A risk scoring system for seafood supply chain breaches and examination of freshwater fish imported to Australia
Food Quality and Safety, ISSN: 2399-1402, Vol: 5
2021
- 5Citations
- 29Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Legislative changes have altered the way imported edible seafood is inspected in Australia. Greater onus of responsibility has been placed on exporting countries to provide documentary evidence of adherence to internally recognized food safety standards. According to global trade agreements, any additional safety tests applied to freshwater fish imported into Australia must be justified. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop a risk scoring method to provide justification for identifying countries as 'Freshwater fish high risk' and to examine the seafood they export to Australia for seafood supply chain breaches. Scoring was conducted using six predictor variables, identified in the literature as important contributors to seafood supply chain breaches, to achieve the outcome variable, Country considered 'Freshwater fish high risk'. Sixty-seven fish fillets (9.55 kg) of the same species were examined from the third highest scoring country (Country 20) and 562 (5.6 kg) whole fish from the sixth highest scoring country (Country 22). Country 20 had supply chain breaches of 28 macroscopic yellow cysts in one fillet. Two hundred and thirteen parasites and other supply chain breaches were identified in fish from Country 22, including retained liver (91 per cent), visible mud (11 per cent), a variety of debris (16 per cent) and, depending on the commodity code, these fish were imported to Australia under full intestine (90 per cent), retained gills (89 per cent), and partial intestine (9 per cent). Three serious physical hazards were recovered from the edible portion of three 'consumer-ready' fish and snails of Genus Lymnaea and Indoplanorbis were recovered from gill mud also from 'consumer-ready' fish. The study showed variable results from the scoring system and vast differences in seafood supply chain breaches between the third and sixth highest scoring countries.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know