United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation

ATTACHMENT C-8

FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASEUNSCEAR 2013 Report, Annex A, Levels and effects of radiation exposure dueto the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami,
Appendix C and Appendix F
Contents
This attachment describes the development of a database on radionuclide concentrations infoodstuffs due to the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant (NPP) accident for the
UNSCEAR assessment of doses to the public and to non-human biota.
The attachment also has six supplements with further underpinning or explanatory information.
Supplement 4 refers to a separate MS Excel workbook ‘C-8suppl’ (UNSCEAR_2013A_C8suppl_FAO_IAEA_foodstuff_database_reduced_version_2014-07.xlsx).
Acknowledgements
The Committee would like to highlight that the establishment of the database was only possible
thanks to the successful collaboration and immense contribution by staff from: the Joint
FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques for Food and Agriculture, Vienna, Austria; theMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), Tokyo, Japan; the Centre for
Radiation, Chemicals and Environmental Hazards, Health Protection Agency, Chilton, United
Kingdom; and the World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. The following experts
were involved in preparing this attachment: Gerd Dercon1, Ivancho Naletoski1, Yukiko Yamada2,
Hiroki Ishida2, Carl Blackburn1, Stephan Nielen1, David H. Byron1, Jane Simmonds3, Philippe

Verger4, Minh-Long Nguyen1, and Qu Liang1.

Notes
The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply theexpression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations
concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, orconcerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
©

United Nations, July 2014. All rights reserved, worldwide.

This publication has not been formally edited.
1

Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques for Food and Agriculture, Vienna, Austria
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), Tokyo, Japan
3
Centre for Radiation, Chemicals and Environmental Hazards, Health Protection Agency, Chilton, UK
4World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
2

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

3

Contents
CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................. 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 1
NOTES ......................................................................................................................................... 1
CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................. 3
I. BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... 3
II. DATABASE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE UNSCEAR EVALUATION ............................ 4
A. Structure of Fukushima Foodstuff Database .................................................................... 4
B. Simplification of database ................................................................................................ 7
C. Final selection of dataset for UNSCEAR assessment ...................................................... 8III. METADATA ANALYSIS OF THE DATABASE ............................................................... 9
IV. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................. 12
SUPPLEMENT 1: ...................................................................................................................... 14
SUPPLEMENT 2: ...................................................................................................................... 15
SUPPLEMENT 3: ...................................................................................................................... 16
SUPPLEMENT 4: ...................................................................................................................... 18
SUPPLEMENT 5: ...................................................................................................................... 19
SUPPLEMENT 6: ...................................................................................................................... 20I.

BACKGROUND

During the accident at the Fukushima-Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (FDNPS), which started
on 11 March 2011, radionuclides were released into the environment over a protracted periodof time. Radioactive caesium and iodine were observed in soil and plants as early as
15 March. In response to this situation, the Japanese authorities established provisional
regulation values for food on 17 March 2011. A food monitoring programme began
immediately thereafter, and the first restrictions on the distribution of specific products were
imposed and reported by the Japanese Government on 21 March, i.e. as soon as further
sampling had identified the locations and food products that should be removed from the diet.
Over subsequent months, many and various foodstuffs were affected as radionuclides
transferred through the air, rivers, streams and ocean currents, and dispersed into theenvironment and into different types of food products at different rates. Within a few months,
concentrations of radioactive iodine were no longer a food safety concern because the specificisotope of concern, iodine-131, has a short half-life of 8 days and much of it was eliminatedby radioactive decay. However, two radioactive isotopes of caesium were of concern,

3

4

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

caesium-134 and caesium-137, which have half-lives of about 2 and 30 years respectively,
and persist in the environment. Raw milk, vegetables, mushrooms, fruit, nuts, seaweeds,
marine invertebrates, coastal fish, freshwater fish, cattle meat, wild animal meat, brown rice,wheat, tea leaves and other foodstuffs were found with concentrations of radioactive caesium
above the provisional regulation values and the subsequent limits established by the Japanese
authorities.

II.

