Signal 1 Facilitators and Signal 2 Facilitators, Their Immunomodulatory Compounds, Receptors They Act on and Principal Immune Responses They Elicit
11.4 VACCINE—TYPES OF ADMINISTRATION
The vaccines are administrated through diluted vaccine suspensions using the immersion method, orally through feed, and through the classic method of injecting in the intramuscular (DNA vac- cines) or the intraperitoneal route (w/o-based vaccines). When the duration and level of efficacy is taken into account, the injection method is the best mode, but it induces stress while handling fish and shrimp. In the case of small fry which cannot be injected, vaccination can be done through the oral route or the immersion method.
11.4.1 VaccIne admInIstratIon—IntraperItoneal/Intramuscular InjectIon metHod Injection-based vaccination plays a major role in the fortification of aquatic organisms from patho- genic diseases from the production cycle till the harvest period. During the late 1980s, in salmon and trout, water-based vaccines were primarily used against the pathogens such as Vibrio salmonicida, Listonella anguillarum, and Yersinia ruckeri. In Norwegian salmon farming, water-based furuncu- losis vaccines were not effective against infection caused by Aeromonas salmonicida, whereas the application of oil-based and immersion vaccines in the early 1990s significantly reduced the furun- culosis disease outbreak (Sommerset et al., 2005). The water-in-oil (w/o) adjuvants had shown pro- longed and high efficacy of protection against infections in salmonid culture. For instance, there are several types of oil containing emulsion like water-in-oil-water (w/o/w), oil-in-water (o/w), w/o, and oil-in-water-in-oil (o/w/o), but for long-term protection, the w/o emulsions are used primarily in fish vaccines (Ancouturier et al., 2001). The w/o vaccines have the ability to improve the economy of the aqua farmers by increasing the growth (larger size) and yield till the harvest period. In some cases like during the Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) harvest, the downgrading and reduced growth caused by the injection site reactions of w/o vaccines were obvious (Midtlyng et al., 1996). Several other related studies show that the inflammatory reactions caused by the vaccines may vary in different species of salmonid (Mutoloki et al., 2010). The aftereffects of these vaccines are less vulnerable in some species such as the yellowtail (Seriola quinqueradiata), turbot (Scophthalmus maximus), sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax), and cod (Gadus morhua) (Graviningen et al., 2008; Afonso et al., 2005; Castro et al., 2008; Maira et al., 2008). Usually the anesthetized fishes are vaccinated by a team of professional vaccinators by following righteous vaccination procedure and a professional vaccinator has the ability to vaccinate up to 3500 fishes per hour. In the past two decades, new auto- mated vaccination machines had been developed in order to reduce the high labor cost for manual vaccination and these automated vaccinators have the capability to vaccinate around 20,000 fishes per hour (Brudeseth et al., 2013). For a matter of fact, the DNA vaccines are also administrated
Mass Vaccination in Aquaculture 175
TABLE 11.1 List of Vaccines Used in Aquatic Organisms Infectious Viral PathogensViral FamilyVaccine Experimental ConditionsVaccines- Dosage (μg)
Relative Percent Survival (RPS)Reference White spot syndrome virus (WSSV)NimaviridaeMonovalent vaccine, purified VP28 proteinPost-larval staged Penaeus monodon, challenged for 3–7 days
2577Witteveldt et al. (2004) WSSVNimaviridaePurified VP24 proteinAdvanced post-larval staged Penaeus monodon, challenged for 10 days
5 1064 11Thomas et al. (2014) WSSVNimaviridaeTransgenic B. subtilis spores, CotB-VP28 CotC-VP26 CotC-VP28
Litopenaeus vannamei oral administration (14 days)10 each47 100 50
Nguyen et al. (2014) Ning et al. (2011) WSSVNimaviridaeVP28 protein (Chlamydomonas reinhardtii)1 g L. vannamei, challenged for 10 days4 mg70Lahn et al. (2021) WSSVNimaviridaeAttenuated envelope protein VP28Intramuscular injection in L. vannamei for 4 weeks590Ma et al. (2019) Infectious hematopoietic necrosis virusRhabdoviridae RNAG Glycoprotein1 g rainbow trout, challenged for 6 weeks1075Anderson et al. (1996) Infectious Salmon anemiaOrthomyxoviridae, ssRNAHemagglutinin-esterase (HE)20 g Atlantic salmon pre-smolts, challenge for 9 weeks15 and two 15 μg boosters40–60Mikalsen et al. (2005) Hemorrhagic septicemia virus (HSV), freshwaterRhabdoviridaeG13 g rainbow trout, challenged for 54 weeks 10 5097 94Lorenzen et al. (1998) HSV, MarineRhabdoviridaeG3 g Japanese flounder, challenged for 1 month1093–100Byon et al. (2005) Hirame rhabdovirus (HIRRV)RhabdoviridaeG2 g Japanese flounder, challenged for 28 days1 1070 90Takano et al. (2004) (Continued)
176 Fish Vaccines
TABLE 11.1 (continued) List of Vaccines Used in Aquatic Organisms Infectious Viral PathogensViral FamilyVaccine Experimental ConditionsVaccines- Dosage (μg)
Relative Percent Survival (RPS)Reference HIRRVRhabdoviridaePartial G3 g Japanese flounder, challenged for 21 days595Seo et al. (2006) HIRRVRhabdoviridaeG10 g Japanese flounder, challenged for 28 days1096Yasuike et al. (2007) Spring viremia carp virus (SVCV)RhabdoviridaeMixture of two G plasmids11 g common carp, challenged for 6 weeks25 each48Kanellos et al. (2006) Atlantic halibut nodavirus (AHNV)Nodaviridae, ssRNACapsid protein C3.6 g turbot, challenged for 35 days50Sommerset et al. (2003) AHNVNodaviridaeC2.2 g turbot, challenged for 10 weeks207Sommerset et al. (2005) Infectious pancreatic necrosis virusBirnaviridae, dsRNASegment A large ORF and VP2 VP2 alone20 g Atlantic salmon post-smolts, challenged for 69 days15 each84Mikalsen et al. (2005) Channel catfish virus (CCV)Herpesviridae, large dsDNAORF6 ORF59 ORF6 & 59
6–10 months old channel catfish, challenged for 4–6 weeks50 50 50
15 38 46
Nusbaum et al. (2002) Red seabream iridovirusIridoviridae, large dsDNAMajor capsid ORF5695–10 g red seabream, challenged for 30 days 25 each43–69 48–71Caipang et al. (2006)
Mass Vaccination in Aquaculture 177
through intramuscular injection in most of the cases; for example, the DNA vaccine used against infectious hemorrhagic necrosis (IHN) is administrated by intramuscular injection.
