Heavy metals in Tilapia

Quick read

Tilapia in the HMI library has 286 reported results for lead, cadmium, total arsenic, inorganic arsenic, total mercury, methylmercury, mercury, nickel, chromium, uranium, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, Se, Ba, mercury (Hg) and Mg from 24 sources.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →}^{6Abbas MMM, EL-Sharkawy SM, Mohamed HR, Elaraby BE, Shaban WM, Metwally MG, Farrag DMG · 2023Heavy Metals Assessment and Health Risk to Consumers of Two Commercial Fish Species from Polyculture Fishponds in El-Sharkia and Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt: Physiological and Biochemical StudyBiological Trace Element ResearchRead source →}

Metals measured:
Lead, cadmium, total arsenic, inorganic arsenic, total mercury and methylmercury and others, in 286 results from 24 sources.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}
Main drivers:
Tilapia, as sold from Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River) (mining-affected area) had total mercury higher at 14 µg/kg, against 8 µg/kg for Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama) in the same study.^{7Shumba T, Kayumba AV, Kalinda C, Mukosha M, Mbewe M, Mwila C, Handema R, Mwenye OJ, Mbewe M · 2025Assessment of total mercury (Hg) in soil, sediment, and tilapia fish (Oreochromis niloticus) and health risk assessment among residents of Kitwe mining area, ZambiaEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchRead source →}
Practical framing:
Ask for lot results with a quantification limit well below the limit that applies in the destination market.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}

Tilapia overview

Tilapia in the HMI library has 286 reported results for lead, cadmium, total arsenic, inorganic arsenic, total mercury, methylmercury, mercury, nickel, chromium, uranium, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, Se, Ba, Hg and Mg from 24 sources.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →}^{6Abbas MMM, EL-Sharkawy SM, Mohamed HR, Elaraby BE, Shaban WM, Metwally MG, Farrag DMG · 2023Heavy Metals Assessment and Health Risk to Consumers of Two Commercial Fish Species from Polyculture Fishponds in El-Sharkia and Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt: Physiological and Biochemical StudyBiological Trace Element ResearchRead source →} WHO GEMS/Food submissions reported lead in tilapia, as sold from 150 results in 2 reporting regions, with subgroup medians from 1 to 2 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} In the US Total Diet Study, tilapia, cooked had a median lead result below 4 µg/kg across 27 composites from 2017–2020.^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}

Across 4 other studies of ordinary farms and markets, reported lead means and medians on a dry-weight basis ranged from 346 µg/kg (authors 2021) to 1,850 µg/kg (Mendoza et al. 2023).^{8Unknown authors · 2021International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2021; 9(4): 230-233Peer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →} For cadmium, 4 studies on an as-sold or fresh-weight basis reported means and medians from 0.5 µg/kg (Spungen et al. 2024) to 840 µg/kg (Islam et al. 2015).^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{10Spungen JH, et al. · 2024Infants’ and young children’s dietary exposures to lead and cadmium: FDA total diet study 2018-2020Food Additives & Contaminants: Part ARead source →} Higher results came from contaminated or exposed settings rather than ordinary supply. Tilapia, as sold from 0.3 mg/L HgCl2 exposure, basal diet (experiment) had total mercury higher at 1,500 µg/kg, against 40 µg/kg for unexposed control, basal diet in the same study.^{11Zahran E, Ahmed F, Hassan Z, Ibrahim I, Khaled AA, Palić D, El Sebaei MG · 2023Toxicity Evaluation, Oxidative, and Immune Responses of Mercury on Nile Tilapia: Modulatory Role of Dietary Nannochloropsis oculataNot reportedRead source →}

For a buyer the practical points are the form bought, the basis a result is reported on, where the tilapia came from and the laboratory’s reporting limit. Testing finds contamination but does not remove it.

What counts as tilapia

This page covers tilapia in 4 forms kept separate in every comparison: tilapia, as sold (255 results), tilapia, dried (11 results), tilapia, peeled or flesh (11 results) and tilapia, cooked (9 results).^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →}^{6Abbas MMM, EL-Sharkawy SM, Mohamed HR, Elaraby BE, Shaban WM, Metwally MG, Farrag DMG · 2023Heavy Metals Assessment and Health Risk to Consumers of Two Commercial Fish Species from Polyculture Fishponds in El-Sharkia and Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt: Physiological and Biochemical StudyBiological Trace Element ResearchRead source →}

Results stay on the basis each source reports: as sold or fresh weight, dry weight, or unstated. Dry-weight, as-sold and unstated results are never pooled, and no moisture conversion is applied.

