INDEX Aquaculture Magazine Volume 42 Number 4 August - September 2016
16 6 9 10 12
An overview of Andhra Pradesh L. vannamei shrimp aquaculture. INDUSTRY NEWS AwF in Indonesia.
Prince Edward Island renews funding for Aquaculture Programs.
Biological sea lice control takes another step forward.
Uptake of Copper by American Alligators Exposed to Pressure-Treated Wood Products.
Volume 42 Number 4 August - September 2016
Editor and Publisher Salvador Meza firstname.lastname@example.org Editor in Chief Greg Lutz email@example.com
ASF Pushing for Closed Containment Technologies.
Managing Editor Teresa Jasso firstname.lastname@example.org Editorial Design Francisco Cibrián Designer Perla Neri email@example.com
Culture of hatchery-reared spotted rose snapper in floating net cages: effect of density at harvest and profitability.
Marketing and Communications Manager Alex Meza firstname.lastname@example.org Sales and Marketing Christian Criollos email@example.com Sales Support Expert Gustavo Ruiz firstname.lastname@example.org International Sales and Marketing Steve Reynolds email@example.com
OUT AND ABOUT
Inbreeding, Selection and Disease Resistance in Penaeid Shrimp.
Business Operation Manager Adriana Zayas firstname.lastname@example.org
Subscriptions: email@example.com Design Publications International Inc. 203 S. St. Mary’s St. Ste. 160 San Antonio, TX 78205, USA Office: +210 5043642 Office in Mexico: (+52) (33) 3632 2355
The need to elevate the profile of aquaculture in worldwide forums on economics.
Aquaculture Magazine (ISSN 0199-1388) is published bimontly, by Design Publications International Inc. All rights reserved. www.aquaculturemag.com Follow us:
Drought impacts in Vietnam.
US$3.2 million to support ecologically sustainable development of aquaculture in Zanzibar.
Latin America Report
Chile - The Chilean Fund for Fisheries and Aquaculture Research (FIPA) offers grants totaling 1 million USD for 10 new projects in fisheries and aquaculture research.
columns OFFSHORE AQUACULTURE
Hatchery Technology and Management..............................................................................50 Health Highlights
Aquaculture Stewardship Council
Aquaculture Economics, Management, and Marketing................................................66 The Fishmonger
Shrimp / TILAPIA / SALMON Updates from Urner Barry.................................................74 Upcoming events
Erratum Dear readers, In our last edition of Aquaculture Magazine – June/July Vol. 42 No. 3 we omitted to include the original source were the following articles were obtained. • The Brazilian Market of farm shrimp by Itmar Rocha, 4/2015 Info Fish International • Counting the cost of aquatic disease in Asia by Andy Shinn, Jarunan Pratoomyot, Christian Delannoy, Niroj Kijphakapanith, Giuseppe Paladini and Don Griffiths, January/February 2016 AQUA Culture Asia Pacific Magazine. »
The Best Available Science…
By C. Greg Lutz
ow can any of us decide what science is “the best?” The criteria for awarding such a title are often quite different depending on whether you are a politician, a consumer, a regulatory bureaucrat, or an actual scientist. In theory, science is a cut-and-dry process, so if you adhere (strictly) to the process you automatically get “good” science. But maybe not the best... Many policy-makers have a love-hate relationship with science, depending on their agenda. But even for this group, science can ALWAYS serve as an important political ally when choosing to play the “we don’t have enough information – we need more data” card. Science continues to take a back seat for many issues related to the state of our industry. In the debate over closed containment salmon culture, even the most simple of science is overlooked while people shout over which approaches are really more “sustainable.” This might be due to the fact that few if any of the participants can actually provide a working definition of sustainability. Another example of the selective exclusion of science can be seen in opposition to off-shore aquaculture in the Gulf of Mexico. One has only to look at the decades-old seabass and sea bream industry in the Mediterranean to see that this approach can be environmentally, socially and economically sustainable – even with the labor costs and environmental oversight found in European countries. 4 »
That’s a phrase that has stuck in my mind for many, many years now. Probably because it doesn’t fit easily into any conceptual compartment - way back there in the recesses of my brain. Although much of the progress that has been made with all major aquaculture species has been based on scientific inquiry, in this day and age many “scientists” must compete for funding in an academic environment. Political correctness, from a “green” perspective, can have an enormous impact on a young scientist’s career and ability to attract monetary support for research. Alternately, some scientists eventually find their way into the aquaculture consulting arena, at which point the relative objectivity of science can be easily compromised. In terms of the public’s perception of aquaculture, science seems to be co-opted at every opportunity. Internet articles on any number of topics ranging from global warming to GMO crops to cancer research often refer to
the findings or opinions of “scientists” as though they were a group of two or three dozen people wearing white lab coats and locked away in a refuge somewhere. In the public’s perception, these folks are always the same group – whether making proclamations about the ozone layer, or fatty acids in farmed fish, or radioactivity from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant. Until that perception of science changes and the average citizen actually understands how it works, we cannot count on science alone to drive our industry forward. Dr. C. Greg Lutz has a B.A. in Biology and Spanish by the Earlham College at Richmond, Indiana, a M.S. in Fisheries and a Ph.D. in Wildlife and Fisheries Science by the Louisiana State University. His interests include recirculating system technology and population dynamics, quantitative genetics and multivariate analyses and the use of web based technology for result-demonstration methods.
AwF in Indonesia Asia Pacific Aquaculture (APA) 2016, the second ever WAS event to be held in Indonesia, took place at the end of April.
ndonesia has a rapidly expanding aquaculture industry – with a nearly 20 % increase in the last 5 years in hectares in production and over 50 % per year increases in tons produced every year for the last 10 years. For those visiting from EU, USA, Australia, etc. it was important to see the government and industry partnership which is obviously needed to maximize aquaculture outcomes. In the conference’s student session AwF Directors Albert Tacon and Roy Palmer gave their own unique stories of how their careers evolved within the industry. The AwF Session included sessions about AwF activities, funding opportunities; women in aquaculture and a number of talks by the WAS-APC students and female aquaculture people who secured scholarships to attend Asia Pacific Aquaculture 2016. Funding for this opportunity was provided by WAS-APC, and Aquaculture without Frontiers facilitated the process. All of the presentations have been posted at www.aquaculturewithoutfrontiers.org/education/slideshows/ Typically the women’s network session was an interesting discus6 »
Speakers at Students Session at APA16.
sion and well led by Dr. Janine Pierce (soon to take over the Secretariat of the AwF Indigenous Network) with great contributions from WAS-APC Directors, May Myat Noe Lwin and Bibha Kumari and excellent presentations from Arlyn Mandas, Vaishali
Joshi, Renata Melon Barroso, Menaga Meenakshisundaram and Nikoleta Ntalamagka. The AwF Women’s Network is now over 550 people strong thanks to secretariat, Julie Kimber, and we expect that will continue to grow as newly elected AwF (USA)
director, Sally Krueger, is going to take special interest in this area. Nikoleta Ntalamagka spoke about her home county of Greece and the issue of Syrian refugees and this created much discussion about how we could all assist. Nikoleta has also emerged as a leader of students and is helping AwF establish the Students Network along with new AwF (USA) board member, Professor Michael Lee. Over 350 people joined the Students Network in the first couple of weeks so this augers well for the future. We were very pleased that Lian E.Heinhuis was able to be a special guest presenter for AwF. Lian is an Associate Analyst working specifically on Seafood and works with Gorjan Nikolik senior industry analyst on food and agribusiness for Rabobank International and AwF Director. Lian presented on the various Rabobank organizations including Rabobank Foundation which pursues its objectives by supporting cooperatives or member-based organizations which offer an opportunity to save, borrow or insure and has recently signed a contract which is engaged in Indonesia. The timing was excellent as AwF had just received its first Rabobank funding which is going to assist with the training of women in Vakkom, Kerala, India. We anticipate that the project will get under way in July once all the contracts have been approved and signed. We are very excited about this, as are our MoU partners, Organic Life and the people of Vakkom. We are also grateful to Dr. Dinesh Kaippilly for his efforts in linking the opportunity and we hope that this will be the first of many such activities in the area. Another AwF board member,
Doris Soto presenting.
Polly Legendre, is using her skills to create a branding strategy for AwF. Developing a long-term plan for the development of the brand to achieve specific goals is something we have never attempted so will be interesting to see what comes of this. On the subject of strategies, DOS O’Sullivan, Australian director, is working on improving and updating the Risk Strategy. José Villalón has agreed to join the Trustees of the CIO in UK. José is Corporate Sustainability Director at Nutreco, a company based in the Netherlands committed to improving the sustainability of the aquaculture sector. José is well known in the industry as he joined World Wildlife Fund in 2007 and led its’ aquaculture program for six years; managing the initiative called the Aquaculture
Dialogues which involved over 2,200 global stakeholders that created environmental/social standards for 12-species of aquaculture commodity products including salmon and shrimp. With WWF and partners, José co-founded the independent Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) where he was the Chairman of the Board for its’ initial four years. We look forward to having José on board our exciting new UK operation and learning from his vast experience. Aquaculture without Frontiers has great pleasure to announce Dr. Doris Soto as our ‘Woman of the Month’ for June 2016. Doris has worked tirelessly within a male dominated global government organization not only promoting aquaculture but also endeavoring to create a culture that is »
Doris Soto at FAO event in Vigo, Spain.
more conducive to women’s involvement. Along her journey she has built a solid reputation for developing and increasing capacity and capability enabling the advancement of food security for disadvantaged people. Graduating from the “Universidad de Chile”, Santiago, in Biology-Limnology in 1979, Doris then moved to University of California, Davis, San Diego State, where she obtained her Ph. D. in Ecology under the Joint Doctoral Program between San Diego State University and University of California-Davis. Doris served as Professor of the Fisheries and Oceanography Faculty at the Austral University in Puerto Montt where her research has contributed to scientific knowledge and decision making through the aquaculture environmental regulation program set up by the Chilean gov8 »
ernment, and through interaction with the private sector. Doris joined the United Nations FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department in Rome in May 2005 as a senior officer leading the aquaculture and environment team. There, she has been leading the development and implementation of an Ecosystem Approach to Aquaculture (EAA) at global level with production of normative instruments and on-the ground implementation in different countries, initially focusing on Central America and Africa. She has also led the development and implementation of a new FAO instrument (online questionnaire) to assist compliance reporting for aquaculture elements of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF). This assessment is contributing to
Students enjoying the contest.
improved aquaculture performance and transparency worldwide. Dr. Soto retired recently from FAO and is now heading home to Chile, moving to work with an institution advancing multidisciplinary approaches to sustainable aquaculture development. Full details on AwF’s ‘Woman of the Month’ award, including application forms, can be seen at www.aquaculturewithoutfrontiers.org/womens-network/ woman-of-the-month-award/ Finally, we are very grateful to AQUACULTURE MAGAZINE for donating $1 from every subscription to Aquaculture without Frontiers.
Prince Edward Island
renews funding for Aquaculture Programs
The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries is committed to supporting our primary food production industries. Over a short period of time, aquaculture has grown to be an extremely successful industry in Prince Edward Island and has proven to be very important to our rural economy,” said Minister McIsaac. “The entrepreneurial and innovative spirit of P.E.I.’s aquaculturists, and supporting businesses, have made this industry successful. The two programs we are committing to today support this innovative spirit and continued development of this industry.” The Department of Agriculture and Fisheries is investing USD$50,000 into the Aquaculture Technology Program and an additional USD$93,800 in the Aquaculture Futures Program. The Aquaculture Technology Program assists aquaculture operations in the development of, or to adopt, innovative technologies or equipment that will advance the industry. The Aquaculture Futures Program supports the aquaculture industry in funding towards research and development projects, local promotion, strategic planning, investigative travel and other initiatives that will assist in developing the entire industry. “We are very happy that the provincial government continues to support the growing aquaculture sector,” said Matt Sullivan, Executive Director of the PEI Aquaculture Alliance.
Renewed funding for two aquaculture programs emphasizes government’s commitment to growing the Island’s primary industries, said Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries Alan McIsaac.
“Our industry truly values this support to continue efforts in research and development, and innovation, to maintain P.E.I.’s position as a globally recognized center for sustainable and great tasting seafood.” The aquaculture industry in Prince Edward Island contributes more than USD$80 mil-
lion to the Island’s economy and employs more than 2,000 Islanders in the mussel, oyster, finfish and processing sectors. To learn more about the Aquaculture Technology and Aquaculture Futures Programs visit the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries website at www.gov.pe.ca »
Biological sea lice
control takes another step forward
ews of the project – a collaboration between industry partners Marine Harvest Scotland, the Scottish Salmon Company, Otterferry Seafish, BioMar, Pharmaq and the Institute of Aquaculture at University of Stirling, supported by USD$ 1.07 million (£ 817,474) of SAIC funding – broke in November 2015. In the months since, the project agreement has been signed; a specialist team recruited; and four work packages outlined covering broodstock management, nutrition, cage deployment, and health and welfare. Now, research and commercial activities have begun in earnest. Explains Dave Cockerill, Head of Fish Health at Marine Harvest Scotland: “Currently, the industry is reliant on wild-caught lumpsucker broodstock, from which farmed juvenile lumpsuckers are grown and used for delousing farmed salmon. However, if we are to achieve our ambition of significantly reducing the use of medicines by upscaling our use of cleaner fish, we need access to an increased, secure and sustainable supply of farmed broodstock and juveniles. At Marine Harvest Scotland alone we could be looking to deploy more than two million lumpsuckers each year by 2020.” Spanning three years, the research project aims to tackle a range of commercial bottlenecks and objectives, supported by a much better understanding of lumpsucker biology and behaviour in captivity. Says Professor Hervé Migaud, Deputy Director of the Institute of Aquaculture: “While 10 »
The drive to control sea lice in salmon farming through nonmedicinal approaches has taken another step forward with the start of a new USD$ 2.8 m (£ 2.12 m) lumpsucker project, co-funded by the Scottish Aquaculture Innovation Centre (SAIC).
Lumpsucker fish. Credit Pablo Gordillo Chueca. Courtesy SAIC.
evidence from farms clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of lumpsuckers at consuming sea lice, research is required to improve the reliability of this innovative biological pest management strategy.” “The challenge for us, the project team, is to fast-track the domestication of a new marine species through the development and implementation of a suite of protocols to control breeding, nutrition, disease and deployment into salmon cages, while also ensuring good welfare. This is a great example of collaboration between academia and industry with experts from different research groups at the Institute joining forces to study
the full lifecycle and key physiological traits.” This latest project is the fourth in a series of SAIC-supported cleaner fish initiatives; the key learnings from which will be shared across the industry. Comments SAIC CEO Heather Jones: “Knowledge exchange is a huge part of what we do and we’re planning to host a dedicated workshop in early 2017 where partners from the different cleaner fish projects can meet to share the insights being made. Longer-term, the goal is produce a comprehensive how-to guide to cleaner fish that the whole industry can share in and benefit from.”
Uptake of Copper by American Alligators Exposed to Pressure-Treated Wood Products
Alligator farming is one of the most profitable aquaculture industries in Louisiana. In commercial facilities, alligators are housed in enclosures By: H. Trent Bullard, Robert Reigh and Millie Williams*
ue to the constant contact with moisture, treated wood products must be used in “alligator houses.” The treatment process for this lumber involves infusing a mixture of chromated copper arsenic (CCA) into the wood product. As a result of their contact with water, treated wood products have the potential to leach CCA into the grow-out environment of the alligators. This study examined the leach rate of chromium, copper, and arsenic from both treated and untreated lumber, determined amounts of chromium, copper and arsenic present in the blood of alligators housed with both types of lumber, and measured how long it took for the animals to show concentrations of these compounds in the blood. Results of this study can benefit both alligator farmers and researchers by providing information regarding the uptake of heavy metals leached from treated building materials. This information is not currently available in the literature. 12 »
primarily made of wood products.
Alligator farming is a staple of Louisiana’s aquaculture industry. In 2015, farmers produced over 327,000 captive-raised alligators, sold over 446,000 kg of meat, and supplied about 424,000 m of alligator skins to luxury leather markets all across
the world. Alligator farmers obtain these animals by collecting eggs off of property leased from landowners. Farmers pay a certain price per egg depending on the number of eggs that can legally be collected that year based on population surveys con-
ducted by the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries. Once the eggs have been collected, farmers place them in incubators. The temperature at which the incubator is kept is very important. Eggs kept at 86 degrees Fahrenheit or lower typically result in female alligators, while a temperature of 91 degrees F and above will produce male alligators. Most farmers use a temperature of about 88 to 90 degrees in order to provide an even mixture of sexes for maximum survival and growth among the alligators. Once the alligators are hatched, they go to large pens made from wood products with concrete floors. These pens typically hold about a foot of water and have an area that allows the animals to exit the water when they want. The animals are fed a high-protein diet multiple times per day. Over time the animals grow and are separated into different enclosures based on their size. Once the animals reach a length of about 4 feet, they are humanely euthanized and their meat and skin are harvested. The average price of alligator skin varies but usually ranges from $6 to $8 per centimeter of width, measured at the fourth belly scoot. The main concerns of alligator farmers are factors that will negatively impact growth rate, cause the death of their animals, or reduce the skin quality. Concerns were brought to the attention of our lab involving alligator deaths on a farm that occurred in the presence of unexplainably high copper levels. This research project was undertaken to determine if it was possible that copper could have leached from treated lumber used in the alligator enclosures. Once this was answered, trials exposing alligators to copper concentrations found to leach from treated wood samples over a known period of time were performed. A preliminary experiment was performed to find the leach rate of chromium, copper and arsenic from
both treated and untreated lumber products that could be found in a typical alligator house. The lumber products used for this experiment were untreated plank wood (2 x 4), untreated plywood, treated plank wood and treated plywood. Sections of each lumber product, with known weights, were placed into plastic tubs with 1,000 ml of water. A 20 ml water sample was taken from each of the tubs with a pipette at 6-hour intervals over the course of 48 hours. Samples were sent to Louisiana State Universityâ€™s Wetland Biogeochemical and Analytical Services Lab (WBASL) for analysis. The samples were run through an ICP-MES analyzer which measured chromium, copper and arsenic con-
centrations. All samples analyzed in this experiment were processed at the WBASL. The first experiment answered our question of how much chromium, copper and arsenic leached from the wood at given periods of time. One of the more interesting findings was that neither chromium nor arsenic was present in the water samples. Thus copper was the only element tested in the subsequent exposure studies. Treated plywood had the highest leach rate of copper with a peak of 10 ppm at the 48-hour mark. Ten ppm then became the benchmark for the solution that the alligators would be submerged in for various periods of time. The 48-hour exposure experiÂť 13
ment was a randomized design with six treatments (0, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 48 hours of exposure) and three replicates (alligators) per treatment, involving 18 alligators (two years old and ranging in size from 800 to 2800 grams) stocked individually in 75-L aquaria. Treatments were established by adding a known amount of copper to a known amount of water, which was then added to the aquar14 »
ium. This procedure was repeated until 15 tanks had been prepared for the exposure trial. Alligators selected at time 0 were not exposed to a solution of treated water. After each exposure period, animals were removed from three randomly selected tanks, their mouths were taped, and blood samples were taken from the ventral coccygeal vein in the tail. Alligators larger
than 2500 g required the use of an 18-gauge, 1½-inch needle; 15002500 g alligators needed a 20-gauge, 1½-inch needle; and for alligators less than 1500 g, a 22-gauge needle worked best. In most cases, about 5 ml of blood was taken from each animal. After collection, the blood samples were immediately placed in a -80 degrees Celsius freezer before transportation to the analytical lab. To determine the copper concentrations in the exposure tanks, a 20ml sample of water was taken from each tank and frozen until analyzed. Results of water analyses indicate likely errors in the calculation of copper concentrations among tanks. Nonetheless, the objective of the study was to determine how copper concentrations in the alligators’ blood changed during a 48-hour period of exposure to a given aqueous concentration (Figure 3). Results from the preliminary experiment were not significantly surprising. Copper was found to leach out at a very predictable rate over the course of the 48-hour period, at which time leaching seemed to plateau. Forty-eight hours is also an important time frame because this is approximately the amount of time an alligator would be exposed to water with such a high concentration of copper. Alligator farms normally clean their houses every 48-72 hours, so one could infer that an alligator would not be exposed to the same water for much longer than this before fresh water would be provided. The concentrations in a typical alligator house have not been reported in the literature. Results from the blood samples were not exactly what were expected. Even at concentrations that were two, three and four times what would be considered normal leaching in the time frame in question, there was no significant difference in blood levels between treatments. Possible sources of error in the experiment include inaccurate concentrations
of copper in the exposure solution and the fact that an alligator from the 48 hour treatment escaped at some point in time between 36 and 48 hours. Future experiments investigating chronic exposure of alligators to these compounds may turn up different results, but it does not appear likely that the animals would be at risk for chronic exposure since leaching leveled off after 48 hours in our trials. Results of this experiment indicate that even when alligators are exposed to higher than normal concentrations of copper in their water, they show no measurable increase in the amount of copper found in the blood.
An overview of Andhra Pradesh
L. vannamei shrimp aquaculture After the introduction of L. vannamei culture in 2009, Andhra Pradesh became India’s largest vannamei farming area. Currently, the state’s shrimp aquaculture is facing various difficulties and challenges to achieve sustainability.
By D. Srinivas1, Ch. Venkatrayulu1 and B.Swapna2
itopenaeus vannamei is the most commonly cultured shrimp in Latin America and Southeast Asia, representing over 90 % of total shrimp production. India with its 8,118 km of coastline and 1.24 million Ha of brackish water area is the second shrimp producer in the world, with Andhra Pradesh being India’s largest vannamei farming area. The state, situated on the southern coast of the country, has 974 km of coastline and 175,000 Ha of brackish water. Andhra Pradesh has gradually increased its share in total marine exports of the country, with the United States and Vietnam as the main export markets. Currently, the state’s L. vannamei aquaculture is facing different issues and challenges to achieve sustainability related to diseases outbreaks, lack of availability of quality seed, high feed costs, unauthorized farming, international price fluctuations, less demand in the domestic market, and others. If farmers implement Better Management Practices (BMP) and biosecurity in L. vannamei culture 16 »
supported by the Government policy measures then sustainability can be achieved. This article discusses the present culture practices, major problems, future perspectives and suggestive measures for sustainable L. vannamei farming in Andhra Pradesh.
A brief history of L. vannamei introduction in Andhra Pradesh Shrimp farming in Andhra Pradesh started as an initiative of the Government of India (GoI) with a study of brackish water fish farming in the late 1970’s. Due to the economic benefits from shrimp farming, the culture of
L. vannamei harvesting.
Penaeus monodon in the state developed rapidly during the early 1990’s. The intensification of culture systems and the lack of biosecurity led to disease outbreaks of White Spot Syndrome Virus (WSSV) in 1994. The P. monodon culture almost collapsed in the late 1990’s so in 1999 the fresh water prawn, ‘scampi’ Macrobrachium rosenbergii was introduced as an alternative to P. monodon. The 1990’s are well known as the “era of virus disease” and Andhra Pradesh’s shrimp aquaculture was not the exception. In 2001- 2002, fresh water prawns faced severe disease outbreaks that affected the state’s production significantly. This is when the Litopenaeus vannamei was proposed as
an alternative species due to their disease resistance and tolerance to high stocking densities, low salinity and temperature, as well as their high growth rate. In 2003, the GoI permitted pilot-scale L. vannamei cultures, and Sharat Sea Foods industries and BMR exports got the permissions for conducting these pilots. At the same time a risk analysis was carried out by the Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture (CIBA) and National Bureau of Fish Genetics and Resources (NBFGR) with the aim of evaluating the feasibility of the introduction of this new species. After the experimental studies and due to the constant pressure of growers and traders for the introduction of L. vannamei due its potential in the export market, in 2009 the Coastal Aquaculture Authority (CAA) approved vannamei culture through import of Specific Pathogen Free (SPF) brood stock and strict regulatory guidelines. In order to reduce the risk of adverse effects of the introduction of this exotic shrimp, the Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Aquaculture (RGCA) created the “Aquatic Quarantine Facility of L. vannamei” (AQF) at the behest of Ministry of Agriculture, which is a state-of-the-art facility located in Chennai, Tamil Nadu for quarantine of L. vannamei broodstock imported to India.
L. vannamei in Andhra Pradesh For over 25 years, the P. monodon was the mainstay of Indian aquaculture but since L. vannamei’s introduction in 2009, its production and culture area has gradually decreased while L. vannamei has increased as shown in Figures 1 and 2. Figure 1 Area (in Ha) under culture for P. monodon and L. vannamei in Andhra Pradesh from 2009-10 to 2014-15. (Source: MPEDA, 2015). Area P. monodon 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0
Area L. vannamei
Figure 2 Production (in tonnes) for P. monodon and L. vannamei in Andhra Pradesh from 2009-10 to 2014-15. (Source: MPEDA, 2015). Production P. monodon 300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0
Production L. vannamei
Potential for development of L. vannamei culture The production of L. vannamei shrimp is concentrated in East Godavari, West Godavari, Krishna, Prakasam and Nellore state districts. Andhra Pradesh produces more than half of the country’s farmed shrimp and still has a lot of potential to exploit this resource by expanding culture to low salinity waters and through the rehabilitation of abandoned farms in Krishna district. Currently, Srikakulam (the northernmost district of the Andhra Pradesh Coastline) is considered as the ‘sunrise’ of the state’s shrimp farming.
Figure 3. State of Andhra Pradesh and districts. Source: Wikicommons cortesy of Miljoshi.
Nursery, culture and feeding practices The CCA recommends a density of 60 shrimp/m2 but depending on the pond and soil conditions as well as the farmers’ experience the culture densities vary, occasionally reaching 2,000,000 to 6,000,000 Post Larvae (PL) per hectare. Prior to stocking, the pond is tested in order to maintain a pH of 6.5-7. The PL 10 -12 is regularly stocked in high salinities with more than 10 ppt, while PL 15 is stocked when the salinity is low. During the production cycle the water temperatures are maintained between 24-32ºC and the Dissolved Oxygen at 4-5 ppm. The culture cycles in the region range from 90 – 120 days and producers regularly have 2 cycles per year, with stocking in February-March and later in September-October. Shrimp of 17 – 19 grams are considered as a marketable size for the species. Currently the farmers are practicing partial harvests after 60 – 70 days of culture to overcome the slower growth rates of L. vannamei after reaching a size of 19 grams and the increase of operational cost as the days of culture increase. According to the Department of Fisheries of Andhra Pradesh the average production per hectare in the state is 3,000 to 4,000 kg. As a consequence of the intensification of L. vannamei culture systems in recent years, higher Feed Conversion Ratios (FCR) have been registered, ranging from 1.5:1 to 1.8:1. The feeding frequency in the state is typically 2-4 times per day. As in other parts of the world, the profitability of shrimp farming depends on the operational costs such
ARTICLE Table 1 Andhra Pradesh shrimp hatcheries operating per district. S. No.
Name of the District
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total
Srikakulam Vizianagaram Visakhapatnam East Godavari West Godavari Krishna Guntur Prakasam SPSR Nellore
Total Number of shrimp hatcheries approved CAA GoI Total 1 8 29 59 0 0 6 24 65 192
0 0 0 4 2 1 1 0 9 17
1 8 29 63 2 1 7 24 74 209
as seed and feed. Among the main shrimp feed companies in the state stand out CP Aquaculture India, Avanthi Feeds, Godrej Agrovet, Growel Feeds, Water Base and Grobest Feeds. Presently, the price of feed per kg ranges between US $1.13–1.42 (INR 76-95).
Challenges for sustainable L. vannamei farming The growth of L. vannamei in the state has been impressive but for further expansion and sustainability the main issue is the lack of availability of quality seed from Specific Pathogen Free brood stock. By 2015, in Andhra Pradesh the CAA has given permission to 192 L. vannamei hatcheries and the Government of India permitted 17 hatcheries for nauplii rearing in facilities outside the jurisdiction of the CAA. For the last couple of years, L. vannamei farms started to develop their own brood stocks from grow out ponds and began producing seed; these seed are sold in the market as SPF and due to the lack of proper testing facilities is impossible for farmers to known the real quality of the seeds. Disease outbreaks are another issue that L. vannamei farming is facing nowadays; they have increased the economic risks and slowed the industry’s development. The White Spot Syndrome Virus (WSSV) and Yellow Head Virus (YHV) resulted in catastrophic losses in Asian and Latin American shrimp farms. However, no major disease outbreaks have been registered in Andhra Pradesh. WSSV, White Faeces Syndrome (WFS), Loose Shell Syndrome, Black Gill Disease (BGD), Running Mortality Syndrome (RMS) and White Muscle Disease (WMD) are the most common diseases that have affected L. vannamei in Andhra Pradesh. And most recently, Enterocytozoon hepatopenaei (EHP) which does not cause mass mortalities but has been shown to reduce growth. Globally, the feed prices are gradually increasing as a consequence of the rise of raw materials and fishmeal price hikes and Andhra Pradesh shrimp producers are 20 »
resenting this situation, reflected in the increment of their operational costs. In Andhra Pradesh, small farm holdings are the most common. Price fluctuations and the lack of information on international prices and demand have generated economic losses for small-scale producers. The uncertainty of market prices has made farmers unable to buy high quality feed, which is very costly. In addition, the quality of more economical feed is often unknown and has to be tested but there is a dearth of technical manpower and laboratories.
Suggestions for achieving sustainability The shrimp farming industry in the region has been consolidated over the years, but to achieve sustainability it is necessary to increase the Aquatic Quarantine Facilities (AQF) and create more SPF brood stock and nauplii rearing centers. At the same time, it is important to prevent the operation of unauthorized hatcheries and nauplii rearing centers. It is also fundamental to generate protocols and guidelines for probiotic use in soil, water and feed; as well as promote the implementation of best management practices and biosecurity in shrimp culture. The installation of reservoir ponds in L. vannamei farms
Black splinters disease in L. vannamei.
The government should incentivize the rehabilitation of abandoned shrimp farms and expansion of culture areas as well as promote the development of alternate species with culture systems.
should be a must, as well as effluent treatment. The government should incentivize the rehabilitation of abandoned shrimp farms and expansion of culture areas as well as promote the de-
velopment of alternate species with culture systems and hatcheries for mud crabs, sea bass and cobia. Techniques for reducing bacterial loads in shrimp culture systems should be addressed, among other topics. The Andhra Pradesh L. vannamei aquaculture sector is characterized by small-scale farms, therefore it is important to organize shrimp producers into Farmer Producer Organizations to provide technical support and training in Best Management Practices and Biosecurity, as well as information about the national and international market.
Conclusions The potential of shrimp culture in Andhra Pradesh is extraordinary; it generates a great number of direct and indirect jobs in the region, represents a great opportunity for rural development and brings a significant economic impact. Thus, it is
important for all shrimp farmers to practice responsible aquaculture by only purchasing seed from authorized hatcheries, implementing strict biosecurity protocols and following strict quarantine measures and best management practices in culture systems. This way crop losses will be reduced, as well as the risk of disease outbreaks. Andhra Pradesh has the possibility to become an aquaculture hub in India, thatâ€™s the reason why the State government has considered incentives and subsidies to foment aquaculture and its sustainability.
1 Department of Marine Biology and 2Department of Biotechnology Vikrama Simhapuri University, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh, India.
for Closed Containment Technologies The Atlantic Salmon Federation (ASF) is calling on the Canadian Government to devise and implement an effective plan for transitioning from net-pen sea cages to closed containment for raising farmed Atlantic salmon.
isheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has identified net pen salmon aquaculture as a marine threat to the wild salmon populations of the inner Bay of Fundy region, which were listed as “endangered” under the Federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) in 2003. The wild salmon populations in the outer Bay of Fundy and along the Atlantic Coast of Nova Scotia have been designated by the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) as “endangered”, and the south coast populations of Newfoundland have been designated as “threatened”. DFO’s recovery potential assessments for all of these wild populations consistently identify sea cage salmon farming as being of a high level of concern to their recovery and survival. ASF President Bill Taylor said “Despite this evidence, Canada continues to invest heavily in support of sea cage operations that negatively impact wild Atlantic salmon populations and the environment, with little commitment to research and technological development, funding and incentives to allow effective transition to closed containment systems.” In contrast, Norway has introduced a Polluter Pays approach and Green Licenses to stimulate the use of environmentally-friendly salmon 22 »
farming technology. Industry in Norway is taking advantage of the development concessions established by the Norwegian Government to fuel investment into major technology shifts. Marine Harvest and Hauge Aqua signed a contract in February, 2016, to invest $100 million in development of closed containment systems in the ocean. Jon Carr, Executive Director of ASF’s Research and Environment Department, said, “Closed containment research is being left largely to the private and nonprofit sectors. Because of private commitment, there
are now two operations (Sustainable Blue and CanAqua) in Nova Scotia that are growing salmon in closedcontainment facilities for market, with plans to expand. ASF has been working with The Conservation Fund Freshwater Institute in West Virginia for more than five years now on studies towards economically and environmentally-sustainable closed containment technology that completely separates growing farmed fish from the wild environment.” A presentation at the NASCO Special Session by Ivar Warrer-Nansen, Inter Aqua Advance, Denmark,
on recent development, costs and benefits of closed containment indicates that the progress towards closed containment salmon aquaculture that is environmentally and economically sustainable has been happening fast, especially in the last year. “The responsible action for Canada,” said Mr. Taylor, “is to deal with all the impacts on wild populations
of sea cage salmon aquaculture - sea lice infestation, disease and weakening of the wild gene pool through interbreeding - by requiring future expansion in the salmon farming industry to be in closed containment facilities.” The Atlantic Salmon Federation is dedicated to the conservation, protection and restoration of wild Atlantic
salmon and the ecosystems on which their well-being and survival depend. ASF has a network of seven regional councils (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Maine and Western New England). The regional councils cover the freshwater range of the Atlantic salmon in Canada and the United States.
Culture of hatcheryreared spotted rose snapper in floating net cages: effect of density at harvest and profitability By: Carlos Humberto Hernández1, Cristantema Hernández2, Francisco Javier Martínez-Cordero2, Nicolás CastañedaLomas3, Guillermo Rodríguez-Domínguez3, Albert G. J. Tacon4 and Eugenio Alberto Aragón-Noriega5
The great economic potential of Lutjanus guttatus in the Latin American market raises the necessity to determine the optimum culture densities and the profitability of hatchery-reared spotted rose snapper in floating cages.
n the Mexican and Latin American market the spotted rose snapper, Lutjanus guttatus, is a commercially important fish with a high value and demand. This species is a carnivorous marine finfish that can be found along the Pacific coast, from the Gulf of California to Peru. It represents one of the most commercially important species in the coastal fisheries of northwest Mexico. In 2015, the total snapper catch of the northwestern states of Baja California, Baja California Sur, Nayarit, Sinaloa and Sonora was 3,281 tons with a total value of US$ 5.4 million (CONAPESCA 2015). The increasing demand has led to the overexploitation of natural stocks reflected in a decrease of fisheries activities in the northern states of Mexico. Over the last few years, an analysis has been carried out of different species for commercial culture in floating cages and as a result of diverse aquaculture research projects, spotted rose snapper has been identified as one of the best prospects for 24 »
large-scale commercial culture in the country due to its ready acceptance of pelleted diets, tolerance to captive conditions and good performance in floating sea cages. Mariculture is an innovative productive activity and in order to maximize the efficiency and profitability of culture it is essential to determine the optimum densities for each species and stage of cultivation. For example, excessively high stocking density can result in a potential source of stress for fish, affecting growth rate, feeding rates and survival.
There has been considerable research on the technical feasibility of spotted rose snapper culture in sea cages, but it is necessary to determine whether such culture of hatchery-reared L. guttatus is feasible, technically and economically, as well as the optimum stocking density. The results of this study will increase the knowledge about spotted rose snapper aquaculture, which has the potential to generate great economic and social benefits to communities of the region.
