Ian,
Thank you for your detailed reply to the question on how to monitor onboard
catch results and fishing practices regarding tuna and mahi mahi. I have been
in the fishing end (onboard handling) of the business for 30 years and agree
that monitoring onboard post harvest handling of scrombroid fish is a difficult
task to say the least. However, if we want to make any progress in resolving
the problems of dockside sampling we have to take some steps in this direction.
I recently made a fact finding tour of tuna transhipment and testing
practices in the Indian Ocean where fish from a variety of fishing platforms were
loaded into a freezer hole of a larger cargo freezer to be shipped to a another
port in the Indian Ocean, unloaded for processing and then shipped into the EU.
The task of taking a valid sample is almost impossible when you consider the
size of the transport shipment to be 1000 tons or more. As you all know fishing
platforms although they may appear to be simillar are all a bit different.
Also, catch rates on a daily basis that tax the capacity of some vessels is also
a consideration. Finally, the method of fishing as you have pointed out. I
observed longline, troll caught and seined fish being unloaded in the port from
a variety of vessels each flying a different flag. The appearance of these
fish at unloading ranged from quality to poor at best. And we haven't yet talked
about unloading a -20C fish and allowing it to sit in a transport bin for 4
hours in a tropical ambient environment before it is transferred to the plant.
Lets keep this dialogue going as it is a most important question regarding
seafood safety worldwide.
Paul Dion
Paul Dion Associates, Inc.
Plymouth, MA
USA
In a message dated 11/8/2004 3:57:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,
listreader@megapesca.com writes:
> Subj: Re: Histamine sampling of tuna question
> Date: 11/8/2004 3:57:26 AM Eastern Standard Time
> From: listreader@megapesca.com
> To: seafood@ucdavis.edu
> CC: walter.staruszkiewicz@cfsan.fda.gov
> Sent from the Internet
>
>
>
> Dear Colleagues
>
> Thanks to Walter for his helpful comments and useful research study. As many
> will know, a significant proportion of the histamine producing species
> (including mahi mahi and various tunas) implicated in toxicity are caught by
> longlining. Longline fishing technology involves the setting a line sometimes
> 30-40km in length with hooks at intervals. A typical fishing pattern is 6 hours
> set + 4 hour rest + 6 hour haul. Therefore, with a "first in-last out"
> fishing pattern fish hooked at the start of the set can be in the water ("soak
> time") for 16 hours. Even under optimum conditions (first in-first out) fish
> could be in the ater for up to 10 hours. Higher catch rates significantly slow
> down the haul as the crew have to deal with the catch, regularly tricky live
> sharks, a secondary target in these fisheries. Yellowfin tuna and mahi mahi
> longline fisheries fisheries are mainly surface sets (compared to much deeper
> sets at the thermocline for swordfish, bigeye and bluefin). Surface !
> water
> temperatures in tropical tuna fisheries are typically 28-30 degrees C,
> frequently higher. Most fish die on the line and are brought on board dead. Some
> are alive onboard.
>
> Given the results of Walter's study (mahi mahi reaches 50ppm histamine after
> 12 hours in seawater at 26 degrees C, see below) it it is easy to see how
> tuna and mahi mahi can be well on the way to becoming toxic by the time they
> even arrive on board. My view is that the variability in histamine levels
> measured on imports of fresh tropical fish of these species is due mainly to the
> stage of the longline set where they are caught. Furthermore it would appear
> that the typical longline fishing practices eliminate most of the margin for
> mistreatment.
>
> Whilst taking Walter's point that testing at import is the only means of
> control for an import authority, it would be preferable to apply vessel level
> controls to prevent the development of histamine in the first place. What can
> be done in terms of onboard practices? Maximum soak time is a critical
> variable and fishing patterns should ensure "first in -first out" to reduce this.
> Similarly the length of the set should be reduced when seawater tempertaures
> are abnormally high. On deck, histamine producers should always be dealt with
> as a priority over non-histamine producers (eg.sharks) irrespective of catch
> order. Implementing a HACCP plan onboard runs into the problem that strictly
> speaking we should deal with each single fish as a batch, since the presence
> of the hazard depends on the catch history of individual fish. The critical
> variables are the time since death and temperature. However we have no means
> of measuring time of death, so use the maximum possible time of dea!
> th as a
> proxy, or note whether the fish is "live on board". Practically, tracking
> and monitoring temperature/time of individual fish on deck and in the fish room
> is extremely difficult on a working fishing vessel, but the use of remote
> temperature sensors and RFID tags seems to offer some promise of providing
> HACCP data without interfering too much in vessel operations.