DATABASE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE UNSCEAR EVALUATION

From March 2011, a database was compiled on radionuclide concentrations in foodstuffs dueto the FDNPS accident. The database was developed under the guidance of FAO/IAEA and incollaboration with the Japanese authorities, including the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries (MAFF).
The database includes data for over 500 types of foodstuffs sampled in all 47 prefectures ofJapan. These data were provided through the FAO/WHO International Food Safety
Authorities Network (INFOSAN) based on information published and provided by theJapanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW), and were compiled by the Joint
FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture.
The database was used in the UNSCEAR assessment of doses to the public and non-humanbiota. Approximately 126,000 records on food monitoring were compiled from samples
collected during the period 15 March 2011 through 15 March 2012. In September 2012, thesedata were made available — through a relational database prepared in Microsoft Access®
format (hereinafter referred to as the Fukushima Foodstuff Database) — to the relevant expert
subgroups of UNSCEAR who were assessing ingested doses to the population of Japan
resulting from the FDNPS accident.

A.

Structure of Fukushima Foodstuff Database

The Fukushima Foodstuff Database refers to a set of data related to concentrations ofradionuclides (specifically caesium-134, caesium-137 and iodine-131) in foodstuffs collected
officially in Japan over one-year period after March 2011, along with the tools needed toutilize and assess the data, such as sorting, extracting, or summarizing.
The database is composed of multiple tables, which are lists of related information presented
in a column/row format. Each row is referred to as a Record. Each foodstuff sample is such a
record. Each column in a table is a category of information referred to as a Field, for instanceradionuclide concentration. One data item, such as the concentration of radionuclides in one
foodstuff sample, is called a Data Value.
The foodstuff database is a relational database, a step further than a flat file database. A
simple spreadsheet (e.g. a Microsoft Excel® worksheet), would be considered a flat file
database. In such a flat file database, relational data must be repeated. For instance, for
information on foodstuff type, the foodstuff name and its taxonomy would need to berepeated on several records, or for a location, its prefecture and geographic coordinates. Such
repetition of data values, particularly in a database with approximately 126,000 data records
of foodstuff samples, could cause challenges in sorting or processing the compiled

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

5

information. Spelling differences in names of locations or synonyms for a foodstuff type
would affect the database's integrity, and, for example, not allow correct calculation of
average values of radionuclide concentrations for that particular location or foodstuff.
To avoid these problems, a relational database was developed, which comprises multiple
tables, each pertaining to a specific topic. For instance, a specific table of locations or
foodstuffs avoids duplication or spelling differences and in the main table with the data
values, each location or foodstuff is identified by numbers, and each number is a unique
identifier for a location or foodstuff.
The Fukushima Foodstuff Database is composed of the following tables:(i)
Main table (in which all data values are stored)
In this main table (identified by a red rectangle in Fig. 1), radionuclide concentration data are
stored for all foodstuff samples (whether or not they are available for food consumption), in
combination with essential information about (a) the date of sampling, date of obtaining theanalytical results and press release date, (b) origin of the samples (location and prefecture,through unique IDs), (c) name and taxonomy of the food product (unique ID), (d) availability
for food consumption, (e) pre- or post-market sampling; (f) additional information about
foodstuff samples, such as the cultivation/harvest characteristics (e.g. indoor versus outdoor
cultivation); (g) type of detectors used to measure the radionuclides in the samples; (h)foodstuff categories (developed by UNSCEAR expert subgroups, using unique IDs; see below
for more information); (i) Japanese foodstuff categories (through unique IDs); (j) samples
from wildlife, and (k) status of the product (processed versus not processed).
(ii)
Location table(iii) Prefecture table(iv)
Foodstuff product table(v)
UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 (Foodstuffs) categories and subcategories(vi)
UNSCEAR expert subgroup C3 (Wild versus domesticated species) categories andsubcategories(vii) Japanese foodstuff categories
Figure 1 shows the structure of the relational database and how the different tables werelinked.

5

6

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Figure 1: Structure of relational Fukushima Foodstuff Database (red rectangle indicates themain table)

In the relational database, categorical variables (i.e. variables that can take on one of a limited,and usually fixed, number of possible values) were used in the following main fields:(viii) UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 categories and subcategories for the foodstuff
samples (Assessment of doses to the public, see categories under supplement 1)(ix)
UNSCEAR expert subgroup C3 categories for the foodstuff samples (Assessmentof doses to non-human biota, see categories under supplement 2)(x)
Japanese food categories(xi)
Availability for food consumption
The variables reflecting the UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 and C3 categories and theavailability for food consumption were essential variables used in the UNSCEAR assessmentof doses to the public and to non-human biota. The C2 and C3 categories were established inclose collaboration with the respective UNSCEAR Lead Writers.
Japanese food categories were included in the database for information only.

