DNA testing finds mislabelled species in surimi products
What it found
DNA analysis of 16 commercial surimi products found fish and cephalopod species that often did not match the label. 37.5% of the products were mislabelled, and some did not declare molluscs at all.
What they found
Animal and lab studies
Species found
DNA from 13 families, 19 genera and 16 species of fish, and from 3 families, 3 genera and 3 species of cephalopods was found across the samples. Gadidae fish DNA was in all 16 samples, and Gadus chalcogrammus was identified in 93.75% of them.
Molluscs in all samples
Mollusc DNA was found in every sample, though often at low levels. In 25% of samples it was less than 1% of the DNA, in 50% it was between 1% and 10%, and in 25% it was above 10%.
Other findings
Mislabelling rate
37.5% of the surimi products were mislabelled. All non-EU products had labelling problems, compared with 23.1% of EU products.
Undeclared molluscs
25% of the samples, all produced in non-EU countries, did not mention molluscs on the label even though mollusc DNA was found. The authors say this poses a potential health threat for allergic consumers.
Species substitution
25% of the samples declared a species that was not found in the DNA analysis. For example, one sample declared Micromesistius poutassou but no DNA of that species was found.
Vulnerable species used
Some samples contained species listed as vulnerable or endangered, including Paretroplus maculatus (Critically Endangered) and Trichopodus leeri (Near Threatened). One species found, Lutjanus rivulatus, has been linked to ciguatera poisoning.
What the authors conclude
“Overall, 37.5% of the SBPs' were found as mislabelled.”
Also in their conclusions
- They say the Ion Torrent NGS method proved suitable for identifying species in processed mixed seafood products, though further work is needed to optimise and standardise the protocol.
- They conclude that surimi production depends on catching and processing area, fishing season and species availability rather than a fixed resource.
- They call for stronger controls and better tools to protect both consumers and the environment, given the wide range of species found and the undeclared allergenic risks.
How it was done
Surimi is made from a mix of fish and cephalopod species, and current EU labelling rules do not require the species to be named. The authors wanted to test whether a new DNA sequencing method could identify species in these highly processed products and check label accuracy.
They analysed 16 commercial surimi-based products from Spain, Italy, Korea, China and Thailand. DNA was extracted and sequenced using the Ion Torrent Personal Genome Machine to identify fish and cephalopod species present. They also compared the results with the information on each product's label.
What it can’t tell you
- This study looked at only 16 products, so the mislabelling rate may not reflect all surimi products.
- The DNA method cannot show how much of each species is actually present in the product, only that its DNA was detected.
- The study cannot show whether eating these products would cause allergic reactions in any particular person.
Who paid
- Conflicts
- Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
- Authors work at
- University of Pisa, Italy; Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas (IIM-CSIC), Spain
The paper
- Title
- Advances in the analysis of complex food matrices: Species identification in surimi-based products using Next Generation Sequencing technologies
- Type
- Study
- Evidence
- Animals and lab studies
- Summarised from
- Full text
- Licence
- CC BY. Words in quotation marks are the authors’; the rest is our summary.
- Cite
- Giusti A, Armani A, Sotelo CG (2017). Advances in the analysis of complex food matrices: Species identification in surimi-based products using Next Generation Sequencing technologies. PloS one. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0185586Free full textPubMed 28968423DOI
Summary written 30 Sep 2026. Check it against the paper before it changes what you eat. How we summarise papers · Report an error