Gill Disease in Finfish Aquaculture with Particular Emphasis on Amoebic Gill Disease

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Gill Disease in Finfish Aquaculture with Particular Emphasis on Amoebic Gill Disease GILL DISEASE IN FINFISH AQUACULTURE WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON AMOEBIC GILL DISEASE Jamie Kian Downes, BSc, MSc Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Supervised by Dr Eugene MacCarthy, Dr Ian O’Connor, Dr Hamish Rodger & Dr Neil Ruane Submitted to Galway/Mayo Institute of Technology August 2017 GILL DISEASE IN FINFISH AQUACULTURE WITH PARTICULAR EMPHASIS ON AMOEBIC GILL DISEASE PhD Thesis Jamie Downes Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Galway/Mayo Institute of Technology Supervised by Dr Eugene MacCarthy, Dr Ian O’Connor, Dr Hamish Rodger & Dr Neil Ruane This project is funded under the Marine Institute Research Fellowship Programme (project MEFSS/PhD/2013) in conjunction with the Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology. I Author: Jamie Kian Downes Title: Gill disease in finfish aquaculture with emphasis on amoebic gill disease Abstract Gill disease is one of the most significant challenges facing global salmon aquaculture and in terms of economic impact; amoebic gill disease (AGD) caused by the free living protozoan Neoparamoeba perurans is perhaps the most destructive. However, gill disease is often multifactorial, with numerous putative pathogens identified as potentially playing a role. AGD was first described in Irish aquaculture in 1995. Between the years 1995 and 2010, there were sporadic and relatively minor outbreaks of AGD. Since the re-emergence of the disease in 2011/2012, greater focus has been placed on gill health. This research aimed to investigate gill disease and in particular the re-emergence of AGD caused by N. perurans in Irish aquaculture. Through this it was hoped to provide the industry with the tools and information to help improve management of gill disease as well as fish health and welfare. With respect to this, Chapter 2 of this thesis details the effort to develop and validate a real-time TaqMan® PCR assay to detect Neoparamoeba perurans in Atlantic salmon gills. Furthermore, it describes the use of this assay to monitor disease progression on a marine Atlantic salmon farm in Ireland in conjunction with gross gill pathology and histopathology. As molecular diagnosis of AGD remains a high priority for much of the international salmon farming industry, Chapter 3 evaluates the suitability of currently available molecular assays in conjunction with the most appropriate non-destructive sampling methodology. In addition it compares this methodology with traditional screening methods of gill scoring and histopathology. Chapter 4 addresses the complex and multifactorial nature of gill disorders. Co-infections are common on farms and there is a lack of knowledge in relation to interactions and synergistic effects of these agents. The advances in molecular diagnostics have made it possible in Chapter 5 to identify N. perurans as the causative agent in the earliest AGD outbreaks. In addition to this, a number of other putative pathogens were also identified in these early cases of gill disease. Finally, Chapter 6 concludes the findings of this research and how they relate to the current knowledge of gill health and welfare. II Declaration I hereby declare that the results presented are to the best of my knowledge correct, and that this thesis represents my own original work, carried out during the designated research project period, and has not been taken from the work of others save and to the extent that such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text of my work. Signed: , candidate ID No. G00170432 Date: 25/08/2017 III Acknowledgement Firstly, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors Eugene MacCarthy (GMIT), Ian O’Connor (GMIT), Hamish Rodger (Fish Vet Group) and Neil Ruane (FHU, Marine Institute) for their support, guidance and valuable advice on all aspects of the thesis. I would like to thank the Marine Institute for providing the funding and opportunity for this project as well as GMIT for facilitating the project. A special thanks to my colleagues in CSIRO, Australia, Dr. Mat Cook and Dr. Richard Taylor for their encouragement since meeting them at the first Gill health Initiative. I can’t thank them enough for arranging for me to visit their labs in Australia and for their hospitality during the visit. The bloody Mary oyster shot could be left out next time. Not forgetting Dr. Megan Rigby and Dr. Ben Maynard for their assistance with the collaboration in this study. I am very grateful to Tadaishi Yatabe, (CADMS, UC Davis) for getting involved and helping carry out analysis on the interactions of pathogens and for his advice and guidance in preparing the resulting publication. A big thank you to all members of the Fish Health Unit in the MI who I have worked with over the past 4 years. You were always there when a little bit of help or advice was needed as well as showing me the ropes when I first started. Also thank you to Kathy Henshilwood for her guidance when starting out with the molecular work. Thank you to Eve Collins for her help analysing the histology for this project but also for always being available to offer sound advice. Also, a massive thank you to Teresa Morrissey for not only helping out whenever needed, but for also helping to keep me sane through the last 4 years. Thank you to my family and friends who for the most part weren’t really sure what I was doing. But the support they provided when breaking away from the thesis was invaluable. Thank you especially to my mother Johanna, for the all the support and encouragement she has given me, not just in the last 4 years during this study but from the very beginning. I certainly wouldn’t be where I am today without her help. IV Contents Contents Legends to Figures ............................................................................................................... VIII Legend to Tables ..................................................................................................................... X Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Salmon Aquaculture ...................