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

7

More information about the levels of the above mentioned categorical variables (availability
for food consumption and Japanese food categories) can be found in supplement 3.

B.

Simplification of database

Date for calculation of the number of months after the accident
In the foodstuff database, only samples collected between 15 March 2011 and 15 March 2012were included. Data on foodstuff samples collected in the first year, but reported later, were
excluded from the database.
For simplification, all foodstuffs were classified according to the number of months after theaccident. For example, number “1” indicates that sampling was conducted in the period from
15 March 2011 to 14 April 2011.
In general, “Date of Sampling” was used to calculate “Months after Accident”. If it was
unknown, “Date of obtaining Data” was used. If both “Date of Sampling” and “Date ofobtaining Data” were not known, “Date of Press Release” was used.
Availability for food consumption
For purposes of the UNSCEAR assessment, some categorical variables were simplified. For
example, the original variable indicating the availability of food for consumption had multiple
levels as indicated in supplement 3. This variable was changed to have only two levels, i.e.
available or not available for consumption. For the calculation of dose, only samples that
represented foodstuffs available for consumption were used.
Radionuclide concentrations
For all data with caesium-134 and caesium-137 concentrations in foodstuffs that were below
the detection limit of the detectors, a value of 10 Bq/kg was assigned. A similar value wasused for data on iodine-131 concentrations, except for those samples collected five or moremonths after the accident. For these latter data, a value of 0 Bq/kg was assigned.
If only the sum of caesium-134 and caesium-137 concentrations was provided, the decay of
caesium-134 and caesium-137 for each two-month period was taken into consideration whencalculating the activity concentration of caesium-134 and caesium-137 respectively.
Table 1 shows the ratio of caesium-134 and caesium-137 to the total radioactive caesium used
for calculation. The concentration of caesium-134 and caesium-137 in air was almost thesame. Most of the ratios of caesium-134 to caesium-137 were found to be between 0.9 and 1.1(Ohkura, et al, 2012) 5. In March 2012, the report of a research project was issued jointly by
the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and MAFF,
which stated that from the analytical results of soil samples, the average ratio of caesium-134
5

Okura, Takehisa; Oishi, Tetsuya; Taki, Mitsumasa; Shibanuma, Yukio; Kikuchi, Masamitsu; Akino, Hitoshi;
Kikuta, Yasuaki; Kawasaki, Masatsugu; Saegusa, Jun; Tsutsumi, Masahiro; Ogose, Hitoshi; Tamura, Shunsuke;
Sawahata, Tadahiro, 2012. Emergency monitoring of environmental radiation and atmospheric radionuclides at
Nuclear Science Research Institute, JAEA following the accident of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.
Report No. : JAEA-Data/Code 2012-010, 37 Pages, PDF : JAEA-Data-Code-2012-010.pdf:2.28MB.

7

8

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

and caesium-137 on 14 June 2011 was 0.92:1. This ratio on that specific day was used toestimate the ratio of these two radionuclides in specific periods. Also using this value, theratio at the time of emission was calculated to be 1 to 1.
Table 1: Ratio of caesium-134 and caesium-137 to total radioactive caesium (calculated by
MAFF)
Month after accident

Ratio of caesium-134

Ratio of caesium-137

1 or 20.50

0.50

3 or 40.49

0.51

5 or 60.47

0.53

7 or 80.46

0.54

9 or 10

0.45

0.55

11 or 12

0.44

0.56

C.

Final selection of dataset for UNSCEAR assessment

For the UNSCEAR assessment for both expert subgroups C2 and C3, all relevant variables
were identified in close collaboration with the Lead Writers (expert subgroup leaders),
selected from the relational database (via an MS Access Query), and exported in one flat fileworksheet (MS Excel). The final selection of variables used can be found in Table 2.
In the resulting worksheet, pivot tables were created for further rapid selection of datasets
based on foodstuff categories or locations. Such pivot tables are useful to summarize, analyse,
explore, and present summary data and can help visualize summary data so that comparisons,patterns, and trends can easily be seen.
Table 2: Variables selected in the UNSCEAR assessment for expert subgroups C2 and C3
Column heading
Run_ID
Orig_Index_No

Description
Unique index number assigned by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division
The order number of the sample within each individual press release by MHLW

Serial_No

Unique serial number assigned by the MAFF of Japan

Prefecture

Prefecture nameLocation

Location name

LocSpecifier

Specifier for the location of sampling

LatitudeLatitude in degrees

Longitude

Longitude in degrees

Food
FoodSpecifier

Name of the food productSpecifier for the food product (for example: Boiled, roasted…)

FoodLatin

Latin name of the food productOrigin_Type

Additional information about foodstuff sample such as the cultivation/harvest characteristics (forexample: outdoor, indoor, offshore …)

Post_Pre_Market

Sampling timing (Pre- or post- market)

Detector

Type of the detector

AFC_CatAvailability for food consumption - Japanese category

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Column heading

Description

Date_f_calc_MOA

Date for calculation of the number of months after the accident

Sampling_F

Date of first sampling

Sampling_L

Date of last sampling

Data_Obt

Date of obtaining the analytical results

PRD

9

Press release date

AFC_YN

Availability for food consumption - (yes or no), based on the Japanese categories (field AFC_Cat)

I_131_FAO

Corrected numeric value of the iodine-131 concentration in food products

Cs_134_FAO

Corrected numeric value of the caesium-134 concentration in food products

Cs_137_FAO

Corrected numeric value of the caesium-137 concentration in food products

Cs_Tot_FAO

Corrected numeric value of the total radio-caesium concentration in food products

JP_SmallJapanese food product category (small)

JP_Medium

Japanese food product category (medium)

JP_Large

Japanese food product category (large)

Codex_Code
FAO_Proc-NonProc

Codex Alimentarius code (only for vegetables)
Status of the food product (Processed or not processed)

C2_Subcategory

UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 subcategory

C2_Category

UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 category

C3_Subcategory

UNSCEAR expert subgroup C3 subcategory

C3_Category

UNSCEAR expert subgroup C3 category

An extract of the main table of the database has been made in Microsoft Excel® (for all
foodstuff samples used in the UNSCEAR assessment) and is available in digital format as
another attachment (C-8suppl) to this report on the Food database.

III. METADATA ANALYSIS OF THE DATABASE
A set of tables and figures below indicate the main characteristics of the data, and also shows
the trend of data availability in time over the first year after the accident.
Figure 2 indicates the number of collected samples for the period of one year (15 March
2011–15 March 2012) after the accident. The first 5,000 samples were collected at the end of
the third month, the first 25,000 samples close to the 6th month, approximately 60,000
samples around the 8th month, and the milestone of 100,,000 samples was reached between
month 10 and 11.

910

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Figure 2: Accumulated numbers of foodstuff samples collected from 15 March 2011 until
15 March 2012

Figure 3 shows the geographic distribution of the foodstuff samples. At three months after theaccident, 63% of the collected samples (3,381 samples) came from Fukushima Prefecture and
18% (982 samples) from Ibaraki Prefecture (located to the south of Fukushima Prefecture). At
12 months after the accident (i.e. as of 15 March 2012), over 16% of the total number ofsamples (20,621 samples) had been collected in Fukushima Prefecture. Approximately 50%of the samples (around 61,500 samples) came from neighbouring prefectures.
Figure 3: Geographic distribution (prefecture level) of the foodstuff samples collected across
47 prefectures (15 March 2011–15 March 2012)

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

11

Table 3 also shows the major emphasis on the sampling of cattle meat: representing 66.9% of
the samples. Vegetables represented approximately 10% of the foodstuff samples. Marine fishand migratory fish accounted for close to 5% of the samples, whereas rice and rice products
about 3%.
Table 3: Distribution of foodstuff samples across expert subgroup C2 categories (15 March2011 – 15 March 2012)
C2_Category
Algae
Cereals

Eggs

C2_Subcategory

Totals%Total

Algae

319

0.25

Other cereals

507

0.40

Rice and rice products (excl oil)

4010

3.19

Wheat and wheat products

345

0.27

Poultry eggs

453

0.36

Food of mixed composition

Food of mixed composition

58

0.05

Freshwater fish and shellfish

Crustaceans (freshwater)

11

0.01

FruitsMarine species (e.g. Fish and Shellfish)

Meat

Milk and dairy products

Freshwater fish

820

0.65

Molluscs (freshwater)

4

0.00

Fresh and processed fruits

3512

2.79

Juices63

0.05

Crustaceans (marine)

159

0.13

Marine fish and migratory fish

6218

4.94

Molluscs (marine)

956

0.76

Other marine species

99

0.08

Cattle meat

84189

66.91

Other meat

550

0.44

Pork meat (excl wild boar)

542

0.43

Poultry

223

0.18

Milk

2493

1.98

Other dairy products

289

0.23

Mushrooms

Mushrooms

2789

2.22

Other plants

Other plants

1357

1.08

Unclassified

Unclassified product

3157

2.51

Vegetables

Leafy vegetables

3498

2.78

Other vegetables

6157

4.89

Root vegetables

3048

2.42

Considering single food products and not categories, the ranking was slightly different fromthe second position downwards, with rice (3.2%), cattle milk (2.0%), Japanese green tea
leaves (1.8%), shiitake mushrooms (1.3%) and spinach (1.2%) (Table 4).

11

12

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Table 4: Top ten ranking of foodstuff types in descending order of sample share (absolutevalues and percentage of total number of samples over the first year after the accident)
Food

Total

% TotalCattle meat

84188

66.9

Rice

3984

3.2

Cattle milk

2493

2.0

Japanese green tea leaves

2235

1.8

Shiitake (mushroom)

1578

1.3

Spinach1509

1.2

Soybean685

0.5

Cucumber

675

0.5

Apple

663

0.5

Japanese mustard spinach (Komatsuna)

640

0.5

Others (645 foodstuff types)

27171

21.6

As expected, the sampling focused mainly on products collected from agricultural land or
aquaculture, with close to 93% of the samples. Only 7 % of the samples were related tofoodstuffs such as marine or freshwater fish, game meat or wild mushrooms (Table 5).
Table 5: Distribution of foodstuff samples across expert subgroup C3 categories (15 March
2011–15 March 2012)
C3_Category

C3_Subcategory

Total% TotalBrackish ecosystems

Brackish wild

34

0.027

Freshwater ecosystems

Freshwater aquaculture222

0.1764

Freshwater wild608

0.4832Marine aquaculture154

0.1224

Marine wild

7228

5.7444

Others7179

5.7055

Marine ecosystems
OthersTerrestrial ecosystems

Unclassified

Cultivated mushrooms

2290

1.82

Cultivated plants or crops

21701

17.247

Domesticated animals

84945

67.51

Unclassified mushrooms

15

0.0119Wild animals

528

0.4196

Wild mushrooms

412

0.3274

Wild plants

258

0.205

Unclassified

252

0.2003More detailed information about the time distribution of the samples for the different expert
subgroup C2 and C3 categories can be found in supplements 5 and 6.

IV. CONCLUSIONSThe compilation and organization of measurement data into the foodstuff database was
essential for the Committee to conduct its assessment of doses to the public and to non-humanATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

13

biota. Approximately 126,000 records on food monitoring were compiled for the sampling
period of 15 March 2011–15 March 2012.
The establishment of a relational database facilitated rapid data analysis by the UNSCEAR
experts for the Committee.
Besides its application in the current UNSCEAR evaluation, the relational database is
expected to be a valuable resource for scientists in the future for assessing the long-term
impact of the accident. In this context, further uploading of all collected foodstuff data to the
database over the coming years would be beneficial. As at 13 December 2012, approximately
330,000 records of foodstuffs were available.

13

14

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Supplementary material
Supplement 1:
Categories and subcategories of foodstuff samples used under UNSCEAR expert subgroup
C2 (sub) categories for the assessment of doses to the public.
C2_Category

C2_Subcategory

Algae

Algae

Cereals

Other cereals
Rice and rice products (excl oil)
Wheat and wheat products

Eggs

Poultry eggs

Food of mixed composition

Food of mixed composition

Freshwater fish and shellfish

Crustaceans (freshwater)
Freshwater fish
Molluscs (freshwater)

FruitsFresh and processed fruits
JuicesMarine species (e.g. Fish and Shellfish)

Crustaceans (marine)
Marine fish and migratory fish
Molluscs (marine)
Other marine species

Meat

Cattle meat
Other meat
Pork meat (excl wild boar)
Poultry

Milk and dairy products

Milk
Other dairy products

Mushrooms

Mushrooms

Other plants

Other plants

Unclassified

Unclassified product

Vegetables

Leafy vegetables
Other vegetables
Root vegetables

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

15

Supplement 2:
Categories and subcategories of foodstuff samples used under UNSCEAR expert subgroup
C3 (sub) categories for assessing doses to non-human biota.
C3_Category

C3_Subcategory

Brackish ecosystems

Brackish wild

Freshwater ecosystems

Freshwater aquaculture
Freshwater wild

Marine ecosystems

Marine aquaculture
Marine wild

OthersTerrestrial ecosystems

Others
Cultivated mushrooms
Cultivated plants or crops
Domesticated animals
Unclassified mushrooms
Wild animals
Wild mushrooms
Wild plants

Unclassified

Unclassified

15

16

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Supplement 3:
Description of specific categorical variables “Availability for food consumption” and“Japanese food categories”
a. Availability for food consumption (AFC) category
In order to clarify whether foodstuffs in the same lot are available for consumption or not,eight categories were created according to the time of sampling; and whether the foodstuff
was: subject to “distribution restraints imposed by government and local governments on thesampling date” and sampled in the harvest season. In creating these categories, the file
“Restriction of Distribution” is used as reference. Table 1 indicates characteristics of eachcategory.
Table S3.1: Characteristics of each AFC category
Category

Sampling pre-market or
post-market

0Pre-market

1

Pre-market

2
3

Pre-market
Pre-market

4Pre-market

5Pre-market

Was distribution restraint
imposed on the sampling
date?
No
Sampled before
distribution restraints
No
Sampled before
distribution restraints
Yes
Yes
But the result wasdisclosed within the day
before lifting restraints
No
Sampled after lifting
restraints
No

6
M

Pre-market
Post-market

Yes or No
No

Was foodstuff
sampled in harvest
season?
No
Sampled before
harvest season*1.
Yes
Yes or No
Yes or No

Was foodstuff available for
consumption?
No
Yes

Yes

No
Yes
(Possibility that foodstuff
was distributed after lifting
restraints.)
Yes

Yes

Yes

No*2
Yes

No
Yes

*1. Raw milk sampled during the cessation of milk production by the destruction of dairy factories and/or milk collection centre withcooling facility was included.
*2. Fishing was banned on the sampling date. Crops in AFC category 6 were cultivated only in some experimental farms

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

17

b. Food class (National Health and Nutrition Survey in Japan)
In the National Health and Nutrition Survey in Japan, there were 17 large classes that are
further sub-divided into 99 smaller classes originally for the purpose of determining thenutritional status of citizens.
Food class 100 and 200 were additionally established because there were some foodstuffs
falling outside existing classes.
- Food class 100 includes foodstuffs which are normally eaten after processing or
cooking whereby radionuclide concentration is reduced, e.g. dried mushrooms anddried wheat noodles.
- Food class 200 includes mineral water, processed foods of multiple ingredients,
and those foods without sufficient information for classification.
For aquatic food samples, excluding processed foods of multiple ingredients, “Marine or fresh
water” was added in the data sheet. Eight categories were created according to the “habitat”
and “in the case of migrating species, place of sampling”. Characteristics of each category
were described as follows in table 2:
Table 2: Characteristics of each category of “Marine or fresh water”
Category

The habitat

In the case of migrating species, place of samplingF

Fresh water-

B

Brackish water-

M

Marine water-MB

Mostly in marine water (occasionally in brackish water)

-

A(F)*

Migrating between fresh water and marine water

Fresh waterA(B)*Brackish water

A(M)*
X

Marine water
Insufficient information* Letter in parentheses indicates place of sampling.

Foodstuff sampled in either marine wildlife or terrestrial wildlife was identified as “1” in the“WL” field in the database.

17

18

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

Supplement 4:
Extract of the main table of the database, in Microsoft Excel format, for all foodstuff samples
used in the UNSCEAR assessment, is available in digital format. See attachment ‘C-8suppl’(UNSCEAR_2013A_C-8suppl_FAO_IAEA_foodstuff_database_reduced_version_201407.xlsx).

C2_Subcategory
Algae
Other cereals
Rice and rice products (excl oil)
Wheat and wheat products
Eggs
Poultry eggs
Food of mixed composition
Food of mixed composition
Freshwater fish and shellfish
Crustaceans (freshwater)
Freshwater fish
Molluscs (freshwater)
FruitsFresh and processed fruits
JuicesMarine species (e.g. Fish and Shellfish) Crustaceans (Marine)
Marine fish and migratory fish
Molluscs (marine)
Other marine species
Meat
Beef / cattle
Other meat
Pork meat (excl wild boar)
Poultry
Milk and dairy products
Milk
Other dairy products
Mushrooms
Mushrooms
Other plants
Other plants
Unclassified
Unclassified product
Vegetables
Leafy vegetables
Other vegetables
Root vegetables

