Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration?

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration? / Ballin, Nicolai Zederkopff; Vogensen, Finn Kvist; Karlsson, Anders H.

In: Meat Science, Vol. 83, No. 2, 2009, p. 165-174.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Ballin, NZ, Vogensen, FK & Karlsson, AH 2009, 'Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration?', Meat Science, vol. 83, no. 2, pp. 165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003

APA

Ballin, N. Z., Vogensen, F. K., & Karlsson, A. H. (2009). Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration? Meat Science, 83(2), 165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003

Vancouver

Ballin NZ, Vogensen FK, Karlsson AH. Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration? Meat Science. 2009;83(2):165-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003

Author

Ballin, Nicolai Zederkopff ; Vogensen, Finn Kvist ; Karlsson, Anders H. / Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration?. In: Meat Science. 2009 ; Vol. 83, No. 2. pp. 165-174.

Bibtex

@article{86c69840d43911dea1f3000ea68e967b,
title = "Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration?",
abstract = "Proper labelling of meat products is important to help fair-trade, and to enable consumers to make informed choices. However, it has been shown that labelling of species, expressed as weight/weight (w/w), on meat product labels was incorrect in more than 20% of cases. Enforcement of labelling regulations requires reliable analytical methods. Analytical methods are often based on protein or DNA measurements, which are not directly comparable to labelled meat expressed as w/w. This review discusses a wide range of analytical methods with focus on their ability to quantify and their limits of detection (LOD). In particular, problems associated with a correlation from quantitative DNA based results to meat content (w/w) are discussed. The hope is to make researchers aware of the problems of expressing DNA results as meat content (w/w) in order to find better alternatives. One alternative is to express DNA results as genome/genome equivalents.",
author = "Ballin, {Nicolai Zederkopff} and Vogensen, {Finn Kvist} and Karlsson, {Anders H}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003",
language = "English",
volume = "83",
pages = "165--174",
journal = "Meat Science",
issn = "0309-1740",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Species determination - can we detect and quantify meat adulteration?

AU - Ballin, Nicolai Zederkopff

AU - Vogensen, Finn Kvist

AU - Karlsson, Anders H

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Proper labelling of meat products is important to help fair-trade, and to enable consumers to make informed choices. However, it has been shown that labelling of species, expressed as weight/weight (w/w), on meat product labels was incorrect in more than 20% of cases. Enforcement of labelling regulations requires reliable analytical methods. Analytical methods are often based on protein or DNA measurements, which are not directly comparable to labelled meat expressed as w/w. This review discusses a wide range of analytical methods with focus on their ability to quantify and their limits of detection (LOD). In particular, problems associated with a correlation from quantitative DNA based results to meat content (w/w) are discussed. The hope is to make researchers aware of the problems of expressing DNA results as meat content (w/w) in order to find better alternatives. One alternative is to express DNA results as genome/genome equivalents.

AB - Proper labelling of meat products is important to help fair-trade, and to enable consumers to make informed choices. However, it has been shown that labelling of species, expressed as weight/weight (w/w), on meat product labels was incorrect in more than 20% of cases. Enforcement of labelling regulations requires reliable analytical methods. Analytical methods are often based on protein or DNA measurements, which are not directly comparable to labelled meat expressed as w/w. This review discusses a wide range of analytical methods with focus on their ability to quantify and their limits of detection (LOD). In particular, problems associated with a correlation from quantitative DNA based results to meat content (w/w) are discussed. The hope is to make researchers aware of the problems of expressing DNA results as meat content (w/w) in order to find better alternatives. One alternative is to express DNA results as genome/genome equivalents.

U2 - 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003

DO - 10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.06.003

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 20416768

VL - 83

SP - 165

EP - 174

JO - Meat Science

JF - Meat Science

SN - 0309-1740

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 15894048