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Gill Disease ................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Non-infectious Gill Disorders ....................................................................................... 5 1.4 Amoebic Gill Disease .................................................................................................... 6 1.4.1 AGD in Ireland ......................................................................................................... 7 1.4.2 Pathology ................................................................................................................. 8 1.4.3 Morphology and Phylogeny ..................................................................................... 9 1.4.4 Diagnosis of AGD .................................................................................................. 10 1.4.5 Infection trials ........................................................................................................ 16 1.4.6 Treatment of AGD ................................................................................................. 18 1.4.7 Transmission Pathways .......................................................................................... 20 1.5 Multifactorial Gill Disease .......................................................................................... 23 1.6 Objectives .................................................................................................................... 26 1.7 Summary of Chapters .................................................................................................. 27 1.8 Literature Cited ........................................................................................................... 30 A longitudinal study of amoebic gill disease on a marine Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., farm utilising a real-time PCR assay for the detection of Neoparamoeba perurans . .... 43 2.1 Abstract ....................................................................................................................... 44 2.2 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 45 2.3 Materials and Methods ................................................................................................ 47 2.3.1 Amoeba isolates and culture: ................................................................................. 47 2.3.2 DNA extraction and conventional PCR of cultured amoebae: ............................... 48 2.3.3 Real time primer and probe design: ....................................................................... 48 2.3.4 TaqMan® real-time PCR: ...................................................................................... 49 2.3.5 Validation of reaction efficiency, sensitivity and specificity: ................................ 49 2.3.6 Reproducibility: ..................................................................................................... 50 2.3.7 Longitudinal study site and sampling details: ........................................................ 50 2.3.8 In-situ hybridisation: .............................................................................................. 51 2.3.9
Recommended publications
  • The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks Bioblitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Stewardship and Science The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 ON THIS PAGE Photograph of BioBlitz participants conducting data entry into iNaturalist. Photograph courtesy of the National Park Service. ON THE COVER Photograph of BioBlitz participants collecting aquatic species data in the Presidio of San Francisco. Photograph courtesy of National Park Service. The 2014 Golden Gate National Parks BioBlitz - Data Management and the Event Species List Achieving a Quality Dataset from a Large Scale Event Natural Resource Report NPS/GOGA/NRR—2016/1147 Elizabeth Edson1, Michelle O’Herron1, Alison Forrestel2, Daniel George3 1Golden Gate Parks Conservancy Building 201 Fort Mason San Francisco, CA 94129 2National Park Service. Golden Gate National Recreation Area Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1061 Sausalito, CA 94965 3National Park Service. San Francisco Bay Area Network Inventory & Monitoring Program Manager Fort Cronkhite, Bldg. 1063 Sausalito, CA 94965 March 2016 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Stewardship and Science office in Fort Collins, Colorado, publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics. These reports are of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Report Series is used to disseminate comprehensive information and analysis about natural resources and related topics concerning lands managed by the National Park Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – APRIL 2011
