ArticlePeerJ2021
Multiple drivers behind mislabeling of fish from artisanal fisheries in La Paz, Mexico.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Seafood mislabeling has the potential to mask changes in the supply of species due to overfishing, while also preventing consumers from making informed choices about the origin, quality and sustainability of their food. Thus, there is a need to understand mislabeling and analyze the potential causes behind it to propose solutions. We conducted a COI DNA barcoding study in La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico, with 74 samples from fish markets and 50 samples from restaurants. We identified 38 species sold under 19 commercial names, from which at least ∼80% came from local small-scale fisheries. Overall, 49 samples, representing 40% (95% CI [31.4-48.3]) were considered mislabeled in our samples. Based on analyses where species were assigned to three price categories, economic incentives were associated with approximately half of the mislabeling events observed, suggesting that other motivating factors might simultaneously be at play. Using a network approach to describe both mislabeling (when species are mislabeled as the focal species) and substitution (when the focal species is used as substitute for others), we calculated proxies for the net availability of each species in the market. We found that local fish landings were a significant predictor of the net availability of the 10 most important commercial species at retail, but this true availability was masked to the eyes of the final consumer by both mislabeling and substitution. We hypothesize that the level of supply of each species could help explain mislabeling and substitution rates, where species in low supply and high demand could show higher mislabeling rates and rarely be used as substitutes, while species in high supply and low demand could be used as substitutes for the preferred species. Other factors affecting mislabeling include national regulations that restrict the fishing or commercialization of certain species and local and global campaigns that discourage specific patterns of consumption. We discuss how these factors might influence mislabeling and propose some solutions related to communication and education efforts to this local and global challenge.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.