Algae
CerealsC2_Category

4
173
49
14
18
3
16
7
149
8
36
21
171
481
565
71

4
140
20
1
25
4
19

96
37
1
621
344
8

131
5
159
29
72
548
385
60

115

44

88
3
270
48
16
88
1
25
12
140
11
29
16
185
243
660
219

219

2
99

1
102

18

10

78
22

1
6

14

20

2
64

4
16
11

3
3

2
5

82
14
2
9
1
26
15
241

1

12
271
57
13
2 865
5
43
10
133
29
107
15
167
64
763
99

417

70

16
84
61
153
28

5

14
481
86
14
6 060
63
57
22
194
9
242
100
106
90
678
177

604

1
89

19
6
1 731
15
45

6

8

9
10
43
53
33
151
40
2
107
54
24
20
31
8
44
60
34
8
8
5
2
1
56
50
61
17
2
577
536
430
185
4
15
15
7
20
22
17
10
742 1 054
783
448
88
116
116
63
7
5
7
3
8 402 13 419 18 849 10 574
91
87
117
64
55
57
64
35
11
36
29
18
196
226
258
217
35
16
73
17
527
514
297
170
173
455
352
55
1 579
379
160
116
128
293
300
154
448
575
558
271
390
565
514
239
16
132
1 948
8
25

7

92
6
26
764
121
5
10 509
23
69
32
271
28
227
52
107
275
399
322

65
9
33
9
74
21
3
185

12

Grand Total:

48
8
52
22
81
16
1
63
2
205
16
27
1 010
178
12
13 371
91
76
31
337
58
385
52
114
301
511
384

11

125 826

100.0%

Total% Total
319
0.3%
507
0.4%
4 010
3.2%
345
0.3%
453
0.4%
58
0.0%
11
0.0%
820
0.7%
4
0.0%
3 512
2.8%
63
0.1%
159
0.1%
6 218
4.9%
956
0.8%
99
0.1%
84 189
66.9%
550
0.4%
542
0.4%
223
0.2%
2 493
2.0%
289
0.2%
2 789
2.2%
1 357
1.1%
3 157
2.5%
3 498
2.8%
6 157
4.9%
3 048
2.4%

Number of foodstuff samples under UNSCEAR expert subgroup C2 (sub) categories, collected from 15 March 2011 until 15 March 2012 (Number
in columns reflects the number of months after the accident)

Supplement 5:

ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE
19

C3_Category
C3_Subcategory
Brackish ecosystems
Brackish wild
Freshwater ecosystems Freshwater aquaculture
Freshwater wild
Marine ecosystems
Marine aquaculture
Marine wild
OthersOthersTerrestrial ecosystems Cultivated mushrooms
Cultivated plants or crops
Domesticated animals
Unclassified mushrooms
Wild animals
Wild mushrooms
Wild plants
Unclassified
Unclassified
3

4
2
53
33

18
2

72
46

233
275
36
1 227
41

2
23
80

146
201
157
1 021
44

3

101
263
96
1 078
51

2

10

1

2
2
16

1

1
1
24
12

3
25
78
3
320
271
28
1 562
124

4

5

2
16

2
21
49
6
339
243
91
1 787
2 921

5
3
13
73
6
582
385
142
3 384
6 143
4
59
96
11
2

6

Grand total:

8
9
10
11
12
3
2
2
2
5
7
23
10
30
39
22
14
37
39
36
8
33
149
8
32
32
22
24
21
830 1 155895
519 1 196
912
519
851
648
1 896
833
794
311
402
267
167
372
221
3 774 2 611 2 072
816 1 317 1 052
8 471 13 514 18 938 10 626 13 466 10 606
7
4
87
84
115
63
88
22
202
83
6
5
1
4
1
19
9
33
14
8
26
43
8
32
35

7

125 826

100.0%

Total% Total
34
0.0%
222
0.2%
608
0.5%
154
0.1%
7 228
5.7%
7 179
5.7%
2 290
1.8%
21 701
17.2%
84 945
67.5%
15
0.0%
528
0.4%
412
0.3%
258
0.2%
252
0.2%

Number of foodstuff samples, under UNSCEAR expert subgroup C3 (sub) categories, collected from 15 March 2011 until 15 March 2012 (Number
in columns reflects the number of months after the accident)

Supplement 6:

20
ATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASEATTACHMENT C-8: FAO/IAEA FOOD DATABASE

21