Advertisement

Implications of Quorum Sensing and Quorum Quenching in Aquaculture Health Management

  • Mani JayaprakashvelEmail author
  • Ramesh Subramani
Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

The world human population is growing on an exponential phase and pace. Aquaculture, raising of aquatic animals in artificial or facilitated ecosystem, is evolving as the rapidly growing food production sector globally. The growth of aquaculture industry has been speculated to be inevitable that may certainly contribute toward meeting the food security of growing global population. India, with a vast coastline and enormous marine resources, is having greater potential to build up this industry as a productive economic sector. However, the bacterial infections in aquaculture hatcheries and farms cause a huge loss in productivity and remain a major challenge for the growth of this vital industry. Considering the ill effects to environment and public health, risk of development of antibiotic resistance, and persistence of antibiotic residues in aquaculture animal foods, it has necessitated the regulatory bodies across the globe to restrict the usage of antibiotics for aquaculture disease management. Hence, finding alternate measures for the aquaculture disease management in both hatcheries and forms is the current need. It has been well documented that exhibition of virulence factors and formation of biofilms are the major factors for the establishment of disease in aquaculture animals by the bacterial pathogens. Both these factors are being regulated by quorum sensing (QS), which is a population density-dependent expression of selected phenotypes in a coordinated manner through the production of autoinducers (AI). Quorum quenching (QQ) is a disruption of quorum sensing. Thus, QQ is considered as one of the most preferred preventive strategies for the ecofriendly management of aquaculture infections. The AI molecules involved in gram-positive and gram-negative QS system and also the enzymes and molecules involved in QQ are also widely studied in aquaculture systems. This chapter would provide an overview of QS and QQ systems being operated among aquaculture pathogens and other beneficial organisms in the aquaculture system with more emphasis on shrimp aquaculture. This chapter also emphasizes the recent developments on the impact of QS and QQ with special reference to the virulence of bacterial pathogens both in vivo and in vitro with a short focus on future perspectives of QQ and QS for the disease management in aquaculture systems.

Keywords

Aquaculture systems Quorum sensing (QS) Quorum quenching (QQ) Marine bacteria Disease management 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Author MJ would like to record his acknowledgments to the Management of AMET University for encouragement and financial support in the form of seed money. Author RS thanks the University of South Pacific, Fiji, for support and encouragement.

