1. INTRODUCTION 2 - Department of Agriculture and …. INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Scope of the ......

1. INTRODUCTION 2

1.1 Scope of the import risk analysis 2

1.2 Description of the import risk analysis process 2

1.3 Animal quarantine policy 31.3.1 International framework 31.3.2 Quarantine legislation in Australia 41.3.3 Domestic policy environment 71.3.4 Quarantine policy on the importation of aquatic animals and products 8

2. PRAWNS IN AUSTRALIA: DISTRIBUTION, COMMERCIAL VALUE AND HEALTHSTATUS 10

2.1 Classification and distribution of Australian prawn species 10

2.2 Characteristics of the Australian prawn fisheries (wild and cultured) 112.2.1 Industry overview 112.2.2 Wild Australian prawn fisheries 112.2.3 Prawn aquaculture in Australia 132.2.4 Non-commercial prawns in Australia 14

2.3 Health status of Australian prawn species 152.3.1 Prawn health in Australia 152.3.2 Limitations of current information on prawn health in Australia 182.3.3 Future directions for aquatic animal health in Australia 18

3. RISK ASSESSMENT 21

3.1 Identification of disease agents for further consideration in the import risk analysis 21

3.2 Categorisation of disease agents: viruses 23

3.3 Categorisation of disease agents: bacteria 29

3.4 Categorisation of disease agents: fungi 34

3.5 Categorisation of disease agents: protozoa 36

3.6 Categorisation of disease agents: metazoan parasites and algae 41References 45

Annexe Review of pathogens of prawns 51

2

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope of the import risk analysis

Animals of many crustacean species are referred to as prawns or shrimp, however the bulk ofinternational trade is based on a few prawn genera. The import risk analysis (IRA) considers theimportation of non-viable prawns (shrimp) of the superfamily Penaeoidea and infraorder Carideawithin the phylum Crustacea (Bowman & Abele, 1982). This covers the majority of speciescommercially traded internationally and includes all products containing material derived fromprawns.

Products derived from these prawn species and imported into Australia range from uncooked, frozen(green) whole prawns to highly processed products which include a small proportion of prawn-derived material. Prawn products may be imported for human consumption or other purposes; someof this product may ultimately be used as fishing bait or crustacean feed.

The IRA is generic, ie. disease/pest risks to Australian animals and the environment potentiallyassociated with the importation of all prawn products from any source are considered. Food safetyissues are addressed through a separate process administered by the Australia and New ZealandFood Authority (ANZFA).

1.2 Description of the import risk analysis process

In August 1997 the Australian Government released its response to the major review of Australianquarantine, Australian Quarantine: a shared responsibility. The review committee, chaired byProfessor Malcolm Nairn, was established in December 1995 by the then Government to undertakean independent review of Australia’s plant and animal quarantine policies and programs, andreported against its terms of reference in October 1996 (Nairn et al., 1996).

One of the areas of quarantine policy receiving wide attention in recent times has been the processfor carrying out import risk analyses. The Nairn Committee made a number of recommendations toaddress this issue and these recommendations were endorsed by the Australian Government. ThisIRA follows the non-routine approach, which is described in the AQIS publication “ The AQISImport Risk Analysis Process: A Handbook”. The approach set out in the Handbook is consistentwith obligations under the SPS Agreement and relevant recommendations of the OIE.

The IRA process provides the scientific and technical underpinning of quarantine policy andprocedures. Quarantine Proclamation 1998 states that the Director of Quarantine takes into accountall relevant factors in considering the quarantine risk when making a decision on an import accessrequest. The report of the IRA documents relevant information and makes recommendations for theDirector of Quarantine to consider before making the final decision on an import access request.

Copies of the Handbook may be obtained from AQIS or viewed on AQIS’s homepage on theInternet (http://www.dpie.gov.au/aqis/homepage/aqispub.html).

3

1.3 Animal quarantine policy

1.3.1 International framework

As a Member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Australia has certain rights and obligationsunder the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) and the Agreement on theApplication of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS Agreement). Further information onthe rights and obligations arising from the SPS Agreement may be found in the publication ‘TheAQIS Import Risk Analysis Process: A Handbook’.

Under the SPS Agreement, the Office International des Epizooties (OIE) is the internationalorganisation that sets animal health standards, guidelines and recommendations relevant tointernational trade in animals (including fish) and their products. Australia is a member of the OIE andactively contributes to the process of standards development. The OIE publication relevant to thisIRA is the ‘International Aquatic Animal Health Code 1997’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’).The principal aim of the Code and its companion volume, the Diagnostic Manual for Aquatic AnimalDiseases, is to facilitate international trade in aquatic animals and their products by providing detaileddefinitions of minimum health guarantees to be required of trading partners “...in order to avoid therisk of spreading aquatic animal diseases....” (OIE Code 1997) (through international trade).

Aquatic animal diseases are categorised for listing in the Code as follows:

Diseases notifiable to the OIE:‘transmissible diseases that are considered to be of socio-economic and/or public health importancewithin countries and that are significant in the international trade of aquatic animals and aquatic animalproducts’

Other significant diseases:‘diseases that are of current or potential international significance in aquaculture but have not beenincluded in the list of diseases notifiable to the OIE, because they are less important than thenotifiable diseases; or because their geographical distribution is limited, or is too wide for notificationto be meaningful, or is not yet sufficiently defined; or because the aetiology of the diseases is not wellenough understood; or approved diagnostic methods are not available’.

The Code states that

‘International trade in aquatic animals and aquatic animal products depends on a combination offactors that should be taken into account to ensure unimpeded trade, without incurring unacceptablerisks to human and aquatic animal health.An exporting country should be prepared to supply the following information to importing countrieson request:1. information on the aquatic animal health status and national aquatic animal health systems to

determine whether that country is free or has free zones of disease notifiable to the OIE, includingthe regulations in force to maintain its free status;

2. regular and prompt information on the occurrence of transmissible diseases;3. details of the country’s ability to apply measures to control and prevent diseases notifiable to the

OIE and, where appropriate, other diseases;4. information on the structure of the Competent Authority and the authority that it exercises;

4

5. technical information, particularly on biological tests and vaccines used and applied in all or partof the national territory.’

The OIE listed diseases relevant to prawns are:

Diseases notifiable to the OIE:No diseases of prawns are listed

Other significant diseasesbaculoviral midgut gland necrosisnuclear polyhedrosis baculoviroses (Baculovirus penaei and Penaeus monodon-type baculovirus)infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosisyellowhead diseasewhite spot diseaseinfectious pancreatic necrosis1

The Code provides no recommmendations for international trade of non-viable crustaceans and theirproducts.

Regional organisations

As a member of Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific Region (NACA), Australia isinvolved in developing regional guidelines for aquatic animal quarantine and health certification. Thisis a joint program of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), OIE and NACA(FAO/OIE/NACA) Regional Programme for the Development of Technical Guidelines onQuarantine and Health Certification, and Establishment of Information Systems for theResponsible Movement of Live Aquatic Animals in Asia as one initiative under this program.Regional reporting of aquatic animal diseases commenced in 1998.

Australia will report occurences of aquatic animal diseases on the NACA list to the Tokyo Office ofOIE. This office will forward the information to NACA and regional OIE/NACA reports will beprepared on a quarterly basis as Quarterly Aquatic Animal Disease Reports.

The proposed NACA list includes the following prawn diseases/disease agents:

Infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virusBaculoviral midgut gland necrosisGill associated virusSpawner mortality syndromeWhite spot diseaseYellowhead virus disease

1.3.2 Quarantine legislation in Australia

The Quarantine Act 1908 and subordinate legislation, including Quarantine Proclamation 1998, is thebasis of human, animal and plant quarantine in Australia. The scope of quarantine is defined in section4 of the Act as follows:

1 Infectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN) is regarded as a significant disease of salmonids but IPNV does not causesignificant disease in prawns.

5

‘In this Act, Quarantine has relation to measures for the inspection, exclusion, detention,observation, segregation, isolation, protection, treatment, sanitary regulation, anddisinfection of vessels, installations, persons, goods, things, animals, or plants, and having astheir object the prevention of the introduction, establishment or spread of diseases or pestsaffecting human beings, animals, or plants.’

Subsection 13(1) of the Act provides, inter alia, that the Governor-General in Executive Councilmay, by proclamation, prohibit the importation into Australia of any articles likely to introduce anyinfectious or contagious disease, or disease or pest affecting persons, animals or plants. This powerof prohibition may be applied generally or subject to any specified conditions or restrictions, which ifapplied, must relate to pest or disease concerns.

The Director of Animal and Plant Quarantine (the Secretary of the Department of Primary Industriesand Energy) may permit unrestricted entry of products or entry subject to compliance withconditions, which are normally specified in a quarantine protocol. An IRA process results in theestablishment of quarantine policy which may prohibit or allow imports, and if allowed the specificconditions under which such importation may or may not occur; it may also establish conditionsunder which such importation would be permitted. In practice, specific protocols have beenestablished for a minority of imported aquatic animal products; most enter under standard conditionsbased on precedent.

Quarantine Proclamation 1998 sets out the conditions which govern the importation of animals(including fish), plants and their products into Australia. The parts of the Proclamation relevant to thisIRA include:

37 Importation of live animals

(1) In this section, a reference to a live animal does not include a fish, of a kind mentionedin Division 2 of Part II of Schedule 6 to the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports andImports) Act 1982, that has not been genetically modified.

(2) The importation into Australia of a live animal by a person is prohibited unless:(a) a Director of Quarantine has granted the person a permit to import it into Australia;

andNote For what a Director of Quarantine must consider when deciding whether to grant such apermit, see Part 8.

(b) when the vessel on which it is imported into Australia arrives at its first port of entry inAustralia: (i) the permit or a copy is produced to an officer; or(ii) the details necessary to identify the permit are given to an officer electronically.

44 Importation of fish meal and crustacean meal

The importation into Australia of fish meal or crustacean meal by a person is prohibited unless:(a) a Director of Quarantine has granted the person a permit to import the fish meal or

crustacean meal into Australia; andNote For what a Director of Quarantine must consider when deciding whether to grant such a permit,

see Part 8(b) when the fish meal or crustacean meal is landed at a place in Australia:

(i) the permit or a copy is produced to an officer at the place; or(ii) the details necessary to identify the permit are given to an officer electronically.

6

45 Importation of other fish and fish products

(1) The importation into Australia of an animal, or animal product, mentioned in column 2 of an itemin table 14 is prohibited unless the animal or product complies with the condition in column 3 ofthe item.

(2) For the table, an animal or part is non-viable if a living animal of the same species cannot beproduced from it.

The relevant sections of Table 14 are reproduced below:

Table 14 (in part) Other fish and fish productsColumn 1Item

Column 2Product

Item 3Condition

1 Crustaceans (other thanprawns or freshwatercrayfish, or crustaceanmeal)

If non-viable and clean

8 Prawns (other than driedprawns or prawn meal)

If cooked or fit for human consumption

9 Prawns, dried (otherthan prawn meal)

If free from insects, soil and otherdebris and packed in clean new bags

Part 8 Administration

70 Things a Director of Quarantine must take into account when deciding whether togrant a permit for importation into Australia

(1) In deciding whether to grant a permit to import a thing into Australia, a Director of Quarantine:(a) must consider the quarantine risk if the permit were granted; and(b) must consider whether, if the permit were granted, the imposition of conditions on it

would be necessary, to limit the quarantine risk to a level that would be acceptably low;and(c) may take into account anything else that he or she knows is relevant

(2) In this section quarantine risk means:(a) the likelihood that, if the permit is granted, the importation will lead to the

introduction, establishment or spread of a disease or a pest in Australia; and(b) the likelihood that any such introduction, establishment or spread of a disease or pest

will result in harm being caused to human beings, animals, plants, other aspects of the environment or economic activities as a result of the introduction, establishment or

spread of the disease or pest; and(c) the likely extent of any such harm.

This IRA will provide the basis for future consideration of the matters outlined in sections 44, 45 and70 of QP 1998 above in relation to the importation of prawn and shrimp from all countries. Inkeeping with the scope of the Quarantine Act, only those factors relevant to the evaluation ofquarantine risk (ie the risk associated with the entry, establishment and spread of unwanted pests anddiseases) are considered in the IRA. Questions related to the potential economic consequences of

7

importation, (other than the economic impact of a disease outbreak) are not part of AQIS’s processof evaluation. This approach allows Australia to meet its obligations as a WTO Member, in particularthe disciplines imposed by the SPS Agreement.

The actions of the Director of Quarantine or his delegate in reaching a decision under the QuarantineAct must take into account relevant provisions of other Commonwealth legislation, including theEndangered Species Protection Act 1992 and the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports andImports) Act 1982.

The Environment Protection (Impact of Proposals) Act 1974 and the Administrative Proceduresunder that Act require the consideration of whether Commonwealth action (such as the granting of animport permit) is an action which will, or is likely to, affect the environment to a significant extent orwhich will have the effect of permitting or facilitating an action by another person which will or islikely to result in such an effect. AQIS considers that decisions to permit the entry of animalproducts, made under the Quarantine Act and consistent with Australia’s conservative approach torisk, would generally be unlikely to constitute actions leading to significant adverse effects on theenvironment.

1.3.3 Domestic policy environment

In 1992 AQIS commissioned the then Bureau of Rural Resources, later Bureau of ResourceSciences (BRS), to conduct a major review of aquatic animal health and quarantine. The report,which was released in 1995, was a comprehensive examination of Australia’s quarantine policies andpractices in relation to aquatic animals and their products (Nunn, 1995). The BRS report identifiedconcerns in relation to quarantine policy on importation on several aquatic species, including prawns.

In 1995, the National Task Force on Imported Fish and Fish Products (NTF) was established toexamine the BRS report and related issues. The NTF included representatives of relevantCommonwealth agencies, State/Territory agencies, commercial and recreational fisheries, importers,aquaculturists, research organisations and environment groups. Inter alia the NTF recommendedchanges to Australia’s policies on aquatic animal health and quarantine. The NTF considered thatAQIS should review aquatic animal quarantine and indicated the specific policies and practices thatshould be reviewed with high priority; the importation of prawns and prawn products wasrecommended for review with high priority (Higgins 1996).

