Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/31643
Appears in Collections:Aquaculture Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: A comparison of the use of different swab materials for optimal diagnosis of amoebic gill disease (AGD) in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)
Author(s): Fernandez‐Senac, Carolina
Fridman, Sophie
Sokolowska, Jadwiga
Monaghan, Sean J.
Garzon, Teresa
Betancor, Monica
Paladini, Giuseppe
Adams, Alexandra
Bron, James E.
Keywords: amoeba
calcium alginate
diagnostics
sodium citrate
Issue Date: Nov-2020
Date Deposited: 4-Sep-2020
Citation: Fernandez‐Senac C, Fridman S, Sokolowska J, Monaghan SJ, Garzon T, Betancor M, Paladini G, Adams A & Bron JE (2020) A comparison of the use of different swab materials for optimal diagnosis of amoebic gill disease (AGD) in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). Journal of Fish Diseases, 43 (11), pp. 1463-1472. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfd.13243
Abstract: Routine gill swabbing is a non‐destructive sampling method used for the downstream qPCR detection and quantitation of the pathogen Neoparamoeba perurans, a causative agent of amoebic gill disease (AGD). Three commercially available swabs were compared aiming their application for timelier AGD diagnosis (Calgiswab® (calcium alginate fibre‐tipped), Isohelix® DNA buccal and cotton wool‐tipped). Calcium alginate is soluble in most sodium salts, which potentially allows the total recovery of biological material, hence a better extraction of target organisms’ DNA. Thus, this study consisted of (a) an in vitro assessment involving spiking of the swabs with known amounts of amoebae and additional assessment of retrieval efficiency of amoebae from agar plates; (b) in vivo testing by swabbing of gill arches (second, third and fourth) of AGD‐infected fish. Both in vitro and in vivo experiments identified an enhanced amoeba retrieval with Calgiswab® and Isohelix® swabs in comparison with cotton swabs. Additionally, the third and fourth gill arches presented significantly higher amoebic loads compared to the second gill arch. Results suggest that limiting routine gill swabbing to one or two arches, instead of all, could likely lead to reduced stress‐related effects incurred by handling and sampling and a timelier diagnosis of AGD.
DOI Link: 10.1111/jfd.13243
Rights: © 2020 The Authors. Journal of Fish Diseases published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
Licence URL(s): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
jfd.13243.pdfFulltext - Published Version587.61 kBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.