Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 714

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Histamine fish poisoning revisited

Open access
Lehane, Leigh, Olley, June·2000·International Journal of Food Microbiology

Abstract

Histamine (or scombroid) fish poisoning (HFP) is reviewed in a risk-assessment framework in an attempt to arrive at an informed characterisation of risk. Histamine is the main toxin involved in HFP, but the disease is not uncomplicated histamine poisoning. Although it is generally associated with high levels of histamine (> or =50 mg/100 g) in bacterially contaminated fish of particular species, the pathogenesis of HFP has not been clearly elucidated. Various hypotheses have been put forward to explain why histamine consumed in spoiled fish is more toxic than pure histamine taken orally, but none has proved totally satisfactory. Urocanic acid, like histamine, an imidazole compound derived from histidine in spoiling fish, may be the "missing factor" in HFP. cis-Urocanic acid has recently been recognised as a mast cell degranulator, and endogenous histamine from mast cell degranulation may augment the exogenous histamine consumed in spoiled fish. HFP is a mild disease, but is important in relation to food safety and international trade. Consumers are becoming more demanding, and litigation following food poisoning incidents is becoming more common. Producers, distributors and restaurants are increasingly held liable for the quality of the products they handle and sell. Many countries have set guidelines for maximum permitted levels of histamine in fish. However, histamine concentrations within a spoiled fish are extremely variable, as is the threshold toxic dose. Until the identity, levels and potency of possible potentiators and/or mast-cell-degranulating factors are elucidated, it is difficult to establish regulatory limits for histamine in foods on the basis of potential health hazard. Histidine decarboxylating bacteria produce histamine from free histidine in spoiling fish. Although some are present in the normal microbial flora of live fish, most seem to be derived from post-catching contamination on board fishing vessels, at the processing plant or in the distribution system, or in restaurants or homes. The key to keeping bacterial numbers and histamine levels low is the rapid cooling of fish after catching and the maintenance of adequate refrigeration during handling and storage. Despite the huge expansion in trade in recent years, great progress has been made in ensuring the quality and safety of fish products. This is largely the result of the introduction of international standards of food hygiene and the application of risk analysis and hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) principles.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0168-1605(00)00296-8

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 714

Metadata

Authors
Lehane, L., & Olley, J.
Venue
International Journal of Food Microbiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-06
Volume
58
Issue
1-2
Pages
1-37
ISSN
0168-1605 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998402771
Cited by
714
References
1
FWCI
2.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.