In 1996, quarantine was the subject of a detailed independent review by a committee chaired byProfessor Nairn (Nairn et al.,1996). Noting that IRA underpins Australia’s quarantine policies andprocedures, the Nairn Committee identified six principles which should apply. The committeerecommended that IRA should be:. conducted in a consultative framework;. a scientific process and therefore politically independent;. a transparent and open process;. consistent with both Government policy and Australia’s international obligations (under the SPS

Agreement);. harmonised, through taking account of international standards and guidelines. subject to appeal on the process.

In its response the Government accepted all recommendations of the Nairn Report relevant to theIRA process (Anon, 1997); the process is described in the AQIS Risk Analysis Handbook (Anon,

8

1998). The Government also supported most of the recommendations in the NTF Report andagreed to provide additional resources to AQIS so that it could conduct several major reviews ofaquatic animal quarantine. This IRA is one of a series of policy reviews that will be undertaken in theperiod 1997-2001.

AQIS advised stakeholders of the commencement of its aquatic animal quarantine policy review inSeptember 1996, and invited stakeholder comment. In November 1996 AQIS imposed interimrestrictions on the entry of uncooked prawns not fit for human consumption to address concerns ofrisks potentially associated with the use of imported prawns as fishing bait.

In September 1997 AQIS advised stakeholders that it proposed to use the ‘non-routine’ approachto the IRA, involving the formation of a risk analysis panel (RAP). The RAP met on 24 November1997, 24-25 March 1998 and 27/28 August 1998. The reports of consultancies commissioned bythe RAP to investigate issues relevant to the IRA will be made available to the public. Theconsultancies are titled as follows: Scientific Review of Prawn Diseases, the Routes of Exposureof Aquatic Animals to Aquatic Animal Products Intended for Human Consumption,Crustacean Feeds, Assessment of the Environmental Impact of the Establishment of ExoticPrawn Pathogens and The Economic Impact of the Establishment of Exotic PrawnPathogens.

1.3.4 Quarantine policy on the importation of aquatic animals and products

Inter alia, AQIS protects Australia’s animal and human health environment by providing policiesand inspection services that allow the safe importation of animals, their genetic material and otherproducts. In developing quarantine policy, the quarantine risks potentially associated with imports areanalysed in a structured process that is transparent and scientifically-based. Options for themanagement of quarantine risks are based on technically sound, objective advice provided by staffwith a high level of professional integrity. Australia’s objective is to adopt quarantine measures thatare based on international standards and are least trade restrictive, yet provide a level of protectionacceptable to the Australian community.

All goods entering Australia are subject to quarantine. They may be inspected on arrival and may besampled and tested at the importer’s expense regardless of whether or not prior permission to importis required and granted.

Under Quarantine Proclamation 1998, the importation of crustacean meal which may comprisematerial derived from prawn or shrimp, is prohibited unless the Director of Quarantine is satisfiedthat importation is unlikely to introduce diseases into Australia and has granted an import permit. Theimportation of other prawn products (other than dried prawns or prawn meal) is not permitted unlessprawns are cooked or fit for human consumption. Dried prawns are permitted entry provided theyare free from insects, soil and other debris and packed in clean new bags.

The importation of live crustaceans including prawns, is not permitted without an import permit. Apermit is only granted if the Director of Quarantine is satisfied that importation is unlikely to introducediseases into Australia, based on a consideration of the quarantine risk. The quarantine risk posed bythe importation of live prawns has not been the subject of an IRA, so entry is currently prohibited.Commencement of such IRA for live prawns is included in AQIS’s aquatic animal policy workprogram.

9

ReferencesAQIS (1998) The AQIS import risk analysis handbook, Australian Quarantine Inspection Service,

Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

Bowman, T.E. and Abele, L.G. (1982) Classification of the recent crustacea. in Abele, L.G. (ed.),The Biology of Crustacea Vol.1 Systematics, the fossil record, and biogeography. Academicpress New York.

DPIE (1997) Australian Quarantine: a shared responsibility; the Government response, Departmentof Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

Nairn, M. E., Allen, P. G., Inglis, A. R. and Tanner, C. (1996) Australian Quarantine: a sharedresponsibility. Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

Nunn, M. J. (1995) Aquatic Animal Quarantine in Australia: Report of the Scientific Working Partyon Aquatic Animal Quarantine. Bureau of Resource Sciences, Canberra.

OIE (1997) International Aquatic Animal Health Code, Fish, molluscs and crustaceans.Recommendation for international trade in aquatic animals and aquatic animal products.

Higgins, R.A. (Chair) (1996) Report of the National Task Force on Imported Fish and FishProducts: a report into the implications arising from aquatic animal imports. Department ofPrimary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

10

2. PRAWNS IN AUSTRALIA: DISTRIBUTION, COMMERCIAL VALUE AND HEALTH STATUS

2.1 Classification and distribution of Australian prawn species

Marine prawns of commercial significance in Australia belong to the family Penaeidae in theInfraorder Penaeidea (Jones & Morgan, 1994). The freshwater prawns belong to the familyPalaemonidae in the Infraorder Caridea. The taxonomic order of these prawns is presented below.

Crustacea

Order Decapoda Suborder Natantia

Infraorder PenaeidaSuperfamily Penaeoidea

Family Penaeidae Solenoceridae Aristaeidae

Infraorder CarideaSuperfamily Palaemonoidea

Family Palaemonidae

Superfamily PanaloideaFamily Pandalidea

Genera of the Penaeidae family represented in Australia are: Penaeus, Parapenaeus,Metapenaeopsis, Metapenaeus, Atypopenaeus, Parapenaeopsis, Trachypenaeus. Over 50species are found in Australian waters (Grey et al., 1983). At least 12 prawn species arecommercially fished in Australia (Kailola et al., 1993) These species are:

Black or giant tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon)Eastern king prawn (Penaeus plebejus)Red spot king prawn (Penaeus longistylus)Western king prawn (Penaeus latisulcatus)White banana prawn (Penaeus merguiensis)Red-legged banana prawn (Penaeus indicus)Brown tiger prawn (Penaeus esculentus)Grooved tiger prawn (Penaeus semisulcatus)School prawn (Metapenaeus macleayi)Blue endeavour prawn (Metapenaeus endeavouri)Red endeavour prawn (Metapenaeus ensis)Greasyback prawn (Metapenaeus bennettae)

Kailola et al., 1993 describe these species’ diagnostic features, distribution, life history, stockstructure, commercial and recreational fishery and resource status.

11

Deepwater penaeid prawns (Infraorder: Penaeidea) are trawled in waters off the Australian coastline, especially on the North West Shelf and off New South Wales at depths exceeding 200 metres.These species include the red prawn (Aristaeomorpha foliacea, Family: Aristaeidae) the giantscarlet prawn (Plesiopenaeus edwardsianus, Family: Aristaeidae), the pink striped prawn (Aristeusvirilis, Family: Aristaeidae) and the royal red prawn (Haliporoides sibogae, Family: Solenoceridea)(Jones and Morgan, 1994).

Caridean shrimp (Infraorder: Caridea) are usually of small size and, unlike penaeids (which areexclusively found in marine waters), occur in marine and freshwater environments. In Australia,carids are often taken from deep waters of the north west of Western Australia producing goodyields of several species. The major marine carids caught are the red caridean shrimp(Heterocarpus woodmasoni, Family: Pandalidae) and the white caridean shrimp (Heterocarpussibogae, Family: Pandalidae) (Jones and Morgan, 1994).

Freshwater prawns (Macrobrachium spp., Family: Palaemonidae) are widespread in northern andcentral Australia. The largest species Macrobrachium rosenbergii, commonly known as thecherabin, inhabits streams across northern Australia. This species is an important aquaculturespecies in South-East Asia (Jones and Morgan, 1994) but attempts to culture it in Australia have metwith limited success.

2.2 Characteristics of the Australian prawn fisheries (wild and cultured)

2.2.1 Industry overview

The Australian fishing zone covers approximately 9 million square kilometres. Commercial fishingstocks comprise approximately 300 finfish, crustacean and molluscan species. In 1996-1997prawns accounted for 20% ($344 million) of the total value of Australian fisheries products and 14%($184 million) of the value of Australian fisheries exports. Eleven Commonwealth and State fisheriesare involved in prawn fishing (ABARE, 1997).

In addition to wild marine fisheries production, aquaculture production has become a major nationalresource in recent years. Prawns are the dominant crustacean species farmed in Australia. Thevalue of prawn aquaculture production has increased steadily since 1990 and was estimated at $35million in 1996-97.

The volume and value of prawns caught by recreational fishers in Australia is not well documented,however, four prawn species are reported to be taken mostly from estuaries (Kailola et al., 1993).

Other fishing industry-related activities include processing, preserving, storing, transporting,marketing, and selling fish or fish products. The commercial sector of the Australian fishing industry,including prawn fishing, directly employs about 20,000 people in the catching sector, a further 3,500in processing and thousands in marketing and selling (FRDC, 1996).

2.2.2 Wild Australian prawn fisheries

Commonwealth Fisheries

In 1996-97 the total prawn catch of Australian Commonwealth fisheries of 10,090 tonnes wasvalued at $119 million (ABARE, 1997). This accounts for 36% of the total prawn production in

12

Australia. The two major Commonwealth prawn fisheries are the Northern Prawn Fishery and theTorres Strait Fishery. The South East Trawl Fishery has a significant prawn catch. These 3 fisheriesare discussed below.

Northern Prawn Fishery

This is the most valuable fishery managed by the Commonwealth with an annual catch valued at$100-150 million. The 1996-97 catch reached 8,279 tonnes and was valued at $102 million(ABARE, 1997). Established in 1960, the fishery extends from Cape Londonderry in WesternAustralia to Cape York in Queensland encompassing the Gulf of Carpentaria, the northern coast ofArnhem Land and Joseph Bonaparte Gulf.The main catch of this multispecies fishery are prawns; white banana prawns (Penaeus merguiensis)and tiger prawns (Penaeus semisulcatus and Penaeus esculentus) accounting for 80% of thecatch. Other prawn species caught include red-legged banana prawns (Penaeus indicus),endeavour prawns (Metapenaeus endeavouri and Metapenaeus ensis) and king prawns (Penaeuslatisulcatus and Penaeus longistylus). These species have a life span of 1-2 years and can reachcommercial size by 6 months of age. The preferred market size for tiger prawns is reached by 9-12months of age (BRS, 1997).

Torres Strait Prawn Fishery

This is a high value fishery covering four fishing regions between the tip of Cape York Peninsula andthe south coast of Papua New Guinea and bordered by the Coral Sea to the east and the ArafuraSea to the west (ABARE, 1993). In 1996-97 the prawn catch of 1,624 tonnes was valued at $16million (ABARE, 1997).

The main prawn fishing region lies to the east of the Warrior Reefs with a catch comprised of browntiger prawn (Peneaus esculentus) and blue endeavour prawns (Metapenaeus endeavouri). Bothprawn species complete their life cycle in one year and may live for two years. Brown tiger prawn inthe Torres Strait spawn year round, with variable peaks of activity. About 5% of the catch in thisfishery is red spot king prawn (Penaeus longistylus).

South East Trawl Fishery

This is a mixed species fishery with trawl and non-trawl sectors. The trawl sector stretches fromSydney southwards around Tasmania to Kangaroo Island in South Australia. Royal red prawn(Haliporoides sibogae) is the major prawn species in the trawl landings. The species ranges alongthe entire NSW coastline in depths of 350-550m (BRS, 1997). In 1996-97, the royal red prawncatch of 188 tonnes was valued at $568,000 (ABARE, 1997).

State fisheries

Nine State fisheries are involved in prawn fishing (ABARE, 1997):New South Wales 1Queensland 2Western Australia 3South Australia 3

Queensland

In 1996-97 the prawn catch of 8,270 tonnes was valued at $96 million (ABARE, 1997). Prawnfisheries in Queensland comprise distinct sectors based on prawn species and location (DPI,

13

Qld,1996).

There is a major coastal fishery for tiger prawn (Penaeus semisulcatus and Penaeus esculentus)and endeavour prawn (Metapenaeus endevouri and Metapenaeus ensis).

Red spot prawn (Penaeus longistylus) and blue-legged king prawns (Penaeus latisulcatus) arecaught in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon. Banana prawn (Penaeus merguiensis) are caught incoastal waters in the vicinity of major estuaries. Eastern king prawn (Penaeus plebejus) migratefrom estuarine nursery areas to deep waters and may be caught inshore and offshore. Black (alsoknown as giant) tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon) are caught for use as aquaculture broodstock.Coral prawn (Metapenaeopsis spp.) are part of the bycatch in most fisheries.Bay prawns are a mixture of small prawns, including school prawn (Metapenaeus macleayi), greasyback prawn (Metapenaeus benettae), and less common species such as hardback prawn(Trachypenaeus spp.), as well as juvenile eastern king and tiger prawns. These species are caughtin the inshore waters of southern Queensland particularly Moreton Bay (DPI-Qld, 1996).

New South Wales

In 1996-97 the prawn catch from New South Wales of 1,849 tonnes was valued at $18 million.Eastern king prawn (Penaeus plebejus) and school prawn (Metapenaeus macleayi) are the mainspecies caught (ABARE, 1997).

Western Australia

In 1996-97 prawn catch from Western Australia of 3,995 tonnes was valued at $50 million(ABARE, 1997). Three State fisheries are involved in prawn fishing: Shark Bay prawn, Exmouthprawn and Nickol Bay prawn. The main prawn species caught are western king prawn (Penaeuslatisulcatus), brown tiger prawn (Penaeus esculentus), endeavour prawn (Metapenaeusendeavouri) and banana prawn (Penaeus merguiensis) (Kailola et al., 1993).

South Australia

In 1996-97 prawn catch from South Australia of 2,024 tonnes was valued at $25 million (ABARE,1997). The three State fisheries involved in prawn fishing are West Coast Prawn Fishery, SpencerGulf Prawn Fishery and Gulf St Vincent Prawn Fishery with western king prawn (Penaeuslatisulcatus) the main species taken.

Victoria

In 1996-97 prawn catch from Victoria was 2 tonnes compared to 32 tonnes in 1994-95, and 12tonnes in 1995-96 (ABARE, 1997). The two main species taken are eastern king prawn (Penaeusplebejus) and school prawn (Metapenaeus macleayi) (Kailola et al., 1993).