References

  1. Abraham TJ, Palaniappan R (2004) Distribution of luminous bacteria in semiintensive penaeid shrimp hatcheries of Tamil Nadu, India. Aquaculture 232:81–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahmed N, Thompson S (2019) The blue dimensions of aquaculture. Sci Total Environ 20(652):851–861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Assefa A, Abunna F (2018) Maintenance of fish health in aquaculture: review of epidemiological approaches for prevention and control of infectious disease of fish. Vet Med Int 2018:10 pages. Article ID 5432497.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5432497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baruah K, Cam DTV, Dierckens K, Wille M, Defoirdt T, Sorgeloos P, Bossier P (2009) In vivo effects of single or combined N-acyl homoserine lactone quorum sensing signals on the performance of Macrobrachium rosenbergii larvae. Aquaculture 288:233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bauer WD, Mathesius U (2004) Plant responses to bacterial quorum sensing signals. Curr Opin Plant Biol 7:429–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bauer WD, Robinson JB (2002) Disruption of bacterial quorum sensing by other organisms. Curr Opin Biotechnol 13:234–237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Béné C, Arthur R, Norbury H, Allison EH, Beveridge M, Bush S, Campling L, Leschen W, Little D, Squires D, Thilsted SH, Troell M, Williams M (2016) Contribution of fisheries and aquaculture to food security and poverty reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Dev 79:177–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bondad-Reantaso MG, Subasinghe RP, Josupeit H, Cai J, Zhou X (2012) The role of crustacean fisheries and aquaculture in global food security: past, present and future. J Invertebr Pathol 110(2):158–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bramhachari PV, Dubey SK (2006) Isolation and characterization of exopolysaccharide produced by Vibrio harveyi strain VB23. Lett Appl Microbiol 43(5):571–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chan CY, Tran N, Pethiyagoda S, Crissman SC, Sulser TB, Phillips MJ (2019) Prospects and challenges of fish for food security in Africa. Glob Food Sec 20:17–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrisolite B, Thiyagarajan S, Alavandi SV, Abhilash EC, Kalaimani N, Vijayan KK, Santiago TC (2008) Distribution of luminescent Vibrio harveyi and their bacteriophages in a commercial shrimp hatchery in South India. Aquaculture 275:13–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cock J, Gitterle T, Salazar M, Rye M (2009) Breeding for disease resistance of Penaeid shrimps. Aquaculture 286:1–11. 10.1016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Das S, Adams L, Burke C (2010) Screening of marine Streptomyces spp. for potential use as probiotics in aquaculture. Aquaculture 305:32–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Defoirdt T, Boon N, Bossier P, Verstraete W (2004) Disruption of bacterial quorum sensing: an unexplored strategy to fight infections in aquaculture. Aquaculture 240:69–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Defoirdt T et al (2006) Quorum sensing-disrupting brominated furanones protect the gnotobiotic brine shrimp Artemia franciscana from pathogenic Vibrio harveyi, Vibrio campbellii, and Vibrio parahaemolyticus isolates. Appl Environ Microbiol 72:6419–6423PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Defoirdt T, Boon N, Sorgeloos P, Verstraete W, Bossier P (2007) Alternatives to antibiotics to control bacterial infections: luminescent vibriosis in aquaculture as an example. Trends Biotechnol 25:472–479PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Defoirdt T, Boon N, Bossier P (2010) Can bacteria evolve resistance to quorum sensing disruption. PLoS Path e1000989:6Google Scholar
  18. de Kievit TR, Iglewski BH (2000) Bacterial quorum sensing in pathogenic relationships. Infect Immun 68:4839–4849PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fray RG (2002) Altering plant–microbe interaction through artificially manipulating bacterial quorum sensing. Ann Bot 89:245–253PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gatesoupe FJ (1999) The use of probiotics in aquaculture. Aquaculture 180:147–165.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(99)00187-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gopala S, Ottaa SK, Kumar S, Karunasagar I, Nishibuchi M, Iddya Karunasagar T (2005) The occurrence of Vibrio species in tropical shrimp culture environments; implications for food safety. Int J Food Microbiol 102:151–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gupta MV (2018) Contribution of aquaculture to global food security. In: Reference module in food science. Elsevier.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100596-5.22361-5Google Scholar
  23. Haenen O (2017, April) Major bacterial diseases affecting aquaculture. Aquatic AMR Workshop, Mangalore, India, vol 1, 10–11 April 2017. Weblink: http://www.fao.org/fi/static-media/MeetingDocuments/WorkshopAMR/presentations/07_Haenen.pdf
  24. Hentzer M, Riedel K, Rasmussen TB et al (2002) Inhibition of quorum sensing in Pseudomonas aeruginosa biofilm bacteria by a halogenated furanone compound. Microbiology 148:87–102PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Heuer OE, Kruse H, Grave K, Collignon P, Karunasagar I, Angulo FJ (2009) Human health consequences of use of antimicrobial agents in aquaculture. Clin Infect Dis 49:1248–1253PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Immanuel G, Vincybai VC, Sivaram V, Marian MP (2004) Effect of butanolic extracts from terrestrial herbs and seaweeds on the survival, growth and pathogen (Vibrio parahaemolyticus) load on shrimp Penaeus indicus juveniles. Aquaculture 236(1–4):53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jayaprakashvel M, Shanmugaiah V (2015) Quorum sensing in plant pathogenic and plant associated bacteria. In: Rajeshkannan V, Kurtulus BK (eds) Sustainable approaches on controlling of plant pathogenic bacteria. CRC Press, pp 223–240Google Scholar
  28. Jayaprakashvel M, Guru R, Surendiran G, Chelvan Y, Ashok Kumar P, Selvanayagi K, Jaffar Hussain A (2014) Antagonistic mechanism of probiotic Lactobacillus against sea food and human pathogenic Bacteria. Biosci Biotechnol Res Asia 11.(Spl. Edn. 1:45–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Karunasagar I, Karunasagar I, Umesha RK (2004) Microbial diseases in shrimp aquaculture, pp 121–134. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fd5c/a1854f713f1f6572b506d3b77b75ab1f501c.pdf?_ga=2.159626749.1139818412.1567775712-327379712.1560235569Google Scholar
  30. Karunasagar I, Shivu MM, Girisha SK, Krohne G, Karunasagar I (2007) Biocontrol of pathogens in shrimp hatcheries using bacteriophages. Aquaculture 286:288–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Little DC, Bunting SW (2016) 5 – Aquaculture technologies for food security. In: Madramootoo C (ed) In Woodhead publishing series in food science, technology and nutrition, emerging technologies for promoting food security. Woodhead Publishing, pp 93–113Google Scholar
