Advertisement

Development of DNA Vaccines for Aquaculture

  • Joël Heppell
  • Tong Wu
  • Niels Lorenzen
  • Anthony E. Ellis
  • Susan M. Efler
  • Neil K. Armstrong
  • Joachim Schorr
  • Heather L. Davis
Chapter

Abstract

Aquaculture is a rapidly growing industry in many countries (Meyer, 1991; Leong & Fryer, 1993). Its development is driven by an increasing demand for fish and shellfish products, and the continuous decline of wild caught harvests (Meyer, 1991; Hanfman, 1993). However, loss due to infectious disease is a major concern for fish farmers. Approximately 10% of all aquatic animals are lost annually due to pathogens (Leong & Fryer, 1993). For various reasons, such as inefficacy, high cost and/or environmental concerns, traditional antigen-based vaccines (i.e., whole killed, live attenuated and subunits) have only been used successfully for the prevention of a limited number of diseases, mainly those of bacterial origin. DNA vaccination could circumvent many of the disadvantages associated with classical methods of immunization. In mammals and birds, they have been shown to induce very potent, long-lasting and protective humoral and cell-mediated immune responses against numerous viral, bacterial or parasitic diseases (Wahren, 1996; Donnelly et al., 1997; Davis & Brazolot Milian, 1997).

Keywords

Rainbow Trout Luciferase Activity Tibialis Anterior Zebra Fish Fish Disease 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Davis, H.L. and Brazolot Millan, C.L. 1997, Blood Cell Biochemistry (in press).Google Scholar
  2. Donnelly, J.J., Ulmer, J.B., Shiver, J.W. and Liu, M.A. 1997, Annual Review of Immunology 15: 617–648.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hanfman, D.T. 1993, The status and potential of aquaculture in the United States: an overview and bibliography. National Agricultural Library, Beltsville, MD, USA.Google Scholar
  4. Leong, J.C. and Fryer, J.L. 1993, Annual Review of Fish Diseases 3: 225–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Lorenzen, N., Olesen, N.J., Vestergârd Jorgensen, P.E., Etzerodt, M., Holtet, T.L. and Thogersen, H.C. 1993, Journal of General Virology 74: 623–630.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Meier, W., Schmitt, M. and Wahli, T. 1994,. Annual Review of Fish Diseases 4: 359–373.Google Scholar
  7. Meyer, F.P. 1991, Journal of Animal Sciences 69: 4201–4203.Google Scholar
  8. Smail, D.A., Bruno, D.W., Dear, G., McFarlane, L.A. and Ross, K. 1992, Journal of Fish Diseases 15: 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Smail, D.A., McFarlane, L., Bruno, D.W. and McVicar, A.H. 1995, Journal of Fish Diseases 18: 631–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Stangeland, K., Hole, S. and Taksdal, T. 1996, Journal of Fish Diseases 19: 323–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Stone, D.M., Way, K. and Dixon, P.F. 1997, Journal of General Virology 78: 1319–1326.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Wahren, B. 1996, Immunotechnology 2: 77–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Wolf, K. 1988, Fish Viruses and Fish Viral Diseases. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joël Heppell
    • 1
  • Tong Wu
    • 1
  • Niels Lorenzen
    • 2
  • Anthony E. Ellis
    • 3
  • Susan M. Efler
    • 1
  • Neil K. Armstrong
    • 1
  • Joachim Schorr
    • 4
  • Heather L. Davis
    • 1
  1. 1.Ottawa Civic Hospital Loeb Research InstituteOttawaCanada
  2. 2.Danish Veterinary LaboratoryÅrhusDenmark
  3. 3.SOAFD Marine LaboratoryAberdeenScotland
  4. 4.Qiagen GmbHHildenGermany

Personalised recommendations