- :: Atom & Cosmos
- :: Body & Brain
- :: Earth
- :: Environment
- :: Genes & Cells
- :: Humans
- :: Life
- :: Matter & Energy
- :: Molecules
- :: Science & Society
- :: Other Topics
- :: Science News For Kids
CHICAGO — Young lice-infested wild salmon not only bear the burden of a parasite load, but they are also more likely to get snapped up by predators than their clean schoolmates, new research shows.
The research, presented February 15 at the meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, adds to a growing body of evidence that aquaculture, which ideally would take pressure off wild fish stocks, may harm some wild populations in unexpected ways. Scientists are still untangling the web of interactions between farmed and wild fish — a web that includes parasites, antibiotics, feed fish and the humans who scarf down more than 9 million metric tons of farmed fish every year.
When juvenile, 1-inch–long pink and chum salmon swim down the rivers of the Pacific Northwest toward the open sea, many pass aquaculture pens that dot coastal inlets. Normally, there is little overlap of adult and juvenile habitats — the young and old fish travel in different circles — and most fish don’t pick up parasites such as sea lice until they are adults. But when the wild juveniles swim through fish farm territory, the sea lice that are prevalent in the close quarters of aquaculture pens can glom onto the juveniles.
Not only do the lice suck the lifeblood from the young fish, but the wounds are also an open door for harmful bacteria and viruses. Previous research suggests that juvenile mortality linked to lice-infested farms can be as high as 95 percent, says Martin Krkošek of the University of Washington in Seattle.
Now Krkošek reports that infested fish engage in riskier behaviors, making them more likely to become dinner for the 3- to 4-inch–long coho salmon smolts, a primary predator of the pink and chum juveniles.
Krkošek
and his colleagues set up tanks with small schools of the juveniles, some of
which were infected with sea lice. The scientists trained the fish to expect
food in the exposed center of the tank, occasionally simulating a predator
strike by having a fake bird dive down into the tank. Healthy fish quickly
scattered, bolting for cover under the fake kelp in the tanks’ corners, but
lice-burdened fish took longer to seek shelter, Krkošek says. Infested fish also were more
inclined to swim in the exposed positions in the school, hanging toward the
outside of the group and lagging behind their closest neighbors, making it
easier for predators to see the fish and strike.
John Volpe of the University of Victoria in British Columbia, who also presented at the conference, is part of a research team that’s spearheading a consistent way of assessing the sustainability of aquaculture operations. The Global Aquaculture Performance Index evaluates a country’s fish farms using several parameters, such as water quality and the amount of disease and parasites. Currently the global production of farmed fish is growing, with the bulk of farmed species made up of fish that are high in the food chain and need to be fed other fish. "It's farming the tigers of the sea," Volpe says.
Found in: Agriculture, Environment and Science & Society


Removal of infected fish by predators is no real answer because the predators can also become infected. Many parasites are passed on from host to host as prey fish are consumed. Fish lice for instance can live quite well in the gill rakers of even modest sized fish. Fish lice are like moles. They tunnel through the host creating tunnels throughout the fish body. The fish dies when a vital organ is impacted in an aquarium. In the wild, the affected fish wouldn't live that long because a predator would catch and eat it - and the parasites. In the meantime the host fish is packed with Fish lice eggs or whatever other parasites that were resident.
While it's commonly thought that fish farming is taking the pressure off wild populations; that is a fantasy.
The world human population is growing too fast for fish farming and wild stock combined to keep up for long.
The planet's fish stocks are being systematically destroyed one after the other and the habitats are being scraped clean by the chains that drag along the bottom. That not only removes the fish, it precludes those former habitats from supporting any future populations for decades.
Removing shellfish and other fish from lower on the food chain is no answer either. Shell fish are the bio-filters that keep the water and the substrate clean. Remove too many of them and aquatic eco-systems would collapse and so would terrestrial eco-systems eventually as a direct result.
Removing the smaller fish would mean depriving the natural prey from the predators. That would impact predator (salmon) numbers.
What scientists don't get is the math. The natural world is not a grocery store for humans. When humans extract a living resource from an eco-system, that eco-system collapses at least in part. Just because aquatic creatures live mostly out of sight doesn't mean that our harvesting is without impact. What it means is the planet is merely a larger version of Easter Island. There is no getting off and when the food is gone, we will have no choice eventually but to start eating each other just like the isolated population of Easter Island had to after wiping out all of their local natural resources including trees and chickens. They were left with nothing substantial to eat but each other. The entire planet is now racing to that sorry fate.
No one can medicate the ocean. And if they did that would change its chemistry. Using drugs on farmed fish ought to be illegal. But then oceanic fish farms could not survive - and that would be a very good thing from a planetary perspective.
Please login or register to participate.