  32. Lundin CG (1996) Global attempts to address shrimp diseases. Marine Environmental Paper No. 4, Land, Water and Natural Habitats Division, Environmental Department, The World Bank. 45 ppGoogle Scholar
  33. Mäe A, Montesano M, Koiv V, Palva ET (2001) Transgenic plants producing the bacterial pheromone N-acyl-homoserine lactone exhibit enhanced resistance to the bacterial phytopathogen Erwinia carotovora. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 14:1035–1042PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manefield M, Harris L, Rice SA, de Nys R, Kjelleberg S (2000) Inhibition of luminescence and virulence in the black tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon) pathogen Vibrio harveyi by intercellular signal antagonists. Appl Environ Microbiol 66:2079–2084PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nayak S, Singh SK, Ramaiah N, Sreepada RA (2010) Identification of upregulated immune- related genes in Vibrio harveyi challenged Penaeus monodon postlarvae. Fish Shellfish Immunol 29:544–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ozer EA, Pezzulo A, Shih DM, Chun C, Furlong C, Lusis AJ, Greenberg EP, Zabner J (2005) Human and murine paraoxonase 1 are host modulators of Pseudomonas aeruginosa quorum-sensing. FEMS Microbiol Lett 253:29–37PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Rodgers CJ, Furones MD (2009) Antimicrobial agents in aquaculture: practice, needs and issues. In: Rodgers CJ, Basurco B (eds) The use of veterinary drugs and vaccines in Mediterranean aquaculture. CIHEAM, Zaragoza, pp 41–59Google Scholar
  38. Roque A, Gómez-Gil B, Guerra FA (2001) Enfermedades infecciosas más comunes en la camaronicultura en México y el impacto del uso de antimicrobianos. In: Páez-Osuna F (ed) Camaronicultura y Medio Ambiente. Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Mazatlán, Sin, Unidad Académica Mazatlán, México, pp 315–346Google Scholar
  39. Selvina J, Lipton AP (2004) Dendrilla nigra, a marine sponge, as potential source of antibacterial substances for managing shrimp diseases. Aquaculture 236(1–4):277–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sharma K, Shankar SR, Sathyanarayana KM, Sahoo ML, Rajreddy Patil AK, Narayanaswamy HD, Rao S (2010) Evaluation of immune response and resistance to diseases in tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon fed with biofilm of Vibrio alginolyticus. Fish Shellfish Immunol 29:724–732PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soundarapandian P, Babu R (2010) Effect of probiotics on the hatchery seed production of Black Tiger Shrimp, Penaeus monodon (Fabricius). Int J Anim Vet Adv 2(1):9–15Google Scholar
  42. Stevens JR, Newton RW, Tlusty M, Little DC (2018) The rise of aquaculture by-products: increasing food production, value, and sustainability through strategic utilisation. Mar Policy 90:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Subramani R, Aalbersberg W (2012) Marine actinomycetes: an ongoing source of novel bioactive metabolites. Microbiol Res 167(10):571–580PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Sung H-H, Hsu S-F, Chen C-K, Ting Y-Y, Chao W-L (2001) Relationships between disease outbreaks in cultured tiger shrimps (Penaeus monodon) and the composition of Vibrio communities in pond water and shrimp hepatopancreas during cultivation. Aquaculture 192:101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taga ME, Bassler BL (2003) Chemical communication among bacteria. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 100(Suppl. 2):14 549–14 554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teplitski M, Robinson JB, Bauer WD (2000) Plants secrete substances that mimic bacterial N-acyl homoserine lactone signal activities and affect population densitydependent behaviors in associated bacteria. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 13:637–648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tinh NTN, Asanka Gunasekara RAYS, Boon N, Dierckens K, Sorgeloos P, Bossier P (2007) N-acyl homoserine lactone-degrading microbial enrichment cultures isolated from Penaeus vannamei shrimp gut and their probiotic properties in Brachionus plicatilis cultures. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 62(1):45–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tinh NTN, Yen VHN, Dierckens K, Sorgeloos P, Bossier P (2008) An acylhomoserine lactone-degrading microbial community improves the survival of first-feeding turbot larvae (Scophthalmus maximus L.). Aquaculture 285:56–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tyagi A, Khushiramani R, Karunasagar I, Karunasagar I (2007) Antivibrio activity of recombinant lysozyme expressed from black tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon. Aquaculture 272:246–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Van Cam DT, Van Hao N, Dierckens K, Defoirdt T, Boon N, Sorgeloos P, Bossier P (2009) Novel approach of using homoserine lactone-degrading and poly-βhydroxybutyrate-accumulating bacteria to protect Artemia from the pathogenic effects of Vibrio harveyi. Aquaculture 291(1):23–30Google Scholar
  51. Vaseeharan B, Sundararaj S, Murugan T, Chen JC (2007) Photobacterium damselae ssp. damselae associated with diseased black tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon Fabricius in India. Soc Appl Microbiol Lett Appl Microbiol 45(2007):82–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wang Y-B, Li J-R, Lin J (2008) Probiotics in aquaculture: challenges and outlook. Aquaculture 281:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. You YS, Marella H, Zentella R, Zhou Y, Ulmasov T, Ho TH et al (2006) Use of bacterial quorum-sensing components to regulate gene expression in plants. Plant Physiol 140:1205–1212PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. You J, Xue X, Cao L, Lu X, Wang J, Zhang L et al (2007) Inhibition of Vibrio biofilm formation by a marine actinomycete strain A66. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 76:1137–1144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang LH (2003) Quorum quenching and proactive host defense. Trends Plant Sci 8:238–244PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhao Z, Eberhart LJ, Orfe LH, Lu SY, Besser TE, Call DR (2015) Genome-wide screening identifies six genes that are associated with susceptibility to Escherichia coli microcin PDI. Appl Environ Microbiol 81:6953–6963.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01704-15CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Marine BiotechnologyAMET deemed to be UniversityKanathur, ChennaiIndia
  2. 2.School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Faculty of Science, Technology & EnvironmentThe University of the South PacificSuvaRepublic of Fiji

Personalised recommendations

Cite chapter

Buy options