Effect of density at harvest For the study, three floating net cages were located at Isla de la Piedra along the Sinaloa coast. Hatchery-reared spotted rose snapper juveniles (60 d old) with a mean weight of 14.2 g were obtained from the Research Center for Food and Development (CIAD) in Mazatlan, Mexico. Juveniles were transported over land in plastic 1000 L tanks with constant aeration, acclimated in the tanks with clean seawater (35 mg/L) and maintained at 23ºC before introduction into the experimental net cages. For the study, three circular floating net cages were constructed out of high-density extruded polyethylene (HDPE) fitted with Raschel knotless netting. Two of the cages had a diameter of 9 m and a depth of 3.5 m (222 m3), while the third one had a diameter of 9 m and a depth of 4.5 m (286 m3). Each cage was outfitted with a surface predator exclusion net in order to avoid bird predation, additionally a treatment to avoid marine fouling was applied to protect the infrastructure. The cages were stocked with 39,120 juveniles randomly distributed at target harvest densities of 15 kg/m3 (222 m3), 20 kg/m3 (222 m3) and 22 kg/m3 (286 m3). During the trial period the fish were fed twice per day with a sinking extruded diet containing 50 % crude pro-
tein and 12 % crude lipid, manufactured by Alikam S.A. de C.V. in Culiacan, Mexico. For the first 30 days a 2 mm pellet was fed and then a 3 mm pellet until termination. For the first 3 months, the fish were fed an initial rate of 3 % of their estimated biomass per day, progressively decreased to 1 % daily for the following 9 months. Every 15 days the fish were sampled to evaluate increases in weight and length. For sampling, 3 % of the fish in each cage were captured and anesthetized with 0.2 ml/L clove oil. After each sample, the feeding rate was adjusted to the mean weight and biomass in each cage. To determine mortality, a daily collection on the surface and bottom of each cage was performed using scuba diving equipment. The feed intake and water quality parameters were monitored daily (temperature, DO, pH and salinity). Water samples were taken from inside the cages and from two points at opposite ends at a distance of 60 m from the cages, these samples were measured in triplicate by spectrophotometric analysis. Table 1 Growth performance of juvenile spotted rose snapper cultured at three different harvest densities in floating net cages for 360 d. The values are reported as the means ± SD. Values within a row with different superscripts differ significantly (P<0.05). Parameters Initial weight (g) Final weight (g) Initial length (cm) Final length (cm) Initial biomass (kg) Final biomass (kg) Survival (%) Feed intake (kg) AFCR Final K AGR (g/day) SGR (%/day) TGC
15 kg/m3 14.2 ± 5 429.3 ± 47.8a 10.8 ± 1.2 29.8 ± 1.3 131.6 3,792.6 95 7,134 1.8 1.6 1.2 0.94 0.05
Harvest densities 20 kg/m3 14.2 ± 5 436.9 ± 59.6a 10.8 ±1.2 30.1 ± 1.3 174.6 5,120.7 95 10,217 1.8 1.5 1.2 0.95 0.05
22 kg/m3 14.2 ± 5 379.9 ± 68.3b 10.8 ± 1.2 28.0 ± 2.0 247.3 6,308.8 95 11,734 1.7 1.6 1 0.91 0.04
AFCR, apparent feed conversion rate; AGR, absolute growth rate; SGR, specific growth rate; TGC; thermal growth coefficient.
Results Throughout the culture period, the physical and chemical variables of water quality were within the tolerance range for snapper aquaculture and there were no differences in the mean values between the three stations. During the first 3 months, low levels of dissolved oxygen and low temperature were recorded. Although they were within the range of spotted rose snapper culture in marine cages some mortality was observed at the beginning of the experiment and was associated with these low temperatures. This was most likely the result of low acceptance of food, as the dead fish showed clear signs of emaciation. Thus, mortality rates were not related to harvest density. The mean survival rate for all densities was 95 %, so it is possible to say that different harvest densities did not affect survival. This was supported by the pathological results that did not reveal any association between harvest density and snapper mortality. The mean growth rate obtained in this study for L. guttatus culture in floating net cages was 1.1 g/day. In the study, the growth rate at a harvest density of 22 kg/m3 was lower than the growth rats at the other densities, but there were no significant difference between 15 and 20 kg/m3 densities. Only 12 % of the fish presented some degree of deformity, particularly scoliosis, which was observed as an evident curvature on the spine; deformed jaws and eyes were some of other physical abnormalities observed. The SGR results obtained in the study were comparable with those registered for juveniles reared in other marine growth media, such as sea bass, halibut, and mutton snapper stocked at lower densities in cages and grown to a mean weight of 302.8 g. The results obtained are also comparable with the SGR reported for wild spotted rose snapper in an experimental test (1.1 %/day) performed in floating net cages by Castillo-Vargasmachuca (2007). Âť 27
The Apparent Feed Conversion Rate (AFCR) for the medium density was 1.8 (20 kg/m3), while the other two densities exhibited 1.8 for 15 kg/m3 and 1.7 for 22 kg/ m3. It has been reported that an increase in density can generate a reduction in food conversion efficiency; in this study the AFCR decreased when snapper were stocked at higher densities. Chronic stress with increased stocking densities was also observed. The lower AFCR at higher densities can be attributed to the effect of dominant fish, which cause subordinate fish to experience stress and decrease their feeding activity as reported for sea bass by Paspatis et al. (1999). Similar studies have revealed that the AFCR decreases with increasing densities because of social interaction and innate survival strategies. Decreases in AFCR may also be related to increased energy expenditure due to higher activity levels and growth limitations under captivity conditions (Ellis et al. 2002). Finally, the findings of the present study suggest that a density of 20 kg/m3 is more appropriate for achieving weight gain and profitability. The inadequate use of space in the other two densities, 15 and 22 kg/m3, caused reductions in profitability, making them unfeasible options.
Watanabe et al. (1990) found that higher densities significantly lowered the variation between fish reared in floating marine cages. This can be taken as an advantage, as large variation in growth and size required the use of grading to improve performance, management and profitability.
Profitability analysis With the aim to determine the economic feasibility of L. guttatus culture in floating net cages, a financial analysis of a complete production cycle was performed; all values were updated to August 2014. For the financial analysis the issues considered were labor cost (biologists), unit production cost (infrastructure and installation), maintenance after harvest, cost of feed and juveniles, selling price of the product in the local market and annual depreciation. At the time, a whole fresh spotted rose snapper over 420 g sold between US$ 6-8, depending on the season, and juveniles (10 g mean weight) cost $US 0.6 per unit. A base line scenario was created to project the cash flow of an enterprise with four 222 m3 cages over a 5 year period. For this scenario, investments were classified as investment in capital and operating cost.
The financial analysis showed that the major costs of farm operations were feed (ranging from 44.7 45.7 %), labor (22.4 – 32.6 %) and seed cost (20.2 – 26.1 %). The production cost per kilogram differed between densities ranging between US$ 6.5 – 7.5. The results obtained in the financial analysis suggest that a commercial enterprise may not be profitable for any of the harvest densities studied (Table 2). A direct relationship between the negative income and the harvest densities was observed because in the baseline scenarios, the highest profitability of each harvest density was determined by the average weight gained and the value of total biomass produced during the study. Table 2 Cost and return analysis of spotted rose snapper cultured for 360 d at three harvest densities in floating cages. Parameter Unit cost (US$) Total harvest (kg) Total revenue Revenue (US$ / kg) Capital investment Floating cages Equipment Production costs Variable costs Variable cost (% total cost) Juveniles (fish) 0.6 Feed (kg) 1.6 Labor (month) 767.5 Variable cost (US$ / kg) Income after variable cost Fixed costs Fixed coss (% total cost) Maintenance and repair (year) 12.8 Depreciation (12% year) 142.3 Fixed cost (US$ / kg) Total costs Total cost (US$ / kg) Net income (US$ / kg) Net income (US$ / kg)
Harvest densities (kg/m3) 15 20 22 3,792.6 5,120.7 6,308.8 26,548.2 35,845.0 38,735.9 7.0 7.0 6.1 14,003.5 14,003.5 18,040.6 230.2 230.2 230.2 26,417.0 33,252.3 38,852.9 93.4 5,709.9 7,576.4 10,732.2 11,497.6 16,466.4 18,911.3 9,209.5 9,209.5 9,209.5 6.9 6.5 6.2 131.2 2,592.8 -116.9 1,861.5 1,861.5 2,345.9 6.58 153.5 153.5 153.5 1,708.1 1,708.1 2,192.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 28,278.6 35,113.8 41,198.9 7.5 6.9 6.5 -1,730.4 731.2 -2,462.9 -0.5 0.1 -0.4
Conclusion The study showed that culture of hatchery-reared spotted snapper is feasible for commercial purposes; the data indicated that culture under a harvest density of 20 kg/ m3 resulted in better growth and economical indices. Further work is still required in order to determine the optimum densities to maximize profits, which are influenced by the fingerling size, length of growing season and feed conversion, among others. It is important to further explore the market of L. guttatus and develop strategies to increase profitability in order to exploit the great economic potential of this highly appreciated species in Mexican and Latin American markets. Postgraduate in Aquatic Resource Science, Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Mazatlán, Sinaloa, Mexico. 2 Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, Mazatlán (CIAD), Sinaloa, Mexico. 3 Facultad de Ciencias del Mar, Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Mazatlán, Sinaloa, Mexico. 4 Laboratório de Aquicultura, Instituto Oceanográfico, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brasil. 5 Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste (CIBNOR), Universidad Sonora, Guaymas, Sonora, Mexico. 1
As mentioned before, fish raised at 20 kg/m3 resulted in the best production efficiency and were the base for an economic sensitivity model where changes in selling price of fish, feed cost and the cost of juveniles were simulated (Table 3). Table 3 Economic sensitivity analysis of spotted rose snapper production in four cages of 222 m3 stocked at a harvest density of 20 kg/m3. Scenarios Current conditions 10 % decrease in feed cost 10 % decrease in juvenile cost 10 % increase in selling price 10 % decrease in selling price
Internal rate of return (%) -42 77 72 183 -15
Net present value (US$) -10,304.4 54,278.8 51,272.5 97,628.9 -19,935.6
The results indicate that the profitability of hatcheryreared spotted rose snapper depends more on the market size and selling prize than production volume and operation costs. Evidence of this is that changes in the selling price have greater effect in profitability of hatcheryreared L. guttatus culture in floating cages than changes in the cost of juveniles or cost of feed.
Inbreeding, Selection and Disease Resistance in Penaeid Shrimp
Whether we are talking about cattle, chickens, hogs or farmed shrimp, artificial selection (even when realized as simple domestication) is based on using the “best” animals available to produce the following By Greg Lutz*
his approach is dependent on additive genetic effects, and the concept that beneficial genes can be transmitted directly from one generation to the next. In this context, genetic “superiority” is inherent in an individual and manifests itself in the offspring regardless of who the individual is mated with. One inevitable consequence of selection, unfortunately, is that the gene pool is reduced because generation after generation after generation a large segment of the population is excluded from reproducing. Another major form of genetic influence we will be concerned with in this discussion is referred to as dominance genetic effects. These effects are based on combinations: combinations of individuals, combinations of strains, and even combinations of species. They are the basis for hybrid vigor, and also for inbreeding depression. The accumulation of inbreeding can be a cause for concern when closed populations are subject to several generations (or more) of intense selection pressure. Reduction of genetic variation and the mating of more closely related individuals become unavoidable. The question then is reduced to “how much and how fast?” This, in turn, has led to some speculation and debate in recent years 30 »
over the potential impacts of inbreeding on the resistance of shrimp stocks to established and emerging diseases. On the one hand we hear of on-going efforts to select for disease resistance in various places (keeping in mind that such an exercise automatically involves some amount of inbreeding) while we are also presented with theoretical models and computer simulations that imply that inbreeding may be the cause of all our disease woes. Over the years, a number of studies have examined the relationships between domestication, selection,
inbreeding and disease resistance in farmed shrimp. Individually, few of these studies have been able to provide definitive conclusions that can be applied broadly, but taken together they show some interesting and reassuring tendencies. Let’s look at some of them. What we refer to these days as selection was originally termed “artificial selection.” Natural selection often follows a similar course, with similar consequences, and shrimp is no exception to the rule. VallesJiminez et al. showed in 2004 that
compared to the wild population (P < 0.05). Effective population size estimates declined from 48.2% to 64.0% (P < 0.05) compared to the wild population. Nonetheless, selected lines were far superior under culture conditions. Contrary to what some consultants would have you believe, inbreeding does not always necessarily lead to inbreeding depression. Even severe inbreeding. Let’s look at some examples from the scientific literature. The term “F” is used to describe inbreeding, and it basically refers to the portion of an organism’s genes that are homozygous by descent. The same year that Valles-Jiminez and Preston published the results discussed above, Keys et al. reported on the growth and survival of inbred and outbred Penaeus (Marsupenaeus) japonicus, reared under controlled environment conditions. They concluded that levels of inbreeding (F values) of 28–31% had consistently negative, yet insignificant, effects on growth, survival and yield of domesticated P. japonicus, suggesting that “inbreeding levels below F=31% may be tolerated by penaeids although the negative trends may continue at higher levels.” A key
Average population fitness (W) against number of generations (t) of maintenance with population size N=10 when, in the original population, individuals carried on the average one rare recessive lethal. Evolution of W expected only from inbreeding (dark line) or from inbreeding and purging (lighter line). Courtesy DaybreakGD. W
genetic and geographic distances of populations of L. vannamei along the coast of Mexico and Central America were somewhat correlated, with each population exhibiting a comparative reduction in genetic variation while responding to distinct local selection pressures. A combination of natural selection pressures, local environmental conditions, and partially closed populations resulted in distinct differences between populations from Sinaloa to Panama. That same year, Preston et al. compared the growth of selected and non-selected Penaeus japonicus in commercial ponds, and demonstrated that similar principles applied. While one generation of selection resulted in improved performance, an additional 3 generations under culture conditions with random mating (no selection) further improved growth – presumably as the population became more adapted to the prevailing environment… just like in nature. The loss of genetic variation within selected populations is an inconvenient reality, but it often has negligible effects. Certainly, these are often completely dwarfed by the gains realized through selection, as can be observed in modern livestock
breeds and crop varieties. In 2013 Vela-Avitúa et al. presented comparisons between a wild population of vannamei collected from the Mexican Pacific Ocean and two different generations (7 and 9) from a captive population selected for growth and survival. Using 26 loci, both captive populations showed a decline in the expected heterozygosity (20%) and allelic diversity indices (48 to 91%) Siblings
F = 25 %
F = 37.5 %
F = 50 %
F = 6.25 %
F = 59.38 %
factor here is the word ‘domesticated,’ but first, let’s put these results in perspective. Much more recently, in 2015, de los Rios-Perez et al. reported on inbreeding effects on body weight at harvest and grow-out survival in a selected population of vannamei. Starting with a line already selected for growth and survival, 320 families were produced with inbreeding coefficients ranging from 0 to 60.4%. For every 10% increase in inbreeding, body weight decreased by 2.19% + 0.41%. However, survival was unchanged (-0.009% + 0.006%). Why? Because this population had already undergone selection for survival. During the process of selection for survival, the frequency of deleterious genes is reduced because an accumulation of inbreeding through selection allows for an increased efficiency of natural selection against those genes. This results in a reduction of what is referred to as the inbreeding load, and from this point forward fewer harmful effects can be expected from inbreeding. This process is referred to as “purging.” Several phenomena
tend to occur as a result: inbreeding depression is reduced, fitness declines from on-going inbreeding will be less than theoretically predicted, and in many cases fitness can actually return to levels in the original population prior to the onset of inbreeding. So, in broad strokes, these and other studies suggest that in populations of farmed shrimp that have already been subject to selection, we can expect growth to be reduced by 2 to 4 percent for every 10% increase in inbreeding (F of 0.1) but survival will be unchanged or only slightly reduced. How would this manifest itself under the scenario of a breeder “lock?” Well, if we assume the lock increases inbreeding by 25% in a single generation, similar to mating full-siblings, we should be reducing growth by 5 to 10%, but the expected reduction in survival might be around 2.5%. Now, this is an extreme situation, and any breeder who uses a lock has probably already invested in developing superior growth traits. Or survival. Now, some impacts on survival in farmed shrimp are quite different
Founder Sotcks A (402)
C (403) Year 1
Cross1: AxA Cross2: BxB Cross3: CxC Cross4: DxD
Cross1: CxA Cross2: BxC Cross3: AxD Cross4: DxB Year 2
Cross1: AAxAA Cross2: BBxBB Cross3: CCxCC Cross4: DDxDD
Cross1: BCxAA Cross2: CAxDB Cross3: ADxBC Cross4: DBxCA
from others. Apart from occasional marginal conditions for salinity, temperature, oxygen, pH, shrimp also have to deal with viruses, bacteria, and other microorganisms. The influence of inbreeding (if any) has yet to be firmly established for several new diseases as they have only recently presented themselves. In the case of AHPND, mortality is caused in large part by a toxin (albeit produced by a bacteria), and prior studies with other animals suggest that inbreeding levels have little influence on resistance to highly toxic compounds. Hugo Montaldo and his colleagues from several Mexican institutions presented results last year in Ecuador suggesting that inbreeding level was not associated directly with resistance against AHPND, but there were some tendencies that might be cause for concern, and that research is on-going. On a final note, the same genetic influence (dominance effects) that leads to inbreeding depression can often be used to our advantage in terms of improving survival in shrimp farming. Offsetting the accumulation of inbreeding by crossing distinct lines can have immediate, positive effects on survival in farmed shrimp. In 2008, Goyard et al. reported that crossbreeding distinctly different strains of stylirostris improved growth rate by 37% (+ 7%), improved survival, and improved production by 40% in year 1 and 130% in year 2. And in China, Yao et al. reported in 2007 that crossbreeding different strains of vannamei improved growth rate and survival simultaneously. So… why don’t more hatcheries do this? It’s not a difficult or complicated practice. I suspect it’s because you don’t need a consultant to do this, so consultants don’t recommend it… C. Greg Lutz, has a PhD in Wildlife and Fisheries Science from the Louisiana State University. His interests include recirculating system technology and population dynamics, quantitative genetics and multivariate analyses and the use of web based technology for result-demonstration methods. firstname.lastname@example.org
OUT AND ABOUT
The need to elevate the profile of aquaculture
in worldwide forums on economics In spite of the fact that world production stemming from aquaculture
already represents 72 % of the total of worldwide fishing production, this industry is still not receiving due attention from worldwide economic analysts.
