4.5 Article

Infectious agent detections in archived Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) samples from British Columbia, Canada (1985-94)

Journal

JOURNAL OF FISH DISEASES
Volume 42, Issue 4, Pages 533-547

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jfd.12951

Keywords

archived; BioMark; Fraser River; infectious agents; Skeena; Sockeye salmon

Funding

  1. Genome British Columbia
  2. Pacific Salmon Foundation
  3. Fisheries and Oceans Canada
  4. Mitacs [IT06621]
  5. Canada Excellence Research Chair

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In response to concerns that novel infectious agents were introduced through the movement of eggs as Atlantic salmon aquaculture developed in British Columbia (BC), Canada, we estimated the prevalence of infectious agents in archived return-migrating Sockeye salmon, from before and during aquaculture expansion in BC (1985-94). Of 45 infectious agents assessed through molecular assays in 652 samples, 23 (7 bacterial, 2 viral and 14 parasitic) were detected in liver tissue from six regions in BC. Prevalence ranged from 0.005 to 0.83 and varied significantly by region and year. Agent diversity ranged from 0 to 12 per fish (median 4), with the lowest diversity observed in fish from the Trans-Boundary and Central Coast regions. Agents known to be endemic in Sockeye salmon in BC, including Flavobacterium psychrophilum, Infectious haematopoietic necrosis virus, Ceratonova shasta and Parvicapsula minibicornis, were commonly observed. Others, such as Kudoa thyrsites and Piscirikettsia salmonis, were also detected. Surprisingly, infectious agents described only recently in BC salmon, Ca. Branchiomonas cysticola, Parvicapsula pseudobranchicola and Paranucleospora theridion, were also detected, indicating their potential presence prior to the expansion of the aquaculture industry. In general, our data suggest that agent distributions may not have substantially changed because of the salmon aquaculture industry.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available