Heavy metal contamination profile of tilapia

The table holds every extracted tilapia result: one row for each statistic a source reports for a form, group and metal, 286 rows in all, grouped by metal and form; percentiles, ranges and maxima for the same samples as a mean or median are shown on that row.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →}^{6Abbas MMM, EL-Sharkawy SM, Mohamed HR, Elaraby BE, Shaban WM, Metwally MG, Farrag DMG · 2023Heavy Metals Assessment and Health Risk to Consumers of Two Commercial Fish Species from Polyculture Fishponds in El-Sharkia and Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt: Physiological and Biochemical StudyBiological Trace Element ResearchRead source →} Monitoring medians are HMI calculations from individual submissions; non-detects remain intervals between zero and the reporting limit and are never read as zero.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

5 rows can be rated against an HMI reference for the same form and basis, 30 rows have a direct same-study comparison, and the rest stay unrated with the reason recorded. 50 values from 7 sources failed a check against their own source and are shown but not compared.^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →}^{8Unknown authors · 2021International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2021; 9(4): 230-233Peer-reviewed articleRead source →}^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →}^{12Okonofua ES, Komolafe AS, Emeribe CN, Ogbomida ET, Butu AW · 2024Analysis of Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals in Water, Cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata) and Tilapia Fish (Oreochromis niloticus) from Unreclaimed Mining PitsEarth Sciences PakistanRead source →}^{13Shaalan WM · 2024Hazardous effects of heavy metal pollution on Nile tilapia in the aquatic ecosystem of the Eastern Delta in EgyptBMC Veterinary ResearchRead source →}^{14Páez-Osuna F, Bergés-Tiznado ME, Valencia-Castañeda G, Fregoso-López MG, León-Cañedo JA, Fierro-Sañudo JF, Ramírez-Rochín J · 2024Mercury and selenium in three fish species from a dam 20 months after a mine-tailing spill in the SE Gulf of California ecoregion, MexicoNot reportedRead source →}^{15Sawe S, Amasi A, Wynants M · 2023Assessment of Potentially Toxic Metals in Fish from Lake Manyara, Northern TanzaniaBulletin of Environmental Contamination and ToxicologyRead source →}

Comparison methods and scope

Each row is one statistic a source reports for one form of tilapia, group and metal; percentiles, ranges and maxima reported for the same samples as a mean or median are shown on that row. Different forms and preparation states are kept apart, and dry-weight results never share a reference with as-sold or fresh-weight results. Ratings place a result against an HMI reference built from monitoring results and ordinary-setting medians for the same form and basis. Same-study contrasts compare a contaminated or treated site with its control, targeted with random sampling, a prepared form with the unprocessed one, or one group of a study with the median of its other groups. Held rows failed a check against their own source and are shown but not compared.

Filter findings

AnalyteFood formCollection regionCollection periodSourceCompare withComparable findings only

282 of 282 findings · 18 analytes

About this table

Food formCollection scopeFindingComparisonEvidence

Tilapia findings from monitoring programmes, total diet studies and every extracted field, market and contaminated-site study, in µg/kg with each source’s form, basis, statistic and censoring retained.
Food form	Collection scope	Finding (µg/kg)

36 findings · 11 studies
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO2009As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	SEARO2009–2016As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	SEARO2013As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldCammilleri et al. 2025	Tilapia (Tilapia spp.) source2022–2023As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Tilapia2012As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (highest concentration in text)Collection date unreported	max.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (species)Collection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R1, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R2, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R3, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R4, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	all five landing sites2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Jangwani ziwani2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Mfulo wa Ng'ombe2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Migunga mitatu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Minjingu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Oltukai2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	SEARO2015Basis not stated	median.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
3 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, peeled or fleshCammilleri et al. 2025	Brand 42022–2023As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
2 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, cookedSpungen et al. 2024	all samples2018–2020As sold / fresh	not detected.

