4.7 Article

Lobster Supply Chains Are Not at Risk from Paralytic Shellfish Toxin Accumulation during Wet Storage

期刊

TOXINS
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins13020129

关键词

lobster health; toxic algae; Alexandrium; Jasus edwardsii

资金

  1. Fisheries Research and Development Corporation [2017-051, 2017-086]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The research shows that Southern Rock Lobsters exposed to toxic algal cells did not accumulate PST toxins and did not have any negative impacts on their health. This suggests that there is no risk of PST accumulation or negative effects on survival or quality from exposure to toxic algal cells.
Lobster species can accumulate paralytic shellfish toxins (PST) in their hepatopancreas following the consumption of toxic prey. The Southern Rock Lobster (SRL), Jasus edwardsii, industry in Tasmania, Australia, and New Zealand, collectively valued at AUD 365 M, actively manages PST risk based on toxin monitoring of lobsters in coastal waters. The SRL supply chain predominantly provides live lobsters, which includes wet holding in fishing vessels, sea-cages, or processing facilities for periods of up to several months. Survival, quality, and safety of this largely exported high-value product is a major consideration for the industry. In a controlled experiment, SRL were exposed to highly toxic cultures of Alexandrium catenella at field relevant concentrations (2 x 10(5) cells L-1) in an experimental aquaculture facility over a period of 21 days. While significant PST accumulation in the lobster hepatopancreas has been reported in parallel experiments feeding lobsters with toxic mussels, no PST toxin accumulated in this experiment from exposure to toxic algal cells, and no negative impact on lobster health was observed as assessed via a wide range of behavioural, immunological, and physiological measures. We conclude that there is no risk of PST accumulation, nor risk to survival or quality at the point of consumption through exposure to toxic algal cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据