Limb-loss in pond-reared blue swimmer crabs Portunus pelagicus (L.): Effect on growth in an indoor shedding system

Limb-loss in crustaceans can reduce moult increment and delay or advance the timing of moulting, both aspects that are likely to impact upon soft-shell crab production. Pond-reared blue swimmer crabs Portunus pelagicus were harvested and maintained in a crab shedding system. The wet weight, carapace width (CW) and the occurrence of limb-loss were assessed before stocking in the shedding system and after each of the next three moults. Many of the crabs were initially missing one or two limbs and these did not grow as much as the crabs that were intact at the start of the trial. Despite its strong correlation with wet weight, CW changes proved to be misleading. Limb-loss reduced the %CW increment but not the per cent weight increment (where the later is calculated from the actual pre-moult weight). Pre-moult weight explained much of the variation in post-moult weight, with crabs moulting to approximately double their weight. Limb-loss reduced 'growth' and production from the pond because it reduced pre-moult weight but limb-loss did not alter the weight change on shedding a given weight of crabs, although some of that change now included regeneration of limbs. One can hypothesize that much of the size variation seen in pond-reared crabs may be due to accumulated effects of repeated limb-loss, rather than genetic variation.

Post capture necrosis of the feet caused by soft-catch traps – incidents, cause and prevention.

When recapturing satellite collared wild dogs that had been trapped one month previous in padded foothold traps, we noticed varying degrees of pitting on the pads of their trapped paw. Veterinary advice, based on images taken of the injuries, suggests that the necrosis was caused by vascular compromise. Five of six dingoes we recaptured had varying degrees of necrosis restricted only to the trapped foot and ranging from single 5 mm holes to 25% sections of the toe pads missing or deformed, including loss of nails. The traps used were rubber-padded, two–coiled, Victor Soft Catch #3 traps. The springs are not standard Victor springs but were Beefer springs; these modifications slightly increase trap speed and the jaw pressure on the trapped foot. Despite this modification the spring pressure is still relatively mild in comparison to conventional long spring or four-coiled wild dog traps. The five wild dogs developing necrosis were trapped in November 2006 at 5-6 months of age. Traps were checked each morning so the dogs were unlikely to have been restrained in the trap for more than 12 hours. All dogs exhibited a small degree of paw damage at capture which presented itself as a swollen paw and compression at the capture point. In contrast, eight wild dogs, 7-8 month-old, were captured two months later in February. Upon their release, on advice from a veterinarian, we massaged the trapped foot to get blood flow back in to the foot and applied a bruise treatment (Heparinoid 8.33 mg/ml) to assist restoring blood flow. These animals were subsequently recaptured several months later and showed no signs of necrosis. While post-capture foot injuries are unlikely to be an issue in conventional control programs where the animal is immediately destroyed, caution needs to be used when releasing accidentally captured domestic dogs or research animals captured in rubber-padded traps. We have demonstrated that 7-8 month old dogs can be trapped and released without any evidence of subsequent necrosis following minimal veterinary treatment. We suspect that the rubber padding on traps may increase the tourniquet effect by wrapping around the paw and recommend the evaluation of offset laminated steel jaw traps as an alternative. Offset laminated steel jaw traps have been shown to be relatively humane producing as few foot injuries as rubber-jawed traps.

Pythium soft rot of ginger: Detection and identification of the causal pathogens, and their control

Ginger is considered by many people to be the outstanding member among 1400 other species in the family Zingiberaceae. Not only it is a valuable spice used by cooks throughout the world to impart unique flavour to their dishes but it also has a long track record in some Chinese and Indian cultures for treating common human ailments such as colds and headaches. Ginger has recently attracted considerable attention for its anti-inflammatory, antibacterial and antifungal properties. However, ginger as a crop is also susceptible to at least 24 different plant pathogens, including viruses, bacteria, fungi and nematodes. Of these, Pythium spp. (within the kingdom Stramenopila, phyllum Oomycota) are of most concern because various species can cause rotting and yield loss on ginger at any of the growth stages including during postharvest storage. Pythium gracile was the first species in the genus to be reported as a ginger pathogen, causing Pythium soft rot disease in India in 1907. Thereafter, numerous other Pythium spp. have been recorded from ginger growing regions throughout the world. Today, 15 Pythium species have been implicated as pathogens of the soft rot disease. Because accurate identification of a pathogen is the cornerstone of effective disease management programs, this review will focus on how to detect, identify and control Pythium spp. in general, with special emphasis on Pythium spp. associated with soft rot on ginger.

Pythiogeton ramosum, a new pathogen of soft rot disease of ginger (Zingiber officinale) at high temperatures in Australia

Pythium soft rot (PSR) of ginger caused by a number of Pythium species is of the most concern worldwide. In Australia, PSR outbreaks associated with Pythium myriotylum was recorded in 2007. Our recent pathogenicity tests in Petri dishes conducted on ginger rhizomes and pot trials on ginger plants showed that Pythiogeton (Py.) ramosum, an uncommon studied oomycete in Pythiaceae, was also pathogenic to ginger at high temperature (30–35 °C). Ginger sticks excised from the rhizomes were colonised by Py. ramosum which caused soft rot and browning lesions. Ginger plants inoculated with Py. ramosum showed initial symptoms of wilting and leave yellowing, which were indistinguishable from those of Pythium soft rot of ginger, at 10 days after inoculation. In addition, morphological and phylogenetic studies indicated that isolates of Py. ramosum were quite variable and our isolates obtained from soft rot ginger were divided into two groups based on these variations. This is also for the first time Py. ramosum is reported as a pathogen on ginger at high temperatures.