012-03-23 07:13 · Score: 2

If the cheaper version is nearly identical then what warrants the high price to begin with?
1. Re:Nearly identical cheaper alternatives? by Abreu · 2012-03-23 08:33 · Score: 2
  
  Snobbishness, of course!
  
  --
  No sig for the moment.