>
> In conclusion, it seems that typical longline fishing practices for tropical
> tunas and mahi mahi give rise to conditions in which fish can acquire
> histamine toxicity. The only solution to this problem is through a fundamental
> re-appraisal of the operation of longline fishing practices. In the meanwhile
> producers are going to have to suffer trade repressive and costly sampling and
> testing at point of import.
>
> Yours
>
> Ian Goulding
> Fisheries consultant
> Megapesca Lda. PORTUGAL
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original message-----
> From: Pamela Tom pdtom@ucdavis.edu
> Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:12:20 -0500
> To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List seafood@ucdavis.edu
> Subject: [Spam] Re: Histamine sampling of tuna question
>
> To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List
>
> I'm posting the following response from Walter F. Struszkiewicz (U.S. Food
> and Drug Administration) and including links to histamine references.
>
> Pamela Tom
> Univeristy of California
> Sea Grant Extension Program
>
> ===========================================================================
> "Consumer illness from the ingestion of decomposed and scombrotoxic fish
> remains a major public health problem. Most of the unsafe fish are
> received as imported products. There has been a long standing problem of
> inadequate attention given to preventing bacterial decomposition at the
> point of harvest which results in the production of irreversible unsafe
> chemical changes in fish.
>
> "The progression of bacterial decomposition which leads to the formation
> of histamine and other biogenic amines begins in the anterior end of a
> fish and the highest concentrations of the amines are usually found in the
> lower anterior region. These changes are not always accompanied by
> obvious odors of decomposition within the muscle. It is necessary to
> sample the tissue at the anterior end cutting through the transverse
> section (backbone to belly) to have a high degree of reliability in
> assessing the safety of the fish. The sample location rather than the
> amount of tissue is the important factor. Our publication in the January
> 2004 issue of the J of Food Protection* documents the rapid formation of
> biogenic amines in susceptible fish.
>
> "The reality is that fish are harvested, delivered, transported and
> offered for sale in the U.S. that contain high concentrations of histamine
> due to bacterial decomposition. These shipments of fish usually consist
> of a mixture of very good quality fish commingled with decomposed and
> unsafe fish. They may be accompanied by "certificates" alleging an
> absence of histamine or decomposition. Our laboratories have identified
> scombrotoxic levels of histamine in such shipments and we have had
> numerous reports of consumer illness from scombrotoxic fish delivered at
> the retail level.
>
> "Until a valid control mechanism is established from the point of harvest
> at sea through the delivery of fish, chemical analysis will remain the
> only reliable test of safety for scombroid-type fish. "Certificates" and
> good intentions will not suffice as substitutes."
>
> Walter Staruszkiewicz
> Research Chemist
> FDA
> Laurel, MD
>
> *Journal of Food Protection: Vol. 67, No. 1, pp. 134141. Effects of
> On-Board and Dockside Handling on the Formation of Biogenic Amines in
> Mahimahi (Coryphaena hippurus), Skipjack Tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis), and
> Yellowfin Tuna (Thunnus albacares) WALTER F. STARUSZKIEWICZ, JAMES D.
> BARNETT, PATRICIA L. ROGERS, RONALD A. BENNER, JR., LYNN L. WONG, and JOHN
> COOK
>
> Abstract:
> http://apt.allenpress.com/aptonline/?request=get-abstract&issn=0362-028X&
> volume=067&issue=01&page=0134
>
> SeafoodNIC Histamine Links:
> http://seafood.ucdavis.edu/organize/histaminetoxin.htm
>
>
>
> Received: from nixon.ucdavis.edu ([169.237.105.5])
> by email14.webhosting-email.com (Merak 7.6.1) with ESMTP id EZA74671
> for <listreader@megapesca.com>; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 14:16:23 -0500
> Received: from host (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by nixon.ucdavis.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/it-std-5.2.0) with SMTP id
> iA7JCPgQ019396;
> Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:12:25 -0800 (PST)
> Received: from havana.ucdavis.edu (havana.ucdavis.edu [169.237.104.156])
> by nixon.ucdavis.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/it-std-5.2.0) with ESMTP id
> iA7JCMgQ019372
> for <seafood-rl@nixon.ucdavis.edu>; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:12:22 -0800 (PST)
> Received: from veni.ucdavis.edu (veni.ucdavis.edu [169.237.105.38])
> by havana.ucdavis.edu (8.12.10/8.12.9/it-defang-5.2.0) with ESMTP id
> iA7JCK95006942
> for <seafood@ucdavis.edu>; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:12:21 -0800 (PST)
> Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by veni.ucdavis.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/it-std-5.2.0) with ESMTP id
> iA7JCKaC015742
> for <seafood@ucdavis.edu>; Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:12:20 -0800 (PST)
> Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 11:12:20 -0800 (PST)
> From: Pamela Tom <pdtom@ucdavis.edu>
> X-X-Sender: szptom@veni.ucdavis.edu
> To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List <seafood@ucdavis.edu>
> Subject: [Spam] Re: Histamine sampling of tuna question
> In-Reply-To: <2662F396C3C2944FA57E1DD798FCFD9A01170D6F@CFSCP033>
> Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0411071053591.14792@veni.ucdavis.edu>
> References: <2662F396C3C2944FA57E1DD798FCFD9A01170D6F@CFSCP033>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.41
> Sender: owner-seafood@ucdavis.edu
> X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.2.10/991025/16:55 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=5.26 required=6.50
> tests=X_X_PRESENT,BAYES_90,NO_RDNS2 version=3.0
> X-Spam-Level: *****
> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0 (1.3) on
> email14.webhosting-email.com
>
>
>
> To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List
>
> I'm posting the following response from Walter F. Struszkiewicz (U.S. Food
> and Drug Administration) and including links to histamine references.