2.2.3 Prawn aquaculture in Australia

Prawn farming has expanded rapidly in Australia since the early 1980s. The total production offarmed prawns in 1996-97 of 1,626 tonnes was valued at $35 million. Queensland produces themajority of farmed prawns, contributing over 83% of Australian farmed prawns in 1996-1997(ABARE, 1997).

Black (giant) tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon) is the major cultured prawn species. More recently,

14

kuruma prawn (Penaeus japonicus) is being produced for the purpose of live export to Japan(Brown et al., 1997).

As prawn farming intensifies, the management of disease will be of major importance to the long-term success of this industry. The potential impact of diseases is recognised as one of the problemsin prawn farming in Queensland (Donovan, 1998).

Black tiger prawn aquaculture

This is the most suitable prawn species for farming in Australia due to:• availability of aquaculture technology, which was established in South East Asia• fast growth rate relative to other prawn species• ability to withstand significant changes in water salinity.Black tiger prawn farms have been operating in Australia for the past 10 years. In 1995-96Queensland (24 farms), New South Wales (4 farms), and the Northern Territory (2 farms) produced1,552 tonnes of black tiger prawns. Most of the product is sold on the domestic market.

In Queensland, black tiger prawn farms are situated along the coast between Brisbane andCooktown. Climatic conditions in Queensland allow production of one to two crops a year. Mostof the farms in New South Wales are on the Clarence River in the northern part of the state. Atpresent all spawning stock to supply the farms is wild-caught by trawlers operating in waters offCairns. The Australian Institute of Marine Sciences is conducting research to develop techniques toproduce broodstock in captivity (Brown et al., 1997).

Kuruma prawn aquaculture

The kuruma prawn is a native species with a natural distribution as far south as Torres Strait (Grey etal., 1983). Wild populations in waters off Mackay, Queensland are thought to have been introducedvia ship’s ballast water (Brown et al., 1997). An increasing number of farms in Queensland andNew South Wales produce this commercially prized species. Seven kuruma prawn farms operate inQueensland and 4 in New South Wales. Most Australian kuruma prawns are exported live to Japanand Korea (Brown et al., 1997).

The 1995-96 kuruma prawn production of 229 tonnes was almost double that of 1994-95 (Brownet al., 1997). Kuruma prawn hatcheries currently depend on wild-caught broodstock; research intoclosed cycle farming is underway (Harrison, 1997).

Other prawn species in aquaculture

Other farmed prawn species include the brown tiger prawn (Penaeus esculentus) and bananaprawn (Penaeus merguiensis).

2.2.4 Non-commercial prawns in Australia

In addition to commercial prawn species discussed above, many prawn species of minor or nocommercial value occur throughout Australia’s marine and freshwater aquatic environment includingfreshwater prawns, common estuary shrimps, commensal shrimps and rock pool shrimps. The non-commercial species are likely to be important in the food chain of various aquatic animals and thus

15

contribute to the sustainability of commercial fisheries as well as to maintaining the balance of aquaticecosystems.

2.3 Health status of Australian prawn species

2.3.1 Prawn health in Australia

Several sophisticated facilities exist which are used in the investigation, diagnosis and research ofprawn disease and health. These may be used to monitor disease episodes in farmed prawns. Otherthan this, there is little structured surveillance of the presence of prawn diseases in Australia.

Significant disease events affecting prawns in Australia are investigated. Because of the economicimportance of prawns and the high level of human utilisation of the coastal regions of Australia,significant disease episodes affecting wild prawns are likely to be recognised. To date, suchepisodes have only been observed in experimental and aquaculture situations where the stockingdensity, environmental conditions and close monitoring of the animals may contribute to diseaseoccurrence and its early recognition.

Information on prawn health in Australia has been obtained from:

• published scientific literature;

• reports provided by the Commonwealth and State/Territory government agencies; includingofficial notifications to regional and international organisations;

• published and unpublished material held by Commonwealth and State/Territory governmentagencies, universities, industry and research organisations.

Prawn diseases/disease agents which have not been reported in Australia

Aerococcus viridans var. homari occurs in North America and EuropeInfectious hypodermal and haematopoietic necrosis (IHHN)2 occurs in Asia, the Pacific region andthe AmericasInfectious pancreatic necrosis (IPN) occurs worldwideBaculoviral midgut gland necrosis virus (BMNV), occurs in Japan and KoreaBaculovirus penaei (BP), occurs in the AmericasHaematodinium-like organism occurs in North AmericaMicrosporidiosis3 occurs in the Americas and AsiaNecrotising hepatopancreatitis (NHP), occurs in the AmericasParauronema spp. occur in the U.S.A.REO-III, occurs in Japan, France, Hawaii, Malaysia, Missisippi, U.S.A. and EcuadorREO-IV, occurs in the Yellow Sea region of AsiaRhabdovirus of penaeid shrimp (RPS), occurs in the Americas4

Rickettsia spp.5 occur in North America and AsiaTaura syndrome (TS) occurs in the AmericasVibrio spp.6 occur worldwide 2 The IHHNV-like virus detected in prawns in Australia is distinct from IHHNV (Owens 1997).3 Some species are exotic to Australia.4 RPS is closely related to spring viraemia of carp (SVC) Loh et al., 19975 Some species are exotic to Australia6 Some species are exotic to Australia.

16

White spot syndrome (WSS), occurs in Asia and U.S.A.Yellow head disease (YHD), occurs in Asia and U.S.A.

Prawn diseases/disease agents which have been reported in Australia

Spawner-isolated mortality virus (SMV)Monodon baculovirus (MBV)Plebejus baculovirus (PBV)Bennettae baculovirus (BBV)Gut and nerve syndrome (GNS)Hepatopancreatic parvovirus (HPV)Penaeid haemocytic rod-shaped virus (PHRV)Infectious hypodermal and haematopoeitic necrosis -like virus (IHHNV-like)Lymphoidal parvo-like virus (LPV)Lymphoid organ virus (LOV)Gill-associated virus (GAV)Lymphoid organ vacuolization virus (LOVV)Parvo-like virus of Penaeus japonicus (P-PJ)Baculovirus midgut gland necrosis virus-like viral infection

Prawn diseases/disease agents which are notifiable in Australia

The mandatory notification of authorities on the occurrence of specified (‘listed’) diseases providesinformation which assists in the prevention and management of disease outbreaks. Such informationcan be used in combination with official controls on the movement of live animals and, whereappropriate, their products to establish disease-free areas within infected countries or zones.

Prawn diseases/disease agents which are notifiable in Australia are:

Northern Territory, Australian Capital Territory,Victoria and Tasmania

Nil

South AustraliaBaculoviral midgut gland necrosis virus (BMNV)Baculovirus penaeiInfectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHHNV)MicrosporidiosisPenaeus monodon-type baculovirusTaura syndrome virusWhite spot disease virusYellowhead disease virus

Western AustraliaBaculovirosesBaculoviral midgut gland necrosis virusInfectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virusYellowhead monodon virus infection

Queensland (proposed list, not yet finalised)Baculoviral midgut gland necrosis virusInfectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virusMicrosporidiosisWhite spot syndrome virus

17

Yellowhead disease virusTaura syndrome virusBaculovirus penaei

New South WalesBaculoviral midgut gland necrosisInfectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virusYellowhead diseaseThe following are anticipated to be added to list:White spot disease virusTaura syndrome

Internal restrictions on movement of prawns and prawn products

During the preparation of this document, Chief Veterinary Officers of all States and the NorthernTerritory were asked to provide information on prawn disease control zones and details of intra- orinter-State movement controls on prawns and prawn products within their jurisdiction. The followingis a summary of their responses in relation to these issues:

New South Wales: All post-larvae entering NSW must test negative for MBV prior to stockinginto ponds. Similarly, post-larvae produced at NSW hatcheries which were derived from spawnersimported from interstate must test negative for MBV prior to stocking into ponds.

Queensland: Disease control zones have not been established within Queensland but live prawnsfor use in aquaculture operations must be certified free of Declared Diseases when imported frominterstate. YHV, IHHNV, WSSV, BMNV and TSV are on List A of the draft Declared DiseasesList and BP is on List B of the draft Declared Diseases List. It is prohibited to sell prawns as food ifthe prawns contain a viable Declared Disease agent.

The Northern Territory: The Fisheries Act 1988, administered by the Department of PrimaryIndustries & Fisheries prohibits the importation of live prawn into the Northern Territory unless theperson does so under and in accordance with a permit.

There are no controls presently in place under the Fisheries Act 1988 to control the importation ofnon-live prawns and prawn products into the NorthernTerritory. Action is presently under way toimplement a National Docketing System which, when in place, will require all such product to beaccompanied by approved documentation.

Western Australia: There are currently no disease control zones for prawns within the State. Theimportation of post-larvae into the State is restricted.

Victoria: No measures were reported.

Tasmania: No measures were reported.

South Australia: No measures were reported.

18

2.3.2 Limitations of current information on prawn health in Australia

In common with other countries, information on Australia’s prawn health status is limited relative toour knowledge of the health of livestock and established farmed aquatic species such as salmonids.Definitive diagnosis of prawn diseases, especially viral diseases, is difficult. In many cases detectionand identification methods are not available or have not been developed to a stage which wouldpermit large-scale, low cost application. Specialised equipment and highly-trained personnel arerequired to perform many diagnostic tests currently applicable to prawns. Routine healthsurveillance, particularly of wild populations would be costly and is not widely practiced in Australia.Accurate diagnosis of disease in farmed prawns sites is generally based on an evaluation of clinicaland pathological evidence. In most cases the presence of disease agents is only recognised after anoutbreak of clinical disease in farmed prawns.

Several pathogens have been identified in Australian prawns, however, in many cases the relationshipbetween strains of viruses reported in Australia and prawn viruses reported in other countries is yetto be fully elucidated. The clinical expression of certain diseases reported in Australian prawnsappears to be less severe than that reported overseas. There is evidence that these differences arebased upon the occurrence in Australia of strains of pathogens that are unique to this continent/regionand distinct from strains reported elsewhere.

The health status of Australian prawns is difficult to describe because many disease agents are poorlycharacterised, few comparisons have been made between Australian and foreign strains of diseaseagents, diagnostic tests have not been fully validated and the case definitions for many syndromes isincomplete. Consequently there is a lack of clarity in the description of the health status of Australianprawns. In many cases descriptive terms are used including; ‘disease not reported’, ‘agent notdescribed’, ‘disease suspected but agent not identified’, ‘agent detected but pathogenicity notdetermined’.

2.3.3 Future directions for aquatic animal health in AustraliaResearch and development

In response to the needs of the prawn farming industry, several research projects on prawn healthissues are currently underway (OCVO, 1997). These investigations include:

• Development of continuous prawn cell lines for isolation and growth of prawn viruses.

• Characterisation and development of a genomic probe for yellow head-like viruses found incultured Australian prawns (including a sub-project on the defensive response of prawns to viralinfections).

• Methods for rapid identification of prawn viruses.

• Research on exotic viral pathogens of prawns (South East Asia), in collaboration with theMahidol University, Bangkok.

• Methods for the control of disease in prawn hatcheries.

• Health monitoring programs for farmed Penaeus monodon.

There is an increasing awareness of aquatic animal health issues in Australia. Several comprehensivereviews have critically assessed and recommended improved approaches to aquatic animal health

19

and quarantine infrastructure (Jones, 1995; Nunn, 1995; Nairn, 1996; Higgins, 1996 and SCARM,1997).

The Australian Government has made a strong commitment to improving the management of theaquatic animal resource to ensure the effective development and profitability of the aquaculturesector; the prevention and management of diseases are of paramount importance in this context.

Aquatic animal health infrastructure (AQUAPLAN)

A national aquatic animal health strategy is under development. Under the strategy, AQUAPLAN,the issues which must be addressed are grouped as follows:1. International Linkages2. Quarantine3. Surveillance, monitoring and reporting4. Preparedness and response arrangements5. Awareness6. Research and development7. Legislation, policies and jurisdiction8. Resources and funding

States and Territories will be asked to list specified diseases of aquatic animals as notifiable diseases.The proposed national list includes:• the diseases listed by OIE• certain diseases which are exotic to Australia or, if present in Australia, those which are the

subject of official control.

The proposed disease list includes:Baculoviral midgut gland necrosisNuclear polyhedrosis baculoviroses: (baculovirus penaei and Penaeus monodon-type baculovirus)Infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosisWhite spot diseaseYellowhead diseaseTaura syndrome

References:

ABARE (1997) Australian Fisheries Statistics, ABARE, Canberra.ABARE (1993) Torres Strait Prawn Fishery: An Economic Analysis ABARE Research Report 93

p.15.Brown, D., Van Landeghem, K. and Schuele, M. (1997) Australian Aquaculture: Industry Profiles

for Selected Species. ABARE Report to the Fisheries Resource Research Fund. ABAREResearch Report 97.

BRS (1997) Fishery Status Reports: Resource Assessments of Australian Commonwealth Fisheries,BRS, Canberra.

Donovan, D. (1998) Prawn Farming in Queensland. In: Proceedings of Queensland WarmwaterAquaculture Conference (Status and Potential). Aquaculture Information Technologies, Tarome,Queensland.

DPI (1996) Queensland’s Fisheries Resources: Current Conditions and Recent Trends 1988-1995.DPI-Qld. Information Series QI97007. Ed. L. E. Williams.

FRDC (1996) Investing for Tomorrows Catch. The FRDC’s Research and Development Plan,

20

1996-2001.Grey, D. L., Dall, W. and Baker, A. (1983) A Guide to the Australian Penaeid Prawns. Northern

Territory Government Printing Office.Harrison, G. (1997) Commercial results of investing in a breeding program, Abstract. In: Australian

Prawn Farmers Association Annual Conference, 26-27 July 1997.Higgins, R. A. (chair) (1996) Report of The National Task Force on Imported Fish and Fish

Products. Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.Jones, D. and Morgan, G. (1994) A Field Guide to Crustaceans of Australian Waters. Ed. J.

Young. Publisher, Reed -a part of William Heinemann Australia, Chatswood, NSW.Jones, R. 1996. Managing the National Response to Fisheries and Aquaculture Emergencies.