By: Salvador Meza
f, in addition, we stop to ponder that production from aquaculture has arrived at this figure of 72 % of the total of worldwide fishing production in only a few years —it grew 25 % in the last 6 years— and considering that fishing production has been practically the same during the past 30 years, this lack of attention from the worldwide economic community is less comprehensible still. “The Economist,” the prestigious English publishing house of worldwide renown in economic and socio-political topics, has been organizing a biannual meeting called World Ocean Summit, which it plans to carry out in its fourth version February 22-24, 2017 in Bali, Indonesia. In this exercise to succeed in determining a pattern in investment and economic growth using the resources that oceans can offer, the editorialists at “The Economist” have tried to include sea-farming as an option of economic interest important within this range of oceanic possibilities, but even they have not been able to arouse the ambition of the bold in34 »
vestors that have rendezvoused at these meetings, where it’s mining and communications that have monopolized the spotlight. In over 20 years of aquafarming development, we have seen companies grow from scratch and become consolidated among the most important suppliers of fish and seafood in international markets of greater value and volume, in many instances even over fishing companies that
owned the market in other times. We can name several companies among these: Marine Harvest, Tropical Aquaculture Products, Regal Springs, Rain Forest Aquaculture, Cermaq, Mitsubishi Corporation, AquaChile, Taylor Shelfish Farms, Omarsa, Expalsa, C P Aquaculture, Aguas claras, to mention only a few and without taking into consideration all the service companies that have also developed right beside the growth of these companies.
These aquafarming corporations sum up between them, as a group, several billions of dollars in investment and a similar amount in sales and annual benefits. They represent, in aggregate, a development area in each of their home countries where just a little over 20 years ago there was nothing.
These examples confirm that aquaculture is a living, economic force that generates growth and wealth. That it faces problems, like any other industry, but has maintained a positive rate of growth from inception, in spite of having a cost added by ignorance and the lack of interest of the authorities, which, but for honorable exceptions,
have ended up being an obstacle in the industry’s governance process. It is important for the growth of this industry that adequate speakers be developed to carry the appropriate message to these worldwide economic forums and to be able to attract talent and investment to aquaculture. The interlocution present until now, including the attempts made by “The Economist,” have been both inadequate, and due to their lack of knowledge of their own industry, they have deflected the attention towards discussion issues on environmental compatibility. And so at the end, it all comes down to a squandering of ignorance and time instead of actually discussing the opportunities that aquaculture can offer investors.
Salvador Meza is Editor & Publisher of Aquaculture Magazine, and of the Spanish language industry magazine Panorama Acuicola.
research report ASIAN report
Drought impacts in Vietnam According to the Voice of Vietnam news agency, drought and consequential saltwater intrusion in the first three months of 2016 had a devastating impact, destroying thousands of hectares of prime fish farming area.
By: Staff / Aquaculture Magazine
More than 11,000 hectares have been lost in Ca Mau and Kien Giang provinces alone,” said a representative of the government of Vietnam. The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) reported that Ca Mau was the most badly affected with over 70% of its farming area damaged, followed by Tra Vinh and Ben Tre provinces with over 30% of their areas destroyed. “The drought has affected the Mekong Delta region severely,” said
Nguyen Do Anh Tuan from MARD. Eight out of the 13 provinces in the region declared a state of disaster due to the prolonged dry spell. Additionally, almost the entire planning area for brackish water shrimp was “hampered” by the salinity brought about by the drought, especially farming areas downstream of the Hau River. The region’s aquaculture development plan appeared to be in imminent danger of coming apart at the seams, said Mr Tuan. Nonetheless,
despite the shortage of usable water, total production of fish (including shrimp and other crustaceans) during March exceeded 441,000 metric tons, a 2.3% increase against last year’s same period. Additionally, the Vietnam Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers (VASEP), reports fish exports in the first quarter of 2016 jumped nearly 9% over last year’s corresponding three-month period, to US$1.4 billion, which they consider positive news in light of the toll exacted by the drought.
Cages in the Mekong delta.
Processors also faced a shortage of raw materials said Ngon Thanh Linh, general director of the Ca Mau Association of Seafood Exporters and Producers. The processing capacity for Ca Mau Province is large but raw shrimp supplies were hard to come by, meeting only half of the demand. Additional pressures on processors resulted from Chinese processors purchasing raw shrimp. Recently, reports of more frequent rainfall have suggested the region will eventually recover.
Myanmar hatchery aims to exploit untapped opportunity for food and nutrition security WorldFish has introduced the first breeding program for the high value and popular climbing perch (Anabas testudineus) in Myanmar. It is hoped that the fish will thrive in the shady ‘chan myaung’ or irrigation canals that crisscross the Ayerwaddy Delta, an untapped opportunity for aquaculture say WorldFish researchers.
As part of the LIFT funded MYFC project, researchers established, in consultation with local communities, that climbing perch together with catfish, tilapia and snakehead are high value popular fish that can boost food and nutrition security in the region, but also offer an income to ‘chan myaung’ owners. The goal of the initial experiment, conducted at a Department of Fisheries owned hatchery, is to discover whether the introduction of bred fish into ‘chan myaung’ is a viable means of fish farming. While ‘chan myaung’ may be already populated to some extent with wild fish, the introduction of fish bred for farming may offer a higher quality and more consistent harvest. Climbing perch can attract market prices more than double that of traditionally farmed rohu. An initial result of the experiment is that half a million climbing perch larvae have been produced, signaling great potential for its introduction to aquaculture in Myanmar.
The MYFC project will provide training to more than 500 farmers on how to farm the different species identified. Manjurul Karim, Program Manager with WorldFish, stated “If the fish can be successfully reared in the ‘chan myaung’ WorldFish will work with the Department of Fisheries and private sector to establish a market for the seed and extend the practice throughout the Ayerwaddy Delta.”
Malaysian Department of Fisheries and WorldFish establish new research committee The Malaysian Department of Fisheries (DoF) and WorldFish have today signed an agreement establishing the Technical Committee on Research Collaboration to promote the sustainable development of aquaculture and fisheries in Malaysia. The agreement formalizes the existing collaboration between DoF and WorldFish, which began when WorldFish established its headquarters in Penang, Malaysia, » 37
in 2000. Currently, there are five projects listed under this collaboration: • GIFT tilapia production and dissemination in Malaysia • Socio-economic evaluation of GIFT tilapia related to value chain analysis • Genetic improvement of red tilapia (molecular approach) • Improvement of Trawlbase • Genetic enhancement of giant freshwater prawn (Macrobrachium rosenbergii) WorldFish collaborates with DoF at the Jitra Aquaculture Extension Center, in Kedah, Malaysia, to run research activities and to serve as a nu-
Courtesy UM Vietnam Study Files (Wordpress).
cleus breeding center for Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia (GIFT), the fast-growing strain of tilapia developed by WorldFish. In addition to producing genetically improved families, WorldFish plans to expand research into developing new genetic characteristics, such as disease resistance. Since 2015, DoF has been upgrading the Jitra center with new facilities and improved bio-security to enable expansion of the GIFT program. The first phase of upgrading involved the development of two stand-alone incubation rooms, one for WorldFish’s research breeding
programs and the other for DoF’s own fry production. The department also plans to increase the total ponds for Worldfish genetic research and improve water quality management at the center. In view of this planning, Malaysia has the potential to be a hub for the production of quality tilapia seeds for the country and the region, with the Jitra Station developed as an internationally-recognized center of excellence for GIFT Tilapia. In return, WorldFish is helping DoF to increase aquaculture production of tilapia in Malaysia. Current tilapia production is 34,500 metric tons; by 2020, DoF aims to increase production to 60,000 metric tons. In 2015, WorldFish provided 13,000 GIFT broodstock fry to DoF, which were used to produce 60 million fry, before distributing to fish farmers for grow out. In January 2016, 15,000 broodstock were provided and another 30,000 will be delivered this year. It is estimated that 9 million fry will be produced and distributed by end of 2016. WorldFish continues to provide technical advice and guidance to assist DoF to achieve its target. WorldFish also supports DoF with a red tilapia breeding program to provide red tilapia for the local market in Malaysia. Plans are underway to include engagement in fish disease R&D and the potential of domestication of the giant tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon).
research report AFRICA report
US$3.2 million to support ecologically sustainable development of aquaculture in Zanzibar The Government of Zanzibar in partnership with the Korean International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have launched an aquaculture project that will run for three years. The initiative will see the development of a marine hatchery, leading to positive economic and food security outcomes.
By: Staff / Aquaculture Magazine
n a message read on his behalf at the launch, Hamad Rashid Mohamed, Minister of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Livestock and Fisheries, said the investment reflected the strong partnership between the Government, KOICA, and FAO. “Today’s event clearly shows how our partnership has grown stronger over the last years and how mariculture sector development has become an increasingly important policy objective of this Government,” said Mohamed. The Minister added that small-scale farming households were responsible for almost the entire aquaculture production in the island thus providing the local population with an affordable source of protein. This he said was a clear indicator of the crucial role small-scale aquaculture played and its potential to scale up. He also noted that while it created jobs for farmers - thereby increasing income – it also utilized land and water resources more rationally. The immediate objective of the project is to support the construction and operation of a marine multispecies hatchery in Zanzibar and offer support to aquaculture farmers in 40 »
Zanzibar. The operational hatchery will cost-effectively provide milkfish, crab and sea cucumber seed for growout farmers and other profitable aquafarmers. Mr. Shinyoung Pyeon, Deputy Country Director for KOICA Tanzania, lauded the cooperation in the development of this project. “In 2012, KOICA undertook a feasibility study on mariculture in Zanzibar. The results showed high demand for marine products in Zanzibar but also identified challenges. We hope this project
will have a significant impact in boosting the economic growth and food security of Zanzibar,” he said. Speaking at the same occasion, Patrick Otto, the acting FAO Representative in Tanzania, noted that the project was designed in a way that guaranteed sustainability. “Given the need for an eventual uptake of aquaculture by more entrepreneurs and for the hatchery to be driven by the needs of industry and key stakeholders, the project has incorporated an exit strategy that will ensure sustainability,” said Otto.
The plan, Otto said, included the establishment of a project board to advise and provide the strategic direction for the hatchery. The board will also promote activities to encourage the private sector participation and investment in the development of the sub-sector. The board will also engage government in mariculture related activities. On the other side of the continent, the FAO in collaboration with the Government of Liberia through the Ministry of Youth and Sports and other partners will launch an Aquaculture Project valued at US $492,000 in early July. The initiative is an effort to
address the challenges and constraints of youth unemployment – cited as the reason the Government of Liberia requested technical support from the FAO. The Technical Cooperation Project, titled: “Creating Aquaculture Enterprise for Youth Employment, Poverty Reduction and Food Security,” is meant to build the capacity of 600 vulnerable youths in aquaculture development in Margibi, Grand Bassa, Grand Cape Mount and Bomi Counties. The project is aligned with the FAO’s Strategy Objectives 2, 3, and 4, focusing on rural development. It is also aligned with the United Nations Development
Framework (UNDF) Pillar II: (Sustainable Economic Transformation), while at the same time contributing to the FAO’s Country Program Framework (CPF) for sustainable agriculture development. In late June, 40 youths from across Grand Cape Mount and Bomi Counties benefitted from a ten-day aquaculture training seminar on the provision of economic development through youth employment, entrepreneurship, and improved nutrition and poverty reduction. The seminar was a follow up to a prior seminar conducted from June 13th to 23rd. The objective of these training sessions is to develop small business management skills, gender wealth creation opportunities, and develop the potentials of young people for sustainable aquaculture entrepreneurship. Participants of the seminar are expected to acquire improved methods of fish farming and hatchery management techniques, and better business development strategies. A training guide which was developed at the end of the first session will be used as a reference tool for youth aquaculture throughout Liberia.
Fishfarm in Africa.
Latin America Report
Chile - The Chilean Fund for Fisheries and Aquaculture Research (FIPA) offers grants totaling 1 million USD for 10 new projects in fisheries and aquaculture research The Subsecretariat of Fisheries and Aquaculture (SUBPESCA) through the Fund for Fisheries and Aquaculture Research launched their fourth call for the 2016 public bidding for 10 new projects in the field of fisheries and aquaculture research throughout the country. The total investment exceeds USD$1 million.
By: Staff / Aquaculture Magazine
mong the 10 projects, the proposal of “Biomass and exploitation status assessment of natural grasslands of brown algae in open access areas in the regions of Arica Parinacota, Tarapacá and Antofagasta” stands out with an investment of almost USD$200,000. The aim of the project is to determine the levels of
abundance and exploitation of black kelp resources (Lessonia berteroana), as well as seaweed stick (Lessonia trabeculata) and long bladder kelp (Macrocystis pyrifera) in the northern territory of the country. Around USD$150,000 were destined for the development of small-scale aquaculture and AMERB (acronym in Spanish for Benthic Resource Management and Exploita-
tion areas) aquaculture in the Region of Magallanes, with the objective of identifying the appropriate areas for the exercise of the activity in the austral zone of the country.
Mexico – CONAPESCA and Baja Aqua Farms released 190 tons of Bluefin tuna to help in protection and recovery of the species as part of the voluntary commitment to reduce the 2016’s quota allocated by IATTC A total of 190 tons of Bluefin tuna were released into the Pacific Ocean in joint agreement between CONAPESCA and the Mexican company Baja Aqua Farms on June 25th. During the release all the conservation measures established by the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) were implemented. The release is part of a set of actions that have the objective of protecting and restoring the Bluefin population. With the aim of contributing to the recovery of the Bluefin tuna population, during 2015 the com-
mercial fisheries, the Mexican authorities and Fisheries Commissioner Mario Aguilar agreed to establish a voluntary commitment to reduce the quota allocated by IATTC for Bluefin tuna landings this year, from 3,000 to 2,750 tons. However, exceptional circumstances led the Mexican fishing industry to exceed the voluntary quota established for this year by 156 tons. Therefore in order to rectify the situation, 190 tons of captive Bluefin tuna were returned to the Pacific Ocean. The authorities emphasized that such actions represent the commitment of Mexico to be the first country in the world to implement measures of this nature, with the firm intention of recovering the population of this species in the Pacific Ocean.
duction in the first trimester of 2015. For the first quarter of 2016 shrimp sales were higher, by USD$10 million compared to the USD$17.7 million exported in the same period in 2015. Regardless shrimp prices fell from $6.78 USD per kilo in 2015 to USD$5.53 per kilo in 2016, representing a reduction of 18.4 % in price. The rise can be attributed to the implementation of “best aquaculture practices and biosecurity” in shrimp culture applied by Honduran companies with the aim of eliminating the effects of “Vibriosis” dis-
ease that impacted production and the stock of shrimp farms during the last trimester of 2015, this situation allowed to harvest shrimp in months that usually do not register high levels of production. The early crops enhanced the frozen shrimp processing and packaging industry; this was reflected in higher exports. According to the official report “Honduran Economic Performance for the first trimester of 2016” published by the Central Bank of Honduras (CBH) on June 2nd, the country exported around 5 million kilos of shrimp representing a 92.2 % increase over the first quarter of 2015, when 2.6 million kilos were sold.
Still in process: Trade Agreement between Ecuador and EU would prevent Ecuadorian shrimp from paying 12 % duty, allowing the Latin American country to maintain its main export market The agreement’s approval is still in process, and currently the official translations of the text have been delivered to the different nations of the European Council. The next step is the evaluation of the agreement by Trade Ministers and their technical teams, and a decision is expected on
Honduran aquaculture companies with the aim of eliminating the effects of “Vibriosis” disease get shrimp export revenues 56 % higher than for the same period in 2015 For the first quarter of 2016, shrimp export revenues in Honduras were 56.5 % higher than for the same period in 2015, totaling USD$27.7 million. Honduran shrimp aquaculture continues to recover from the “Vibriosis” disease that impacted pro» 43
Latin America Report
August 22nd. If there is no objection to the agreement, it will be approved for the European Commission to sign and for approval by the European Parliament and the Ecuadorian National Assembly. If an objection is made within this period, the European Commission would vote on the accession of Ecuador, and by a simple majority, the agreement could be approved. This is not an ideal outcome, but it is an alternative. All efforts by Ecuador are being concentrated on the agreement’s approval on August 22nd, to ensure it is sent to the Parliament in early October. José Camposano, president of the country’s National Aquaculture Chamber (CNA), said that Ecuador has the support from members of the European Parliament, and from Trade Commission members, to shorten the time of the approval process and have the agreement in place before the end of the year. Currently, Ecuadorian shrimp exports to the EU market enjoy duty preferences, which expire at the end of this year. If the trade agreement is not approved, the Ecuadorian product will start to pay a duty of 12 % in 2017. EU has become a natural client for Ecuadorian shrimp, besides its economical crisis the shrimp demand has been stable for the last few years; it represents approximately 40 % of shrimp exports with a total
value between USD$ 700 – 800 million per year. If the agreement is not approved and the 12 % duty is applied, losses for the Ecuadorian shrimp sector could reach USD$7 million monthly. This is why the president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, has stated that the agreement is a necessity for the country. Vietnam is the main competitor of Ecuador in the EU market; to compete with the flexible cost structure of the Asian shrimp, Ecuador produces and processes an addition-
al 15 % while managing to maintain stable production costs such as labor. Last year, the 220,000 ha of shrimp farms in Ecuador produced 337,500 tons of shrimp, which were processed and exported to more than 50 countries, generating an income of USD$ 2,300 million. The Ecuadorian shrimp exports to the EU are extremely valuable for the country’s economy, contributing 10% of the FOB value exported. Hence the importance of the approval of this trade agreement.
