DNA BARCODING FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PROCESSED TUNA FISH IN INDONESIAN MARKET

Authors

  • Mala Nurilmala Aquatic Product Technology Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl. Agatis, FPIK – Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
  • Utut Widyastuti Biology Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl. Meranti, FMIPA – Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
  • Wisnu Ananta Kusuma Computer Science Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl Meranti Wing 20 Level V Kampus Dramaga IPB, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
  • Nurjanaha Nurjanaha Aquatic Product Technology Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl. Agatis, FPIK – Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
  • Nuring Wulansari Aquatic Product Technology Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl. Agatis, FPIK – Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia
  • Yustin Widyatuti Aquatic Product Technology Dept., Bogor Agricultural University, Jl. Agatis, FPIK – Kampus IPB Darmaga, Bogor 16680, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.8190

Keywords:

Mislabeling, PCR, tuna

Abstract

DNA barcoding is a molecular technique to characterize species organism using a short DNA sequence. Recently, it becomes useful tool to detect seafood mislabeling and species substitution. Cytochrome b is one of the mitochondrial gene used in DNA barcoding. In order to face the regulation of AFTA (ASEAN Free Trade Area), the accurate method to detect the fish species and its products is needed in order to avoid the fraudulent in Indonesia. Thus, an attempt was carried out to identify authentication for tuna’s products (sushi, fish ball, meat floss, and canned tuna). The samples were collected from, Bogor, West Java, Indonesia. DNA was isolated according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The amplification of DNA by PCR was carried out, then the direct sequence was performed. In the present study, DNA barcoding of tuna’s product using cytochrome b were elucidated. The amplification of DNA by PCR was successfully obtained from tuna’s sample except one of canned tuna (K3). It showed that one of the canned tuna as in the label did not contain tuna. It indicated that there was an economic fraud for one of canned tuna.

References

Majkowski. 2007. Global Fishery Resources of Tuna and Tuna-Like Species. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. Rome (IT): FAO. 483: 54.

FAO. 2009. Food and Agriculture Organization. 2009. FAO yearbook 2007: Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics. Rome (IT): FAO: 73.

KKP. 2014. Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan Angka Tahun 2014 [Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fishery: 2014 Indonesian Fishery Statistics]. Kementrian KKP. [Bahasa Indonesia].

Mackie, I. M., S. E. Pryde, C. Gonzales-Sotelo, I. Medina, R. Peréz-Martin, J. Quinteiro, et al. 1999. Challenges in the Identification of Species of Vanned Fish. Trend and Food Science and Technology. 10: 9–14.

Warner, K., W. Timme, B. Lowell, and M. Hirshfield. 2013. Oceana Study Reveals Seafood Fraud Nationwide. Oceana. 11: 1–69.

Marko, P. B., S. C. Lee, A. M. Rice, J. M. Gramling, T. M. Fitzhenry, J. S. McAalister, et al. 2004. Mislabelling of A Depleted Reef Fish. Nature. 430: 309–310.

Maralit, B. A., R. D. Aguila, M. F. H. Ventolero, S. K. L. Perez, D. A. Willette, and M. D. Santos. 2013. Detection of Mislabeled Commercial Fishery By-products in The Philippines Using DNA Barcodes and Its Implications to Food Traceability and safety. Food Control. 33: 119–125.

Filonzi, L., S. Chiesa, M. Vaghi, and F. N. Marzano. 2010. Molecular Barcoding Reveals Mislabelling of Commercial Fish Products in Italy. Food Research International. 43: 1383–1388.

Mackie, I. M., S. E. Pryde, C. Gonzales-Sotelo, I. Medina, R. Peréz-Martin, J. Quinteiro, et al.1999. Challenges in The Identification of Species of Vanned Fish. Trend and Food Science and Technology. 10: 9–14

Strauss, R. E., and C. E. Bond. 1990. Taxonomic Methods: Morphology. In Schreck, C. B. and P. B. Moyle (eds.). Methods for Fish Biology. Bethesda: American Fisheries Society.

Galimberti, A., F. De Mattia, A. Losa, I. Bruni, S. Federici, M. Casiraghi, et al. 2013. DNA Barcoding as A New Tool for Food Traceability. Food Research International. 50: 55–63.

Baker, J. A. 2000. Molecular Methods in Ecology. Australia: Blackwell Science.

Wulansari, N., M. Nurilmala, and Nurjanah. 2015. Detection of Tuna and Processed Products Based on Protein and DNA Barcoding]. Jurnal Pengolahan Hasil Perikanan Indonesia. 18(2): 119–127. [Bahasa Indonesia].

Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A., and Kumar, S. 2013. MEGA 6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution. 30: 2725–2729.

Ferri, E., M. Barbuto, O. Bain, A. Galimberti, S. Uni, R. Guerriero, et al. 2009. Integrated Taxonomy: Traditional Approach and DNA Barcoding for the Identification of Filarioid Worms and Related Parasites (Nematoda). Frontiers in Zoology. 6(1): 1–12.

Nurilmala, M., H. Ushio, G. Kaneko, and Y. Ochiai. 2013. Assessment of Commercial Quality Evaluation of Yellowfin Tuna (Thunnus albacares) Meat Based on Myoglobin Properties. Food Science Technology. 19(2): 237–243.

Zhao, W., Y. Zhao, Y. Pan, X. Wang, Z. Wang, and J. Xie. 2013. Authentication and Traceability of Nibea albiflora from Surimi Products by Species-specipic Polymerase Chain Reaction. Food Control. 31: 97–101.

Nicole, S., E. Negrisol, G. Eccher, R. Mantovani, T. Patarnello, D. L. Erickson, W. J. Kress, G. Barcaccia. 2012. DNA Barcoding as A Reliable Method for Authentication of Commercial Seafood Products. Food Technology and Biotechnology. 50(4): 387–398.

Downloads

Published

2016-04-12

How to Cite

DNA BARCODING FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PROCESSED TUNA FISH IN INDONESIAN MARKET. (2016). Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering), 78(4-2). https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.8190