Department of Primary Industries and Energy.Kailola, P., Williams, M. J., Stewart, P., Reichelt, R., McNee, A. and Grieve, C. (1993) Australian

Fisheries Resources, Bureau of Resource Sciences, Department of Primary Industries and Energyand Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, Canberra

Loh, P.C., Tapay, L.M., Lu, Y. and Nadala, Jr., E.C.B. (1997) Viral pathogens of the penaeidshrimp Adv. virus Res. 48; 263-312

Nairn, M. E., Allen, P. G., Inglis, A. R. and Tanner, C. (1996) Australian Quarantine: a sharedresponsibility. Department of Primary Industries and Energy, Canberra.

Nunn, M. J. (1995) Aquatic Animal Quarantine in Australia: Report of the Scientific Working Partyon Aquatic Animal Quarantine. Bureau of Resource Sciences, Canberra.

OCVO (1997) Aquatic Animal Health Status Report, 1997, Australia. OCVO, DPIE, Canberra.Owens, L. (1997) Special topic review: The history of the emergence of viruses in Australian prawn

aquaculture. World J. of Microbiol & Biotechnol. 13: 427-431.SCARM (1997) Report of the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management’s

Task force into Managing Incursions of Aquatic Pests, Weeds and Diseases. DPIE, Canberra.

21

3.RISK ASSESSMENT

3.1 Identification of disease agents for further consideration in the import risk analysis

AQIS has used a process of categorisation to determine which agents require further consideration inthis import risk analysis.

In this system, a disease agent is given further consideration in the IRA if it is:

1. infectious and

2. (a) exotic to Australia or

(b) present in Australia but subject to official control and

3. (a) OIE listed and/or

(b) is likely to cause disease in a significant proportion of infected prawns or other species or is associated with significant economic and/or ecological

harm.

The categorisation of disease agents is based on the following criteria.

1. The disease agent is infectious

A putative disease agent must cause/be associated with a recognised disease and the disease mustbe shown to have an infectious aetiology.

The disease agent has been found in association with animals that are the subject of this IRA. Thedisease agent is transmissible to susceptible hosts and may have been isolated. Ideally Koch’s7 orEvan’s (Thrusfield 1995) postulates have been satisfied. This excludes diseases caused byenvironmental (eg. toxicosis), genetic or nutritional factors.

2(a) The disease agent is exotic to Australia

The disease agent is considered exotic in absence of any report of the disease or detection of thecausal agent in animals susceptible to infection in Australia. The level of confidence which can be

7 Koch’s postulates refer to the experimental evidence required to establish a relationship of causation between a microorganismand a disease. The conditions are: 1) the microorganism must be present in every case of the disease, 2) it must be isolated andcultivated in pure culture, 3) inoculation of such culture must produce the disease in susceptible animals, 4) it must be observed in,and recovered from, experimentally diseased animal.

22

attributed to such a determination depends on factors such as the virulence of the organism, severityof the clinical disease and nature of targeted surveillance applied to the disease/agent in question.

Where a disease agent is present in Australia, but the strain(s) present in other countries is/aresignificantly more virulent, exotic strains of the disease agent meet this criterion.

2(b) The disease agent is present in Australia but subject to official control

A disease agent or disease occurs in Australia and one or more State/Territory Government(s) hasenacted legislation to control or eradicate the disease/agent, ie. mandatory control measures are inplace.

3(a) The disease agent is OIE listed

The disease agent causes a notifiable or “other significant” disease as listed by the OIE.

3(b) The disease agent causes disease in a significant proportion of infected prawns orother species or is associated with significant economic and/or ecological harm

The disease agent satisfies one or more of the following criteria:

• it would cause a distinct pathological effect in a significant proportion of an infectedpopulation.

• it would cause significant economic losses, for example, increased mortality, reduced growthrates, decreased product quality, loss of market access, increased management costs.

• it would cause significant harm to native species and/or the environment.

Examples of disease agents which cause disease in species other than prawns include infectiouspancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV) and Aerococcus viridans var. homari. These disease agentswhich have been reported in prawns unassociated with significant disease, may cause serious diseasein finfish and lobsters respectively.

Where definitive data relevant to categorisation are lacking, AQIS makes conservative judgementswhich draw upon scientific knowledge and observations made in similar situations and any otherrelevant information.

23

3.2 Categorisation of disease agents: viruses

Table 1 Viruses which will be further considered in the IRA

Disease agent/pest

1.Diseaseagent is

infectious

2aAgent or

strain exotic toAustralia

2bControlprogram

inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther

considerationof diseaseagent isrequired

Baculovirus midgutgland necrosis virus(BMNV)

Y(Lightner

1993)

Y N Y Y(Sano et al.,1981,1984)

Y

Infectious hypodermaland haematopoeiticnecrosis virus(IHHNV)

Y(Lightner etal.,1983)

Y(Owens et al.,

1992a)

N Y Y(Lightner 1996)

Y

Infectious PancreaticNecrosis virus (IPNV)

Y(Giorgetti

1989)

Y N Y Y8

(Wolf 1988)Y

Nuclearpolyhedrosis viruses:Monodon baculovirus(MBV)

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Doubrovsky et

al., 1988)

Y9 Y Y(Lightner 1996)

Y

Baculovirus penaei(BPV)

Y(Overstreetet al., 1988)

Y N Y Y(Lightner 1988)

Y

Rhabdovirus ofpenaeid shrimp (RPS)

Y(Lu &Loh

1994)

Y N N Y10

(Wolf 1989)Y

Taura syndrome virus(TSV)

Y(Lightner etal., 1997)

Y N N Y(Lightner et al.,

1995)

Y

White Spot syndromevirus (WSSV)

Y(Lightner, etal., 1997)

Y N Y Y(Chang et al.,1996; Lightner

1996)

Y

Yellow-head Virus(YHV)

Y(Lightner

1996)

Y N Y Y (Lightner

1996;Boonyaratpalin

et al., 1994)

Y

Baculoviral midgut gland necrosis virus (BMNV)BMNV is now regarded by the ICTV (1997) as an unclassified, nonoccluded bacilliform virus.Epizootics of BMNV in Penaeus japonicus have occurred in Japan and Korea (Sano et al., 1984;

8 IPNV is not associated with significant disease in prawns but causes significant disease in finfish (Wolf, 1988).9 Queensland, WA and NSW legislation controls the movement of live aquatic animals in relation to listeddiseases; MBV is included in these lists.10 RPS is not associated with significant disease in prawns but is closely related to SVC (Loh et al., 1997) which isa significant pathogen of cyprinids (Wolf, 1988).

24

Lightner, 1993). Other penaeids, P. chinensis, P. semisulcatus and P. monodon, are susceptibleto BMNV. BMNV-type infections have been observed in P. monodon in East and South-EastAsia. Mortalities in hatcheries occur in mysis through to 20 day old postlarvae (PL) and may reachup to 98% in PL9-10 (Sano et al., 1981).

Additional nonoccluded baculoviruses, in prawn species other than P. japonicus, including virusesreported from Australia, have been grouped as BMNV-like viruses (Brock, 1991; Lightner, 1996),.The term BMN-type virus/agent is misleading as it gives the impression that these viruses are similarto BMNV when the necessary information is lacking. The term nonoccluded bacilliform viruses ismore correct at this point in time.

BMNV, which is distinct from BMN-like viruses, is regarded as exotic to Australia. BMNV is asignificant pathogen overseas and OIE listed and as such, will be given further consideration in theIRA.

Infectious hypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHHNV)

Infectious hypodermal and haematopoietic necrosis virus (IHHNV) is distributed widely in penaeidsin culture facilities and in the wild in Asia and the Americas. Epizootics of disease due to IHHNVhave been reported in south-east USA, Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Brazil, Carribean, CentralAmerica, Hawaii, Guam, Tahiti, New Caledonia. The virus has been reported from Singapore,Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines (Lightner, 1996) and China (Zhang and Sun 1997).Natural infections have been reported from P. stylirostris, P. vannamei, P. occidentalis, P.californiensis, P. monodon, P. semisulcatus and P. japonicus (Lightner, 1996).

While IHHNV has not been reported in Australia, there is one report of an IHHNV-like virus in thiscountry in prawns held under experimental conditions (Owens et al., 1992).

This agent will be given further consideration in the IRA, as it is (or at least, virulent strains of thisvirus are) exotic to Australia. Additionally, IHHNV is a significant pathogen overseas and is OIElisted.

Infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV)

Infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV) may cause severe damage to the pancreas and otherinternal organs of farmed and wild finfish species, including salmonids (Wolf 1989) resulting insignificant mortalities. IPN is reported from Europe, the Americas and Asia. This agent has beenisolated from P. japonicus but is of limited pathogenicity in this species (Giorgetti 1989).

This agent will be given further consideration in the IRA, as it is exotic to Australia, a significantpathogen overseas and OIE listed.

Nuclear polyhedrosis virus - Monodon baculovirus (MBV)

Monodon baculovirus (MBV) type viruses are type-A occluded baculoviruses designatedP. monodon singular nucleopolyhedrovirus (PmSNPV) and are considered to comprise a number ofdistinct strains (Lightner 1996). MBV-type baculoviruses are reported from most areas of the Indo-Pacific where penaeid prawns are cultured (Brock and Lightner, 1990). These viruses have beendescribed in P. monodon, P. indicus, P. merguiensis, P. penicillatus, P. plebejus, P. esculentus,P. semisulcatus, P. kerathurus, P. vannamei and Metapenaeus ensis (Lightner 1996).

25

Infection with MBV can cause moderate to very heavy infections of the hepatopancreas and anteriormidgut. Mortalities occur primarily among postlarvae in the hatchery, although disease may alsooccur in juvenile and adult prawns (Johnson & Lightner, 1988). Cumulative mortality amongpostlarvae (PL) may reach over 90%.

MBV type viruses have been reported in cultured P. monodon and P. plebejus and wildP. merguiensis in Australia (Doubrovsky et al., 1988; Lester et al., 1987).

Different strains of this virus are recognised and it is likely that more virulent strains found overseasare exotic to Australia. An official control program has been implemented in Queensland and NSWwith the objective of restricting the spread of the virus. MBV is listed under ‘other significant’ diseaseagents by the OIE. Accordingly, MBV will be given further consideration in the IRA.

Plebejus baculovirus and Bennettae baculovirus (Spann & Lester 1996) are considered to be strainsof MBV but are not included for consideration in the IRA as these viruses occur in Australia.

Nuclear polyhedrosis virus - Baculovirus penaei (BP)

Baculovirus penaei (BP) affects cultured and wild-caught P. vannamei, P. stylirostris, P. setiferus,P. schmitti, P. penicillatus, P. brasiliensis, P. paulensis, P. subtilis , P. aztecus, P. marginatus,Trachypenaeus similis and Protrachypene precipua from the Americas (Lightner et al., 1989;Brock and Lightner, 1990; LeBlanc et al., 1991).

Epizootics of disease due to BP are characterised by sudden, high mortality rates among larvae,postlarvae and juvenile prawns.


Rhabdovirus of Penaeid shrimp

Prawns infected with rhabdovirus of penaeid shrimp (RPS) show no signs of clinical disease andmortalities are not common (Lu et al., 1991), even among prawns infected experimentally (Nadala,et al., 1992). However, RPSV is closely related to spring viraemia of carp virus (SVC,Rhabdovirus carpio) (Lu & Loh 1994), a pathogen exotic to Australia. SVC is an acutehaemorrhagic infection causing mortalities, typically of cyprinids (Wolf 1988). SVC is listed as anotifiable disease in the OIE Aquatic Animal Code.

Since RPS is exotic to Australia, and may be closely related to SVC which is a significant pathogen,overseas; especially of cyprinids, it will be considered further in the IRA..

Taura syndrome virus (TSV)

Since 1991, disease caused by this virus has reportedly cost the prawn culture industries of theUSA and Latin America over US$1 billion (Brock et al., 1996). TSV continues to cause problemsthroughout the Americas and is the subject of research into methods for the prevention and control ofdisease.

26

TSV affects cultured P. vannamei, P. stylirostris, P. aztecus and P. setiferus (Lightner et al.,1997). Mortalities have been reported in cultured penaeids from Ecuador, Peru, Colombia, ElSalvador, Guatemala, Brazil, Nicaragua, Hawaii, Florida, Mexico and Texas (Lightner, 1996).

This agent will be given further consideration in the IRA, as it is exotic to Australia and a significantpathogen overseas.

White spot syndrome virus (WSSV)

White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) causes disease characterised by the appearance of white spotson the carapace and a high level of mortality. The syndrome affects cultured P. monodon, P.japonicus, P. chinensis, P. indicus, P. merguiensis and P. setiferus stocks world-wide. Theagent is described variously as: hypodermal and haematopoietic necrosis baculovirus (HHNBV) inChina, rod-shaped nuclear virus of P. japonicus (RV-PJ) in Japan, China and Korea, systemicectodermal and mesodermal baculovirus (SEMBV) in Thailand and Bangladesh, white spotbaculovirus (WSBV) in Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, India, South Carolina and Texas and P.monodon non-occluded baculovirus (PMNOB) in Taiwan (Lightner 1996).

White spot disease has spread throughout most prawn culture areas of the Indo-Pacific, exceptingAustralia, New Caledonia and the Phillipines and continues to cause massive stock losses of culturedprawns in countries affected by the virus.


Yellow-head virus (YHV)

Yellow-head virus (YHV) is reportedly widespread in cultured stocks of P. monodon. It hascaused serious disease in cultured P. monodon in South-East Asia and India. By the third day postinfection, mass mortality occurs and the entire crop is typically lost (Chantanachookin et al., 1993).YHD may have been associated with the P. monodon industry crash in Taiwan in 1986-1987 andalso with disease epizootics in Indonesia, Malaysia, China, India and the Philippines (Lightner,1996).

Two yellow-head-like viruses, one pathogenic (gill-associated virus, GAV) and the other benign(lymphoid organ virus, LOV) have been found in cultured P. monodon in Australia (Spann &Lester 1997). GAV and LOV have approximately a 1% difference over a 400 base pair PCRsequence of a highly conserved RNA polymerase gene (Dr Peter Walker, personal communication).Thai YHV has 15% difference to the Australian viruses for the same targeted gene sequence (DrPeter Walker, personal communication) and is considered to be distinct from the Australian viruses.

YHV will be given further consideration in the IRA, as it is (or more virulent strains of the virus are)exotic to Australia, it is a significant pathogen overseas and is OIE listed.