There’s (still) a lot of talk out there about open ocean aquaculture…
In April, the Offshore Mariculture Conference convened in Barcelona. Here was a two-day event, focused wholly and solely on that sector most near and dear to our hearts.
By Neil Anthony Sims*
he meeting was wellenough attended, but it was a little disappointing to see how little there was that was new to talk about. There was, most notably, a very large hole in the list of attendees, and in the schedule of speakers…. not a single Norwegian salmon farmer! Sure, they’ve never shown up at Offshore Mariculture Conferences before, but we have all been staring goggle-eyed at the drawings of oil-rig structures and mega-yachts without hulls which had been gracing the pages of various publications over the preceding months. Salmar and Nordlaks had gone public with their plans for bold new expansion into the legendary “Green” concessions of Norway. These more ambitious salmon farming companies were responding to the Norwegian government singing the alluring siren-songs of new, larger concessions (leases) and higher production quotas for operations in more exposed sites, beyond the fjords, or even out in the middle of the North Sea. We in Barcelona were all eagerly hoping to hear from some or more of these Norwegians as to how they were approaching this challenge; the where, when and how of an established fish farm industry pushing the envelope into some of 46 »
Courtesy NOAA - Giles Lemarchand.
the roughest waters on the planet. But they all stayed home. We were bummed. But we talked about it, all the same, as we gorged ourselves on baby octopus, calamares, and Spanish sardines, to salve our sorrows. Even if the Norwegians don’t want to talk about it, it is still tremendously exciting to see the inklings of their expansion offshore. This is validation, of the highest order, of what we have all been thinking and working towards, and talking about, for years. Chile has also begun to look at incentives to entice their salmon farming industry into ‘more exposed waters’, if not actual ‘offshore’ aquaculture. There have been anecdotal reports among Chilean salmon farmers of lower infestation rates of Caligus (sea lice) and SRS (Salmon Rickettsia Syndrome) in farms that are in deeper water, with better circulation, so there are now public-private initiatives looking at how to best encourage this industry shift. This was even before the recent carnage from the red tides (algal bloom). There are conflicting accounts as to whether the algal bloom was equally intense in inshore areas as in offshore waters, but these arguments are largely moot: if you are moving to more exposed waters, you are probably going to want to have submersible net pens, and if you can put a cage 5 m or 10 m below the surface of the water, you are going to avoid the worst of the algal blooms (or even avoid them altogether… most blooms are confined to the upper layers of the water column). One of the questions that keeps reverberating amongst all these discussions is: are we just going to keep talking about it, or is someone actually going to go out and do it? Sure, there have been a range of various pioneering projects around the planet over the last 10 or 15 years, but… is anyone going to go and build an offshore fish farming industry? The Norwegians certainly seem intent on doing precisely that, and before
they’ve even started, they have already overcome the two primary impediments: money, and permits. Let’s not kid ourselves: the money is critical. You cannot bootstrap an open ocean aquaculture operation. This industry will not work at small scale. You are either boots-in, neckdeep, or you aren’t in the ball-park. Even with lower oil prices and a crushed kroner, the Norwegians still have the commitment and the cash to make this work. They have seen the future of seafood, and they want to dominate the market, and the market for the technologies involved. Good luck to them! It also must help tremendously when your government is encouraging of such entrepreneurship, and makes straight the crooked permitting path. When the question is posed to U.S. aquaculture (“Who is actually going to lead the offshore aquaculture industry in the Gulf of Mexico?”), most of us look down at our shoes, and shuffle our feet. We sure hope that someone is going to step forward, but… who is going to put down that much money on what will be, essentially, a research project? Here in Kona, our Velella Project has had some hard-won successes, but that has been in spite of the Federal
permitting process, not because of it. This has been an iterative research project, far out offshore – the same species of fish that is already farmed commercially off the Kona Coast, and the same feed that is used commercially, just testing different cage designs and mooring structures. The Velella Beta-test was un-anchored; it was a transient, ethereal, nomadic net pen of 2,000 fish, that peregrinated in the eddies between 3 and 75 miles offshore. The research permit for that project took over 18 months to obtain. Our Velella Gamma-test was the very same cage, same fish, same stocking density, same feed; the only difference was that we got smarter, and decided to anchor the pen on a Single Point Mooring. This SPM was sited in 6,000 feet deep water (2 kilometers), some 6 Nm offshore (10 kilometers). The research permit for that project took a mere 23 months to be approved. We are now awaiting another permit – the Velella Delta project - for the same mooring, same fish, same feed – just a larger cage, capable of growing 15,000 fish. It has been, so far, 21 months since we first submitted the application for that research permit. I don’t mean to use this podium to complain and bemoan our own » 47
beefs with our U.S. offshore aquaculture regulatory agencies, but there’s something deeply wrong, here. If we are going to develop an industry – any industry - then we have to be allowed to try, and to fail, and to try again. That is the course of human endeavour. It’s the only way that mankind has ever become better at anything. I would, however, like to suggest one way that the U.S. regulatory process – and that of many other nations – could be improved, and could greatly accelerate offshore aquaculture innovation. Let’s take a leaf out of the Mexican government’s playbook. In Mexico, it is possible to obtain, with a minimum amount of paperwork and headache, what is called a “Fomento” permit. It is designed to do precisely what it says: to foment revolution, but revolution of a blue-hue. It allows for up to 12 months of non-commercial production at a specific site, using specified gear and species. It’s not “No Rules”, but it’s minimal rules, and minimum hindrance of forward progress. It is recognition of the widely-accepted 48 »
fact that – so long as an aquaculture operation is of limited scale, culturing native species, and is located in a non-sensitive area – there is no chance of any significant long-term detriment. None. Zilch. Nada. All of the accumulated evidence (and it is now a vast amount of accumulated evidence – best sourced through those oft-cited gems from NOAA: Price and Morris, 2013, and Rust, et al., 2014)… all of this evidence affirms that no matter how badly awry a project goes – no matter how much immediate, ugly impact there may be on water quality or substrate health from an aquaculture experiment gone horribly wrong - that if you take the offending pen or line or raft or rack away, and leave the site alone, it will revert to its pristine state in around 6 months…. maybe 12 months, max. So what is it that we, as a society, are so afraid of ? A simple research permit process for offshore aquaculture would have no lasting negative effects. It could dramatically accelerate the learning and the growth in this much-needed industry. It could
provide a stepping stone for commercial operations to test the waters of the Gulf of Mexico. And it could take all of our talking, and turn it into action. At some stage, we really do have to just do it.
Neil Anthony Sims is co-Founder and CEO of Kampachi Farms, LLC, based in Kona, Hawaii, and in La Paz, Mexico. He’s also the founding President of the Ocean Stewards Institute, and sits on the Steering Committee for the Seriola-Cobia Aquaculture Dialogue and the Technical Advisory Group for the WWF-sponsored Aquaculture Stewardship Council.
Hatchery Technology and Management
The use of RAS in marine fish hatcheries â€“ what to be aware of The use of recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) is growing rapidly in many areas of the fish farming sector with capacities varying from huge plants generating many tons of fish per year for consumption to small sophisticated systems used for restocking or preserving endangered species.
By Cecilia C. Vargas*
ecirculating systems vary in the degree of recirculation from RAS low, intensive and super intensive levels, having degrees of recirculation at system (vol. recycled one time per hour) of 95.9, 98.6 and 99.6 % respectively. Building and operating RAS systems are costly affairs. Therefore, selecting the right fish species to produce by RAS is of great importance. Species with high market prices and demand as well as any fish reared successfully in traditional aquaculture should be good candidates. In Norway, RAS is mainly used for smolt production of Atlantic salmon and with great success. The number of RAS facilities are increasing and new RAS facilities are built to produce post-smolts with sizes up to 1kg. However, producing marine fish species in RAS in Norway has not given satisfactory results. For instance, there have been a few attempts at producing Atlantic halibut and Atlantic cod without success. This leads to questioning what we are doing wrong or what we need to consider when plan50 Âť
ning to operate RAS for marine fish species? Dr. Kari Attramadal, researcher at Sintef Fisheries and Aquaculture and expert in RAS for marine fish species, points out that knowing the differences between running RAS in freshwater and seawater are crucial. Seawater has a higher buffering ca-
pacity and alkalinity than freshwater. However, ozonation (above a certain dose) forms harmful residual oxidants. The difficulty to ventilate the CO2 requires that aerators must be dimensioned slightly larger and there are secondary bacterial species responsible for nitrification compared to freshwater. The biofilter may take
a little longer to start up and may be slightly less effective (biofilter should be dimensioned slightly larger) but protein skimmers on the other side, work much better and are effective for removing small particles, bacteria and organic materials in sea water. Other bacteria and parasites are more problematic than in freshwater. However, problems associated with fungus are much less than in freshwater, and nitrite is less toxic. Dr. Attramadal remarks that focus should be on very clean water and systems adapted specifically to marine fish species rather than using old systems that were designed for salmon or freshwater species. For many ma-
rine species very clean water with few particles and little organic material is a key consideration. This is true to a much greater extent than with salmon, which means that particle removal and purification must be better in marine RAS. RAS require high knowledge levels and therefore the importance here in Norway, and elsewhere, is to have personnel who can design and operate these systems. Lately, the boom in facilities along the Norwegian coast to produce lumpfish has led to an increasing interest in using RAS to produce this species. Atlantic Lumpus, the first company using RAS for lumpfish production, has just started its opera-
tions. Dan Kristian Larssen (Manager Director), explains that the facility was planned with a strong focus on flexibility, both technically and in layout. All essential parameters like salinity, oxygen, temperature, carbon dioxide and pH can be adjusted with simple actions, in each department. Overall, the facility has 6 physically separated production areas, each with a water treatment configuration that is independent of the others. All components are also mounted above the floor (nothing set in concrete), which allows changing the plan without major ‘surgery.’ Based on this, the facility can theoretically produce cod, wolf fish, lumpfish, halibut, or even salmon. The RAS have recycling rates of 94-98 % due to energy-efficient construction considerations. The facility has not been operating long enough to experience specific challenges in the use of RAS. However, Larssen is aware of the challenges that can appear when running these advanced systems, where multiple components need to work together to function properly. Until now everything is going very well and he is very satisfied with the support from the RAS supplier, Billund Aquaculture Service. The best of luck to Atlantic Lumpus and here’s hoping that other companies producing marine fish species follow its path.
Cecilia C. Vargas is currently R & D Manager at Helgeland Havbruksstasjon in Sandnessjøen, Norway. She has many years of experience in production of aquatic species including rainbow trout, Atlantic salmon, cod, various Japanese fishes, and live feed production. Her PhD studies focused on differences between diploid and triploid Atlantic cod in digestive and muscle systems. e mail: email@example.com
On-line Resources from the AFS Fish Health Section
The Fish Health Section (FHS) is one of the largest and most international sections of the American Fisheries Society. The FHS was formed in 1972 to give fish biologists, diagnosticians, researchers, aquaculturists, veterinarians, administrators, and others involved in fish By: Aquaculture Magazine
or many years, the FHS has compiled what they call “The Blue Book.” This publication has long served as a comprehensive manual for fish health practitioners. The Blue Book currently includes three sections: Diagnostic Methods, Procedures for Aquatic Animal Health Inspections, and Quality Assurance. Previously, the AFS offered The Blue Book for sale on DVD, but that activity has been discontinued. All three sections of the most recent Blue Book (2014) are available for free on the FHS web pages. Officially titled “Suggested Procedures for the Detection and Identification of Certain Finfish and Shellfish Pathogens,” this document contains hundreds of pages of essential information for fish health professionals and students alike. Several videos are also presented to reinforce key considerations.
Section 1 Which deals with diagnostic procedures for finfish and shellfish pathogens, includes a number of topics: • General Procedures for Bacteriology • Gram-Negative Bacterial Diseases • Gram-Positive Bacterial Diseases • General Procedures for Virology • Specific Viral Diseases • Other Viral Diseases 52 »
health, an organization for communication and interaction. • Testing Methods for Presence of Mycoplasma • General Procedures for Parasitic Diseases • Specific Parasitic Diseases • General Procedures for Mycology • Specific Mycotic Diseases • Miscellaneous Mycotic Diseases • Specific Molluscan Shellfish Diseases • Specific Crustacean Diseases
Section 2 Serves as a set of standardized testing protocols to be followed when carrying out health inspections on aquatic animals. As the authors explain, using standardized procedures and protocols allows fisheries biologists and managers to better compare data and
make more informed management decisions when evaluating the intrastate, interstate, or international movement of aquatic animals. Major topics in this section include: • Sampling Procedures • Bacteriology Procedures • Virology Procedures • Parasitology Procedures • Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Procedures • Appendices The third section of The Blue Book was developed to ensure the quality, reproducibility and accuracy of the information and results generated by a fish health laboratory (FHL) for fish health inspection and diagnostic assays. As the authors state, following a carefully written protocol does not in
USFW/AFS-FHS Standard Procedures for Aquatic Animal Health Inspections
Chapter 2 Sampling 2.1 Sampling Introduction 2.2 Sampling 2.3 Reagents, Media, and Media Preparation 2.4 Glossary 2.5 References
itself assure that the consequence is a quality product. “In order for a laboratory to assure quality services it must first establish a system of quality control by which every aspect of laboratory management, structure and upkeep are implemented. The purpose of this Model Quality Assurance/Quality Control Program for Fish Health Laboratories is to provide a structure by which laboratories providing fish dis-
ease diagnostic services can develop individual, lab-specific programs. The document is geared for adaptation at small laboratories as well as large establishments, and will serve to address many of the critical elements provided in the ISO/IEC (International Organization for Standardization/International Electrochemical Commission) International Standards 17025, as well as those standards published by OIE in (Office International de Epizooties).” This section covers the following topics: • Management Responsibilities • Personnel and Personnel Responsibilities • Quality Assurance Coordinator • Laboratory Facilities • Laboratory Equipment and Supplies • Chain of Custody/Case Tracking • Standard Operating Protocols and Conduct of Tests • Routine Quality Control (for various sub-topics) The FHS also maintains a Continuing Education section on its web
pages, which includes a PCR module, a PCR questions and answers section, and a Histology module. Created by Dr. Maureen Purcell, the PCR module is recommended reading for ANYONE who wants to understand how this ever-more-ubiquitous procedure works. The accompanying questions and answers section is available, as a test, in case you really want to evaluate how well you understand PCR after completing the module. The Histology module provides an in-depth (46 page) step by step guide. The module is designed so that participants will learn how to collect tissues for examination, prepare slides and identify artifacts present in histological preparations, and understand normal teleost liver and kidney morphology. This material provides an excellent starting point for students and researchers faced with using histological methods for the first time, or for those needing to refresh their skills. These resources are available at www.afs-fhs.org
Aquaculture Stewardship Council
Aquaculture Stewardship Council
– setting global standards for responsible farming As aquaculture grows, so too does its impact on the environment and local communities.
eafood is one of the most popular sources of protein in the world and aquaculture is the fastest growing food production system in the world. Now, more than half of the fish consumed globally is farmed. Farms that are not well managed can have negative impacts on environment and local communities, but meeting seafood demand can be done responsibly.
Transforming the aquaculture sector The Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) is a global, independent nonprofit organisation established in 2010 by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and The Sustainable Trade Initiative (IDH) to manage the global standards for responsible aquaculture with the aim to transform seafood markets towards responsible practices. The ASC works with aquaculture producers, seafood processors, retail and food-service companies, scientists, and conservation groups around the world using its global influence to fulfil its mission to transform aquaculture towards environmental sustainability and social responsibility. The ASC certification programme recognises and rewards responsible farming activities focusing on the preservation and quality of water resources, preservation of biodiversity and the diversity of species, no misuse of antibiotics, compliance with strict 54 »
feed requirements and social responsibility. The ASC logo is a globally recognised mark for responsibly farmed seafood that is fully traceable to a farm that has been independently certified to the ASC standard and cares for the environment, its workers and the local community. A growing number of companies are making a stand to encourage responsible farming and consumers can be part of that change through their shopping choices. By choosing ASC labelled products consumers can help ensure the health of the oceans, the livelihoods of local communities, and the availability of seafood for the future. Increased consumer demand for certified seafood influences lower per-
formance farms in greater numbers to undergo the rigorous assessment against the ASC standards, thereby improve their farming practices and reducing adverse environmental and social impacts.
Demonstrating environmental and social responsibility The ASC’s standards set criteria for responsible aquaculture that drive industry change and help farms minimise environmental and social impacts. The farm standards were developed by more than 2,000 stakeholders globally through a development process that adhered to ISEAL’s Code of Good Practice for Setting Social and Environmental Standards and the United Nation Food and Agriculture
protecting local surroundings and wildlife, safeguarding the rights of workers and supporting local communities.
Organisation (FAO) guidelines. The standards focus on both the environmental and social impact of farming. Environmentally, farms must show that they actively minimise their impact on the surrounding natural environment. This extends to careful management of the fish health and resources. Socially, farms must be a good and conscientious neighbour; that means operating their farm in a socially responsible manner, caring for their employees and working with the local community. To retain its independence, ASC does not assess fish farms itself. Independent third party certifiers audit farms against the ASC standards to assess whether they are operating responsibly. Certificates are issued by the independently accredited certifying agency. Assessing a farm’s operating systems and their environmental and social impacts is complex. But the basic concept is simple – farms
must have in place the most effective systems that ensure minimal negative environmental and social impact. ASC labelled seafood can be traced back through the supply chain to a responsibly managed farm. All companies that handle certified products have to hold a valid Chain of Custody (CoC) certification. In order to achieve CoC certification a company must meet strict requirements and have in place traceability systems that ensure no product mixing or substitutions can occur. Every ASC certified farm has demonstrated that it is well managed and minimises any adverse impacts. By meeting the requirements of ASC’s standards, certified farms reduce impacts on the environment by delivering a cleaner seabed, cleaner water and healthier fish, preserving the diversity of the species and wild population, adhering to strict feed requirements and ensuring social responsibility by
Growth, global commitments and the future By the start of 2016, more than 200 farms had achieved ASC certification in 24 countries. The growing engagement of farms in the ASC programme has been matched by significant market commitments including the Rio 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games that have pledged to source seafood from ASC certified farms throughout the Olympic village for both athletes and spectators. The ASC has also been developing its presence in North America and the U.S. The expansion in this important market is a keystone of the ASC’s future. In 2013, Canada’s largest retailer Loblaw became the first company in North America to introduce ASC certified tilapia in its stores. And, a year later the retailer was first in North America to launch ASC certified salmon. In March this year, Taylor Shellfish Farms became the first U.S. grower to achieve ASC certification for their farming operation in Washington State. The Shelton, Washington based company received its ASC Bivalve Certification for a portion of its operations in the South Puget Sound basin, which comprises the area south of the Tacoma Narrows, including Olympia and Shelton.