43 findings · 13 studies · 2 spread figures folded in
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	EURO2006–2007As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO2017As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldCammilleri et al. 2025	Tilapia (Tilapia spp.) source2022–2023As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Tilapia2012As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldJMRS et al. 2010	foods from CRF patients' homes and domestic environmentCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	mean.Same samples: 0.5 µg/kg (minimum); 90.7 µg/kg (maximum)
Tilapia, as soldJMRS et al. 2010	foods from CRF patients' homes and domestic environmentCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	min.
Tilapia, as soldJMRS et al. 2010	foods from CRF patients' homes and domestic environmentCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	max.
Tilapia, as soldJMRS et al. 2010	Tilapia (O. niloticus)Collection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (highest concentration in text)Collection date unreported	max.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (species)Collection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldEgbe et al. 2023	all samplesCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R1, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R2, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R3, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R4, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	All dams muscle (range of dam means)2015–2016	range.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 1 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 2 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 3 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 4 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 5 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 6 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 7 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 8 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 9 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 10 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 11 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
2 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Rainy season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
3 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, peeled or fleshCammilleri et al. 2025	Brand 42022–2023As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
2 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, cookedSpungen et al. 2024	all samples2018–2020As sold / fresh	mean.

12 findings · 4 studies
Tilapia, as soldCammilleri et al. 2025	Tilapia (Tilapia spp.) source2022–2023As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Tilapia2012As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
3 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, peeled or fleshCammilleri et al. 2025	Brand 42022–2023As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, peeled or fleshRegina et al. 2016	Bodo River, Ogoniland (oil-polluted)Collection date unreportedBasis not stated	sample value.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.

1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	WPRO2021As sold / fresh	median.

30 findings · 10 studies · 2 spread figures folded in
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO2009As sold / fresh	median.
Tilapia, as soldBezerra 2026	O. niloticus (Re-Farmed)2013–2023As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldBezerra 2026	Oreochromis niloticus (Re-Wild)2013–2023As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Blue tilapia (Oreochromis aureus) muscle2013–2014As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	El Comedero dam (post mine-tailings spill)2013–2014As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldSirisangarunroj et al. 2023	freshwater fish, 3 Bangkok marketsCollection date unreportedAs sold / fresh	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldSmolikova et al. 2016	Nile tilapia2015–2016As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSmolikova et al. 2016	one batch of this species (batch not identified in text)2015–2016As sold / fresh	sample value.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (highest concentration in text)Collection date unreported	max.
Tilapia, as soldauthors 2021	Tilapia (species)Collection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River)2023	median.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River)2023	mean.Same samples: 45 µg/kg (maximum)
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River)2023	max.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Mining area, Kitwe (tilapia)2023	range.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Non-mining area, Chilubula (tilapia)2023	range.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama)2023	median.
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama)2023	mean.Same samples: 54 µg/kg (maximum)
Tilapia, as soldShumba et al. 2025	Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama)2023	max.
Tilapia, as soldWHO GEMS/Food	PAHO2016Basis not stated	median.
Tilapia, as soldLin et al. 2021	Other Fish: TilapiaCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldZahran et al. 2023	0.3 mg/L HgCl2 exposure, basal dietCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldZahran et al. 2023	HgCl2 exposure + 5% Nannochloropsis oculata dietCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldZahran et al. 2023	HgCl2 exposure + 10% Nannochloropsis oculata dietCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldZahran et al. 2023	unexposed control, basal dietCollection date unreportedBasis not stated	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, peeled or fleshCammilleri et al. 2025	Brand 42022–2023As sold / fresh	not detected.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.

1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, as soldHsi et al. 2016	Taipei City markets, 20142007–2014As sold / fresh	mean.

2 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Rainy season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.

26 findings · 6 studies
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Tilapia2012As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R1, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R2, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R3, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R4, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	all five landing sites2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Jangwani ziwani2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Mfulo wa Ng'ombe2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Migunga mitatu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Minjingu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Oltukai2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	Tilapia, Minjingu2022	min.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
2 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Rainy season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	sample value.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.

9 findings · 4 studies
Tilapia, as soldCammilleri et al. 2025	Tilapia (Tilapia spp.) source2022–2023As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Tilapia2012As sold / fresh	range.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R1, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R2, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R3, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	Site R4, muscleCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, peeled or fleshCammilleri et al. 2025	Brand 42022–2023As sold / fresh	range.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.

4 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season (mining pits)2019Basis not stated	not detected.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Dry season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	not detected.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Rainy season (mining pits)2019Basis not stated	not detected.
Tilapia, driedOkonofua et al. 2024	Rainy season control (Riyom)2019Basis not stated	not detected.
1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, cookedFDA Total Diet Study	6 collection regions2017–2020As sold / fresh	median.

