Abstract
In the past twenty years marine biotoxin analysis in routine regulatory monitoring has advanced significantly in Europe (EU) and other regions from the use of the mouse bioassay (MBA) towards the high-end analytical techniques such as high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with tandem mass spectrometry (MS). Previously, acceptance of these advanced methods, in progressing away from the MBA, was hindered by a lack of commercial certified analytical standards for method development and validation. This has now been addressed whereby the availability of a wide range of analytical standards from several companies in the EU, North America and Asia has enhanced the development and validation of methods to the required regulatory standards. However, the cost of the high-end analytical equipment, lengthy procedures and the need for qualified personnel to perform analysis can still be a challenge for routine monitoring laboratories. In developing regions, aquaculture production is increasing and alternative inexpensive Sensitive, Measurable, Accurate and Real-Time (SMART) rapid point-of-site testing (POST) methods suitable for novice end users that can be validated and internationally accepted remain an objective for both regulators and the industry. The range of commercial testing kits on the market for marine toxin analysis remains limited and even more so those meeting the requirements for use in regulatory control. Individual assays include enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and lateral flow membrane-based immunoassays (LFIA) for EU-regulated toxins, such as okadaic acid (OA) and dinophysistoxins (DTXs), saxitoxin (STX) and its analogues and domoic acid (DA) in the form of three separate tests offering varying costs and benefits for the industry. It can be observed from the literature that not only are developments and improvements ongoing for these assays, but there are also novel assays being developed using upcoming state-of-the-art biosensor technology. This review focuses on both currently available methods and recent advances in innovative methods for marine biotoxin testing and the end-user practicalities that need to be observed. Furthermore, it highlights trends that are influencing assay developments such as multiplexing capabilities and rapid POST, indicating potential detection methods that will shape the future market.
Highlights
There are various methods of analysis for marine biotoxins which can be classified into biological, biochemical and chemical based methods (Figure 2) though not all are accepted as official control methods for regulatory purposes and with some acknowledged as proofs of concept for new technological applications
The challenge is that the approaches that can be applied for point-of-site testing (POST) end-product testing are often unvalidated and not shown to be fit for purpose for the end user
The STX or analogue binding to the sodium channel is dependent on the toxin’s affinity to the endogenous target, and because toxin’s affinity for biological receptors is a direct reflection of its toxicity, the Receptor Binding Assay (RBA) uniquely gives an indication of the toxicity of a sample, as well as the amount of toxin present
Summary
Bivalve mollusc production (e.g., mussels, oysters, scallops, and clams), represents a. 1. Introduction significant proportion of the seafood industry in Europe and worldwide, estimollusc production (e.g., mussels, oysters, scallops, and clams), represents a matedBivalve to be 17.7 million tons in 2018 [1]. HABs typically occur in the warmer months and can have a devastating socio- can be economic effect and impact on public health [4]. States seafood industry reported a predicted be high, as for example in 2016, the United States seafood industry reported a predicted million USD annual loss due to HABs [5] and are related but not limited to significant. 1. Economic impact of HABs seafood production,public publichealth, health, tourism/recreation tourism/recreation and and costs. In the importance of monitoring biotoxins, are spent year to prevent HAB events from impacting upon shellfish consumer safety [4]. Lists marine toxins along with the harmful phytoplankton species associated with their production
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