ASC Staff http://www.asc-aqua.org/
Recent news from around the globe by Aquafeed.com
Going with the grain Evonik scientists, along with much of the feed industry, are trying to By Suzi Dominy*
t is not enough however just to substitute fishmeal with soy or another plant-based source. The resulting feeds would not contain the right composition or amount of amino acids such as methionine to meet the animals’ needs. Evonik researchers began looking for a solution to this problem nearly ten years ago, developing special amino acids and amino - acid derivatives for fish and crustaceans aimed at making fishmeal largely unnecessary in aquaculture in the future. The underlying principle is to selectively add amino acids such as methionine and lysine to vegetable - based feeds, improving them to the point where salmon and other marine animals can make optimum use of vegetable proteins as well. The most important task here has been to develop products tailored to the needs of individual fish species. Take salmon, for instance: In 2008, 40 percent of salmon feed was made up of fishmeal, but this figure has since come down to an average of just 10 to 15 percent. Feed manufacturers are already working at full steam to introduce feed concepts that can completely do without fishmeal. 56 »
turn salmon, shrimp, and other marine animals into vegetarians.
Now, after intensive research, there are plans to transfer this success to shrimp. The challenge here is that the feeding behavior and digestive systems of crustaceans like shrimp are entirely different from those of fish. Evonik researchers have managed to develop an improved source of methionine that shrimp can consume and metabolize at the right time and in the right amount. This new dipeptide consists of two methionine molecules and does not dissolve readily in water, which prevents it from leaching out of the feed as quickly. The shrimp themselves have to cleave the molecule, and this makes the methionine available for protein synthesis at the same time as the other products of digestion. The company is currently putting its first production facility for the new product into operation in Antwerp, Belgium. This increasing move toward plant-based proteins gives added urgency to recent supply issues in the European Union. Europe’s food and feed safety standards are very high, with approvals granted only after rigorous testing. In fact, the European commission has come under intense
pressure from millions of petitioners to abandon talks on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the ambitious and comprehensive trade and investment agreement being negotiated between the United States and the European Union, which European critics say will undermine food safety and environmental standards. There has long been a strong rejection by the European public of genetic modification, but in the feed industry a reliance on U.S. commodities has increasingly forced a more expedient approach to GM grains. European feed producers are now deeply concerned about supplies of soy from North America. The EU relies on imports from third countries to cover 75% of its use of protein-rich ingredients for feeding purposes, of which soybean meal is the preferred source. In the light of the EU Commission dragging its feet over approval of three pending GM soybeans, the industry’s feed and grain associations fear severe trade disruptions could happen if no action is taken before the summer break. In June FEFAC, COCERAL and FEDIOL penned an open letter
USSEC Mexico Aquaculture 2016.
to European Commissioner Juncker. US Soybean associations released a similar call. The letter pointed out that The European Union cannot afford to ignore the global dimension of commodities trading and supplies: some of these GM traits, it said were already authorized and/or commercialized in key exporting regions to the EU. In particular, the import approval of MON87708 x MON89788 in China, coupled with the early planting season in producing countries is very close to causing severe trade disruptions should this GM soybean not be authorized in the EU before the summer break. “In absence of a rapid final decision, EU traders may be forced to restrict vital imports of soy due to the increasing risk of finding traces of GM traits yet to be authorized in the
EU, which would negatively affect supplies of both GM and non-GM, which in return will only further exacerbate the long-persisting market crisis in key EU livestock sectors”, the letter stated. COCERAL, FEDIOL and FEFAC noted that the EU Commission had failed over the preceding five months to provide the sound and scientifically justified reasons for the ongoing delay. Meanwhile, the ever inventive Scots have come up with their own answer: Horizon Protein, a spin off from Heriot - Watt University, is developing a salmon feed from recovered barley protein from pot ale - liquid residue left over from the Scottish whisky - making process. With a higher protein content and better digestibility than soybeans or fishmeal and a consistent supply of
some 30,000 tonnes a year, the company’s goal to complete a commercial scale plant at the end of this year and make its first sales in 2017 looks promising. Cheers!
Aquafeed company news • The BioMar - Sagun fish feed factory in Turkey has successfully run its first test of a full production cycle. Construction of the mill, located in Söke, is close to being finalized. This means locally produced grower feeds for trout, sea bass and sea bream will be available. The more specialized feed types in the BioMar-Sagun product portfolio, like hatchery diets and fry feeds, are being produced on other BioMar factories. • BioMar Group also recently announced that they are launching a feed containing a new algae in» 57
gredient with an extra high marine omega-3 content. The ingredient, produced in Brazil by Terra Via Holdings and Bunge Limited, will provide aquaculture producers with greater and more sustainable access to essential marine omega-3 fatty acids. “Current sustainable and certified sources of omega-3 are limited in terms of volume, be it fish meal and oil or krill meal,” explained Jan Sverre Røsstad, BioMar’s Vice President of North Sea. “We are very excited that our collaboration with TerraVia and Bunge has put us in a position to draw on yet another sustainable source of omega-3. Our hope is that this move on our part 58 »
can contribute to the continued growth of our industry.” • Marine Harvest Scotland Ltd. announced plans to build a high technology salmon feed mill on the Isle of Skye. The new Euro 33.5 million (approximately US37.96 million) plant, to be designed by Denmark-based Graintec A/S will produce 170,000 tons a year. The mill will supply feed for Scotland and other Marine Harvest sites in the North Atlantic region. Production will start in summer 2018. • A new Fish Nutrition Research Unit has opened at the WorldFish Abbassa Research Center, in Egypt. The facility will focus on tilapia
nutrition and testing of new, local fish feed ingredients, including agricultural by-products. The launch is the result of a partnership between WorldFish and Skretting. Egypt is the world’s second largest producer of farmed tilapia. With fish production expected to grow to reach 2 million tonnes in 2020, there is a need to support increased production efficiency and profitability, in order to maintain the sector’s sustainability into the future. The partnership also entails the construction of an advanced trial unit with a recirculation system aiming to intensify production combined with the most efficient use of water.
Farmed tilapia. Courtesy Worldfishcenter.
• In a move that surprised many, Biotech Company Alltech bought Dutch feed manufacturer Coppens International. For almost 24 years Coppens International has earned a strong reputation for being an innovative, high-quality aquafeed producer. The company’s specialties include temperate and tropical marine and freshwater diets for a variety of juvenile and adult species. The company also produces ornamental, specialty and bait feeds. Coppens International’s distribution
network is spread across more than 60 countries, including the Netherlands, France, Germany and Australia. Coppens International products are sold to fish producers via direct sales or through distributor and dealer channels. • Cargill’s EWOS brand continues to make measurable progress in its key sustainability indicators, according to its annual sustainability report. Over the last 10 years EWOS has reduced the marine index dramatically from 55 percent in 2005 to 27 percent in 2015, while at the same time increasing feed production by 70 percent. In 2015, EWOS was for the first time able to provide feed that gives salmon farmers the opportunity to be net producers of marine protein and marine oil. In 2015, 32 percent of the marine ingredients used in EWOS feeds were from fish trimmings. That is an increase of almost 10 percent in five years. This raw material has become
available as a result of supplier development programs and screening from Cargill Innovation.
Suzi Dominy is the founding editor and publisher of aquafeed.com. She brings 25 years of experience in professional feed industry journalism and publishing. Before starting this company, she was co-publisher of the agri-food division of a major UK-based company, and editor of their major international feed magazine for 13 years. firstname.lastname@example.org
Overview of HACCP Requirements
for a Warehouse that Stores Refrigerated or Frozen Seafood What is Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP)? HACCP is a management tool used to protect the food supply against biological, chemical and physical hazards.
By: Michael Jahncke*
he United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has regulatory HACCP authority over meat and poultry, and processed egg products (i.e., liquid, frozen, dried egg products). The USDA/Food Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) also has oversight authority for food products containing more than 2-3% meat or poultry. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulatory authority on seafood, fruits and vegetables, grain products, dairy products, and shell eggs, and juice. Mandatory HACCP for seafood was implemented by the FDA in 1997.
Approach In most cases, the warehouse is defined as a secondary processor if it only receives stores and ships refrigerated or frozen seafood products, and does not repack or reprocess the products. Its customer, the primary processor, must have a HACCP Plan to control significant biological (e.g., pathogens), chemical (e.g., control of food allergens through labeling; control of histamine formation through temperature control in scombroid species, etc.) and physical hazards (e.g., potential metal fragments, glass, etc.) in the food product. The warehouse must also implement Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures 60 »
(SSOPs) to prevent recontamination with biological, chemical and physical hazards. In addition, even though the biological hazards (e.g., pathogen growth, toxin formation) and chemical hazards (histamine formation) are initially controlled in the primary processor’s HACCP Plan, unlike other chemical and physical hazards (which are still controlled by the primary processor’s HACCP Plan), pathogen growth, toxin formation, and/or histamine formation can still occur due to temperature abuse during transport and storage. Thus, these significant hazards must be controlled by appropriate refrigerated product temperatures in the warehouse’s HACCP Plan. Therefore, a Seafood HACCP plan is required at the warehouse for high risk refrigerated seafood products (i.e., Time Temperature Control for Safety Foods [TCS]), if the warehouse is: 1). A first-processor, that receives refrigerated fish or shellfish directly from the vessel; or 2). If it stores live or fresh shellfish, or refrigerated scombroid species (tuna, mahi-mahi, bluefish), or refrigerated vacuum packaged smoked fish, refrigerated pasteurized crab meat, or other products where time/temperature abuse can cause a food-safety hazard. A Warehouse HACCP Plan, however, may not be required for fro-
zen seafood products, since pathogen growth, toxin formation, and/or histamine formation are not reasonably likely to occur in frozen products. Regardless, whether or not seafood products are frozen or refrigerated, a Hazard Analysis (HA) must be conducted. The FDA requires that every processor conduct an HA for each step in the flow diagram (i.e., the step in the production cycle in which one would expect to find the potential hazard). The HA is conducted to identify all potential food safety hazards, identify which of these hazards are significant and identify measures to control the significant hazards. In the case of a warehouse that only receives, stores and ships product, the HACCP Plan for high risk refrigerated seafood products (i.e., TCS foods) may include temperature control (depending on the product) to prevent pathogen growth, toxin formation, and/or histamine formation. Solution: The first step in HACCP is to 1). Assemble the HACCP Team. This team should be comprised at a minimum of a supervisor, individuals that understand HACCP concept, individuals that are knowledgeable about the receiving, storage and shipment process, and individuals that are responsible for the specified activities. 2). Draw a flow chart of the flow of food products through the facility.
3). Verify the accuracy of the flow diagram by asking questions and walking through the facility. For a warehouse that receives refrigerated or frozen seafood the processing steps are as follows: CCP 1 – Receiving SOP Incoming goods inspection program
CCP 2 – Storage SOP Proper storage conditions
CCP 3 – Shipping SOP Correct shipping conditions
Step 1. Assess the Hazards: Determine whether or not there is the potential for pathogen growth and/ or histamine formation at the receiving, storage and shipping steps at the warehouse. (i.e., identify the appropriate refrigerated temperatures needed to prevent pathogen growth, toxin formation, and/or histamine formation). Step 2. Establish Critical Control Points: The step in the process where control must be in place to prevent, eliminate or reduce to an acceptable level the identified hazard(s). (i.e., receiving, refrigerated storage and shipping). NOTE: If there is one or more identified CCPs then the company must write a HACCP Plan that includes each identified significant hazard at each CCP. Step 3: Establish Critical Limits (CLs): For a refrigerated warehouse this is the maximum not to exceed temperature to ensure the safety of the refrigerated high risk seafood product(s) at receipt, storage and shipment. Step 4: Establish Monitoring Procedures: Procedures to ensure that a CL is met and to provide documentation that the CLs have been met, and lastly to identify when there is a A hybrid striped bass on ice.
Grimsby Seafood Village.
loss of control at a CCP. (Note: All temperature monitoring equipment should be calibrated at least annually and have daily accuracy checks conducted prior to each use). Step 5: Establish Corrective Action: Procedures to be taken whenever the monitoring step finds that a deviation has occurred (e.g., exceeded maximum internal product temperatures that ensure safe food at receipt, storage or shipping). Step 6: Verification Procedures: Activities other than monitoring that
Courtesy Crystal Cold Storage.
determines the accuracy and reliability of the HACCP Plan and verifies that the HACCP Plan is operating according to the plan. (e.g., the thermometer, continuous temperature recorder device, infrared gun, etc., used to determine product temperatures must be calibrated at least yearly and checked for accuracy prior to each use). Step 7: Recordkeeping: Records including, the HACCP Plan, prerequisite programs such as Sanitation Standard Operating Procedures
(SSOPs), monitoring and corrective action records, temperature calibration and thermometer accuracy records, etc. Whether or not the HA indicates that a HACCP Plan is required, each warehouse must monitor and keep sanitation monitoring records. There are 8 Key Sanitation Conditions and Practices which must be monitored in a warehouse’s SSOPs. 1).Safety of water – source and inplant (includes ice); 2).Condition and cleanliness of foodcontact surfaces (includes gloves, garments etc.); 3).Prevention of cross-contamination reflects employee practices/handling (e.g., separation of raw and “cooked” product), plant design – movement of product and people); 4).Maintenance of hand-washing, hand- sanitizing and toilet facilities; 5).Protection from adulterants; 6).Labeling, storage and proper use of toxic compounds; 7).Employee health conditions; and 8).Exclusion of pests. In addition to monitoring the 8 Key SSOPs, the warehouse should have written Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) at each processing step. (i.e., Incoming goods inspection program, proper storage procedures, and an outgoing goods inspection program).
*Dr. Michael Jahncke is a Professor at Virginia Tech and the Director of the Virginia Seafood Agricultural Research and Extension Center. He earned his Ph.D. in Food Science at Cornell University. His research interests include safety and quality of wild catch and aquaculture species, sensory evaluation of seafood products, handling and processing of fish and fishery products, public, environmental, and animal health issues associated with aquaculture systems.
Possible advantages & disadvantages
of sterile salmon and trout in commercial farming Farmed fish are often detected in rivers with wild stocks of salmon and trout. In Scotland, 14 out of 16 rivers in the northwestern region contained salmon of mixed farm origin according to a study performed By AsbjĂ¸rn Bergheim*
nother study traced 80 % of all salmon in some Norwegian rivers back to fish farms. Yet another report refers to a study indicating that adult farm salmon have been shown to be 84 % less successful than native fish at reproducing in rivers. However, so-called precocious male parr raised in farms were four times more successful than their wild counterparts at the spawning grounds. Selective breeding for intensive farming since the early 1970â€™s has resulted in genetic differences between wild and farmed salmon, such as different growth and behavior. Offspring of farmed salmon also display reduced survival in the wild compared with wild salmon. The potential for interbreeding between escaped farmed and wild salmon in the rivers is the basic motive for introduction of sterile salmon in aquaculture. A couple of years ago, about 64 Âť
more than ten years ago.
Triploid brown trout. Courtesy Environment Agency UK.
TigerTrout -the 3 fish above - are hybrids that are widely stocked as triploids. Photo courtesy Matthew Tyree.
Invasive brook trout threaten coho salmon in the Pacific Northwest courtesy J McMillan NOAA NWFSC.
Triploid salmon and trout can be produced by exposing eggs to high pressure.
one million of sterile smolt were stocked in cages along the Norwegian coast. A recent study, however, demonstrated that use of triploid salmon in commercial aquaculture may cause implications at the spawning sites in the rivers. Triploid males can display the full range of spawning behavior similar to wild males, and wild females will spawn with triploid males, even in the absence of a diploid male. Triploid salmon and trout can be produced by exposing eggs to high pressure. This treatment causes the offspring to receive the usual one set of chromosomes from its father, but two from its mother. The method evolved in the 1980s and was easily introduced in rainbow trout in Scotland and Tasmania. However, salmon offspring of such treatment frequently suffered from skeletal deformities and cataracts. Due to new knowledge, the method has reemerged as a potential way even to produce sterile salmon without such infirmities. Use of modified feed, for instance by adding extra phosphorous to prevent skeletal problems, and more insight into optimal environmental conditions are contributing major factors to successful farming of triploid salmon. However, sterile salmon are still more vulnerable to high summer temperature and low dissolved oxygen concentration than normal salmon. According to Troutlodge some (out of many) benefits of utilizing triploid trout are: - They can be released without any risk of genetic impact of wild stocks. - Improved growth to large size, as their energy is transferred to growth rather than reproduction. - In the early life stages, the growth is comparable to diploid fish. - Better flesh quality as compared to diploids. Some years ago, a transnational project in NW Europe studied the
feasibility of commercial triploid Atlantic salmon production. A series of experimental and full-scale trials were conducted at all stages of production. Triploids outperformed their diploid siblings and the rate of deformity was minimal. Both out-ofseason (0+) and natural (1+) triploid post-smolts demonstrated encouraging performance during the first months after transfer to sea. BioMar Norway claims that a full production cycle can be done up to 4-6 weeks faster using triploids compared to diploid salmon due to higher growth rate. The growth pattern of triploids is quite different from diploids. This company, BioMar, launched a new feed line (Tri-X) adapted to production of triploids. According to Dan Leeming, BioMar: “Basically we had to redesign the composition of our salmon feeds completely to match the needs of triploids in the different growth stages.” As mentioned previously, the introduction of triploid salmonids initially caused severe deformity problems. Based on comprehensive research, addition of a probiotic bacteria strain improves the mineralization and at the same time reduces inflammatory conditions, which are main reasons for vertebral deformities in sterile fry according to the experts.