11.4.2 admInIstratIonof ImmersIon VaccInesIn aquatIc organIsms
The immersion vaccines that are commercially available are either live bacterial vaccines or sus- pension of formalin-inactivated bacteria. In immersion vaccination, the inactivated antigens are exposed for a shorter time in a concentrated antigen suspension or exposed in diluted antigen sus- pension for a longer duration. The standard concentration of immersion vaccines was 1/10 dilution in the concentrated suspension of vaccine, but the duration of exposure is only between 30 and 60 seconds. For example, in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), the application of 1/10 dilution radio labeled A. salmonicida vaccine suspension with exposure duration between 5 seconds and 10 minutes does not show any considerable changes in immunological level (Tatner et al., 1986).
Whereas when compared the 1/10 dilution to 1/100 dilution for 2 hours has resulted in noteworthy uptake in rainbow trout. Likewise, a 1/500 dilution of inactivated immersion vaccines is adminis- trated in the holding tank for 30 minutes by direct bath for better results. Usually, this method is facilitated by increasing oxygenation and reducing water level in the holding tank. When compared to dip, bath vaccination has less stress, labor intensity, and handling of fish. To improve the immer- sion vaccine uptake, several techniques have been applied in the past two decades such as the ultrasound-mediated uptake, hyperosmotic dip, and multiple puncture instrument (Huising et al., 2003). Despite a higher uptake of vaccine components during vaccination, none of the vaccines have obtained commercial status to use in the aquaculture industry. Also, it is important to vac- cinate fishes with diseases, such as infectious pancreas necrosis (IPN) and rainbow trout fry syn- drome, while in the fry stage as soon as possible. The efficacy is reliant on the improvement of immunocompetence of the vaccinated fish. In coho salmon (Oncorhyncus kitsutch), fry below 1 g had poor response, whereas fry of 1–2 g had shown improved protection, with a duration of between 3 and 4 months. Long-term protection is exhibited only in fry size above 2 g. In the USA, live vac- cines are used against Flavaobacterium columnaris and Edwardsiella ictaluri in catfish production, where a frozen vial of vaccine is sufficient to vaccinate catfish of 3–4 kg in approximately 20 L of water. In channel catfish fry (Ictalurus punctatus), between 7 and 30 days of post-hatching, the vac- cine showed effective and remarkable results.
11.4.3 oral admInIstratIonof VaccInesIn large-scale aqua farmIng
Oral administration of vaccines through feed along with antigens is the superlative method of oral vaccine delivery. In this case, the commercially available vaccine suspensions are either coated in the feed with antigen or feed is mixed with antigen during production. However, the efficiency of oral vaccines depends on the amount of antigen content present in the feed/uptake in gut/gastric degradation and antigen adsorption (Wang et al., 2020). MSD Animal Health is a US-based com- pany, which has patented encapsulation technology for oral vaccines’ production. Similarly, for the prevention of ISA and salmon rickettsial septicemia (SRS), Centrovet Laboratories had patented a MicroMatrixTM Targeted Delivery Systems (MTDS). Likewise in Japan, vaccine developing com- panies have licensed oral vaccine against disease caused by Lactococcus garvieae in Seriola sp.
weighing around 100–400 g. Against enduring endemic diseases, these oral vaccines can be used as booster or primary vaccine for improved protection with higher feasibility for vaccine delivery.
11.4.4 VaccIne regImes
In various aquatic species, the reason for the development of vaccine regime is to protect the aquatic species (fish, shrimp, etc.) throughout the production cycle period. In this case, the vaccination can be implicated at three different administrative time-points, which usually initiates with dip
178 Fish Vaccines vaccination further followed by a booster vaccination (bath/dip or oral) and ends up with inject- able vaccine. Subsequent vaccinations will not be encouraged after administration/injection of w/o-based vaccination. But, eventually in Chile, injection vaccination has been performed before oral booster vaccination against piscirickettsiosis. Eventually, to reduce the tedious work intensity of vaccine administration, the booster vaccination is frequently administered by means of bath/
oral or dip delivery (mixed in diet) of vaccine components, which also reduces the stress occur- rence in fish during vaccine administration. Similarly, like described in the vaccination guide, the immersion vaccine regimes were orally delivered for sea bass against pasteurellosis and vibriosis (You et al., 2018).