| Literature DB >> 27812230 |
Greta Carmona-Antoñanzas1, Joseph L Humble1, Stephen N Carmichael1, Jan Heumann1, Hayden R L Christie1, Darren M Green1, David I Bassett2, James E Bron1, Armin Sturm1.
Abstract
The salmon louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer, 1837) is an ectoparasite causing infections of wild and farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in the Northern hemisphere. While L. salmonis control at commercial mariculture sites increasingly employs non-medicinal approaches, such as cage designs reducing infection rates and biological control through cleaner fish, anti-parasitic drugs are still a requirement for effective fish health care. With only a limited range of salmon delousing agents available, all of which have been in use for more than a decade, drug resistance formation has been reported for different products. Successful resistance management requires reliable susceptibility assessment, which is usually achieved through L. salmonis bioassays. These tests involve the exposure of parasites to different drug concentrations and require significant numbers of suitable L. salmonis stages. The present study reports an alternative bioassay that is based on time-to-response toxicity analyses and can be carried out with limited parasite numbers. The assay determines the median effective time (ET50), i.e., the time required until impaired swimming and/or attachment behaviour becomes apparent in 50% of parasites, by conducting repeated examinations of test animals starting at the time point where exposure to a set drug concentration commences. This experimental approach further allows the estimation of the apparent drug susceptibility of individual L. salmonis by determining their time to response, which may prove useful in experiments designed to elucidate associations between genetic factors and the drug susceptibility phenotype of parasites. Three laboratory strains of L. salmonis differing in susceptibility to emamectin benzoate were characterised using standard 24 h bioassays and time-to-response toxicity assays. While both the median effective concentration (EC50) and the ET50 showed variability between experimental repeats, both types of bioassay consistently discriminated susceptible and drug-resistant L. salmonis laboratory strains. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: Infections by sea lice cause significant costs to the global salmon farming industry, which have been estimated to exceed €300 million per year worldwide. Control of sea lice still relies to a significant extent on chemical delousing; however, chemical control is threatened by resistance formation. Resistance can be combated by rotation between different drugs and strategic implementation of non-medicinal strategies. However, resistance management requires reliable and feasible methods of susceptibility assessment. The present study is a technical note introducing a novel approach to susceptibility assessments in sea lice. The method can be applied in susceptibility assessments on farms, where it offers the advantage of a reduced requirement of parasites for testing. In addition, the novel method allows deriving the times of parasite require to show a response after drug treatment has started, thus providing a variable characterizing the drug susceptibility phenotype of individual parasites. Accordingly, the bioassay approach presented here will be useful for studies aiming at unravelling the genetic determinants of drug resistance.Entities:
Keywords: Drug susceptibility; EC50, median effective concentration; EMB, emamectin benzoate; ET50, median effective time; Emamectin benzoate; LC50, median lethal concentration; LT50, median lethal time; PEG 300, polyethylene glycol 300; Parasite; Salmon delousing agent; Sea lice
Year: 2016 PMID: 27812230 PMCID: PMC5035062 DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2016.08.007
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aquaculture ISSN: 0044-8486 Impact factor: 4.242
Fig. 1Standard emamectin benzoate (EMB) bioassay with Lepeophtheirus salmonis. Symbols represent the average behavioural toxic response of at least two batches of ten animals, recorded after 24 h of exposure to EMB in plastic Petri dishes. A, EMB toxicity in salmon louse strains IoA-00 and IoA-01. B, EMB toxicity in strains IoA-00 and IoA-02.
Susceptibility of Lepeophtheirus salmonis strains to emamectin benzoate. The toxicity of EMB to defined parasite stages of different laboratory-maintained strains was determined in 24 h bioassays. Results are expressed as EMB median effective concentrations (EC50), determined by probit analysis except where noted otherwise.
| Strain | Sex/stage | Response rate in controls | EC50 (μg L− 1) | Date of experiment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IoA-00 | Male, adult | 10% | 159.3 (145.4–175.6) | 01/2011 |
| Male, adult | 0% | 74.3 (59.0–94.1) | 05/2011 | |
| Male, adult | 0% | 92.4 (83.2–106.7) | 03/2015 | |
| Female, preadult II | 0% | 78.6 (70.0–88.3) | 03/2015 | |
| IoA-01 | Male, adult | 0% | 695.5 (583.5–841.1) | 11/2010 |
| Male, adult | 0% | 780.3 (642.9–967.4) | 05/2011 | |
| Male, adult | 2.5% | 553.0 (486.1–624.7) | 07/2011 | |
| IoA-02 | Male, adult | 0% | 949.8 (767.8–1204.8) | 11/2011 |
| Male, adult | 0% | 675.0 (618.0–738.0) | 10/2014 | |
| Female, preadult II | 0% | 335.3 (277.0–409.4) | 11/2011 | |
| Female, preadult II | 0% | 355.1 (289.9–521.1) | 03/2015 |
Data shown in Fig. 1A.
Data from Carmichael et al. (2013).
Data shown in Fig. 1B.
Trimmed Spearman–Karber statistics.
Fig. 2Time-to-response bioassay with Lepeophtheirus salmonis. Symbols represent the average behavioural toxic response of at least ten animals. Salmon lice were exposed to 800 μg L− 1 of emamectin benzoate (EMB) for a total period of 24 h, during for which repeated observations of parasite motility and attachment behaviour were made. A, EMB toxicity in salmon louse strains IoA-00 and IoA-01; B, EMB toxicity in strains IoA-00 and IoA-02.
Toxic response of Lepeophtheirus salmonis strains to emamectin benzoate in time-to-response bioassays. Toxicity is expressed as the median effective time (ET50).
| Date | EMB | ET50 (h) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IoA-00 | IoA-01 | IoA-02 | ||||
| Males | Females | Males | Males | Females | ||
| 12/2011 | 800 | 5.86 | 4.03 (3.67–4.43) | 21.36 (16.82– 27.13) | ||
| 07/2012 | 800 | 6.77 (6.08–7.54) | 28.46 (15.94–50.84) | |||
| 07/2012 | 1200 | 5.72 (5.07–6.44) | 25.66 (17.49–37.65) | |||
| 03/2015 | 800 | 6.00 | 5.08 | 13.18 (10.51–16.51) | 9.98 (8.99–11.08) | |
| 07/2015 | 400 | 6.82 (6.33–7.35) | 5.21 (4.68–5.81) | > 24 | 16.50 (13.91–19.56) | |
Data do not allow calculation of 95% confidence limits.
Data set shown in Fig. 2A.
Data set shown in Fig. 2B.
Data do not allow calculation of ET50.