Dr. AsbjØrn Bergheim is a senior researcher in the Dept. of Marine Environment at the International Research Institute of Stavanger. His fields of interest within aquaculture are primarily water quality vs. technology and management in tanks, cages and ponds, among others. email@example.com
Aquaculture Economics, Management, and Marketing
Aquaculture Farm Business to a New Generation This column presents the contents of a webinar hosted by the By: Carole R. Engle, Ph.D.* Engle-Stone Aquatic$ LLC
any aquaculture businesses are family farms that involve multiple generations. However, what happens when the principal owner passes away or experiences a serious illness? In the absence of a comprehensive plan to transition the farm to the next generation, serious problems can arise. Disputes among heirs are not uncommon and can lead to hard feelings at best and serious financial problems at worst. Transitioning the family farm business to the next generation is a complex and serious task with many issues to consider. For example, there may be heirs who have worked on the farm all their lives, with substantial “sweat equity” in the business in addition to non-farm heirs. There may be formal partners in the business in addition to informal business relationships that are critical to the farm. The business structure itself may need to be re-examined and such considerations have income and tax consequences. A smooth transition of a farming business to the next generation requires careful 66 »
National Aquaculture Association in November, 2015.
planning and implementation over a period of 5 to 10 years. A good starting point is to visit the AgTransitions web site (available at: www.agtransitions.umn.edu). Similar to AgPlan, the farm business planning site, AgTransitions allows users to build a transition plan online by responding to prompts, instructions, and tips. The plan can be modified at any time, and printed out for the farm’s records. The web site is maintained by the Center for Farm and Financial Management at the University of Minnesota and is available at no cost. There are three main components of a transition plan for your aquaculture business: 1) business transfer plan; 2) retirement plan; and 3) estate and bequest plan. The first step is for both the owner and the successor generation to put on paper their expectations and vision for the farm business. The expectations of the succeeding generation may be quite distinct from those of the owner generation. For example, the owner generation may be content to have generated sufficient in-
come to provide financial security for the family and their current lifestyle, while the successor may have expectations of a different lifestyle that requires expansion or diversification of the business. Expectations for how to treat both on-farm and non-farm heirs fairly are important topics throughout the planning process. Such discussions, while sometimes difficult, are essential to have periodically throughout the transition process. The next step is to plan for a slow transfer of decision-making responsibilities in the management transfer portion of the transition plan. Planning, operations, staffing, accounting/bookkeeping, and marketing/ sales all need to be addressed. The plan must be based on assessment of the level of preparedness of each successor to be involved with the farm. Levels of formal education, business experience in aquaculture or another business, and critical management skills must be considered in the assessment of what level of management he/she is ready to assume in the business. Over time, what specific skills and experience must he/she develop that are currently lacking? The best approach to groom a successor is to delegate increasing levels of responsibility and authority slowly over a 5 to 10-year period. Throughout the process, it is important to create and maintain an environment of trust and to allow for mistakes. The third step is to develop a plan for transfer of ownership of the assets of the farm business. Assets often are substantial in an aquaculture business and include the land, production facilities (ponds, raceways, tanks), buildings (hatchery, grading shed, shop), hauling trucks, and equipment. Broodstock, on-farm inventory of fish or shellfish, trademarks, patents, brands, and customer lists are all part of the assets of the business. Asset transfer typically involves sale of the assets to the sucÂť 67
Aquaculture Economics, Management, and Marketing
The plan to transfer the business should be accompanied by a retirement plan.
cessor over a period of time, with the owner using the proceeds as part of his/her retirement income. Lease agreements can be useful to ease financing needs for transfer of land, production facilities, and equipment. Careful financial analysis can indicate if leasing assets from the owner would be preferable to borrowing capital during the transition. The fourth step in developing the transition plan for your aquaculture business is to ensure that the business can provide sufficient income to support both the owner and the successor and their families. A phased-in approach to transfer income works best. In the early stages of the transition, the successor often is an employee of the business, with a job description and wages. An incentive plan can be helpful at this stage to motivate the potential successor to seek to develop management skills and abilities. When the successor is ready, an enterprise operating agreement can be used to establish a management role for the successor in one of the business’s enterprises. In this capacity, the successor shares income from the enterprise that he/she manages in proportion to the successor’s contribution of labor, capital, and management responsibilities. An alternative to this approach is to allow the 68 »
successor to run a separate business and either share or co-own some of the assets of the business. As the successor’s management skills grow, the degree of ownership should also grow to the point where the successor is no longer an employee and becomes a part owner. Changes in the business structure to a partnership, LLC, or a decision to incorporate may facilitate this type of growth. The final step is to transfer the management of labor. When the successor begins to make management decisions, either for one of the business’s enterprises or for his/her own business, they also should begin to supervise employees of that business. When the successor becomes a part owner of the entire aquaculture business, then supervision of employees typically is also transferred. In some aquaculture businesses, the original owners continue to be involved with the business after the transition as an employee or consultant. Those involved in the transition should meet once a year to review the transition plan. Accomplishments should be tracked, adjustments made, and new goals set for the upcoming year. The plan to transfer the business should be accompanied by a retirement plan. There are many resources available for retirement planning that should be used to develop a formal, written retirement plan. The retirement plan typically includes income from sale of assets to the successor. The estate plan is the last part of a comprehensive transition plan and describes the owner’s wishes for how personal assets are to be distributed. Beneficiaries are designated and a will included. A tax advisor, attorney, and financial advisor should be consulted throughout the planning process. In summary, it is never too late to begin planning for the transition of your aquaculture business to a succeeding generation although it is
best to plan for a 5 to 10-year transition. Your farm is a business, even if run by the family. Written plans and annual meetings to assess and adjust the plan are the best approach to ensure a smooth transition of your aquaculture business to the next generation. The slides and recording of the webinar this column is based on are available at: http://thenaa.net/webinars/transitioning-your-aquaculture-farm-businessnew-generation
Carole Engle holds a B.A. degree in Biology/Rural Development from Friends World College and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from Auburn University where she specialized in aquaculture economics. Dr. Engle is a past-President of the U.S. Aquaculture Society and the International Association of Aquaculture Economics and Management. She is currently a Principal in Engle-Stone Aquatic$ LLC, and can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
Seafood in the social media world
The world is rapidly changing. Just how quickly is our industry, and more importantly your business, moving in order to survive in the ‘new age’?
here was a time when the first thing I did when I woke up was grab the newspaper to see what was going on in the world. Alas those days are long passed and newspapers, if still in existence, are going through massive restructuring and re-aligning in order to survive. A lack of an on-line service effectively puts them out of the ‘game.’ Television came and changed the way we got our news and entertainment. Change in the way the news is delivered has been a constant. Wherever news is happening it is now very active and the live broadcasts put our living rooms right at the scene. Society is not the same today as it was last year let alone many years ago and one of the main reasons for this is the communication aspect.
Look at the current global political situation with Presidential elections in the US; the vote on whether Great Britain leaves the European Union; the Australian elections and other similar activities which are now so media driven and aim to engage directly through all the social media channels. Social Media has changed the rules of engagement and some experts say that unless you have a digital media strategy then you are not in business. So where does that leave you? I read on how the Norwegian Seafood Export Council had blown past rivals in China’s Twitter world, with well over 110,000 followers on the wildly popular Weibo microblogging site. Apparently at the time that was more than double the followers for the second-most followed sea-
food micro blogs in the country; seafood restaurant chain Aomen Dulou and aquaculture producer/processor Homey. Of course having followers does not always mean success in selling your products. There is more to it than just putting something on social media. The marketing strategy needs to be active. I recall the Australian Government in their “G’day Australia” promotion managing to get an Australian chef on Good Morning America TV program promoting Shrimp which struck the Government people as a major success. The only problem was communication with the industry was poor so even if people wanted to buy Australian Shrimp there were very few retailers who actually had any stock – hence a wasted opportunity!
Santander Retail Market.
Seafood is a global product; in fact the World Trade Organisation says that ‘fish and fishery products now constitute the most highly traded food commodity internationally.’ The figures show that coffee is about one third of seafood, to give you an idea of the volume. Across the world new technologies are entering the world of fishing to help eliminate one of our major challenges, illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing (IUU). Smart phone technologies connected to software enable fishing companies to know what is being caught even though the vessels may be far out to sea. In Norway the world’s first remote pelagic ‘e-auction,’ Norges Sildesalgslag, has shown the way forward. No fish is handled at the market which is on the 5th floor of a city building.
The electronic fish-auction and up-to date catch-journal has proven to be a very efficient marketplace for pelagic fish. The fishermen ‘meet’ the buyers in a digital marketplace with all the information the buyers need to put in bids for the catch. The system is open for all buyers who want to participate in the first-hand sale of pelagic fish and both Norwegian and foreign fishing vessels participate in the auction because of the stability, security, efficiency and fairness it provides to all parties. In China the high use of smart phones has enabled massive access to the country’s media market and made micro-blogging and other social media a key marketing tool for seafood firms in the country and this is slowly happening on our home front. Norway is not the only country
to take advantage of this as the Canadian government, using a Chinese language website, www.canadafood.cn, and a Weibo account promotes Canadian imports, including seafood. In other marketing on social media, global airline KLM Royal Dutch Airlines employs large numbers of people to engage with millions of followers on Facebook and is now giving passengers the option to receive flight updates through Messenger. If they agree while booking a ticket, KLM will then start up a chat thread, where it’ll send booking confirmation, flight status, and any scheduling changes. It’ll also send over a boarding pass, which passengers will be able to use to get through security and onto their flight. Digital boarding passes aren’t new, but Messenger’s conversational
interface is. It’s a familiar way for KLM to get in touch with customers, and a convenient one for the many people who already use Messenger daily to get in touch with friends. KLM goes beyond just sending updates, too — passengers will also be able to chat with KLM support right inside of Messenger. We are seeing how social media can definitely be a powerful tool and it is one that our industry needs to embrace more as we move into the future. Traceability will become more and more important and this can be a difficult area for many developing countries as generally there are many ‘middle-men’ within the system. It is easy for product to get mixed and that then eliminates the traceability component. Systems are being viewed which will be able to solve these problems eventually. Can we sell more fresh seafood using social media? Maybe, but one
Santander Retail Market.
thing is for certain we can definitely inform and educate the consumers through this medium and that surely will be a good thing. The internet is, of course, open to everyone and we have already seen many scare campaigns started by ignorant operators. I cannot stress enough that in the social media space we need to think about the consequences of our actions. The industry has enough enemies as it is without sectors of the industry picking on other sectors. The best rule is ‘if you cannot say positive things about all seafood then say nothing at all.’ The worst situation is one industry person ‘mouthing off ‘about another industry person’s product. Everyone is a critic nowadays when it comes to restaurants. Taking photographs of the meal, posting onto various social media and even critiquing the meal and restaurant –it is all so easy. It impacts on the res-
The best rule is ‘if you cannot say positive things about all seafood then say nothing at all.’ The worst situation is one industry person mouthing off about another industry person’s product.
taurateur for sure but, if done well, it is a good thing for all as it enables continuous improvement. Mind you the need to understand you will never please everyone is important. It is difficult to think that this trend will change in the short term. For the retail fish market or the supermarket seafood counter there are great opportunities with social
media. The products that we have are the essential ‘get-it-now-whilewe-have-it food,’ which is a superb fit for fast-paced, real-time, social media communications. Seafood is always an interesting photo for consumers to take and you can imagine how they could be enticed into uploading images of first-of-the-season wild products and the like. Building a customer support base using social media is an essential tool in today’s world and just think how you could create interest by posting great photographs and descriptions of arrivals at the store. Add some connectivity to recipe ideas and some basic FAQ’s about each species and you are immediately engaging and enticing the taste buds of your clients. They will be beating down the doors if you do it right… Happy Fishmongering! The Fishmonger
Shrimp Import Updates from Urner Barry
By: Paul B. Brown Jr.*
mports for April were down 13.6% pushing YTD imports 3.6% lower. HLSO imports were down almost 19% for the month and 10.5% lower YTD; peeled imports were down 11% for the month but maintained a 10.5% positive result YTD. Cooked imports were about even for the month but down 10.7% YTD and breaded imports were down both for April and YTD. Imports from India were down 28.8% leaving YTD imports about even compared to 2015. Indonesian imports were down 15.5% for April and 6.1% YTD. Ecuador continued their lower imports down 23.2% for April and 21.9% YTD. Vietnamese imports were higher for the month and YTD despite their production issues as raw material from other suppliers is likely sourced. Mexican imports were higher as last seasonâ€™s production was liquidated. The lower imports now correspond to what had developed in the spot market as quotations have trended higher. April /May began the ramp up of imports to the October peak. The decline in Indian shrimp imports comes from a sharp drop in April imports of HLSO shrimp. For the month, HLSO imports dropped 55.6% while peeled imports were slightly higher at 3.7%. This is likely an indication that seasonal production is later than a year ago. Additionally, buying interest for smaller count preharvest shrimp has been active from both China and Vietnam. US offerings from India are increasing and replacement pricing has moderated. Indications are that US 74 Âť
April shrimp imports revealed what many have been expecting, a sharp decline in imports from the major producing countries including India and Indonesia. buying interest; including retail, is active. With limited inventories on-hand in the US spot market, pricing has recently maintained or gone up slightly especially on 26-30 count and larger shrimp. However, the undertone remains unsettled as production increases and moves into larger sizes and inventories are slowly replenished. Indonesia imports of HLSO shrimp including easy peel and peeled shrimp were lower in April. Cooked imports were 33% higher. Indonesian offerings have been mixed; but were expected to slow in the first week of July in observance of Ramadan. Vietnam saw a substantial increase of 23.2% in shrimp exports to the US in April pushing YTD imports almost 14% higher. The bulk of imports were in peeled shrimp and cooked shrimp. HLSO imports also saw a sharp percentage increase. Vietnam continues to suffer from generally inclement weather conditions and sources substantial volumes of raw material from India.
Improved seasonal weather conditions should improve production. The earthquake in Ecuador that devastated the area around Manabi had a serious effect on shrimp production in that area; however, the region produces a fraction of the total Ecuador supply. And although the earthquake did provide a catalyst for a firming market, April and May export data indicate back-to-back record exports. Those exports are predominately headed to Asia. Imports into the US were down 23% in April, and May export data anticipates continued lower imports. Year-to-date imports were down 21.9%. So the US market for Latin American shrimp, dominated by Ecuador, has been full steady to stronger on 41-50 count and larger shrimp and steady on smaller counts. Reports indicate that Mexican shrimp production particularly in Sinaloa has been negatively affected by high mortalities. Some feel that what was projected to be as good or better
production improved and may seasonally increase. Overall the current US shrimp complex is mostly steady; after a firming trend, as seasonal production ramps up worldwide. But there continues to be some firming pressure on large count shrimp ahead of what is hoped to be improved availability.
Figure 1 Urner Barry HLSO Farm-Raised White Shrimp Index. 2013
$ / lb.
6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5
Cyclical Shrimp Imports. All-Types.
´13 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50
production this season as last, may not happen and instead it will be significantly lower. However exports to the US may not be as severely affected due to the attraction of the US market for large count shrimp. For now the harvest of smaller count shrimp are remaining in Mexico where prices are high, insulating especially the US west coast market from an influx of lower
cost Mexican product. Chinese breaded shrimp imports were substantially higher in April but remain lower for the year. Probably more significant to the global shrimp market is China as a shrimp importer. Imports from Ecuador have been significant and growing as well as buying interest in India and Vietnam. Some reports indicate Chinese domestic
Domestic Gulf Shrimp The market for headless shell-on brown shrimp has been largely unchanged in recent weeks, however somewhat unsettled amid scattered pricing which is largely reflective of individual inventory. Meanwhile, there’s sustained weakness in HLSO white shrimp, PUD’s and P&D’s. Larger count HLSO white shrimp remained in production, and the resultant drop in boat price provided sufficient margin to incent discounts. PUD’s and P&D’s have fallen across-the-board, with the most significant declines noted in the smallest counts. Anecdotal reports suggest that new season production has been largely comprised of 111-130 and smaller count PUD’s. The NMFS is reporting April 2016 landings (all species, headless) of 2.81 million lbs. compared to 1.77 million in April 2015. The cumulative total stood at 13.28 million lbs.; 37.4 percent above the Jan-Apr 2015 total. *President of Urner Barry email@example.com
Updates from Urner Barry
By: Paul B. Brown Jr.*
rozen whole fish imports decreased significantly in April from the previous month and compared to the same month a year ago. YTD figures are now 6.5
Overall tilapia imports were down in April as it is seasonally expected. However, when compared to April 2015, imports were up 7.4 percent led by frozen fillets shipments. On a YTD basis tilapia imports were down over 12 percent. percent lower compared to 2015. April imports were the lowest monthly figure since March 2014, when imports fell below the 3.8 million-pound mark. Again, there are several factors that
could be influencing this figure including: misreported numbers under the appropriate HS code; that this is an isolated event; or a change in consumer preferences. Feedback is welcome. » 75
Tilapia Frozen Fillets April imports declined from the previous month as seasonally expected. Through April, imports are nearly 15 percent lower than in 2015, but slightly above 2014. Monthly imports have recorded levels close to the 3-year average and are following historically seasonal behavior. As a result, the market has remained generally steady both abroad and in the U.S. over the past several months. Replacement prices increased just $0.01 per pound from March, while the U.S. wholesale market remains mostly flat. We are now in early sumFigure 2 YTD Imports Tilapia Frozen Fillets.
140 125.8 115.7 120 106.8 107.2 92.8 100 89.9 80 60 40 20 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Figure 1 Cyclical Monthly Imports. Tilapia Frozen Fillets. 2014
´13 - ´15 avg.
60 millions lbs.