29 findings · 6 studies
Tilapia, as soldIslam et al. 2015	Bogra district, all samples2012As sold / fresh	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 1 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 2 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 3 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 4 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 5 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 6 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 7 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 8 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 9 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 10 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 11 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	all five landing sites2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Jangwani ziwani2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Mfulo wa Ng'ombe2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Migunga mitatu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Minjingu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Oltukai2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.

11 findings · 4 studies
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldEgbe et al. 2023	all samplesCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldGupta et al. 2024	all four Cauvery River sites combined (R1-R4), pre-monsoonCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.

9 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.

28 findings · 5 studies
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	ES fishponds, El-SharkiaCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldAbbas et al. 2023	KES fishponds, Kafr El-SheikhCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 1 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 2 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 3 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 4 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 5 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 6 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 7 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 8 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 9 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 10 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	Dam 11 (reservoir with mining sub-basin)2015–2016	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	all five landing sites2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Jangwani ziwani2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Mfulo wa Ng'ombe2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Migunga mitatu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Minjingu2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldSawe et al. 2023	landing site Oltukai2022	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.

1 finding · 1 study
Tilapia, as soldPáez-Osuna et al. 2024	El Comedero dam (post mine-tailings spill)2013–2014As sold / fresh	mean.

7 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.
Tilapia, as soldMendoza et al. 2023	Calapan City vendors, 11 barangaysCollection date unreported	mean.

6 findings · 2 studies
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	dry season, mining-pit site2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, control (Riyom)2019	mean.
Tilapia, as soldOkonofua et al. 2024	rainy season, mining-pit site2019	not detected.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.

2 findings · 1 study
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	Damietta branch of the River Nile, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.
Tilapia, as soldShaalan 2024	El-Rayah El-Tawfeeky canal, Benha City, Egypt2022Basis not stated	mean.

Shared dataset methods and interpretation

Source summaries retain their original statistic, material, basis and censoring. Each source drawer identifies methods and overlapping samples. No matched reference or pooled distribution is inferred.

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold. Tilapia, as sold; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤10	≤11.2	≤12.3
Alternative weighting	≤10	≤11.2	≤12.3

12 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	10	50%
Sirisangarunroj et al. 2023	2	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-e2a18cd0d1e3:81fc68b9f5d3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight. Tilapia, as sold; Dry weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000
Alternative weighting	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000

4 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
Mendoza et al. 2023	4	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a dry weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

Mendoza et al. 2023 is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Mendoza et al. 2023

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-f286bf4488d5:fbe0c2b4c94d

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold, basis not stated

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, as sold, basis not stated. Tilapia, as sold; Basis not stated by the source, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	2	2	2
Alternative weighting	2	2	2

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a basis not stated by the source basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

WHO GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-1fc7e32fb82c:36315322a58d

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Pb reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤4	≤4	≤4
Alternative weighting	≤4	≤4	≤4

28 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	50%
Spungen et al. 2024	1	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-6ef096f064d1:03793878d8c0

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Cd reference · Tilapia, as sold

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Cd reference · Tilapia, as sold. Tilapia, as sold; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤0.9	≤0.95	≤25
Alternative weighting	≤0.9	≤0.95	≤25

5 reference units; 2 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	3	50%
Sirisangarunroj et al. 2023	2	50%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

2 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-487c9dace259:0db2b0d3ad27

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Cd reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Cd reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤1	≤1
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤1	≤1

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-c5a540ce73c9:3fe588b8c1a3

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tAs reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tAs reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight. Tilapia, as sold; Dry weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000
Alternative weighting	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000

5 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
Mendoza et al. 2023	5	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a dry weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

Mendoza et al. 2023 is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Mendoza et al. 2023

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-4c87b66dc251:1014f48907d0

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tAs reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tAs reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	74	100	150
Alternative weighting	74	100	130

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-09efe8eed0fd:2bcf5f0a9a7a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia iAs reference · Tilapia, as sold

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia iAs reference · Tilapia, as sold. Tilapia, as sold; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤20	≤20	≤20
Alternative weighting	≤20	≤20	≤20

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

WHO GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-78c97594fbbf:a10167572691

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold. Tilapia, as sold; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤3.1	3.1–12.4 (bounded)	50
Alternative weighting	≤3.1	3.1–12.4 (bounded)	50

4 reference units; 3 sampling families. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	33%
Sirisangarunroj et al. 2023	2	33%
Smolikova et al. 2016	1	33%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

3 sampling families with different designs; none is a probability sample of world supply. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-31124a02e4fc:f42743acd8a7

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight. Tilapia, as sold; Dry weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000
Alternative weighting	≤1000	≤1000	≤1000

6 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
Mendoza et al. 2023	6	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a dry weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

Mendoza et al. 2023 is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Mendoza et al. 2023

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-dc0473dd6ff3:ef86742d09de

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold, basis not stated

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, as sold, basis not stated. Tilapia, as sold; Basis not stated by the source, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤50	≤50	≤50
Alternative weighting	≤50	≤50	≤50

1 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
WHO GEMS/Food	1	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a basis not stated by the source basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

WHO GEMS/Food is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

WHO GEMS/Food

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-fdc8aa5f28cc:4e44f47ec44e

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia tHg reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	2.7	5.1	9.6
Alternative weighting	2.7	5.05	9.6

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-b23e2608110a:ac20314d38ef

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Ni reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Ni reference · Tilapia, as sold, dry weight. Tilapia, as sold; Dry weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤3000	≤3000	≤3000
Alternative weighting	≤3000	≤3000	≤3000

6 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
Mendoza et al. 2023	6	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, as sold on a dry weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

Mendoza et al. 2023 is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, as sold on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

Mendoza et al. 2023

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-21a93807188a:cd965db25c06

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Ni reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Ni reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤40	≤40	≤40
Alternative weighting	≤40	≤40	≤40

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-ce9c7ef43c79:8c1d3aa3103a

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia Cr reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia Cr reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤50	≤50	≤50
Alternative weighting	≤50	≤50	≤50

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-6a7430431f63:eaecf917b538

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

HMI tilapia U reference · Tilapia, cooked

Reference and scope

HMI tilapia U reference · Tilapia, cooked. Tilapia, cooked; As sold, as eaten or fresh weight, µg/kg; no moisture conversion. Distribution of subgroup median concentration values.

Reference (µg/kg)	Q1	Median	Q3
Primary HMI reference	≤1	≤1	≤1
Alternative weighting	≤1	≤1	≤1

27 reference units; 1 sampling family. Counts describe evidence units, not independent studies or certainty.

Contributing family	Reference units	Weight
FDA Total Diet Study	27	100%

Methods

HMI pools subgroup medians for tilapia, cooked on a as sold, as eaten or fresh weight basis: monitoring results summarized as one median per reporting region, sampling type and collection year, total diet composites and printed sample values as single observations, and printed subgroup medians from ordinary farms or markets. Each sampling family has equal total weight. Non-detects stay as zero-to-limit intervals, so quartiles carry lower and upper bounds. Means, ranges and maxima never enter as observations. Other forms, other bases, targeted sampling and results from mining, industrial, wastewater-affected, experimental, fertiliser or manufacturer settings are kept out of this reference.

Inverse weighted empirical CDF; midpoint at exact cumulative-weight boundaries. At least four reference units and a definitely positive Q1 to Q3 spread are required. This is a display eligibility rule, not statistical validation.

Limitations

FDA Total Diet Study is the only compatible sampling family for tilapia, cooked on this basis in the completed tilapia ledger, so this single-family reference cannot represent other markets. Reporting regions and purchase markets are not growing areas. Non-detects with differing limits widen the bounds. A position is descriptive concentration, not a safety or compliance judgment.

Admitted source families

FDA Total Diet Study

Reference version and interpretation

Frozen evidence selection: 2026-10-22. Method: hmi-pooled-reference-v2.

hmi-pooled-reference-v2:tilapia-f3f3df96f0d5:7e3c31f55e29

The reference is computed by HMI from admitted evidence, not copied from a study baseline. It describes the evidence currently in this scope; it is not a worldwide or current-lot benchmark. Source, year and region filters do not change it. Different HMI scopes are not one common ranking.

