Health – SAIC
Cleaner collaboration T
Working together we can gain new insights into fi sh welfare, writes Heather Jones
his month sees the launch of a collaborati ve project on fi sh vaccina- ti on that aims to support producti on growth in the Scotti sh salmon in- dustry. However, it’s not salmon that will be vaccinated, but lumpfi sh and wrasse.
The need for a suffi cient supply of cleaner fi sh that can operate eff ecti ve-
ly through the salmon growth cycle has heightened industry awareness of cleaner fi sh welfare and health. The new project, sponsored by the Scotti sh Aquaculture Innovati on
Centre (SAIC) and involving Aqualife, Scotti sh Sea Farms and the University of Sti rling’s Insti tute of Aquaculture, should accelerate progress in this area. The aim is to develop eff ecti ve, welfare-friendly techniques and technolo-
gies for vaccinati ng lumpfi sh and wrasse, refl ecti ng that their anatomy and physiology diff er from salmonids. Having fi rst evaluated current vaccinati on methodologies in terms of fi sh
welfare, survival, eff ects on growth and vaccine effi cacy, it will then build on those assessments to deliver new protocols for the vaccinati on of dif- ferent lumpfi sh species; and novel vaccinati on equipment for cleaner fi sh, based on adapti ng a prototype salmonid vaccine device under develop- ment by Aqualife. This project, believes Aqualife, could pave the way for further adapta-
ti ons of the device for use on other farmed non-salmonid species such as Mediterranean bass or Asian catf ish, creati ng a potenti al export market for this Scotti sh fi rm. The Insti tute of Aquaculture will carry out the scienti fi c procedures,
including bacterial challenge trials and welfare assessment. And Scotti sh Sea Farms will provide access to a range of its marine sites
across Orkney, Shetland and the mainland for research to be carried out. The possible gains from this project could be immense - new insights into
cleaner fi sh welfare and physiology; greater vaccine effi cacy and protec- ti on from health threats; more eff ecti ve control of sea lice throughout the salmon growth cycle; reduced use of medicines; producti on growth in the Scotti sh salmon industry; and open knowledge exchange, so that all SAIC’s Scotti sh stakeholders can benefi t from the fi ndings of the project. It’s a list to be proud of. Those benefi ts could arise from a relati vely small investment of a £117,000 grant from the Scotti sh Aquaculture Innovati on Centre, and con- tributi ons worth just over £168,000 from the other partners involved. It’s a fi ne example of how SAIC can facilitate, accelerate and insti gate col-
laborati ons between researchers and businesses that will bring long-term benefi ts for business and the Scotti sh economy. It’s also a fi ne example of Scotti sh ambiti on – the export of Scotti sh
experti se to aquaculture companies in Norway and beyond. Aqualife, having already built up a substanti al salmon vaccinati on busi-
ness in Norway as well as Scotland, now sees market potenti al in cleaner fi sh vaccinati on too. Our ambiti on is to see – and promote – more exam- ples of Scotti sh expert success.
30
www.fishfarmer-magazine.com
Opposite page: Lumpfi sh; wrasse; vaccinati on. Pictures: Aqualife
Much of our thinking focuses on the sustainabil- ity of aquaculture in Scotland. And that means miti gati ng risk as well as sti mulati ng growth in the industry. Hence, our third Priority Innovati on Area (PIA)
is rapid detecti on methods for viral pathogens and diseases. With two previous outbreaks of ISA costi ng the Scotti sh industry alone millions of pounds, the economic implicati ons of viral diseases are enormous. Add to this the spectre of new ‘emerging
diseases’ – pathogenic aquati c viruses that may be naturally present in diff erent aquati c envi- ronments, and in the ti ssues of wild fi sh – and it is clear that work on viral pathogens must be a priority for the aquaculture sector in Scotland. So too is rapid and eff ecti ve determinati on
between pathogenic and non-pathogenic viruses. As well as detecti ng those viruses which can cause diseases in farmed fi sh, we need to disti nguish those that don’t.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68