27

Table 2 Viruses which will not be further considered in the IRA

Disease agent/pest

1.Diseaseagent is

infectious

2aAgent or

strain exotic toAustralia

2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIEliste

d

3bSignificant disease

Furtherconsideration ofdisease agent is

required

Baculovirus midgutgland necrosis viruslike viral infections

Y(Lightner

1996)

N N N Y(Lightner

1996)

N

Bay of Pirian shrimpvirus

Y(Vogt 1996

Y N N N(Vogt1996)

N

Gill associated virus(GAV)

Y(Spann &

Lester 1997)

N(Spann &

Lester 1997)

N N Y(Spann &

Lester1997)

N

Hepatopancreaticparvovirus (HPV)(includesHepatopancreaticparvo-like virus)

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Owens 1990;Roubal et al.,

1989)

N N N(Lightner

1996).

N

Irido-like virus Y(Lightner &

Redman1993)

Y N N N(Lightner& Redman

1993)

N

Lymphoidal Parvo-like Virus (LPV)

Y(Owens etal., 1991)

N(Owens et al.,

1991)

N N Y(Owens etal., 1991)

N

Lymphoid OrganVirus (LOV)

Y(Spann etal., 1995)

N(Spann et al.,

1995)

N N N(Spann etal., 1995)

N

Lymphoid Organvacuolization virus(LOVV)

Y(Lightner

1996

N(Owens 1997)

N N N(Lightner

1996)

N

Nuclearpolyhedrosis virusesBennettae Baculovirus(BBV, MbSNPV)

Y N(Spann &

Lester 1996)

N N N(Spann &

Lester1996)

N

Plebejus baculovirus(PBV) (= MBV)

Y(Lester etal., 1987)

N(Lester et al.,

1987)

N N Y(Lester

&Paynter1989)

N

Penaeid HaemocyticRod-shaped Virus(PHRV)

Y(Owens1993a)

N(Owens 1993a)

N N N(Owens1993a)

N

28

Penaeus chinensisparvovirus

Y(Lianchunet al., 1995)

Y N N N(Lianchun

et al.,1995)

N

Reo-III &IV (includingReo-like virus, andPalaemon B-cell reo-like virus)Gut and nervesyndrome (GNS)

Y(Tsing and

Bonami1986; Vogt

1992;Lightner1996)

Y11 N N N(Lightner

1996;Anderson

et al.,1987)

N

Spawner - isolatedmortality virus

YFraser &Owens(1996)

N N N Y(Fraser and

Owens,1996).

N

The Bay of Pirian shrimp virus, lymphoid organ vacuolization virus (LOVV), the irido-like virus,reo-III &IV (including reo-like virus), Palaemon B-cell reo-like virus and Penaeus chinensisparvovirus have been reported overseas in association with prawns. These agents are exotic toAustralia, but they will not be given further consideration in the IRA, as they are not considered tocause significant disease and are not listed in the OIE Code (Vogt 1996; Lightner & Redman 1993;Lightner 1996; Lianchun et al., 1995).

The following viruses or viral associated diseases have been reported to occur in prawns in Australiaand are not the subject of official control. These agents will not be given further consideration in theIRA.

• Bennettae baculovirus (BBV, MbSNPV)• Gill associated virus (GAV)• Gut and nerve syndrome virus• Hepatopancreatic parvovirus (HPV) (includes Hepatopancreatic parvo-like virus)• Lymphoidal parvo-like virus (LPV)• Lymphoid organ virus (LOV)• Penaeid haemocytic rod-shaped virus (PHRV)• Plebejus baculovirus (PBV)• Spawner-isolated mortality virus (SMV)• Baculovirus midgut gland necrosis virus like viral infection

11 GNS has been observed in Australia but is probably associated with a nodavirus (Dr L. Owens, personalcommunication).

29

3.3 Categorisation of disease agents: bacteria

Outbreaks of disease in prawns are often attributed to bacterial infection, as in many cases, bacteriamay be readily recovered from diseased prawns. However, bacterial infection of prawns commonlyoccurs as a sequel of disease due to environmental, nutritional, traumatic or other factors (Lightner1985). In order to satisfy Koch’s postulates for many of these bacterial species, massive numbersmust be administered to prawns to induce disease (Lightner 1993). However, some species orstrains of bacteria are associated with significant pathogy and are considered to be primarypathogens.

Table 3 Bacteria which will be further considered in the IRA

Diseaseagent/pest

Diseases 1Diseaseagent is

infectious

2aAgent or

strainexotic toAustralia

2bControlprogram

inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther


RICKETTSIA, CHLAMYDIA, MYCOPLASMAS AND RICKETTSIA-LIKE BACTERIARickettsiasp.

1. Rickettsialinfection ofMacro-brachiumrosenbergii

Y (Cohen &Issar 1989)

Y N N Y (Cohen &Issar 1989)

Y

2. Rickettsialinfectionsof Penaeids

Y (Brock etal., 1986)

Y

N N Y (Brock et al.,

1986)

Y

3. Stainedprawndisease/Rickettsia-likeInfection ofPandalidShrimp

Y(Bower etal., 1996)

Y N N Y(Bower etal., 1996)

Y

α Proteo-bacteria sp.

Necrotisinghepato-

pancreatitis

Y(Frelier etal., 1993)

Y N N Y(Frelier et al.,

1994)

Y

GRAM NEGATIVEVibrio spp. Vibriosis

Red legdisease

Y(Chen1992;

Ishimaru,K. et al.,

1995)

Y12 N N Y(Esteve &Quijada

1993; Chen1992)

Y

GRAM POSITIVE

12 Some Vibrio species are exotic to Australia and may cause significant disease overseas.

30

Diseaseagent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControlprogram

inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther


Aerococcusviridans var.homari

Gaffkemia Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

Y N N Y13

(Brock &Lightner

1990;Sinder-man 1990)

Y

Rickettsia spp.

Rickettsia have been detected during outbreaks of disease in cultured penaeids (Chong & Loh 1984;Krol et al., 1991; Lightner et al., 1992), and in cultured (Cohen & Issar 1989) and wild-caughtcarideans (Bower et al., 1996). Experimentally, Rickettsia spp. have been shown to cause diseasewhen inoculated into prawns (Lightner et al., 1992).

At least three different rickettsial species/strains have been identified at different geographicallocations and in different host species (Brock et al., 1986; Brock 1988; Brock & Lightner 1990;Lightner 1993; Bower et al., 1996). The capacity of Rickettsia spp. to cause disease in prawns isnot well established. Disease outbreaks reported in Malaysia and Indonesia involved other agents aswell as rickettsias (Anderson et al., 1987; Lightner et al., 1992).

The taxonomic relationship between rickettsias of marine crustaceans is uncertain. Owens et al.,(1992b) considered that rickettsias could be broadly grouped, based on their tissue tropisms forhepatopancreatic cells or connective tissues. Rickettsial infection of the connective tissues has beenreported in freshwater crayfish in Australia (Owens et al., 1992b).

There is a diversity of rickettsial species and strains and at least one isolate has been reported incrustaceans in this country. Some strains of Rickettsia are not reported in Australia and have beenassociated with significant disease episodes in other countries. Such strains will be given furtherconsideration in the IRA.

α Proteobacteria sp.

An alpha Proteobacterium causes the disease necrotizing hepatopancreatitis (NHP) which can resultin losses approaching 95% of affected cultured penaeids (Frelier et al., 1993). This agent has notbeen reported in Australia. Accordingly, it will be the subject of further consideration in the IRA.

Vibrio spp.

The following vibrio species will be included in the IRA.

Vibrio anguillarum

V. anguillarum has been identified as one of the causative agents of red leg disease, reportedly oneof the most harmful and prevalent diseases of prawns in China (Chen et al., 1992). Experimental

13 Aerococcus viridans var. homari causes significant disease in lobsters.

31

infection with this vibrio caused disease in P. brasiliensis (Esteve & Quijada 1993). Strains of thisvibrio have been recovered from diseased salmonids and oysters in Australia (Humphrey 1995). Therelationship between isolates from temperate waters and those associated with significant disease inprawns in tropical waters overseas is unknown. In the absence of evidence that more virulent strainsaffecting prawns are currently present in Australia, this species will be considered further in the riskanalysis.

Vibrio nereis

V. nereis was associated with disease outbreaks in cultured P. monodon in Taiwan and significantmortality occurred following experimental infection of prawns with this agent (Chen, 1992). Theagent has not been reported in Australia and will, therefore, be given further consideration in theIRA.

Vibrio penaeicida

In Japan, V. penaeicida is considered to be the most important pathogen of cultured P. japonicus(de la Peña et al., 1995; Ishimaru et al., 1995). A highly pathogenic strain of V. penaeicida (AM23) has been identified in association with Syndrome 93 from New Caledonia and continues tocause mortalities in cultured P. stylirostris (Le Groumellec et al., 1996; Costa et al., 1996). Theagent has not been reported in Australia and will, therefore, be given further consideration in theIRA.

Vibrio splendidus

Significant larval mortalities asociated with V. splendidus were reported from penaeids cultured inIndonesia, the Phillipines and Thailand (Baticados et al., 1990). Two biovars of this species arerecognised (Ishimaru et al., 1995). Biovar I has been reported in prawns in Australia (Muir 1990).Biovar II of this species has not been reported in Australia and will be given further consideration inthe IRA.

Aerococcus viridans var. homari

A. viridans var. homari is the aetiological agent of gaffkemia and considered to be the most virulentsystemic bacterial pathogen affecting crustaceans. The disease affects marine lobsters (Homarussp.) and some species of crabs (Carcinus sp., Cancer sp.) (Brock & Lightner 1990; Sinderman1990). A. viridans var. homari has been isolated from penaeid prawns overseas and reported tocause infection at a low incidence in P. aztecus (Brock & Lightner 1990). The causative bacteriumhas not been reported from crustaceans in Australia. This agent will be given further consideration inthe IRA.

Table 4 Bacteria which will not be further considered in the IRA

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or

strainexotic to

Australia

2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther

consideration of

diseaseagent isrequired

32

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or

strainexotic to

Australia

2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther

consideration of


RICKETTSIA, CHLAMYDIA, MYCOPLASMAS AND RICKETTSIA-LIKE BACTERIAMycoplasmasp.

Y(Krol et al.,

1991)

N(Ghader-sohi &Owens1998)

N N N(Krol et al.,

1991)

N

Chlamydia sp. Y(Lightner

1993)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N N N(Lightner

1993)

N

Planctomycetebacteria

Y(Fuerst etal., 1997)

N(Fuerst etal., 1997

N N N(Fuerst etal., 1997

N

GRAM NEGATIVEVibrio spp. Red leg

disease"Yellow gilldisease",Eyeballnecrosisdisease

Y(Chen1992;Sahul-

Hameed etal., 1996)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1989)

N N N/Y14

(Owens &Hall-

Mendelin1989)

N

Aeromonas, sp. Shell disease Y(Flegel etal., 1992)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Flegel etal., 1992)

N

Hepato-pancreatic

brush borderlysis (HBL)

Y(Vogt1997)

Y N N N(Vogt 1997)

N

EpicommensalbacteriaLeucothrixmucorThiothrix sp.Flavo-bacterium sp.Cytophaga sp.Leucothrix sp

Epibiontfouling

FilamentousBacterialDisease

Y(Lightner1996)

N(Paynter

1989)

N N N(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N

Flexibacter sp. LarvalBacterialNecrosis

Y(Lightner

1985)

N(Owens etal., 1992)

N N Y(Lightner

1985)

N

GRAM POSITIVE

14 Some Vibrio species associated with prawns are not considered to cause significant disease. Those that docause significant disease and have been reported in Australia are also included in this table.

33

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or

strainexotic to

Australia

2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther

consideration of


Mycobacteriumsp.

Myco-bacteriosis

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Owens etal., 1992b)

N N N(Mohney et

al., 1998)

N

Diplococcussp.

Y(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N N N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N

Chlamydia sp.

These agents will not be given further consideration in the IRA as they do not cause significantdisease in prawns (Lightner 1993)

Vibrio sp.

Numerous disease outbreaks have been reported in association with Vibrio species. These diseasesyndromes were described variously, as vibrio disease, vibriosis, chitinolytic bacterial shell disease,etc. The role of vibrios as primary pathogens in these syndromes is uncertain. Vibrios are aubiquitous and predominant component of the marine and prawn culture environment and comprise amajor part of the normal flora of crustaceans (Lightner 1993). Infections with vibrios in prawns aregenerally regarded as opportunistic (Sinderman 1990), although several species and particular strainsof vibrios are recognised as primary pathogens (Lightner 1993; Owens & Hall-Mendelin 1989).

A number of difficulties arise in attempting to evaluate the pathogenic potential of vibrios andcategorise them accordingly. The taxonomy of vibrios found in tropical waters is particularly unclear.These vibrios often yield uncertain results in conventional tests (Dr Ian Anderson, personalcommunication) and cannot be easily defined to species level. For this reason, reports of diseaseoutbreaks associated with particular species may not be reliable (Dr Ian Anderson, personalcommunication). Incorrect identification may occur commonly, particularly where diagnosticlaboratories lack the facilities and expertise to test isolates for the purpose of speciation.

When vibrio species are clearly identified, using conventional tests, the status of the species canremain unclear as isolates may be heterogeneous, eg V. cholerae and V. splendidus (Austin et al.,1997). Species groupings may be close according to some tests but strain differences may beevident in other tests. As example, V. parahaemolyticus strains comprise several differentphenotypes and serotypes yet may be 100% identified by gyrB gene based PCR testing(Venkateswaran et al., 1998). Also, the isolates of V. anguillarum constitute a distinctive ribotypecluster but still comprises many serogroups (Austin et al., 1997).

Another difficulty is that Vibrio isolates grouped into a species may include numerous strains ofdiffering virulence, for example V. harveyi (Liu et al., 1996). The expression of virulence may becomplex and may be influenced by the host or environment. Virulence factors may be acquired and

34

associated with genetically mobile elements, eg. plasmids or transposons (Pizzutto & Hirst 1995). Ifso, it would be difficult to definitively assign virulence to a particular species or strain.