How metals reach tilapia

The evidence on how metals reach tilapia comes from studies that compared exposed and ordinary settings. Tilapia, as sold from 0.3 mg/L HgCl2 exposure, basal diet (experiment) had total mercury higher at 1,500 µg/kg, against 40 µg/kg for unexposed control, basal diet in the same study.^{11Zahran E, Ahmed F, Hassan Z, Ibrahim I, Khaled AA, Palić D, El Sebaei MG · 2023Toxicity Evaluation, Oxidative, and Immune Responses of Mercury on Nile Tilapia: Modulatory Role of Dietary Nannochloropsis oculataNot reportedRead source →} In another study, tilapia, dried from Dry season control (Riyom) (mining-affected area) had nickel higher at 15 µg/kg, against 5 µg/kg for Rainy season control (Riyom) in the same study.^{12Okonofua ES, Komolafe AS, Emeribe CN, Ogbomida ET, Butu AW · 2024Analysis of Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals in Water, Cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata) and Tilapia Fish (Oreochromis niloticus) from Unreclaimed Mining PitsEarth Sciences PakistanRead source →} A third study found that tilapia, as sold from Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River) (mining-affected area) had total mercury higher at 15 µg/kg, against 7 µg/kg for Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama) in the same study.^{7Shumba T, Kayumba AV, Kalinda C, Mukosha M, Mbewe M, Mwila C, Handema R, Mwenye OJ, Mbewe M · 2025Assessment of total mercury (Hg) in soil, sediment, and tilapia fish (Oreochromis niloticus) and health risk assessment among residents of Kitwe mining area, ZambiaEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchRead source →}

These are observational comparisons from single studies; the size of the difference depends on the site, metal and distance.

Which forms and regions measured lower

The HMI reference for lead in tilapia, cooked pools 28 subgroup units from 2 sampling families, with a median of below 4 µg/kg and a middle half spanning below 4 (lower quartile) and below 4 µg/kg (upper quartile).^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{10Spungen JH, et al. · 2024Infants’ and young children’s dietary exposures to lead and cadmium: FDA total diet study 2018-2020Food Additives & Contaminants: Part ARead source →} For lead in tilapia, as sold, the reference median was below 11.2 µg/kg, with a middle half from below 10 to below 12.3 µg/kg across 12 units.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →} For lead in tilapia, as sold, the reference median was below 1,000 µg/kg, with a middle half from below 1,000 to below 1,000 µg/kg across 4 units.^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →}

Among GEMS/Food reporting regions, tilapia, as sold had the lowest lead subgroup median in PAHO (1 µg/kg) and the highest in SEARO (2 µg/kg); reporting regions are markets, not growing areas.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

In one study, lead across 5 groups of tilapia ranged from 580 µg/kg (landing site Migunga mitatu) to 730 µg/kg (landing site Oltukai); the lowest is the lowest observed in that study, not an established sourcing preference.^{15Sawe S, Amasi A, Wynants M · 2023Assessment of Potentially Toxic Metals in Fish from Lake Manyara, Northern TanzaniaBulletin of Environmental Contamination and ToxicologyRead source →}

Processing, cooking and preparation

No processing study for metals in this food is in the library yet.

Mitigation for tilapia

Lot testing against the applicable limit is the check that can be verified.

No measured way to lower metals in this food is in the library yet.

Trade-offs and limits of controls

Avoiding exposed growing areas lowered the metal measured in the studies available, but no study measured the cost or supply effect of doing so.^{11Zahran E, Ahmed F, Hassan Z, Ibrahim I, Khaled AA, Palić D, El Sebaei MG · 2023Toxicity Evaluation, Oxidative, and Immune Responses of Mercury on Nile Tilapia: Modulatory Role of Dietary Nannochloropsis oculataNot reportedRead source →} Metals do not move together, so a lot that passes a lead limit says little about cadmium, arsenic or nickel unless those are tested as well.

Testing tilapia for metals

Results depend on the method and its reporting limit. Reporting limits for lead ranged from 1 µg/kg (WHO GEMS/Food) to 1,000 µg/kg (Mendoza et al. 2023), so a non-detect from a less sensitive method says much less.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →} Reporting limits for cadmium ranged from 0.9 µg/kg (Sirisangarunroj et al. 2023) to 2,000 µg/kg (Mendoza et al. 2023), so a non-detect from a less sensitive method says much less.^{5Sirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, Ornthai N, Yafa C, Judprasong K · 2023Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandFoods 2023, 12, 3967Read source →}^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →} Reporting limits for total arsenic ranged from 3 µg/kg (FDA Total Diet Study) to 1,000 µg/kg (Mendoza et al. 2023), so a non-detect from a less sensitive method says much less.^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{9Mendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, Senoro DB · 2023Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentToxics 2023, 11(3), 286Read source →}

A useful lot result names the form, the basis and a quantification limit well below the limit that applies.

