4.5 Article

Stability of viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus, infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus and cyprinid herpesvirus 3 in various water samples

期刊

JOURNAL OF FISH DISEASES
卷 44, 期 4, 页码 379-390

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jfd.13321

关键词

aquaculture; common carp; environmental water; fish viruses; infectivity; rainbow trout

资金

  1. German Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) through the Federal Office of Agriculture and Food (BLE) [2815NA062]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that the stability of the three viruses varied in different water samples, with bacterial load having a significant impact. Among them, CyHV-3 was the most sensitive virus and maintained infectivity for the shortest period of time.
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and common carp (Cyprinus carpio) are the two most common species in traditional fish farming in Germany. Their aquaculture is threatened upon others by viruses that can cause a high mortality. Therefore, this work focuses on three viruses-viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus, infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus and cyprinid herpesvirus 3 (CyHV-3)-that endanger these species. To prevent their spread and contain further outbreaks, it is essential to know how long they can outlast in environmental waters and what affects their infectivity outside the host. Hence, the stability of the target viruses in various water matrices was examined and compared in this work. In general, all three viruses were quite stable within sterile water samples (showing mostly <= 1 log reduction after 96 hr) but were inactivated faster and to a higher extent (up to five log steps within 96 hr) in unsterile environmental water samples. The inactivation of the viruses correlated well with the increasing bacterial load of the samples, suggesting that bacteria had the greatest effect on their stability in the examined samples. In comparison, CyHV-3 seemed to be the most sensitive and maintained its infectivity for the shortest period.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据