Of the vibrios reported overseas in prawns, the majority have been recovered from prawns inAustralia and will not be given further consideration in the IRA. The remaining species, V.anguillarum, V. campbelli, V. fluvialis, V. nereis, V. parahaemolyticus, V. penaeicida, V.splendidus, V. tubiashi and V. vulnificus have not been reported in association with disease inprawns in Australia. However, as the determination of the cause of disease often does not continuebeyond identification at the generic level, the above agents may yet be identified in prawns in thiscountry.

V. campbelli, V. fluvialis, V. parahaemolyticus, V. tubiashi and V. vulnificus have been reportedin association with disease in other Australian aquatic animal species (Humphrey 1995). Thesespecies will not be given further consideration in the IRA as they occur in Australia and are notsubject to official control.

Epicommensals

Fouling of gills, appendages and external surfaces may be caused by a range of microorganisms andparasites generally regarded as epicommensals or epibionts and not primary pathogens.Epicommensal bacteria include Leucothrix mucor, Thiothrix sp., Flavobacterium sp.,Cytophaga sp., Flexibacter sp. and other Leucothrix sp. (Lightner 1996). Under conditions ofhigh organic load, these bacteria may attach to gills, interfering with respiration and leading tohypoxia and mortalities (Brock & Lightner 1990). These bacteria have been recovered from prawnsin Australia (Owens et al., 1988; Paynter 1989) and are not the subject of official control.Accordingly, they will not be given further consideration in the IRA.

Mycobacterium sp., Aeromonas sp. and Diplococcus sp.These disease agents are not generally associated with significant disease in prawns. They have beenreported in prawns in Australia and overseas and are not the subject of official control. These agentswill not be given further consideration in the IRA.

A number of bacteria have not been included in table 3.4 nor considered for further evaluation in theIRA because they are regarded as ubiquitous, eg. Staphylococcus sp.

3.4 Categorisation of disease agents: fungi

None of the fungi reported from prawns (Table 3.4) are considered further in the risk analysis. Inmost instances this is because the fungus has been recovered from aquatic animals in Australia. Inother cases, reports from other countries indicate that significant pathology is not associated withthese fungal infections. In other cases, fungi are not clearly implicated as significant pathogens; wherereports refer to an isolated episode of disease (Brock & Lightner 1990; Shah et al., 1977).

Table 5 Fungi which will not be further considered in the IRA

35

Diseaseagent/pest

Disease 1Diseaseagent is

infectious

2aAgent or

strainexotic to

Australia

2bControlprogram

inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther


Lagendinium callinectesLagendinium sp.

LarvalMycosis

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N N Y(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N

FusariumsolaniFusarium sp.

Burn spotdisease

Black gilldisease

Fusariosis

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N

Sirolpidiumsp.(=Haliphtho-ros sp.)

Brown spotdisease

Larval mycosis

Y(Lightner

1996)

N N N Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N

Clado-sporium sp.

Y(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N N N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N

Achlya sp. Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N(Humphrey

1995)


1990)

N

Saprolegniasp.

Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N(Humphrey

1995)


1990)

N

Pythium sp. Y(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N(Owens et

al.1988)


1990)

N

Atkinsielladubia

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Lester &Paynter1989)


1990)

N

Leptomitussp.

Y(Shah etal., 1977)

Y N N N(Shah etal., 1977)

N

Leptolegniasp.(=Lepto-legniellasp.)

Y(Gopalian

et al., 1980)

NCherax sp.(Humphrey

1995)

N N Y(Lightner

1993)

N

36

3.5 Categorisation of disease agents: protozoa

Table 6 Protozoans which will be further considered in the IRA

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

diseaseFurther


PHYLUM SARCOMASTIGOPHORAHematodinium-like organism ofPandalid shrimp

Y(Bower etal. 1994)

Y N N N(Meyers etal., 1994)

Y(Bower etal. 1994)

Y

PHYLUM MICROSPORAAmeson nelsoni Micro-

sporidosisY

(Bower etal. 1994)

Y N N Y(Bower etal. 1994)

Y

Agmasoma(Thelohania)penaei

Micro-sporidosis

Y(Lightner

1996)

Y N N Y(Sparks1985)

Y

Thelohaniaoctospora

Y(Sparks1985)

Y N N Y(Humphrey

1995)

Y

Pleistophoralintoni

Y(Sparks1985)

Y N N Y(Humphrey

1995)

Y

Pleistophoracrangoni

Y(Sparks1985)

Y N N Y(Humphrey

1995)

Y

PHYLUM CILIOPHORAParauronemasp.

Y(Overstreet

1986)

Y N N Y(Overstreet

1986)

Y

Sarcomastigophora

A Hematodinium-like protozoan was recently, identified as the cause of a new disease that turnedinfected prawns opaque and the haemolymph milky. The disease seemed to be confined to wildpopulations of Pandalus species near British Columbia. Gross signs of infection were observed in upto 10% of prawn populations; subclinical infections were detected in up to 27% of prawns fromthese same populations (Bower & Gladdery 1998; Bower et al., 1994). In most P. platyceros withsubclinical infections, the duration of the infection had been sufficiently long to affect gonadaldevelopment (Bower & Gladdery 1998). Infected prawns from the field did not survive in captivity.In Alaska, unconfirmed reports were of prevalences reaching 50%. This agent does not occur inprawns in Australia, and therefore will be given further consideration in the IRA.

37

Microspora

Microsporidians are generally considered to be significant pathogens. Some species may causemortalities of up to 20% in broodstock on capture (Bower 1995). These agents may also causeparasitic castration of wild-stocks and reduce the market value of prawns with heavy infections(Bower 1995). Agmasoma (=Thelohania ) sp. and Ameson (= Nosema) sp. are recorded fromprawns (and freshwater crayfish) in Australia. Few reports identify individual species, butAgmasoma penaei, A. octospora and Ameson nelsoni have not been reported in Australia. All aresignificant pathogens (Humphrey 1995; Bower 1995). Microsporidia in the genus Pleistophorahave not been identified in prawns in Australia and two species (P. lintoni and P. crangoni) havebeen reported as significant pathogens overseas. Ameson nelsoni, Agmasoma penaei, A.octospora, Pleistophora lintoni and P. crangoni will be given further considered in the IRA.

CiliophoraThe ciliate Parauronema sp. invades the haemocoel of protozoeal, mysid and juvenile stages of thebrown shrimp (P. aztecus) and was associated with mass mortality at a commercial hatchery (Couch1978). Early stages of infection are confined to wounds. Later stages invade the haemolymph anddamage various organs including the gills. Disease is found in larvae and overwintering adults andoften causes 100% mortality in infected tanks (Bower & Gladdery 1998). This protozoan has notbeen reported in Australia and will be given further consideration in the IRA.

Table 7 Protozoans which will not be further considered in the IRA

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease


required

PHYLUM SARCOMASTIGOPHORALeptomonassp.

Y(Couch1983)

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Thalasso-myces sp.

Ellobiopsidparasiteinfection

Y(Sparks

1985; Brock& Lightner

1990)

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Bodo-likeflagellatesChrysidellasp.

Y(Lightner

1996)

N N N N(Lightner

1996)

N

PHYLUM APICOMPLEXANematopsissp.Cephalo-lobussp.Parao-phioidina sp.

Gregarineinfection

Y(Bower etal., 1996;Couch1983)

NGregarin

sp.(Owens

1986)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

PHYLUM MICROSPORA

38

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease


required

Ameson(=Nosema) sp

Micro-sporidosis

Y(Bower etal., 1994)

N(Owens etal., 1988)

N N Y(Lightner

1996)

N

Agmasoma(Thelohania)duorara

Micro-sporidosis(Cooked

shrimp,Cotton or MilkShrimp

Disease)

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Owens &

Hall-Mendelin

1990)

N N Y(Humphrey

1995)

N

Thelohaniabutleri

Y(Sparks1985)

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Thelohaniagiardi

Y(Sparks1985)

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Indosporusspraguei

Palaemontesindosporusis

Y(Humphrey

1995).

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995).

N

PHYLUM CILIOPHORAApostomeciliatesAscophrysspp.Synophrya spGymnodinoides sp.

Gill cystsApostome

ciliatedisease

Black gilldisease ofpenaeidshrimps

Y(Lightner

1996;Bashirullah& Aguada

1998)

N(Owens etal., 1988;Paynter

1989)

N N N(Lightner

1996)

N

Peritrichousand loricateciliatesEpistylis spVorticella sp.Zoothamniumsp.Lagenophryssp. Cothurniasp.

Gill,appendageand surface

fouling

Y(Lightner

1996)

N(Paynter

1989)

N N N(Lightner

1996)

N

SuctoriansEphalota sp.Acinata sp.Terebrospirasp.

Y(Humphrey1995;Bashirullah& Aguada1998)

Y N N N(Humphrey

1995Lightner

1996)

N

39

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControl

program inAustralia

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease


required

Rhabdostylasp. Ciliophorasp.Stylohedra sp.

Y(Paynter &

Lester1987;

Owens etal., 1988;

Humphrey1995)

N(Paynter &

Lester1987;

Owens etal.,.1988;

Humphrey1995)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

PHYLUM ASCETOSPORAHaplo-sporidium sp.=Minchinia sp.)

Hepato-pancreatic

haplo-sporidiosis;

Haplo-sporidian

Infections ofPenaeidShrimp

Y(Lightner

1996;Dykova et

al 1988)

Y N N N(Lightner

1996)

N

Sarcomastigophora

Leptomonas sp., Thalassomyces sp., Bodo-like flagellates and Chrysidella sp. have not beenreported in prawns in Australia. They will not be given further consideration in the IRA as they arenot considered to be pathogenic (Humphrey 1995; Lightner 1996).

Apicomplexa

The gregarines, Nematopsis sp., Cephalolobus sp. and Paraophioidina sp., cause infections inprawns.These agents will not be given further consideration in the IRA as they are not considered tobe pathogenic (Humphrey 1995). At least one species in this group has been recorded in prawns inAustralia (L. Owens, personal communications).

Microspora

Indosporus spraguei and a number of ‘Thelohania’ species have been reported overseas but havenot been recognised as being present in Australia. These microsporidians will not be given furtherconsideration in the IRA as they have not been associated with significant disease.

Ciliophora

Members of this group of protozoans are not generally regarded as serious crustacean primarypathogens (Brock & Lightner 1990). Some are symbionts becoming opportunistic pathogens whenenvironmental conditions are poor. Others are capable of infection only through previous wounds inthe cuticle. Most genera in this Phylum reported overseas are also recorded in Australia and they willnot be considered further in the IRA.

Ascetospora

40

Haplosporidium spp. (=Minchinia sp.) have not been reported in Australia but are not consideredto be significant pathogens overseas (Lightner 1996; Dykova et al., 1988). This protozoan will notbe given further considered in the IRA.

41

3.6 Categorisation of disease agents: metazoan parasites and algae

Published literature on metazoans in prawns provides descriptive information on the parasites,including host species and geographic locations of infected prawns, but usually does not identify thepathogenic significance of the infestations (Markham 1994; Owens 1987). Some parasiticinfestations may be significant in that the prawns may serve as intermediate hosts for trematodes,cestodes and acanthocephala that mature in finfish and warm-blooded animals (Sinderman 1990).However, the helminth parasites are generally considered to be of limited pathogenicity, except inisolated reports of heavy worm burdens in individual prawns (Sinderman 1990; Meyers 1990). Forthis reason the helminths (cestodes, trematodes, nematodes, annelids, turbellarians, acanthocephalansand nemerteans) are not given further consideration in the IRA.

Crustaceans are common parasites of prawns and some may be pathogenic to individual animals.Two groups can cause serious harm to prawn hosts; the rhizocephalans and the epicaridean isopods.Members of these groups of crustacean parasites may cause structural deformity, sterilization anddeath in some instances (Sinderman 1990). However the impact on the total population is generallyconsidered to be insignificant (Sinderman 1990); accordingly these parasites are not given furtherconsideration in the IRA.

Blue green algae (Spirulina sp., Lyngbya sp., Schizothrix spp., Oscillatoriales, spp. etc), diatomsand green algae have been reported in association with prawns (Lightner 1996). Disease may beassociated with these agents via the release of toxins. Many of these agents have been reported inAustralia eg. Spirulina sp. Oscillatoriales spp. (Smith 1996) and consequently these agents will notbe given further consideration in the IRA.

Table 8 Metazoans which will not be further considered in the IRA15

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or

strain exoticto Australia

2bControlprogram

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease

Furtherconsideration

of diseaseagent isrequired

NematodesAscarophis sp. Y

(Owens,1987)

N(Owens,

1987)

N N N(Glazebrooket al., 1986)

N

Bulbocephalusinglissi

Y(Owens,

1987)

N(Owens,

1987)


N

Thynnascaris sp.(=Contracaecum sp. = Hystero-thylacium)

Y(Sinderman

1990)

N(Owens,

1987)

N N N(Meyers

1990)

N

CestodesEutetrarhynchusruficollis.

Y(Sinderman

1990)

N(Owens 1987)

N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

15 Note this table does not include all metazoans listed in Owens (1987)

42

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControlprogram

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease



Parachristia-nellamonomega-cantha

Y(Sinderman

1990)

N(Owens 1987)


N

Parachristianella dimegacantha

Y(Sinderman

1990)

Y N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

Polypocephalussp.

Y(Sinderman

1990)

N(Owens 1987)

N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

Prochristianellapenaei

trypano-rhynchid

Y(Meyer1990)

N (Owens

1987)

N N N(Meyer 1990)

N

Tetrarhynchusrubromaculatus

Y(Sinderman

1990)

N (Owens

1987)

N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

TrematodesOpecoeloidesfimbriatis

Y(Sinderman

1990)

Y N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

Opecoeloidesvariabilis

Y(Owens1987)

N(Owens 1987)

N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

Microphallus Y(Sinderman

1990)

Y N N N(Sinderman

1990)

N

Pseudophyllodistomum johnstoni

Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Diceratocephalasp.

Y(Langdon

1990)

N(Langdon

1990)

N N Y(Langdon

1990)

N

Microphallusbrevicaeca

Y(Overstreet

1986)

Y N N N(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N

TurbellariansKronborgiacaridicola

Y(Sinderman

1990)


1990)

N

Kronborgiacaridicola

Y(Meyers

1990)


1990)

N

Temnocephalacarpentariae

Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Brock &Lightner

1990)

N

Acanthocephalans

43

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControlprogram

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease



rhadinorhynchids

Y(Owens1986)

N(Owens 1986)


N

Nematomorphs (Horse hair worms)Nectonema spp. Y

(Bower et al1995;

Meyers1990)

Y N N N(Bower &Gladdery

1996)

N

MolluscsCaledoniellamontrouzieri

Y(Meyer1990)


1990)

N

Crustaceans,Class; Isopoda , Family; BopyridaeAnisarthus sp. Y

(Nakashima1995)

Y N N N(Nakashima

1995)

N

Anisorbione sp. Y(Paynter

1989)

N(Paynter

1989)

N N N(Paynter

1989)

N

Augustogathomasp.

Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Bopyrella sp.Bopyrinellaalbida

Y(Humphrey

1995;Nakashima

1995)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Cabriopsorbionei

Parasite ofbopyrids/

notpenaeids

Y(Owens &Glazebrook

1985)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N Y(Owens1993b)

N

Epipenaeon sp.Epipenaeoningens

Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Owens &Glazebrook

1985)

N N Y(Humphrey

1995)

N

Hemiarthus sp. Y(Nakashima

1995)

Y N N N(Nakashima

1995)

N

Ionellamaculata.

Callianassaburrowing

mudshrimp)infection

Y(Markham

1994)

Y N N N(Markham

1994)

N

Metaphrixus sp. Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Humphrey

1995)

N

Orbione halipori Y(Owens &Glazebrook

1985)

N(Humphrey

1995)

N N N(Paynter

1989)

N

44

Disease agent/pest


infectious

2aAgent or


2bControlprogram

3aOIE

listed

3bSignificant

disease



ParapenaeonexpansusP. japonicumP. tertium

Y(Humphrey

1995)

N(Owens &Glazebrook

1985)

N N N(Paynter

1989)

N

Parapenaeonella lamellata

Y(Owens &Glazebrook

1985)

N(Paynter

1989)

N N N(Paynter

1989)

N

Probopyrus sp.P. buitendijkiP. pandalicola

Y(Humphrey

1995;(Meyer1990))

N(Glazebrooket al.,1985)

N N Y(Humphrey1995; Brock& Lightner

1990))

N

Sacculina sp. Y(Langdon

1990)

N(Langdon

1990)

N N Y(Langdon

1990)

N

Cirrepedia (rhizocephalan barnacles)Sylon hippolytes Y

(Meyers1990)


1990)

N

AlgaeEnteromorphasp.



N N N(Owens etal., 1988)

N

45

References

Alapide-Tendencia, EV. and Dureza, LA. (1997) Isolation of Vibrio spp. from Penaeus monodon(Fabricius) with red disease syndrome. Aquaculture 154: 107-114.

Anderson, IG., Shariff, M., Nash,G. and Nash, M. (1987) Mortalities of juvenile shrimp, Penaeusmonodon, associated with Penaeus monodon baculovirus, cytoplasmic reo-like virus, andrickettsial and bacterial infections, from Malaysian brackishwater ponds. Asian Fish. Soc. 1: 47-64.

Austin, B., Austin, DA., Blanch, AR., Cerda, M., Grimont, F., Grimont, PAD., Jofre, J., Koblavi,S.,Larsen, JL., Pedersen, K., Tiainen,T., Verdonck, L. and Swings, J. (1997) A comparison ofmethods for the typing of fish-pathogenic Vibrio spp. Systematic and Applied Microbiol. 20:89-101.

Basirullah, AK. and Aguada, N. (1993) Diseases and parasites of penaeid shrimps of commercialinterest in the eastern region of Venezuala in From Discovery to Commercialization 1993European Aquaculture Society compilers Carrillo et al., Torremolinos, Spain May 26-28 1993.

Baticados , MCL., Lavilla-Pitogo, CR., Cruz-Lacierda, ER., de la Pena, LD. and Sunaz, NA.(1990) Studies on the chemical control of luminous bacteria Vibrio harveyi and V. splendidusisolated from diseased Penaeus monodon larvae and rearing water. Dis. Aquat. Org. 9: 133-139.

Boonyaratpalin, S., Supamattaya, K., Kasornchandra, J., Direkbusaracom, S., Aekpanithanpong,U. and Chantanachookin, C. (1994) Non-occluded baculo-like virus, the causative agent ofyellow-head disease in the black tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon). Gyobyo Kenkyu 28(3):103-109.

Bower, SM., McGladdery, S.E. and Price, I.M. (1994) Synopsis of infectious diseases andparasites of commercially exploited shellfish. Annual Review of Fish Diseases 4:1-200.

Bower, SM.(1995) Parasitic diseases of shellfish In: PTK. Woo (ed.) Fish Diseases andDisorders Volume 1; protozoan and metazoan infections CAB International, pp.673-728.

Bower, S.M., Meyer, G.R. and Boutillier, J.A. (1996) Stained prawn disease (SPD) of Pandalusplatyceros in British Columbia, Canada, caused by a rickettsial infection. Dis. Aquat. Org. 24:41-54.

Brock, J.A. (1988) Rickettsial infection in penaeid shrimp. In: C.J. Sindermann and D.V. Lightner(eds.) Disease Diagnosis and Control in North American Marine Aquaculture. Elsevier,Amsterdam. pp. 38-41.

Brock, J.A. and Lightner, D.V. (1990) Diseases caused by microorganisms. In: O. Kinne (ed.)Diseases of Marine Animals Vol. 3, Biologische Anstalt Helgoland, Hamburg. pp. 245-424.

Brock, J.A., Nakagawa, L.K., Hayashi, T., Teruya, S. and van Campen, H. (1986)Hepatopancreatic rickettsial infection of the penaeid shrimp, Penaeus marginatus Randall fromHawaii. J. Fish. Dis. 9: 73-77.

Brock, J.A., Lightner, D.V., Hasson, K. and Gose, R. (1996). An update on Taura syndrome offarmed shrimp in the Americas. World Aquaculture ’96, Book of Abstracts, World AquacultureSociety, Baton Rouge, LA. p. 50.

Chantanachookin, C. Boonyaratpalin, S. Kasornchandra, J., Sataporn, D., Ekpanithanpong, U.,Supamataya, K., Sriurairatana, S. and Flegel, T.W. (1993) Histology and ultrastructure reveal anew granulosis-like virus in Penaeus monodon affected by yellow-head disease. Dis. Aquat.Org. 17: 145-157.

Chen, D. (1992) An overview of the disease situation, diagnostic techniques, treatments andpreventatives used on shrimp farms in China. In: W. Fulks and K.L.Main (eds.) Diseases of

46

Cultured Penaeid Shrimp in Asia and the United States. The Oceanic Institute, Hawaii. pp.47-55.

Chong, Y.C. and Loh, H. (1984) Hepatopancreas chlamydial and parvoviral infections of farmedand marine prawns in Singapore. Singapore Vet. J. 9: 51-56.

Cohen, D. and Issar, G. (1989) Rickettsial disease of Macrobrachium rosenbergii larvae: grosssigns, diagnosis and treatment World Aquaculture Society (Abstract T17.9) p 75.

Costa, R., Mermoud, I., Koblavi, S., Haffner, P., Berthe, F., Le Groumellec, M. and Grimont, P.(1996) Isolation and characterisation of bacteria associated with a Penaeus stylirostris disease(“Syndrome 93”) in New Caledonia. SICCPPS book of abstracts, SEAFDEC, Iloilo City,Philippines. p. 44.

Couch, J.A (1978) Diseases, parasites, and toxic responses of commercial penaeid shrimps of theGulf of Mexico and south Atlantic coasts of North America Fish. Bull., 76: 1-44.

Couch, J.A. (1983) Diseases caused by protozoa. In: A.J. Provenzano (ed.). The Biology of theCrustacea, Volume 6 , Academic Press, New York, pp 79-111.

de la Peña, L.D., Kakai, T. and Muroga, K. (1995) Dynamics of Vibrio sp PJ in organs of orallyinfected kuruma prawn, Penaeus japonicus. Fish. Pathol. 30: 39-45.

Doubrovsky, A. Paynter, J.L., Sambhi, S.K., Atherton, J.G. and Lester, R.J.G. (1988)Observations on the ultrastructure of baculovirus in Australian Penaeus monodon and Penaeusmerguiensis. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 39: 743-749.

Dykova, I., Lom, J. and Fajer, E. (1988) A new haplosporean infecting the hepatopancreas in thepenaeid shrimp Penaeus vannamei J. Fish Dis. 11, 15-22.

Esteve, M. and Quijada, R. (1993) Evaluation of three experimental infection techniques with Vibrioanguillarum in Penaeus brasiliensis in Carillo et al (ed.).,“From discovery tocommercialization” ’93 World aquaculture European Aquaculture Society Special publication#19 Torremolinos, Spain p 129.

Flegel, T.W., Fegan, D., Kongsom, S., Vuthikornudomkit, S., Sriurairatana, S., Boonyaratpalin, S.,Chantanachookin, C., Vickers, J. and MacDonald, O. (1992) Occurrence, diagnosis andtreatment of shrimp diseases in Thailand. In: W. Fulks and K. Main (eds.). Diseases of CulturedPenaeid Shrimp in Asian and the United States. The Oceanic Institute, Honolulu, HI. pp. 57-112.

Fraser, G.C., Callinan, R.B. and Caulder, L.M. (1992) Aphanomyces species associated with redspot disease: an ulcerative disease of estuarine fish from eastern Australia. J. Fish Dis. 15: 173–181.

Fraser, C.A. and Owens, L. (1996) Spawner-isolated mortality virus from Australian Penaeusmonodon. Dis. Aquat. Org. 27: 141-148.

Frelier, P.F., Loy, J.K. and Kruppenbach, R. (1993) Transmission of necrotizing hepatopancreatitisin Penaeus vannamei. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 61: 44-48.

Frelier, P.F., Loy, J.K., Lawrence, A.L., Bray, W.A. and Brumbaugh, G.W. (1994) U.S. MarineShrimp Farming Program 10th Anniversary Review. Gulf Coast Research Laboratory SpecialPublication No. 1. Ocean Springs, MI. pp. 55-58.

Fuerst, JA., Gwilliam, HG., Lindsay, M., Lichanska, A., Belcher, C., Vickers, JE. and Hugenholtz,P. (1997) Isolation and molecular identification of plactomycete bacteria from postlarvae of thegiant tiger prawn, Penaeus monodon. Appl. Environ. Micro.(Washington) 63: 254-262.

Genmoto, K., Nishizawa,T, Nakai, T. and Muroga, K. (1996) 16S rRNA targeted RT-PCR for thedetection of Vibrio peanaecida, the pathogen of cultured kuruma prawn Penaeus japonicus.Dis. Aquat. Org. 24: 185-189.

Ghadersohi,A and Owens, L. (1998) Isolation, characterisation and DNA analysis of Mycoplasmaspp. from moribund prawns (peneaus monodon). Dis. Aquat. Organ. (accepted for publication).

47

Giorgetti, G.(1989) Disease problems in farmed penaeids in Italy in Advances in TropicalAquaculture, Tahiti, AQUACOP, IFREMER, Actes de Colloque 9: 75-87.

Glazebrook, J.S., Owens, L. and Campbell, R.S.F. (1986) Diseases of crustacea relevant toAustralia. In: J.D. Humphrey and J.S. Langdon (eds.) Proceedings of the Workshop on Diseasesof Australian Fish and Shellfish, Australian Fish Health Reference Laboratory, RegionalVeterinary Laboratory, Benalla, May 27–30, 1985: 192–201.

Gopalian,UK., Meenakshikunjamma, PP. and Puruhan, KS. (1980) Fungal infections in the tigerprawn (Penaeus monodon) and in other crustaceans from the Cochin backwater. MahasagarBull. Natl. Inst. Oceanogr. 13: 359.

Harris, L. (1995) The involvement of toxins in the virulence of Vibrio harveyi strains pathogenic tothe black tiger prawn Penaeus monodon and the use of commercial probiotics to reduce prawnhatchery disease outbreaks caused by V. harveyi strains. CRC for Aquaculture, ScientificConference abstracts, Bribie Island, 1995, Australia.

Humphrey, JD. (1995) Australian quarantine policies and practices for aquatic animals and theirproducts: a review for the Scientific Working Party on Aquatic Animal Quarantine, BRS,Canberra .

Ishimaru, K., Akarawa-Matsushita, M., Muroga, K. (1995) Vibrio penaeicida sp., nov., apathogen of kuruma prawns (Penaeus japonicus). Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 43: 8-19.

Janssen, U. (1996) Investigations on Vibrionaceae in wholesale- and retail- seafood, and theirimportance for human health in Tierarztliche Hochschule Hannover, Hannover; Germany

Johnson, P.T. and Lightner, D.V. (1988). Rod-shaped nuclear viruses of crustaceans: gut-infectingspecies. Dis. Aquat. Org. 5: 123-141.

Krol, R.M., Hawkins, W.E., and Overstreet, R.M. (1991) Rickettsial and mollicute infections inhepatopancreatic cells of cultured pacific white shrimp (Penaeus vannamei). J. Invertebr.Pathol. 57: 362-370.

Krol, R.M., Hawkins, W.E. and Overstreet, R.M. (1990) Reo-like virus in white shrimp Penaeusvannamei (Crustacea:Decapoda): co-occurrence with Baculovirus penaei in experimentalinfections. Dis. Aquat. Org. 8:45-49.

Langdon, J.S. (1990) Disease risks of fish introductions and translocations. In: D.A. Pollard (ed.)Introduced and Translocated Fishes and their Ecological Effects,. Australian Society for FishBiology Workshop, Magnetic Island, 24–25 August, 1989, Bureau of Rural ResourcesProceedings 8: 98–107.

Lavilla-Pitogo, C.R., Baticados, C.L., Cruz-Lacierda, E.R. and de la Pena, L. (1990) Occurrenceof luminous bacteria disease of Penaeus monodon larvae in the Philippines. Aquaculture 91: 1-13.

LeBlanc, D.H., Overstreet, R.M. and Lotz, J.M. (1991). Relative susceptibility of Penaeus aztecusto Baculovirus penaei. J. World Aquacult. Soc. 22: 173-177.