    SGR 129 Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – APRIL 2011 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND APPLIED NUTRITION OFFICE OF FOOD SAFETY Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance Fourth Edition – April 2011 Additional copies may be purchased from: Florida Sea Grant IFAS - Extension Bookstore University of Florida P.O. Box 110011 Gainesville, FL 32611-0011 (800) 226-1764 Or www.ifasbooks.com Or you may download a copy from: http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances You may submit electronic or written comments regarding this guidance at any time. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations. gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number listed in the notice of availability that publishes in the Federal Register. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (240) 402-2300 April 2011 Table of Contents: Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance • Guidance for the Industry: Fish and Fishery Products Hazards and Controls Guidance ................................ 1 • CHAPTER 1: General Information .......................................................................................................19 • CHAPTER 2: Conducting a Hazard Analysis and Developing a HACCP Plan
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Louse Lepeophtheirus Salmonis on Atlantic Salmon
    DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Vol. 17: 101-105, 1993 Published November 18 Dis. aquat. Org. Efficacy of ivermectin for control of the salmon louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis on Atlantic salmon 'Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Biological Sciences Branch. Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada V9R 5K6 '~epartmentof Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 2A9 ABSTRACT The eff~cacyof orally administered lveimectin against the common salmon louse Lepeophthelrus salmonls on Atlant~csalmon Salmo salar was invest~gatedunder laboratory condl- tions Both 3 and 6 doses of ivermectln at a targeted dose of 0 05 mg kg-' f~shadmin~stered in the feed every third day airested the development and reduced the Intensity of lnfect~onby L salmon~sThis IS the first report of dn eff~cacioustreatment agd~nstthe chalimus stages of sea lice Ser~oushead dnd doi- sal body lesions, typical of L salmon~sfeed~ng act~vity, which developed on the control f~shwere ab- sent from the ~vermect~n-tredtedf~sh lvermectin fed at these dosage reglmes resulted in a darken~ng of the fish, but appealed not to reduce their feeding activity KEY WORDS Ivermectin Lepeophthe~russalmonis Parasite control Paras~tetreatment - Salmon louse . Salmo salar Sea lice INTRODUCTION dichlorvos into the marine environment, have made the development of alternative treatment methods fol The marine ectoparasitic copepod Lepeophtheirus sea lice a priority salmonis is one of several species of sea lice that Orally administered ivermectln (22,23-Dihydro- commonly infect, and can cause serious disease in, avermectin B,) has been reported to be effective for sea-farmed salmonids (Brandal & Egidius 1979, the control of sea lice and other parasitic copepods on Kabata 1979, 1988, Pike 1989, Wootten et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue Working Group Report on Salmon Disease
    Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue Working Group Report on Salmon Disease Larry Hammell - Atlantic Veterinary College, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada Craig Stephen- Centre for Coastal Health, University of Calgary, Canada Ian Bricknell- School of Marine Sciences, University of Maine, USA Øystein Evensen- Norwegian School of Veterinary Medicine, Oslo, Norway Patricio Bustos- ADL Diagnostic Chile Ltda., Chile With Contributions by: Ricardo Enriquez- University of Austral, Chile 1 Citation: Hammell, L., Stephen, C., Bricknell, I., Evensen Ø., and P. Bustos. 2009 “Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue Working Group Report on Salmon Disease” commissioned by the Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue, available at http://wwf.worldwildlife.org/site/PageNavigator/SalmonSOIForm Corresponding author: Larry Hammell, email: [email protected] This report was commissioned by the Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue. The Salmon Dialogue is a multi-stakeholder, multi-national group which was initiated by the World Wildlife Fund in 2004. Participants include salmon producers and other members of the market chain, NGOs, researchers, retailers, and government officials from major salmon producing and consuming countries. The goal of the Dialogue is to credibly develop and support the implementation of measurable, performance-based standards that minimize or eliminate the key negative environmental and social impacts of salmon farming, while permitting the industry to remain economically viable The Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue focuses their research and standard development on seven key areas of impact of salmon production including: social; feed; disease; salmon escapes; chemical inputs; benthic impacts and siting; and, nutrient loading and carrying capacity. Funding for this report and other Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue supported work is provided by the members of the Dialogue‘s steering committee and their donors.