>
> Pamela Tom
> Univeristy of California
> Sea Grant Extension Program
>
> ===========================================================================
> "Consumer illness from the ingestion of decomposed and scombrotoxic fish
> remains a major public health problem. Most of the unsafe fish are
> received as imported products. There has been a long standing problem of
> inadequate attention given to preventing bacterial decomposition at the
> point of harvest which results in the production of irreversible unsafe
> chemical changes in fish.
>
> "The progression of bacterial decomposition which leads to the formation
> of histamine and other biogenic amines begins in the anterior end of a
> fish and the highest concentrations of the amines are usually found in the
> lower anterior region. These changes are not always accompanied by
> obvious odors of decomposition within the muscle. It is necessary to
> sample the tissue at the anterior end cutting through the transverse
> section (backbone to belly) to have a high degree of reliability in
> assessing the safety of the fish. The sample location rather than the
> amount of tissue is the important factor. Our publication in the January
> 2004 issue of the J of Food Protection* documents the rapid formation of
> biogenic amines in susceptible fish.
>
> "The reality is that fish are harvested, delivered, transported and
> offered for sale in the U.S. that contain high concentrations of histamine
> due to bacterial decomposition. These shipments of fish usually consist
> of a mixture of very good quality fish commingled with decomposed and
> unsafe fish. They may be accompanied by "certificates" alleging an
> absence of histamine or decomposition. Our laboratories have identified
> scombrotoxic levels of histamine in such shipments and we have had
> numerous reports of consumer illness from scombrotoxic fish delivered at
> the retail level.
>
> "Until a valid control mechanism is established from the point of harvest
> at sea through the delivery of fish, chemical analysis will remain the
> only reliable test of safety for scombroid-type fish. "Certificates" and
> good intentions will not suffice as substitutes."
>
> Walter Staruszkiewicz
> Research Chemist
> FDA
> Laurel, MD
>
> *Journal of Food Protection: Vol. 67, No. 1, pp. 134141. Effects of
> On-Board and Dockside Handling on the Formation of Biogenic Amines in
> Mahimahi (Coryphaena hippurus), Skipjack Tuna (Katsuwonus pelamis), and
> Yellowfin Tuna (Thunnus albacares) WALTER F. STARUSZKIEWICZ, JAMES D.
> BARNETT, PATRICIA L. ROGERS, RONALD A. BENNER, JR., LYNN L. WONG, and JOHN
> COOK
>
> Abstract:
> http://apt.allenpress.com/aptonline/?request=get-abstract&issn=0362-028X&
> volume=067&issue=01&page=0134
>
> SeafoodNIC Histamine Links:
> http://seafood.ucdavis.edu/organize/histaminetoxin.htm
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Pamela Tom [mailto:pdtom@ucdavis.edu]
> >Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 1:21 AM
> >To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List
> >Subject: Histamine sampling of tuna question
> >
> >To: Seafood HACCP Mailing List
> >
> >A subscriber to this list asked me to post this message. If you have
> >information, would you either share via the listserv for open discussion
> >or with me privately (pdtom@ucdavis.edu)?
> >
> >"During my visit to Ecuador a question came up about sampling for
> >histamine in tuna. The firm packs headed and gutted tuna (high quality)
> >for the US fresh market - Miami Seafood market and NY Fulton Seafood
> >market. They air freight everyday. After an FDA inspection they were
> >told to sample each fish for histamine by removing at least 50 grams of
> >flesh near the neck line fins (instead of the previous tail location).
> >
> >This type of sampling will destroy the esthetic quality of the fish and
> >make it unsaleable in this particular market. How is this matter is being
> >handled by other sellers of this product?"
> >
> >Pamela Tom
> >University of California
> >Sea Grant Extension Program
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Nov 08 2004 - 06:05:58 PST