Buying and verifying tilapia

No maximum level for metals in tilapia was verified from primary text for this page; buyers should confirm the limit that applies in the destination market.

Exposure from tilapia

No source in the library converted tilapia concentrations into a verified estimate of intake for a defined population. Concentrations describe the food, not individual risk.

Evidence review and remaining gaps

Every source record that names tilapia was decided on its content: 24 occurrence extracted, 24 records in all. The occurrence table renders every extracted result; held values remain visible with their reason.

References identify the sources used in these answers. The Sources index preserves additional discovery links; inclusion there does not mean a source has been reviewed for this assessment. Corrections, completed searches, new direct evidence and changes in requirements should reopen the relevant answer.

Tilapia FAQs

What heavy metals are found in tilapia?

The library reports lead, cadmium, total arsenic, inorganic arsenic, total mercury, methylmercury, mercury, nickel, chromium, uranium, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, Se, Ba, Hg and Mg in tilapia, most often lead, cadmium and total arsenic.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}^{2U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2022FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsFDA Total Diet StudyRead source →}^{3Cammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, Lo Dico GM, Macaluso A, Calabrese V, Jacob UM, Ferrantelli V · 2025Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeOpen MedicineRead source →}^{4Islam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, Raknuzzaman M · 2015The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshEcotoxicology and Environmental SafetyRead source →} WHO GEMS/Food submissions reported lead in tilapia, as sold from 150 results in 2 reporting regions, with subgroup medians from 1 to 2 µg/kg.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

How do heavy metals get into tilapia?

In the studies available, tilapia from contaminated or exposed settings carried more metal than tilapia from the same study’s control.^{7Shumba T, Kayumba AV, Kalinda C, Mukosha M, Mbewe M, Mwila C, Handema R, Mwenye OJ, Mbewe M · 2025Assessment of total mercury (Hg) in soil, sediment, and tilapia fish (Oreochromis niloticus) and health risk assessment among residents of Kitwe mining area, ZambiaEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchRead source →} Tilapia, as sold from Kitwe mining area (streams and Kafue River) (mining-affected area) had total mercury higher at 14 µg/kg, against 8 µg/kg for Non-mining control area (Chilubula, Kasama) in the same study.^{7Shumba T, Kayumba AV, Kalinda C, Mukosha M, Mbewe M, Mwila C, Handema R, Mwenye OJ, Mbewe M · 2025Assessment of total mercury (Hg) in soil, sediment, and tilapia fish (Oreochromis niloticus) and health risk assessment among residents of Kitwe mining area, ZambiaEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchRead source →}

Which regions report the lowest levels in tilapia?

Among GEMS/Food reporting regions, tilapia, as sold had the lowest lead subgroup median in PAHO (1 µg/kg) and the highest in SEARO (2 µg/kg); reporting regions are markets, not growing areas.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

How much of the arsenic in tilapia is inorganic?

Inorganic arsenic, the more toxic form, was measured in 1 result from 1 source, far fewer than total arsenic.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →} WHO GEMS/Food submissions reported inorganic arsenic in tilapia, as sold from 1 result in 1 reporting region, with subgroup medians below 20 µg/kg, mostly non-detects.^{1World Health Organization · 2026GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsGEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment ProgrammeRead source →}

References

Works cited on this page, in citation-number order. See Sources for this page’s source inventory. Each title links to a source record with bibliographic details, reported findings, and document provenance.