    [Show full text]
  • Catching the Complexity of Salmon-Louse Interactions
    Fish and Shellfish Immunology 90 (2019) 199–209 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Fish and Shellfish Immunology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fsi Full length article Catching the complexity of salmon-louse interactions T ∗ Cristian Gallardo-Escáratea, , Valentina Valenzuela-Muñoza, Gustavo Núñez-Acuñaa, Crisleri Carreraa, Ana Teresa Gonçalvesa, Diego Valenzuela-Mirandaa, Bárbara P. Benaventea, Steven Robertsb a Interdisciplinary Center for Aquaculture Research, Laboratory of Biotechnology and Aquatic Genomics, Department of Oceanography, Universidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile b School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences (SAFS), University of Washington, Seattle, USA ABSTRACT The study of host-parasite relationships is an integral part of the immunology of aquatic species, where the complexity of both organisms has to be overlayed with the lifecycle stages of the parasite and immunological status of the host. A deep understanding of how the parasite survives in its host and how they display molecular mechanisms to face the immune system can be applied for novel parasite control strategies. This review highlights current knowledge about salmon and sea louse, two key aquatic animals for aquaculture research worldwide. With the aim to catch the complexity of the salmon-louse interactions, molecular information gleaned through genomic studies are presented. The host recognition system and the chemosensory receptors found in sea lice reveal complex molecular components, that in turn, can be disrupted through specific molecules such as non-coding RNAs. 1. Introduction worldwide the most studied sea lice species are Lepeophtheirus salmonis and Caligus rogercresseyi [8–10]. Annually the salmon industry presents Host-parasite interactions are a complex relationship where one estimated losses of US $ 480 million, representing between 4 and 10% organism benefits the other and often where there is a negative impact of production costs [10].
    [Show full text]
  • Piscirickettsia Salmonis and the Sea Louse Caligus Rogercresseyi
    Disease Resistance in Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar): Coinfection of the Intracellular Bacterial Pathogen Piscirickettsia salmonis and the Sea Louse Caligus rogercresseyi Jean Paul Lhorente1, Jose´ A. Gallardo2*, Beatriz Villanueva3, Marı´a J. Caraban˜ o3, Roberto Neira1,4 1 Aquainnovo S.A, Puerto Montt, Chile, 2 Pontificia Universidad Cato´lica de Valparaı´so, Valparaı´so, Chile, 3 Departamento de Mejora Gene´tica Animal, INIA, Madrid, Spain, 4 Departamento de Produccio´n Animal, Facultad de Ciencias Agrono´micas, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile Abstract Background: Naturally occurring coinfections of pathogens have been reported in salmonids, but their consequences on disease resistance are unclear. We hypothesized that 1) coinfection of Caligus rogercresseyi reduces the resistance of Atlantic salmon to Piscirickettsia salmonis; and 2) coinfection resistance is a heritable trait that does not correlate with resistance to a single infection. Methodology: In total, 1,634 pedigreed Atlantic salmon were exposed to a single infection (SI) of P. salmonis (primary pathogen) or coinfection with C. rogercresseyi (secondary pathogen). Low and high level of coinfection were evaluated (LC = 44 copepodites per fish; HC = 88 copepodites per fish). Survival and quantitative genetic analyses were performed to determine the resistance to the single infection and coinfections. Main Findings: C. rogercresseyi significantly increased the mortality in fish infected with P. salmonis (SI mortality = 251/545; LC mortality = 544/544 and HC mortality = 545/545). Heritability estimates for resistance to P. salmonis were similar and of 2 2 2 medium magnitude in all treatments (h SI = 0.2360.07; h LC = 0.1760.08; h HC = 0.2460.07). A large and significant genetic correlation with regard to resistance was observed between coinfection treatments (rg LC-HC = 0.9960.01) but not between the single and coinfection treatments (rg SI-LC = 20.1460.33; rg SI-HC = 0.3260.34).
    [Show full text]
  • Host-Parasite Interaction of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo Salar) and the Ectoparasite Neoparamoeba Perurans in Amoebic Gill Disease
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 31 May 2021 doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.672700 Host-Parasite Interaction of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and the Ectoparasite Neoparamoeba perurans in Amoebic Gill Disease † Natasha A. Botwright 1*, Amin R. Mohamed 1 , Joel Slinger 2, Paula C. Lima 1 and James W. Wynne 3 1 Livestock and Aquaculture, CSIRO Agriculture and Food, St Lucia, QLD, Australia, 2 Livestock and Aquaculture, CSIRO Agriculture and Food, Woorim, QLD, Australia, 3 Livestock and Aquaculture, CSIRO Agriculture and Food, Hobart, TAS, Australia Marine farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) are susceptible to recurrent amoebic gill disease Edited by: (AGD) caused by the ectoparasite Neoparamoeba perurans over the growout production Samuel A. M. Martin, University of Aberdeen, cycle. The parasite elicits a highly localized response within the gill epithelium resulting in United Kingdom multifocal mucoid patches at the site of parasite attachment. This host-parasite response Reviewed by: drives a complex immune reaction, which remains poorly understood. To generate a model Diego Robledo, for host-parasite interaction during pathogenesis of AGD in Atlantic salmon the local (gill) and University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom systemic transcriptomic response in the host, and the parasite during AGD pathogenesis was Maria K. Dahle, explored. A dual RNA-seq approach together with differential gene expression and system- Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NVI), Norway wide statistical analyses of gene and transcription factor networks was employed. A multi- *Correspondence: tissue transcriptomic data set was generated from the gill (including both lesioned and non- Natasha A. Botwright lesioned tissue), head kidney and spleen tissues naïve and AGD-affected Atlantic salmon [email protected] sourced from an in vivo AGD challenge trial.
