Literature DB >> 17241404

Effect of substrate on progression and healing of skin erosions and epidermal papillomas of Atlantic halibut, Hippoglossus hippoglossus (L.).

O H Ottesen1, E J Noga, W Sandaa.   

Abstract

Juvenile Atlantic halibut cultured on a smooth substrate often develop skin lesions on the blind (abocular) side, significantly reducing carcass value and causing economic losses. We discovered that fish not only developed skin erosions, but also extensive epidermal papillomas when held on a smooth substrate for 39 months. This is the first time that epidermal papillomas have been reported in Atlantic halibut. To determine whether substrate type affected the progression or healing of these lesions, fish with papillomas and skin erosions were moved to identical rearing units having either an irregular (sand, gravel or Netlon) substrate, or a smooth (gel-coated fibreglass) substrate. After 62 days, 42-50% of fish held on any of the three irregular substrates had a skin erosion area (SEA) that had either diminished or appeared to be completely healed via gross examination. In contrast, none of the fish held on the smooth substrate showed improvement and 75-100% had a more severe SEA. Changes in the papilloma area (PA) were less dramatic: none of the fish held on an irregular substrate had any clear change in PA, although there was a suggestion that the PA in some fish might becoming less severe. Similarly, none of the fish held on the smooth substrate had a change in PA, although there was a suggestion that the PA in some fish was becoming more severe. After 97 days, there was also a suggestion that specific growth rates were higher in fish held on an irregular substrate when compared with those held on the smooth substrate. Overall, these data further substantiate previous studies suggesting that an irregular substrate, including the commercially used Netlon, is best for rearing Atlantic halibut. While there was a clear relationship between substrate type and whether skin erosions or papillomas progressed or healed, the exact cause(s) of these two responses is uncertain. Future studies should focus on risk factors such as stress, burrowing behaviour and the microenvironment of the substrate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17241404     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2761.2007.00780.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fish Dis        ISSN: 0140-7775            Impact factor:   2.767


  2 in total

Review 1.  Injuries and deformities in fish: their potential impacts upon aquacultural production and welfare.

Authors:  Chris Noble; Hernán A Cañon Jones; Børge Damsgård; Matthew J Flood; Kjell Ø Midling; Ana Roque; Bjørn-Steinar Sæther; Stephanie Yue Cottee
Journal:  Fish Physiol Biochem       Date:  2011-09-15       Impact factor: 2.794

2.  The Effect of Substrate on Water Quality in Ornamental Fish Tanks.

Authors:  Myriam Vanderzwalmen; Daniel Sánchez Lacalle; Priyadarshini Tamilselvan; Jason McNeill; Dorine Delieuvin; Khadidja Behlouli; Andrew Hursthouse; Iain McLellan; Mhairi E Alexander; Fiona L Henriquez; Donna Snellgrove; Katherine A Sloman
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-10-05       Impact factor: 3.231

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.