Generic placeholder image

Current Nutrition & Food Science


ISSN (Print): 1573-4013
ISSN (Online): 2212-3881

Research Article

Identification of Mislabeling Some Meat Products Sold on the Iran Market Using PCR-RFLP

Author(s): Maryam Farshidi, Reza Mohammadi, Mohammad Reza Sehatkhah and Behzad Ebrahimi*

Volume 16, Issue 2, 2020

Page: [170 - 175] Pages: 6

DOI: 10.2174/1573401314666181011121539

Price: $65


Background: Mislabeling of meat products due to their high market values is a food fraud, which can result in economic deception. Currently, a little information on mislabeling is available in Iran. Therefore, the aim of this study was to carry out a market survey on a variety of meat products sold in Iran to investigate mislabeling.

Methods: A total of 31 meat product samples were purchased from local retailers including supermarkets and local butchers. These samples included salami (n = 6), hamburger (n = 15) and minced meat (n = 10). Labels claimed that the products only contained beef. DNA was extracted from samples and tested using PCR-RFLP for the presence of chicken traces.

Results: Of the 31 meat products, 23 included mislabeling, which substituted low-cost chicken for costly beef. Results showed that six of six salami (100%), nine of 15 hamburger (60%) and eight of ten minced meat (80%) contained chicken meat not listed in ingredient labels.

Conclusion: Overall, results from the current study greatly warn consumers on potential economic deception occurring in meat products in Iran. This study helps meat industries to address potentially fraudulent activities and improve sanitary techniques during meat processes.

Keywords: Adulteration, mislabeling, PCR-RFLP, food fraud, economic deception, fraudulent activities.

Graphical Abstract
Fajardo V, González I, Martín I, et al. Real-time PCR for quantitative detection of chamois (Rupicapra rupicapra) and pyrenean ibex (Capra pyrenaica) in meat mixtures. J AOAC Int 2008; 91(1): 103-11.
[PMID: 18376592]
Ballin NZ, Vogensen FK, Karlsson AH. Species determination - Can we detect and quantify meat adulteration? Meat Sci 2009; 83(2): 165-74.
[] [PMID: 20416768]
Soares S, Amaral JS, Mafra I, Oliveira MBPP. Quantitative detection of poultry meat adulteration with pork by a duplex PCR assay. Meat Sci 2010; 85(3): 531-6.
[] [PMID: 20416827]
Ayaz Y, Ayaz ND, Erol I. Detection of species in meat and meat products using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J Muscle Foods 2006; 2005(17): 214-20.
Hellberg RS, Hernandez BC, Hernandez EL. Identi fi cation of meat and poultry species in food products using DNA barcoding. Food Control [Internet] 2017; 80: 23-8.
Ali ME, Razzak MA, Hamid SBA. Multiplex PCR in species authentication: Probability and prospects: a review. Food Anal Methods 2014; 7(10): 1933-49.
Ali ME, Razzak MA, Hamid SBA, et al. Multiplex PCR assay for the detection of five meat species forbidden in Islamic foods. Food Chem 2015; 177: 214-24.
[] [PMID: 25660879]
Murugaiah C, Noor ZM, Mastakim M, Bilung LM, Selamat J, Radu S. Meat species identification and Halal authentication analysis using mitochondrial DNA. Meat Sci 2009; 83(1): 57-61.
[] [PMID: 20416658]
Erwanto Y, Abidin MZ, Sugiyono EYPM, Rohman A. Identification of pork contamination in meatballs of Indonesia local market using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) analysis. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2014; 27(10): 1487-92.
[] [PMID: 25178301]
Girish PS, Anjaneyulu AS, Viswas KN, et al. Meat species identification by polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) of mitochondrial 12S rRNA gene. Meat Sci 2005; 70(1): 107-12.
[] [PMID: 22063286]
ISO 21569. Foodstuffs - Methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products Qualitative nucleic acid based methods. International Standardization Organisation 2005.
Hsieh YHP. Meat species identification. In: Hui YH, Ed. Handbook of food science, technology and engineering. CRC press: Boca Raton, Florida, United States 2006; Vol. 3, pp. 30-01-19.
Flores‐Munguia ME, Bermudez‐Almada MC, Vázquez‐Moreno L. A research note: detection of adulteration in processed traditional meat products. J Muscle Foods 2000; 11(4): 319-25.
Restani P, Ballabio C, Tripodi S, Fiocchi A. Meat allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2009; 9(3): 265-9.
[] [PMID: 19369863]
FSAI. survey finds horse DNA in some beef burger products 2009.
Cawthorn D, Steinman HA, Hoffman LC. A high incidence of species substitution and mislabelling detected in meat products sold in South Africa. Food Control 2013; 32(2): 440-9.
Quinto CA, Tinoco R, Hellberg RS. DNA barcoding reveals mislabeling of game meat species on the U.S. commercial market. Food Control 2016; 59: 386-92.
Özpinar H, Tezmen G, Gökçe İ. Tekiner İh. Detection of animal species in some meat and meat products by comparatively using DNA microarray and real time PCR methods. Kafkas Univ Vet Fak 2013; 19(2): 245-52.
Hsieh YP, Woodward BB, Ho SHHOSS-H. Detection of species substitution in raw and cooked meats using immunoassays. J Food Prot 1995; 58(5): 555-9.
[] [PMID: 31137275]
Surowiec I, Fraser PD, Patel R, Halket J, Bramley PM. Metabolomic approach for the detection of mechanically recovered meat in food products. Food Chem 2011; 125(4): 1468-75.
Owusu-Apenten R. Food protein analysis: Quantitative effects on processing CRC Press: Boca Raton, Florida, United States 2002; Vol 118

Rights & Permissions Print Export Cite as
© 2023 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy