Head to head
Antarctic Toothfish vs Patagonian Toothfish
These two closely related fish share a genus but have taken very different paths, one shaped by extreme cold, the other by a dramatic commercial rebrand.
| Antarctic Toothfish | Patagonian Toothfish | |
|---|---|---|
| Scientific name | Dissostichus mawsoni | Dissostichus eleginoides |
| Range | Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica | Southern South America and sub-Antarctic waters |
| Water temperature | The most extreme cold, sub-zero water | Somewhat less extreme cold |
| Notable adaptation | Natural antifreeze proteins in its blood | Not documented as having comparable antifreeze |
| Commercial identity | Sold under its own name | Marketed as Chilean sea bass |
| Historical fishing pressure | Managed under an international quota system | A history of illegal and unregulated fishing |
| Conservation status | Least Concern | Near Threatened |
| Habitat | Ocean, polar | Ocean |
Antarctic Toothfish vs Patagonian Toothfish: common questions
Which one produces natural antifreeze in its blood?
The Antarctic toothfish is the one with this adaptation, circulating natural antifreeze glycoproteins to survive the most extreme sub-zero water surrounding Antarctica, a trait not documented in the Patagonian toothfish.
Which one is marketed under an entirely different name?
The Patagonian toothfish is the one rebranded, sold worldwide as Chilean sea bass, a name change that dramatically boosted its commercial value compared with the Antarctic toothfish, which is sold under its own name.
Which one has faced more illegal fishing pressure?
The Patagonian toothfish has faced significantly more illegal and unregulated fishing pressure historically, driven largely by the high value created by its commercial rebranding.