    [Show full text]
  • Detection and Identification of Fish Pathogens: What Is the Future?
    The Israeli Journal of Aquaculture – Bamidgeh 60(4), 2008, 213-229. 213 Detection and Identification of Fish Pathogens: What is the Future? A Review I. Frans1,2†, B. Lievens1,2*†, C. Heusdens1,2 and K.A. Willems1,2 1 Scientia Terrae Research Institute, B-2860 Sint-Katelijne-Waver, Belgium 2 Research Group Process Microbial Ecology and Management, Department Microbial and Molecular Systems, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Association, De Nayer Campus, B-2860 Sint-Katelijne-Waver, Belgium, and Leuven Food Science and Nutrition Research Centre (LfoRCe), Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, B-3001 Heverlee-Leuven, Belgium (Received 1.8.08, Accepted 20.8.08) Key words: biosecurity, diagnosis, DNA array, multiplexing, real-time PCR Abstract Fish diseases pose a universal threat to the ornamental fish industry, aquaculture, and public health. They can be caused by many organisms, including bacteria, fungi, viruses, and protozoa. The lack of rapid, accurate, and reliable means of detecting and identifying fish pathogens is one of the main limitations in fish pathogen diagnosis and disease management and has triggered the search for alternative diagnostic techniques. In this regard, the advent of molecular biology, especially polymerase chain reaction (PCR), provides alternative means for detecting and iden- tifying fish pathogens. Many techniques have been developed, each requiring its own protocol, equipment, and expertise. A major challenge at the moment is the development of multiplex assays that allow accurate detection, identification, and quantification of multiple pathogens in a single assay, even if they belong to different superkingdoms. In this review, recent advances in molecular fish pathogen diagnosis are discussed with an emphasis on nucleic acid-based detec- tion and identification techniques.
    [Show full text]
  • The Salmon Louse Genome: Copepod Features and Parasitic Adaptations
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.15.435234; this version posted March 16, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. The salmon louse genome: copepod features and parasitic adaptations. Supplementary files are available here: DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.4600850 Rasmus Skern-Mauritzen§a,1, Ketil Malde*1,2, Christiane Eichner*2, Michael Dondrup*3, Tomasz Furmanek1, Francois Besnier1, Anna Zofia Komisarczuk2, Michael Nuhn4, Sussie Dalvin1, Rolf B. Edvardsen1, Sindre Grotmol2, Egil Karlsbakk2, Paul Kersey4,5, Jong S. Leong6, Kevin A. Glover1, Sigbjørn Lien7, Inge Jonassen3, Ben F. Koop6, and Frank Nilsen§b,1,2. §Corresponding authors: [email protected]§a, [email protected]§b *Equally contributing authors 1Institute of Marine Research, Postboks 1870 Nordnes, 5817 Bergen, Norway 2University of Bergen, Thormøhlens Gate 53, 5006 Bergen, Norway 3Computational Biology Unit, Department of Informatics, University of Bergen 4EMBL-The European Bioinformatics Institute, Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, CB10 1SD, UK 5 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK 6 Department of Biology, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, V8W 3N5, Canada 7 Centre for Integrative Genetics (CIGENE), Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oluf Thesens vei 6, 1433, Ås, Norway 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.15.435234; this version posted March 16, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Fish Vaccine Development Strategies: Conventional Methods and Modern Biotechnological Approaches
    microorganisms Review A Review of Fish Vaccine Development Strategies: Conventional Methods and Modern Biotechnological Approaches Jie Ma 1,2 , Timothy J. Bruce 1,2 , Evan M. Jones 1,2 and Kenneth D. Cain 1,2,* 1 Department of Fish and Wildlife Sciences, College of Natural Resources, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA; [email protected] (J.M.); [email protected] (T.J.B.); [email protected] (E.M.J.) 2 Aquaculture Research Institute, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 25 October 2019; Accepted: 14 November 2019; Published: 16 November 2019 Abstract: Fish immunization has been carried out for over 50 years and is generally accepted as an effective method for preventing a wide range of bacterial and viral diseases. Vaccination efforts contribute to environmental, social, and