Lavilla-Pitogo, C.R. (1993) Bacterial diseases of penaeid shrimps: an Asian view In: M. Shariff, J.R.Arthur R. and Subashnghe RP. (eds.) Diseases in Asian aquaculture II. Fish Health Section,Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines. pp. 107-121.

Le Groumellec, M., Goarant, C., Haffner, P., Berthe, F., Costa, R. and Mermoud, I. (1996)Syndrome 93 in New Caledonia: Investigation of the bacterial hypothesis by experimentalinfections, with reference to stress-induced mortality. SICCPPS book of abstracts, SEAFDEC,Iloilo City, Philippines. p. 46.

Lester, R.J.G. and Paynter, J.L. (1989) Diseases of cultured prawns in Australia. Advances inTropical Aquaculture, Tahiti, AQUACOP, IFREMER, Actes de Colloque 9: 97-101.

48

Lester, R.J.G., Doubrovsky, A., Paynter, J.L., Sambhi, S.K. and Atherton, J.G. (1987) Light andelectron microscope evidence of baculovirus infection in the prawn Penaeus plebejus. Dis.Aquat. Org. 3: 217-219.

Lianchun, Xiao, Shi Zheni, Gao Wei, Zhang Liren and Chen Dihua (1995) Isolation, purification ofPenaeus chinesis parvovirus and analysis of its nucleic acids and proteins. Virologica Sinica10:356-361.

Lightner, D.V. (1985) A review of the diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp and prawns withemphasis on recent discoveries and developments in Proceedings of the First InternationalConference on the Culture of Penaeid Prawns/Shrimp Iloilo City, Phillipines 1984 SEAFDECAquaculture department pp. 79-103.

Lightner, D.V. (1988) Diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp and prawns. In: C.J. Sindermann andD.V. Lightner (eds.) Disease Diagnosis and Control in North American Marine Aquaculture,2nd. ed. Elsevier, New York. pp. 8-127.

Lightner, D.V. (1993) Diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp. In: J.P. McVey (ed.) CRC Handbookof Mariculture, Second edition, Volume 1, Crustacean Aquaculture. CRC Press Inc., BocaRaton, FL. p. 393-486.

Lightner, (1996 ) A Handbook of Shrimp Pathology and Diagnostic Procedures for Diseases ofCultured Penaeid Shrimp. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.

Lightner, D.V., Redman, R.M., Bell, T.A. and Brock, J.A. (1983). Detection of IHHN virus inPenaeus stylirostris and Penaeus vannamei imported into Hawaii. J. World Maricult. Soc. 14:212-225.

Lightner, D.V. and Redman, R.M. (1985). A parvo-like virus disease of penaeid shrimp. J.Invertebr. Pathol. 45: 47-53.

Lightner, D.V. and Redman, R.M. (1993) A putative iridovirus from the penaeid shrimpProtrachypene precipua Burkenroad (Crustacea: Decapoda). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 62:107-109.

Lightner, D.V., Redman, R.M. and Almada Ruiz, E.A. (1989) Baculovirus penaei in Penaeusstylirostris (Crustacea: Decapoda) cultured in Mexico: Unique cytopathology and a newgeographic record. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 53: 137-139.

Lightner, D.V., Bell, T.A., Redman, R.M., Mohney, L.L., Natividad, J.M., Rukyani, A. andPoernomo, A. (1992) A review of some major diseases of economic significance in penaeidprawns/shrimps of the Americas and Indo-Pacific. In: M. Shariff, R. Subashnghe and J.R. Arthur(eds.) Proceedings 1st Symposium on Diseases in Asian Aquaculture. Fish Health Section,Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines. pp. 57-80.

Lightner, D.V. and Redman, R.M. (1993) A putative iridovirus from the penaeid shrimpProtrachypene precipua Burkenroad (Crustacea: Decapoda). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 62:107-109.

Lightner, D.V., Redman, R.M., Hasson, K.W. and Pantoja, C.R. (1995) Taura syndrome inPenaeus vannamei (Crustacea: Decapoda): Gross signs, histopathology and ultrastructure. Dis.Aquat. Org. 21: 53-59.

Lightner, D.V., Redman, R.M., Nunan, L.N., Mohney, L.L., Mari, J.L. and Poulos, B.T. (1997).Occurrence of WSSV, YHV and TSV in Texas shrimp farms in 1995: Possible mechanisms forintroduction. World Aquaculture ’97 Book of Abstracts, World Aquaculture Society, BatonRouge, LA. p. 288.

Lightner, D.V., Redman, R.M., Poules, B.T., Nunan, L.M., Mari, J.L., Masson, K.W. and Bonami,J.R. (1997) Taura Syndrome: etiology, pathology, hosts and geographic distribution, anddetection methods. In: New Approaches to Viral Diseases of Aquatic Animals. NationalResearch Institute of Aquaculture, Japan. pp. 190-225.

49

Liu, P.C., Lee, K.K. and Chen, S.N. (1996). Pathogenicity of different isolates of Vibrio harveyi intiger prawn, Penaeus monodon. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 22: 413-416.

Loh, P.C., Tapay, L.M., Lu, Y. and Nadala, Jr., E.C.B. (1997) Viral pathogens of the penaeidshrimp Adv. virus Res. 48; 263-312.

Lu, Y. and Loh, P.C. (1994) Viral structural proteins and genome analyses of the rhabdovirus ofpenaeid shrimp (RPS) Dis. Aquat. Org. 19: 187-192.

Markham, JC. (1994) Crustacea Isopoda: Bopyridae in the MUSORSTOM collection from thetropical Indo-pacific I. Subfamilies Pseudioninae (in part), Argeiinae Orbioninae, Althelginae andEntophilinae In : A.Crosner (ed.), Resultats des campagnes MUSORSTOM, Vol 10. Mem.Mus. natn. Hist. nat. 161: 225-253.

Meyers, T.R. (1990) Diseases caused by protistans and metazoans in Chapter 3.2 : Diseases ofCrustacea. In: O. Kinne (ed.) Diseases of Marine Animals Vol. 3, Biologische AnstaltHelgoland, Hamburg. pp. 350-390.

Meyers, TR., Lightner, DV. and Redman, RM. (1994) A dinoflagellate-like parasite in Alaskan spotshrimp Pandalus platyceros and pink shrimp P. borealis. Dis. Aquat. Org. 18: 71-76.

Mohney, LL., Poulos, BT., Brooker, JH., Cage, GD. and Lightner, DV (1998) Isolation andidentification of Mycobacterium peregrinum from the Pacific white shrimp Penaeus vannamei.J. Aquat. An. Health 10: 83-88.

Nakashima, Y (1995) Can small male shrimps achieve copulation in the presence of larger ones? J.Ethol: 9-16.

Nash, G., Nithimathachoke, C., Tungmandi, C., Arkarjamorn, A., Prathanpipat, P. andRuamthaveesub, P. (1992) Vibriosis and its control in pond-reared Penaeus monodon inThailand. In: M. Shariff, R.P. Subasinghe and J.R. Authur (eds.) Diseases in Asian Aquaculture1. Fish Health Section, Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines. pp. 143-155.

Overstreet, RM. (1986) Solving parasite-related problems in cultured crustacea Parasitology-Quovadis? Proceedings of the sixth International Congress of Parasitology, Edited by M.J.Howell. Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, 1986 pp 309-318.

Overstreet, R.M., Stuck, R.A., Krol, R.A. and Hawkins, W.E. (1988) Experimental infections withBaculovirus penaei in the white shrimp Penaeus vannamei as a bioassay. J. World Aquacult.Soc. 29: 175-187.

Owens, L. (1987) A checklist of metazoan paraistes from Natantia (excluding the crustaceanparasites of the caridea) J. Shellfish Res. 6:117-124.

Owens, L. (1990) Maricultural considerations of the zoogeography of the parasites of penaeidprawns. J. Trop. Aquaculture 5, 33-39.

Owens, L. (1993a) Description of the first haemocytic rod-shaped virus from a penaeid prawn. Dis.Aquat. Anim. 16: 217-221.

Owens, L. (1993b) Prevalence of Cabirops orbionei (Epicaridea; Cryptoniscidae) in northernAustralia. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 44: 381-387.

Owens, L. (1997) Special topic review: The history of the emrgence of viruses in Australian prawnaquaculture World J. of Microbiol & Biotechnol. 13: 427-431.

Owens, L., Glazebrook, J.S., Ladds, P.W. and Campbell, R.S.F. (1988) Diseases in tropicalmariculture in Australia. In Fish Diseases. Refresher Course for Veterinarians. Proceedings106, Post-Graduate Committee in Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, pp. 375–416.

Owens, L. and Glazebrook, J.S. (1985) The biology of bopyrid isopod parasitic on commercialpenaeid prawns in northern Australia in P.C. Rothlisberger, B.J. Hill, and D.J. Staples (Eds. )Second Australian National Prawn Seminar NPS2, Cleveland, Australia p. 105-113.

50

Owens, L. and Hall-Mendelin, S. (1989) Recent Advances in Australian prawns (sic) diseases andpathology. Advances in Tropical Aquaculture, Tahiti, AQUACOP, IFREMER, Actes deColloque 9: 103-112.

Owens, L. and Hall-Mendelin, S. (1990) Diseases relevant to penaeid mariculture in tropicalAustralia in Pathology in marine science Academic Press p421-432.

Owens, L., De Beer, S. and Smith, J. (1991) Lymphoidal parvovirus-like particles in Australianpenaeid prawns. Dis. Aquat. Org. 11: 129-134.

Owens, L., Anderson, I.G., Kenway, M., Trott, L. and Benzie, J.A.H. (1992a) Infectioushypodermal and hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHHNV) in a hybrid penaeid prawn from tropicalAustralia. Dis. Aquat. Org. 14: 219-228.

Owens, L., Muir, P., Sutton, D. and Wingfield, M. (1992b) The pathology of microbial diseases intropical Australian crustacea. In: M. Shariff, R.P. Subasinghe and J.R. Authur (eds.) Diseases inAsian Aquaculture 1. Fish Health Section, Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines. pp.165-172.

Paynter, J. and Lester, R.J.G. (1987) A review of the diseases of penaeid prawns in Australianaquaculture. Annual General Meeting, Australian Mariculture Association, Cairns, NorthQueensland, June 12–13, pp.1-13.

Paynter, J. and Lester, R.J.G. (1988) Diseases of cultured prawns in Australian. First AustralianShellfish Aquaculture Conference, Proceedings, pp. 162-169.

Paynter, J. (1989) Diseases of penaeid prawns in Invertebrates in Aquaculture Post GraduateVeterinary Science Committee Proceedings 117 pp. 145-189.

Pizzutto, M and Hirst, R.G. (1995) Classification of isolates of Vibrio harveyi virulent to Penaeusmonodon larvae by protein profile analysis and M13 DNA fingerprinting. Dis. Aquat. Org. 21:61-68.

Roubal, F.R., Paynter, J.L. and Lester, R.J.G. (1989) Electron microscopic observation ofhepatopancreatic parvo-like virus (HPV) in the penaeid prawn, Penaeus merguiensis de Manfrom Australia. J. Fish. Dis. 12: 199-201.

Sahul Hameed, A.S., Rao, P.V., Farmer, J.J., Hickman-Brenner, .W. and Fanning, G.R. (1996)Characteristics and pathogenicity of a Vibrio cambelli-like bacterium affecting hatchery-rearedPenaeus indicus (Milne Edwards, 1837) larvae. Aquaculture Research 27, 853-863.

Sano, T., Nishimura, T., Oguma, K., Momoyama, K. and Takeno, N. (1981) Baculovirus infectionof cultured Kuruma shrimp, Penaeus japonicus in Japan. Fish Pathol. 25: 185-191.

Sano, T., Nishimura, T., Fukuda, H. and Hayashida, T. (1984) Baculoviral mid-gut gland necrosis(BMN) of Kuruma shrimp (Penaeus japonicus) larvae in intensive culture systems. HelgolanderMeeresunters. 37: 255-264.

Sindermann, C.J. (1990) Principal Diseases of Marine Fish and Shellfish, Vol. 2, 2nd edition.Academic Press, New York.

Smith, PT (1996) Toxic effects of blooms of marine species of Oscillatoriales on farmed prawns(Penaeus monodon, P. japonicus) and brine shrimp (Artemia salina). Toxicon 3; 857-869.

Spann, K.M., Vickers, J.E. and Lester, R.J.G. (1995) Lymphoid organ virus of Penaeus monodonfrom Australia. Dis. Aquat. Org. 23: 127-134.

Spann, K.M. and Lester, R.J.G. (1996) Baculovirus of Metapenaeus bennetae from the MoretonBay region of Australia. Dis. Aquat. Org. 27: 53-58.

Spann, K.M. and Lester, R.J.G. (1997) Viral diseases of penaeid shrimp with particular reference tofour viruses recently found in shrimp from Queensland. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 13:419-426.

Sparks, A.K. (1985) Synopsis of Invertebrate Pathology Exclusive of Insects. Elsevier SciencePublishers, Amsterdam. pp. 423.

51

Thrusfield, M. (1995) Veterinary Epidemiology (2nd ed.) Blackwell Science, Oxford UK pp.479.Tsing, A. and Bonami, J.R. (1987) A new virus disease of the tiger shrimp Penaeus japonicus Bate.

J. Fish Dis. 10: 139-141.Venkkateswaran, K., Dohmoto, N. and Harayama, S (1998) Cloning and nucleotide sequence of

the gyrB gene of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and its application in detection of this pathogen inshrimp. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64: 681-687.

Vogt, G. (1992) Palaemon B-cell reo-like virus: a new virus from the hepatopancreas of the shrimpPalaemon elegans J. Invert. pathol 59: 218-220.

Vogt, G. (1997) Hepatopancreatic brush border lysis (HBL) - a new bacterial disease of the shrimpPalaemon elegans. Dis. Aquat. Org. 29, 151-155.

Vogt, G. (1996) Cytopathology of Bay of Piran shrimp virus (BPSV), a new crustacean virus fromthe Mediterranean sea. J. Invert pathol 68: 239-245.

Wolf, K. (1989) Fish viruses and fish viral diseases Comstock Publishing Associates, Ithaca &London pp.115-157.

1. INTRODUCTION 2 - Department of Agriculture and …. INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Scope of the ......

Documents

Transcript of 1. INTRODUCTION 2 - Department of Agriculture and …. INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 Scope of the ......