Defining a Sampling Strategy for Okadaic Acid (OA) Toxins in Shellfish to Determine the Human Health Status of a Growing Area
In order to ensure food safety in Europe, the level of okadaic acid (OA) equivalents in live bivalve molluscs must not exceed 160 μg/kg of raw meat (Regulation 853/2004/EC). Therefore, sampling plans must be set up to monitor production areas, knowing that mussels be used as an indicator species (Regulation 854/2004/EC). During a contamination event, there is a high variability of contamination between mussels. For this reason, determining an appropriate sampling plan is difficult and must be made on a scientific basis. However, there has never been a probabilistic evaluation of the impact that sample size and the number of samples taken, have on the analytical results and the corresponding decision for the public safety of a specific lot of shellfish. In this paper we achieve this aim by the application of scientific method to contamination data already available in scientific publications. Variance data recorded in scientific publications are used to predict variance as a function of OA concentration. A lognormal distribution fits the observed OA distributions among individual mussels. A computer model is used to predict the probability of acceptance for a given sampling plan. By OC (Operating Characteristic) curves, the performance of several sampling plan designs is evaluated to demonstrate how to manipulate sample size, and number of samples analysed to reduce misclassification of production areas. According to these OC curves, a best fit sampling plan is proposed, which consists of taking two samples of 30–40 mussels each.
KeywordsSampling Plan Okadaic Acid Theoretical Distribution Producer Risk True Concentration
This project was financed by the BASELINE European research project, which is part of the 7th Framework Programme (grant agreement 222738). This project is titled “Selection and improving of fit-for-purpose sampling procedures for specific foods and risks” and spans from 2009 to 2013.
- Durborow RM (1999) Health and safety concerns in fisheries and aquaculture. Occup Med State Art Rev 14(2):373–406Google Scholar
- Edebo L, Lange S, Li XP, Allenmark K, Lindgren K, Thompson R (1988) Seasonal, geographic and individual variation of okadaic acid content in cultivated mussels in Sweden. APMIS Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand 96(7–12):1036–1042Google Scholar
- Gestal-Otero JJ (2000) Non-neurotoxic toxins. In: Botana LM (ed) Seafood and freshwater toxins. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 45–64Google Scholar
- Mak CY, Yu H, Choi MC, Shen X, Lam MHW, Martin M, Wu RSS, Wong PS, Richardson BJ, Lam PKS (2005) Okadaic acid, a causative toxin of diarrhetic shellfish poisoning, in green-lipped mussels Perna viridus from Hong Kong fish culture zones: method development and monitoring. Mar Pollut Bull 51:1010–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Whitaker TB, Saltsman JJ, Ware GM, Slate AB (2007a) Evaluating the performance of sampling plans to detect Hypogycin A in ackee fruit shipments imported to the United States. J AOAC Int 90(4):1060–1072Google Scholar
- Whitaker TB, Slate AB, Hurley JM, Giesbrecht FG (2007b) Sampling almonds for aflatoxin, Part II: estimating risks associated with various sampling plan designs. J AOAC Int 90(3):778–785Google Scholar
- Wrange A-L (2008) Investigating mechanisms behind species-specific differences in uptake of diarrhetic shellfish toxins (DST) between oysters (Ostre edulis) and mussels (Mytilus edulis). Master thesisGoogle Scholar