economic sustainability in global aquaculture. Most licensed fish vaccines have traditionally been inactivated microorganisms that were formulated with adjuvants and delivered through immersion or injection routes. Live vaccines are more efficacious, as they mimic natural pathogen infection and generate a strong antibody response, thus having a greater potential to be administered via oral or immersion routes. Modern vaccine technology has targeted specific pathogen components, and vaccines developed using such approaches may include subunit, or recombinant, DNA/RNA particle vaccines. These advanced technologies have been developed globally and appear to induce greater levels of immunity than traditional fish vaccines. Advanced technologies have shown great promise for the future of aquaculture vaccines and will provide health benefits and enhanced economic potential for producers. This review describes the use of conventional aquaculture vaccines and provides an overview of current molecular approaches and strategies that are promising for new aquaculture vaccine development.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphological and Phylogenetic Analysis of Caligus Spp Isolated from Lates Calcarifer Cultured in Floating Net Cages in Malaysia
    MORPHOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF CALIGUS SPP ISOLATED FROM LATES CALCARIFER CULTURED IN FLOATING NET CAGES IN MALAYSIA MUHD FAIZUL HELMI BIN AHAMAD HASMI FACULTY OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2013 MORPHOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF CALIGUS SPP ISOLATED FROM LATES CALCARIFER CULTURED IN FLOATING NET CAGES IN MALAYSIA MUHD FAIZUL HELMI BIN AHAMAD HASMI DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES FACULTY OF SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR 2013 UNIVERSITI MALAYA ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION Name of Candidate: MUHD FAIZUL HELMI BIN AHAMAD HASMI I/C/Passport No: 850809045109 Regisration/Matric No.: SGR090128 Name of Degree: MASTER OF SCIENCE Title of Project Paper/Research Report/Dissertation/Thesis (“this Work”): “MORPHOLOGICAL AND PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS OF CALIGUS SPP ISOLATED FROM LATES CAILCARIFER CULTURED IN FLOATING NET CAGES IN MALAYSIA” Field of Study: MOLECULAR PARASITOLOGY I do solemnly and sincerely declare that: (1) I am the sole author/writer of this Work, (2) This Work is original, (3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or reproduction of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly and sufficiently and the title of the Work and its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work, (4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of this work
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX 1 Classified List of Fishes Mentioned in the Text, with Scientific and Common Names
    APPENDIX 1 Classified list of fishes mentioned in the text, with scientific and common names. ___________________________________________________________ Scientific names and classification are from Nelson (1994). Families are listed in the same order as in Nelson (1994), with species names following in alphabetical order. The common names of British fishes mostly follow Wheeler (1978). Common names of foreign fishes are taken from Froese & Pauly (2002). Species in square brackets are referred to in the text but are not found in British waters. Fishes restricted to fresh water are shown in bold type. Fishes ranging from fresh water through brackish water to the sea are underlined; this category includes diadromous fishes that regularly migrate between marine and freshwater environments, spawning either in the sea (catadromous fishes) or in fresh water (anadromous fishes). Not indicated are marine or freshwater fishes that occasionally venture into brackish water. Superclass Agnatha (jawless fishes) Class Myxini (hagfishes)1 Order Myxiniformes Family Myxinidae Myxine glutinosa, hagfish Class Cephalaspidomorphi (lampreys)1 Order Petromyzontiformes Family Petromyzontidae [Ichthyomyzon bdellium, Ohio lamprey] Lampetra fluviatilis, lampern, river lamprey Lampetra planeri, brook lamprey [Lampetra tridentata, Pacific lamprey] Lethenteron camtschaticum, Arctic lamprey] [Lethenteron zanandreai, Po brook lamprey] Petromyzon marinus, lamprey Superclass Gnathostomata (fishes with jaws) Grade Chondrichthiomorphi Class Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous
    [Show full text]