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 â¼80% 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.
ABSTRACT
Strandings of marine megafauna can provide valuable information on cause of death at sea. However, as stranding probabilities are usually very low and highly variable in space and time, interpreting the results can be challenging. We evaluated the magnitude and distribution of at-sea mortality of marine turtles along the Pacific coast of Baja California Sur, México during 2010-11, using a combination of counting stranded animals and drifter experiments. A total of 594 carcasses were found during the study period, with loggerhead (62%) and green turtles (31%) being the most common species. 87% of the strandings occurred in the southern Gulf of Ulloa, a known hotspot of loggerhead distribution in the Eastern Pacific. While only 1.8% of the deaths could be definitively attributed to bycatch (net marks, hooks), seasonal variation in stranding frequencies closely corresponded to the main fishing seasons. Estimated stranding probabilities from drifter experiments varied among sites and trials (0.05-0.8), implying that only a fraction of dead sea turtles can be observed at beaches. Total mortality estimates for 15-day periods around the floater trials were highest for PSL, a beach in the southern Gulf of Ulloa, ranging between 11 sea turtles in October 2011 to 107 in August 2010. Loggerhead turtles were the most numerous, followed by green and olive ridley turtles. Our study showed that drifter trials combined with beach monitoring can provide estimates for death at sea to measure the impact of small-scale fisheries that are notoriously difficult to monitor for by-catch. We also provided recommendations to improve the precision of the mortality estimates for future studies and highlight the importance of estimating impacts of small-scale fisheries on marine megafauna.