GEMS/Food Contaminants database heavy-metal exportsWorld Health Organization · GEMS/Food Contamination Monitoring and Assessment Programme · 2026 · extranet.who.intDataset
FY2018-FY2020 TDS Elements Analytical ResultsU.S. Food and Drug Administration · FDA Total Diet Study · 2022 · www.fda.govDataset
Toxic metals and metalloids in collagen supplements of fish and jellyfish origin: Risk assessment for daily intakeCammilleri G, Tortorici M, Pantano L, Galluzzo FG, Pulvirenti A, Buscemi MD, et al. · Open Medicine · 2025 · doi.org/10.1515/med-2025-1141Peer-reviewed
The concentration, source and potential human health risk of heavy metals in the commonly consumed foods in BangladeshIslam MS, Ahmed MK, Habibullah-Al-Mamun M, and Raknuzzaman M · Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety · 2015 · doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2015.09.022Peer-reviewed
Toxic Heavy Metals and Their Risk Assessment of Exposure in Selected Freshwater and Marine Fish in ThailandSirisangarunroj P, Monboonpitak N, Karnpanit W, Sridonpai P, Singhato A, Laitip N, et al. · Foods 2023, 12, 3967 · 2023 · doi.org/10.3390/foods12213967Peer-reviewed
Heavy Metals Assessment and Health Risk to Consumers of Two Commercial Fish Species from Polyculture Fishponds in El-Sharkia and Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt: Physiological and Biochemical StudyAbbas MMM, EL-Sharkawy SM, Mohamed HR, Elaraby BE, Shaban WM, Metwally MG, et al. · Biological Trace Element Research · 2023 · doi.org/10.1007/s12011-023-04007-1Peer-reviewed
Assessment of total mercury (Hg) in soil, sediment, and tilapia fish (Oreochromis niloticus) and health risk assessment among residents of Kitwe mining area, ZambiaShumba T, Kayumba AV, Kalinda C, Mukosha M, Mbewe M, Mwila C, et al. · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · 2025 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-025-36506-0Peer-reviewed
International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2021; 9(4): 230-233Unknown authors · Peer-reviewed article · 2021 · doi.org/10.22271/fish.2021.v9.i4c.2540Peer-reviewed
Detection of Heavy Metals, Their Distribution in Tilapia spp., and Health Risks AssessmentMendoza LC, Nolos RC, Villaflores OB, Apostol EMD, and Senoro DB · Toxics 2023, 11(3), 286 · 2023 · doi.org/10.3390/toxics11030286Peer-reviewed
Infants’ and young children’s dietary exposures to lead and cadmium: FDA total diet study 2018-2020Spungen JH and et al. · Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A · 2024 · doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2024.2396910Peer-reviewed
Toxicity Evaluation, Oxidative, and Immune Responses of Mercury on Nile Tilapia: Modulatory Role of Dietary Nannochloropsis oculataZahran E, Ahmed F, Hassan Z, Ibrahim I, Khaled AA, Palić D, et al. · 2023 · doi.org/10.1007/s12011-023-03771-4Peer-reviewed
Analysis of Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals in Water, Cabbage (Brassica oleracea var. capitata) and Tilapia Fish (Oreochromis niloticus) from Unreclaimed Mining PitsOkonofua ES, Komolafe AS, Emeribe CN, Ogbomida ET, and Butu AW · Earth Sciences Pakistan · 2024 · doi.org/10.26480/esp.02.2024.134.139Peer-reviewed
Hazardous effects of heavy metal pollution on Nile tilapia in the aquatic ecosystem of the Eastern Delta in EgyptShaalan WM · BMC Veterinary Research · 2024 · doi.org/10.1186/s12917-024-04367-3Peer-reviewed
Mercury and selenium in three fish species from a dam 20 months after a mine-tailing spill in the SE Gulf of California ecoregion, MexicoPáez-Osuna F, Bergés-Tiznado ME, Valencia-Castañeda G, Fregoso-López MG, León-Cañedo JA, Fierro-Sañudo JF, et al. · 2024 · doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-31487-4Peer-reviewed
Assessment of Potentially Toxic Metals in Fish from Lake Manyara, Northern TanzaniaSawe S, Amasi A, and Wynants M · Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · 2023 · doi.org/10.1007/s00128-023-03794-6Peer-reviewed

Sources

Browse Tilapia Sources for sources cited on this page and additional discovery candidates. The searchable index distinguishes verified citation use from discovery relationships whose relevance has not been established.

Update history

22 October 2026: Rebuilt from every tilapia record in the library: 24 occurrence sources, references by form and basis, same-study contrasts.

Referenced by

Graph View

1

2

Food and Drug Administration

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Food Additives

11

12

13

14

15

Heavy metals in Tilapia

Tilapia overview

What counts as tilapia

Heavy metal contamination profile of tilapia

How metals reach tilapia

Which forms and regions measured lower

Processing, cooking and preparation

Mitigation for tilapia

Trade-offs and limits of controls

Testing tilapia for metals

Buying and verifying tilapia

Exposure from tilapia

Evidence review and remaining gaps

Tilapia FAQs

References

Sources

Update history

Related ingredients

Referenced by

Graph View