First report of three Kudoa species from Eastern Australia: Kudoa thyrsites from Mahi mahi (Coryphaena hippurus), Kudoa amamiensis and Kudoa minithyrsites n. sp. from sweeper (Pempheris ypsilychnus)

Fish species around the world are parasitized by myxozoans of the genus Kudoa, several of which infect and cause damage of commercial importance. In particular, Kudoa thyrsites and Kudoa amamiensis infect certain cultured fish species causing damage to muscle tissue, making the fish unmarketable. Kudoa thyrsites has a broad host and geographic range infecting over 35 different fish species worldwide, while K. amamiensis has only been reported from a few species in Japanese waters. Through morphological and molecular analyses we have confirmed the presence of both of these parasites in eastern Australian waters. In addition, a novel Kudoa species was identified, having stellate spores, with one polar capsule larger than the other three. The SSU rDNA sequence of this parasite was 1.5% different from K. thyrsites and is an outlier from K. thyrsites representatives in a phylogenetic analysis. Furthermore, the spores of this parasite are distinctly smaller than those of K. thyrsites, and thus it is described as Kudoa minithyrsites n. sp. Although the potential effects of K. minithyrsites n. sp. on its fish hosts are unknown, both K. thyrsites and K. amamiensis are associated with flesh quality problems in some cultured species and may be potential threats to an expanding aquaculture industry in Australia.

The potential of microarrays to assist shrimp breeding and production: a review

The shrimp aquaculture industry is a relatively new livestock industry, having developed over the past 30 years. Thus, it is poised to take advantage of new technologies from the outset of selective breeding programs. This contrasts with long established livestock industries, where there are already highly specialised breeds. This review focuses specifically on the potential application of microarrays to shrimp breeding. Potential applications of microarrays in selective breeding programs are summarised. Microarrays can be used as a rapid means to generate molecular markers for genetic linkage mapping, and genetic maps have been constructed for yeast, Arabidopsis and barley using microarray technology. Microarrays can also be used in the hunt for candidate genes affecting particular traits, leading to development of perfect markers for these traits (i.e. causative mutations). However, this requires that microarray analysis be combined with genetic linkage mapping, and that substantial genomic information is available for the species in question. A novel application of microarrays is to treat gene expression as a quantitative trait in itself and to combine this with linkage mapping to identify quantitative trait loci controlling the levels of gene expression; this approach may identify higher level regulatory genes in specific pathways. Finally, patterns of gene expression observed using microarrays may themselves be treated as phenotypic traits in selection programs (e.g. a particular pattern of gene expression might be indicative of a disease tolerant individual). Microarrays are now being developed for a number of shrimp species in laboratories around the world, primarily with a focus on identifying genes involved in the immune response. However, at present, there is no central repository of shrimp genomic information, which limits the rate at which shrimp genomic research can be progressed. The application of microarrays to shrimp breeding will be extremely limited until there is a shared repository of genomic information for shrimp, and the collective will and resources to develop comprehensive genomic tools for shrimp.

Aquaculture's Potential Impacts on Conservation of Wild Stocks and Biodiversity

Anderson theorizes that development of the aquaculture of a fish species (also captured in an open-access fishery) favours the conservation of its wild stocks, if competitive market conditions prevail. However, his theory is subject to significant limitations. While this is less so within his model, it is particularly so in an extended one outlined here. These other models allow for the possibility that aquaculture development can impact negatively on wild stocks thereby shifting the supply curve of the capture fishery, or raise the demand for the fish species subject both to aquaculture and capture. Such development can threaten wild fish stocks and their biodiversity. While aquaculture development could in principle have no impact on the biodiversity of wild stocks or even raise aquatic biodiversity overall, its impact in the long-term probably will be one of reducing aquatic diversity both in the wild and overall. The development of aquaculture does not automatically ensure long-term sustainability of fish and other aquatic supplies.