Tilapia Fresh Fillets Imports in April were the lowest for that month since 2010, when volumes fell below 4.4-million-pounds. Similarly, imports on a year-to-date basis are also the lowest since 2010, when YTD imports totaled 19.18 million pounds compared to 19.36 million pounds this year. This is relevant because monthly imports have been tracking below their 3-year average since March 2015. This means that monthly tilapia imports have fallen below their historical average for 13 straight months. Imports from Ecuador and Costa Rica are down 10.2 and 4.7 percent respectively on a YTD basis; this is despite a bounce back of imports from Ecuador in 2015. Imports from Brazil have been increasing as of the last few months with YTD figures reaching 612,209 pounds so far in 2016. Shipments from Colombia continue to surge and are now 14 percent above year ago levels on a YTD basis.
50 40 30 20 10 0
Feb Mar Apr May Jun
mer, when new harvests and buying positions are assessed by market participants and we will be reporting accordingly. So far traders in the U.S. have been quiet.
Pangasius April imports remained virtually flat compared to both the previous month and to the same month last year. On a year-to-date basis, imports are still at a record high at 90.2 million pounds through April, a 13.4 percent increase compared to the same period last year. In late May, the U.S. Senate voted in favor of repealing USDA’s Catfish Inspection program from the Farm Bill. Joint Resolution (S.J. Res 28) is a U.S House of Representatives vote and White House signature away from complete disapproval. However, a Congressional delegation supporting the program sent a letter to House leadership asking to not take up the resolution. There is no timetable for when the House would vote on the resolution. European data revealed that imports of Pangasius are just slightly higher compared to U.S. imports. However, given all the uncertainty surrounding this market, the trend going forward is not clear. Replacement costs managed to edge up slightly again in April, but again, the latest increases have been minimal since reaching a bottom in December 2015. On a replacement cost basis, April figures remained flat from March at
Oct Nov Dec
$3.07, only $0.03 higher than February 2016 which was the lowest import $/lb. figure since April 2008. Through April 2016, the import price per pound reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce has adjusted 13 percent lower compared to the same period in 2015, averaging $3.06 per pound down from $3.51 per pound.
Imported Channel Catfish Channel catfish imports were 38,000 pounds, or the equivalent of one container. Channel catfish imports for the year are 5.2 million pounds through April, a 20 percent decrease compared to 2015. Shipments in April entered the U.S. with a declared value of $3.24 per pound, virtually unchanged from February —since imports were nil in March— which kept offering levels in the U.S. wholesale market unchanged at approximately $3.80 per pound. Domestic Catfish Prices for domestic catfish fillets adjusted higher as inventories remain tight. It is not uncommon for inventories to hit seasonal lows in the spring as feed consumption declines in the winter due to cooler water temperatures. However, reports indicate that supplies this year are unusually tight from a combination of seasonally low inventories and an abundance of rainfall that hindered production. *President of Urner Barry firstname.lastname@example.org
Updates from Urner Barry By: Paul B. Brown Jr.*
Through April, the salmon market continued the year 10.44 percent higher
YTD. Total month-to-month data, however, reveals a decrease of 10.41 percent when compared to March.
hen looking at the same time last year, total imports were 2.2 percent higher. Fresh Atlantic whole fish imports were up 5.46 percent and fresh fillets were up 17.3 percent YTD. Currently the farmed salmon complex is highly unsettled. The market varies widely from origin to origin. The Canadian wholefish market is weak, the Chilean fillet market was weak at the beginning of the month and is now firming, and the European wholefish market has been extremely firm. Overall demand has been quiet as we approach the seasonal summer slowdown.
Fresh Atlantic Wholefish YTD wholefish imports continued into April with increases; up 5.5 percent. Canada and to a smaller extent
Faroe Island are the drivers with 4.8 and 37.8 percent increases respectively. Norway continues to see decreases to start the year; down 33.3 percent. The month-to-month data reveals a 8.5 percent decrease when comparing April 2016 to March 2016. April 2016 is also 7.7 percent lower than April 2015. April imports into the Northeast continued to see a jump compared to 2015. Currently the market in the Northeast about steady to weak. Downward pricing pressure is being felt due to ample supplies of larger wholefish, ample supply of West Coast wholefish in the Northeast market, and to some extent the return of Chilean fillets to the market after the strike in Chile. Supplies of Northeast fish, as mentioned previously, are fully adequate for larger fish and adequate for smaller sized
fish. Demand has been fair to quiet. Imports into the Northeast are the highest levels seen since 2012; note the bar graph. All sizes listed for Northeast wholefish are trending at their three-year averages. Imports of European wholefish during April were lower than last year at the same time. The European wholefish market has been very firm since the beginning of June. Currently supplies are light for a moderate to fair demand. Sellers report resistence at the higher prices. 2016 imports of European wholefish into the U.S. are slightly lower than 2015. All origins of 6-7s are trending a good amount higher than the 3-year average.
2016 imports from Canada on the West Coast (WC) are slightly under 2015 imports. Currently the market in the West is barely stady to weak; supplies are ample to fully adequate for a dull demand. Supplies of smaller wholefish, in particular, are ample. On the other hand, 14-up fish have been stable. All sizes listed are trending at or below their threeyear averages.
Fresh Atlantic Fillets April 2016 imports of fresh fillets continued the year stronger than 2015 at 107.5 million pounds, the highest YTD volume on record. Month-tomonth data shows a decrease when compared to March 2016 of 4.9 percent. When comparing to the same time last year, April 2016 is 12.6 percent higher than April 2015. Chile is the driver of these increases and 78.4 million pounds have been imported thus far for the year which is up 8.8 percent YTD. Norway continues to see double digit increases YTD; up 63.1 percent with 14.8 million pounds imported so far for 2016. Fillet imports from Chile and Europe total 107.5 million pounds, the highest total seen in the past four years. A toxic algae bloom in Chile did affect month-to-month imports; imports were down over 4.9 percent for April 2016. Currently the fresh fillet market is very volatile. A steep decline was seen at the beginning of the month after Chilean fillets had returned to the market following a 2 week strike in Chile where no fish was available for the spot market. As supplies improved, the market adjusted lower and after a steep decline, supplies as of the middle of June have become more adequate for the current moderate to fair demand. All sizes for Chilean fillets are trending slightly above their three year averages. Frozen Atlantic Fillets Imports of frozen fillets are down
2.2 percent YTD. Additionally, when compared to March 2016 levels, imports are down 29.7 percent. Shipments from Chile are up 11.3 percent YTD and imports from Norway are down 23.5 percent. YTD. Currently the market is full steady to firming. Due to the toxic algae situation in Chile, and the strike in Chile, the fresh market had increased sharply, declined sharply and has rebounded some. Regardless, less volume is being slated for the frozen market and upward pricing pressure is reported.
Frozen non-Atlantic Fillets Imports of frozen fillet (non-Atlantic) decreased 6.5 percent YTD. Also, when looking at month-to-month data, there is a slight decrease of 0.1 percent. Shipments from China, the main supplier of this commodity —chum— decreased by 5.5 percent YTD and totaling 25.5 million pounds. Retail Retail data for the month of June shows the average price for Atlantic salmon fillets adjusted higher when comparing to June of 2015. 2015’s average was $7.65 where 2016’s average was $8.37, which is $0.72 higher. When comparing June 2016 to May 2016, there was a slight $0.01 increase from an average of $8.36 to an average of $8.37. The chart shows the % change in pricing of the wholesale market vs. retail ad pricing since 2012. The graph shows a clear correlation between these two. Wild Salmon (Early June) The wild fresh salmon season has just gotten underway. We are seeing troll and net kings currently along with initial offerings of sockeyes.
*President of Urner Barry email@example.com
Nor-Fishing 2016. Trondheim, Norway August 16-19. Since 1960, Nor-Fishing has been an important national and international meeting for the fisheries industry. Today is one of the largest fisheries technology exhibitions in the world. In recent years, the exhibition has drawn around 15,000 visitors from about 50 countries. Innovations of importance to all sectors of the industry are presented in this show. More info on: http://www.nor-fishing.no/?lang=en The 18th Japan International Seafood and Technology Expo. Tokyo, Japan August 17-19. The upcoming event will bring together about 800 seafood and fisheries related companies from around the world, with an expected attendance of at least 35,000 domestic and international visitors. The 18th Japan International Seafood and Technology Expo will be held simultaneously with the World Aquaculture Expo 2016, Sushi Expo 2016 and Freshness Keeping and Distribution Technology Expo 2016. With Japan being one of the top seafood consumers in the world, the show have received great interest and enquiries form all over the world. Through the years, this show has become an important platform for all the international seafood and seafood related businesses to meet face-to-face. More info on: http://www.exhibitiontech.com/seafood/e_index.html 11th International Conference on Recirculating Aquaculture (ICRA) & 2016 Aquaculture Innovation Workshop. Roanoke, Virginia, USA August 19-21. The Freshwater Institute is partnering with ICRA to offer two concurrent events. The ICRA offers a wider scope of aquaculture-related topics, including research, enterprise and discovery, and unique opportunities for discussion. The Aquaculture Innovation Workshop (AIW) focuses on the technical, biological and economic performance of land-based recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) for production of market sized fish. You will be able to explore new products and technologies at trade show. More info on: http://www.recircaqua.com SEAFOOD EXPO ASIA. Wanchai, Hong Kong September 6-8. Seafood Expo Asia is where top seafood buyers and sellers meet and do business in the expanding Asian Market. The exposition features over 240 exhibiting companies from more than 30 countries. Exhibitors supply an assortment of seafood products from around the world. The event is designed for seafood professionals, including buyers and chefs, looking for new suppliers, products, or trends. More info on: http://www.seafoodexpo.com/asia/ Aquaculture Canada and Cold Harvest 2016 Conference and Tradeshow. St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada September 18-21. Held under the theme “Aquaculture – leading sustainable food production” the event will take place at the Delta’s St. John’s from September 18-21. Aquaculture is recognized globally as a sustainable food production activity that is both an adaption to climate change and requires adaptation for climate change. Canada has a role and responsibility to play in growing more seafood, and this year’s theme reflects that necessity. The conference will highlight advances in science and technology of Canadian aquaculture, in preparing for the sustainable food system of the future. More info on: http://www.aquacultureassociation.ca/ AQUACULTURE EUROPE 2016. Edinburgh, Scotland September 20-23. Finally, Aquaculture Europe in Scotland organized by the European Aquaculture Society. Aquaculture Europe 2016 will take place at the Edinburgh International Conference Centre (EICC) from September 20-23. AE2016 is organized by the European Aquaculture Society with the cooperation and support of Marine Scotland, part of the Scottish Government, and The Marine Alliance for Science and Technology for Scotland. The event is Gold Sponsored by BIOMAR. The event theme “FOOD FOR THOUGHT” means something to think about, something to be seriously considered and something that provides mental stimulation and nourishment. Aquaculture in Europe has plateaued resulting in overall output remaining more or less constant in volume since 2000. AE2016 will present the latest science to support further development, and industry panels will discuss key opportunities. It will also identify areas to encourage further sustainable growth in aquaculture. The morning plenary sessions will address different aspects of the event theme in a novel way. More info on: www.easonline.org. UPCOMING EVENTS Nor-Fishing 2016 Trondheim, Norway August 16-19 | The 18th Japan International Seafood and Technology Expo Tokyo, Japan August 17-19 | 11th International Conference on Recirculating Aquaculture & 2016 Aquaculture Innovation Workshop Roanoke, Virginia, USA August 19-21 | SEAFOOD EXPO ASIA Wanchai, Hong Kong September 6-8 | 3rd International Conference on Fisheries and Aquaculture Negombo, Sri Lanka August 24-25 | 8th International Fisheries Observer and Monitoring Conference San Diego, California, USA August 29 – September 2 | 10th Global Food Processing Summit Sao Paulo, Brazil August 29-31 | Aquaculture Canada and Cold Harvest 2016 Conference and Tradeshow St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada September 18-21 | AQUACULTRE EUROPE 2016 Edinburgh, Scotland September 20-23 | 2016 Algae Biomass Summit Phoenix, Arizona, USA October 23-26 | 11th International Aquaculture Forum Puebla, Mexico October 26-28 | 4th International Conference on Fisheries and Aquaculture San Antonio, Texas, USA November 28-30 | LAQUA16 Lima, Peru November 28- December 1
antibiotics, probiotics and FEED additives Reed Mariculture, Inc............................................................15 900 E Hamilton Ave, Suite 100. Campbell, CA 95008 USA. Contact: Lin T: 408.377.1065 F: 408.884.2322 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org / www.reedmariculture.com Zeigler Bros, Inc..................................................Inside cover 400 Gardners, Station RD, Gardners, pa. 17324, USA. Contact: Priscila Shirley T: 717 677 6181 E-mail: email@example.com / www.zeiglerfeed.com aeration equipment, PUMPS, FILTERS and measuring instruments Aquaculture Systems Technologies, LLC............................5 108 Industrial Avenue. New Orleans, LA 70121. T: 866.530.6513 www.astfilters.com/HPPG Aqua Logic Inc..........................................................................26 9558 Camino Ruiz San Diego, CA 92126, USA. T: 858 292 4773 www.aqualogicinc.com Critical Environment.............................................................23 Unit #145 - 7391 Vantage Way, Delta, BC, V4G 1M3, Canada Contact: Rebecca Erickson - Marketing Manager T: +1.877.940.8741, +1.604.940.8741 Fax: +1.604.940.8745 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org / www.critical-environment.com DELTA DELFINI............................................................................21 Av. Miguel H. Alcívar, Edificio Torres del Norte Torre A, Piso 7, Oficina 704. Guayaquil – Ecuador. Contac: Fatima Jordan V. T: (593-4)2687-280 Fax: (593-4) 2687-290 E-mail: email@example.com / www.deltadelfini.com Fresh Flo..................................................................................27 3037 Weeden Creek Rd. Sheboygan, WI 53081 Contact: Barb Ziegelbauer T: 920-208-1500 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org IN-SITU INC..................................................................................18 Contact: Chris Stevens T: 662 2017 0385 www.in-situ.com/helpfishthrive Pentair Aquatic Eco-Systems, Inc......................back cover 2395 Apopka Blvd. Apopka, Florida, Zip Code 32703, USA. Contact: Ricardo Arias T: (407) 8863939, (407) 8864884 E-mail: email@example.com / www.pentairaes.com RK2 Systems.............................................................................53 421 A south Andreassen Drive Escondido California. Contact: Chris Krechter. T: 760 746 74 00 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org / www.rk2.com
Valterra Products LLC.......................................................1 Mission Hills, CA Contact: Tera Grengs, Marketing Manager. T: 818-898-1671 x11 E-mail: email@example.com / www.valterra.com WATER MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES.................................44 PO Box 66125 Baton Rouge LA 70896 USA T: (225) 755-0026 E-mail: info@ w-m-t.com / www.w-m-t.com events and exhibitions 3rd Science and Technology Meeting on Shrimp Farming...............................................................................33 November 17th and 18th, 2016. Cd. Ogregon, Sonora, Mexico. Contact: Christian Criollos, E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org AQUASUR 2016...........................................................................25 October 19th - 22nd Puerto Montt, Chile. E-mail: email@example.com / www.aqua-sur.cl The 11th ShangHai International fisheries & Seafood exposition.....................................................................................39 August 26th - 28th, 2016. Shanghai, China. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org / www.sifse.com/en/ XI CENTRAL AMERICAN AQUACULTURE SYMPOSIUM..................45 August 24th - 26th, 2016. Choluteca. Contact 1: Lisandro Javier Amador E-mail: email@example.com Contact 2: Leslie Maradiaga E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org XVIII CONGRESO ECUATORIANO DE ACUICULTURA & AQUAEXPO 2016...........................................................................49 October 25th - 27th Guayaquil, Ecuador. E-mail: email@example.com / www.cna-ecuador.com fEEd additives EVONIK Industries AG..............................................................17 Contact: Cristian Fischl T: + 52 (55) 5483 1030 Fax: + 52 (55) 5483 1012 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com www.evonik.com/feed.additives Information Services
Aquaculture Magazine.....................................................69 Design Publications International Inc. 203 S. St. Mary’s St. Ste. 160 San Antonio, TX 78205, USA Office: +210 504 3642 Office in Mexico: (+52) (33) 3632 2355 Subscriptions: firstname.lastname@example.org Advertisement Sales: email@example.com
Buyer´s Guide & Industry Directory 2017.....................11 Ad Sales. Chris Criollos, Sales Manager firstname.lastname@example.org | Office: +52 33 80007595 Cell: +52 (33) 14660392 Skype: christian.criollos Steve Reynolds, International Sales and Marketing email@example.com | Cell: 778 903 4743 Office: 210 209 9175 | Skype: dpsteve Gus Ruiz, Sales Support Executive firstname.lastname@example.org | Office: +52 33 80007595 Cell: +521 (33) 14175480 | Skype: gustavo.rcisneros AADAP PROGRAM.......................................................................73 Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Partnership Program www.fws.gov/fisheries/aadap/home.htm Aquafeed.com..........................................................................79 Web portal · Newsletters · Magazine · Conferences · Technical Consulting. www.aquafeed.com Urner Barry.............................................................................77 P.O. Box 389 Tom Ride. New Jersey USA. Contact: Ángel Rubio. T: 732-575-1982 E-mail: email@example.com seafood professionals.........................................................63 www.seafoodprofessionals.org RAS SYSTEMS, DESIGN, EQUIPMENT SUPPORT AQUACARE...................................................................................29 T: 1 360 734 7964 www.aquacare.com GEMINI FIBERGLASS....................................................................59 San Diego CA. T: 1-858-602-9465 www.geminifiberglass.com / www.oceans-design.com OTHER Services DIVE SAFE INTERNATIONAL............................Inside BACK cover T: (250) 287-3837 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org / vwww.divesafe.com SPECIALIZED LITERATURE IN AQUACULTURE “Aquaculture, Resource Use, and the Environment”....28 By: Claude Boyd, Aaron McNevin. February 2015, Wiley-Blackwell. Buy online: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd0470959193.html tanks AND NETWORKING FOR AQUACULTURE Frigid Units..............................................................................35 5072 Lewis Ave. Toledo, OH 43612 Contac: Dawn M. Heilman T: 419/478-4000 Fax: 419/478-4019 E-mail: email@example.com
An overtview of Andhra Pradesh L. Vannamei shrimp aquaculture