Environmental Biology of Fishes

, Volume 49, Issue 1, pp 129–137

Salmon lice, Lepeophtheirus salmonis, infestation as a causal agent of premature return to rivers and estuaries by sea trout, Salmo trutta, juveniles

  • Kjersti Birkeland
  • Per J. Jakobsen

Abstract

A field experiment conducted in the River Lønningdalselven in spring 1992 supports the hypothesis that salmon lice, Lepeophtheirus salmonis, infestations may cause premature return of sea trout, Salmo trutta, juveniles, either to estuaries or to rivers. When lice infested (exposed) and uninfested (control) sea trout juveniles (post smolts) were released simultaneously into the sea, exposed fish returned to the estuarine area earlier compared with controls. Within the following two days, exposed sea trout migrated further into freshwater. At that time they were infested with a median of 62.5 lice, dominated by chalimus larvae and late juveniles. Exposed sea trout suffered from an osmoregulatory failure in sea water and this is considered one reason for infested fish returning to brackish water. While only a few control fish returned to the estuary on the day of release, some more returned to freshwater the following four days. During this time they had become heavily infested with copepodids, and carried a median of 150.0 lice. It is suggested that physiological stress and high infection pressure in the sea results in sea trout juveniles returning to estuaries and freshwater.

salmonids epizootic field-experiment salmon louse migration mortality 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References cited

  1. Anonymous. 1992. The evolution of a revolution. Fisheries 17: 32–33.Google Scholar
  2. Berger, V.Ja. 1970. The effect of marine water of different salinity on Lepeophtheirus salmonis, ectoparasite of salmon. Parasitologya 4: 136–138.Google Scholar
  3. Birkeland, K. 1997. Consequences of premature return by sea trout (Salmo trutta L.) infested with the salmon louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer); migration, growth and mortality. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. (in press).Google Scholar
  4. Boxshall, G.A. 1974. Infections with parasitic copepods in North Sea marine fishes. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 54: 355–372.Google Scholar
  5. Bruno, D.W. & J. Stone. 1990. The role of saithe, Pollachius virens L., as a host for the sea lice, Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer and Caligus elongatus Nordmann. Aquaculture 89: 201–207.Google Scholar
  6. Grimnes, A. & P.J. Jakobsen. 1996. The physiological effects of salmon lice (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) infection on post smolts of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) J. Fish Biol. (in press).Google Scholar
  7. Hanenkamp, L. & H.J. Fyhn. 1985. The osmotic response of salmon louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Copepoda: Caligidae), during the transition from sea water to fresh water. J. Comp. Physiol. B 155: 357–365.Google Scholar
  8. Holst, J.C., F. Nilsen, K. Hodneland & A. Nylund. 1993. Parasites of Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., from the Norwegian Sea. J. Fish Biol. 42: 962–966.Google Scholar
  9. Hutton, J.A. 1923. The parasites of salmon. Salmon & Trout Magazine 34: 302–312.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson, S.C. & L.J. Albright. 1991a. The developmental stages of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer, 1837) (Copepoda: Caligidae). Can. J. Zool. 69: 929–950.Google Scholar
  11. Johnson, S.C. & L.J. Albright. 1991b. Development, growth, and survival of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Copepoda: Caligidae) under laboratory conditions. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 71: 425–436.Google Scholar
  12. Jònsdòttir, H., J.E. Bron, R. Wootten & J.F. Turnbull. 1992. The histopathology associated with the preadult stages of Lepeophtheirus salmonis on the Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. J. Fish Dis. 15: 521–527.Google Scholar
  13. Margolis, L., G.W. Esch, J.C. Holmes, A.M. Kuris & G.A. Schad. 1982. The use of ecological terms in parasitology (report of an ad hoc commitee of The American Society of Parasitologists). J. Parasitol. 68: 131–133.Google Scholar
  14. McKeown, B.A. 1984. Fish migration. Croom Helm, London. 224 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Nagasawa, K. 1987. Prevalence and abundance of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Copepoda: Caligidae) on high seas salmon and trout in the North Pacific Ocean. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi 53: 2151–2156.Google Scholar
  16. Siegel, S. & N.J. Castellan. 1988. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences. McGraw-Hill Book Company, Singapore. 399 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Tully, O. & K.F. Whelan. 1993. Production of nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from farmed and wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) on the west coast of Ireland during 1991 and its relation to infestation levels on wild sea trout (Salmo trutta L.). Fisheries Research 17: 187–200.Google Scholar
  18. Tully, O., W.R. Poole & K.F. Whelan. 1993a. Infestation parameters for Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) parasitic on sea trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the west coast of Ireland during 1990 and 1991. Aquacult. Fish. Manag. 24: 545–555.Google Scholar
  19. Tully, O., W.R. Poole, K.F. Whelan & S. Merigoux. 1993b. Parameters and possible causes of epizootics of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) parasitic on sea trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the west coast of Ireland. pp. 202–213. In: G. A. Boxshall & D. Defaye (ed.) Pathogens of Wild and Farmed Fish: Sea Lice, Ellis Horwood, London.Google Scholar
  20. Whelan, K. F. 1991. ‘Disappearing sea trout — decline or collapse?’ The Salmon Net 23: 24–31.Google Scholar
  21. Wootten, R., J.W. Smith & E.A. Needham. 1982. Aspects of the biology of the parasitic copepods Lepeophtheirus salmonis and Caligus elongatus on farmed salmonids, and their treatment. Proc. R. Soc. Edin. 81B: 185–198.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kjersti Birkeland
    • 1
  • Per J. Jakobsen
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Animal Ecology, Institute of ZoologyUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations