Ciguatera in the Eastern Caribbean

DAVID A. OLSEN, DAVID W. NELLIS, and RICHARD S. WOOD

Introduction

Ciguateric fish poisoning is a diseaseof circumtropical distribution whichhas apparently been a feature of humanuse of Caribbean marine resourcessince pre-Columbian times (Price,1966). Resource use patterns by theCarib and Arawak Indians who inhab­ited the eastern Caribbean would indi­cate that they, too, must have encoun­tered ciguateric problems (Price,1966).

Presently, many of the Lesser Antil­lean islands have ended or are endingtheir colonial ties and have assumed theeconomic responsibilities of indepen­dent nationhood. Many of these newCaribbean island nations are among themost densely populated areas in theworld, with several (most notably Bar-

ABSTRACT-Ciguatera fish poisoningplays an important role in Caribbeanmarine resource development. Many inde­pendent eastern Caribbean island nationsrely heavily on marine protein. Current de­mand in these areas for seafood approaches775,000 t, a figure greatly in excess of the200,000 t potential yield, as well as currentlandings which are near 87,000 t.

Annual incidence of ciguatera fishpoisoning may reach nine per thousand res­idents in Caribbean communities like St.Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. These highrates affect public health, fishery develop­ment, and liability aspects of island life.Distribution of ciguatera in the Caribbeanindicates that it is found most frequentlynorth of Martinique. Three areas of "highrisk," as well as "high risk" species, areidentified. In St. Thomas nearly 50 percentofthe 84 species in the catch and 56 percentof the total landings by weight bear somerisk of intoxication if eaten.

46( I)

bados) among the top ten in worldpopulation density. As part of their con­tinuing political and economic evolu­tion, emphasis is being placed uponeconomic development of the limitedresources available.

Fish have traditionally been a pri­mary source of protein for island resi­dents, a fact which has resulted in ahigh demand for them and heightenedthe impact of ciguatera within thecommunities. Fisheries development isa frequent and important strategy forthe region since primary production ofmarine protein both enhances the localdiet and eliminates the need to importexpensive substitutes, which mayexacerbate serious balance-of-paymentdeficits that normally characterizesmall-island economies.

There are two features of fishery re­sources in the eastern Caribbean whichoverride the best intentioned plans fordevelopment. The first of these is theinability of the resources to support theadditional levels of exploitation im­plied by most projected developmentschemes. Many island platforms aresimply too small to support additionalexploitation, and development mustconcentrate upon optimization of re­source uti Iization and distribution.Evidence to this effect is presented sub­sequently.

The second feature limiting Carib-

The authors are with the Division of Fish andWildlife, 101 Estate Nazareth, SI. Thomas, Vir­gin Islands 00802. The current affiliation ofDavid A. Olsen is: Managing Director,Thompson Management Inc., 740 Scallop Drive,Port Canaveral, FL 32920. Views or opinionsexpressed or implied are those of the authors anddo not necessarily represent the position of theNational Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA.

bean fishery development is tropicalfish poisoning, which affects and limitsevery serious or responsible attempt todevelop fisheries in areas where cigua­tera occurs. Ciguatera problems mayrange from the unquantifiable loss ofproductivity of poisoned workers tolack of product export and public healthproblems stemming from insufficientprotein in the diet.

Tacket! estimated that the annual in­cidence of fish poisonings reported tothe emergency room in St. Thomas,V.I., was around 4.2 cases per thousandpopulation. In a household survey, shereported a level of 7.3 per thousand,indicating that 43 percent of the casesare not reported to the emergencyroom. McMillan et al. (1980) found intheir household survey that only 45 per­cent of those poisoned reported to theemergency room. They also found that22 percent of all households surveyedexperienced at least one poisoning in 5years. Taylor (cited by Tacket, footnoteI) reported that this figure was as highas 31 percent in homes where fish waseaten. In this regard, St. Thomas isprobably typical of other islands whereciguatera is a normal risk associatedwith the consumption of marine pro­tein.

Ciguatera poisoning is not only fre­quent but dangerous: Scheuer2 has re­ported that ciguatoxin is possibly thefifth most toxic chemical compound

'Tacket, C. 1981. Studies of epidemiological andcI inical aspects of ciguatera. Presentation atCiguatera Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico,unpubl.

2Scheuer, P. 1981. Chemistry of ciguatoxin. Pre­sentation at Ciguatera Conference, San Juan,Puerto Rico, unpubl.

13

Table 1.-Caribbean island fisheries background data.

Land area' Shelf area' Number Fish landings'Island/nation (km') (km') Population of tourists4 (t)

Bahamas 13.935 195.000 210,000 118,596 2,800 (Nassau only)Hispanicla

Dominican Republic 48,734 1,350 5,275,410 301,178 6,435Haiti 27,750 N/A 4,832,504 139,964 2,500

Jamaica 11,430 3,250 2,137,300 395,382 10,100Cuba 114,524 40,000 9,533,000 N/A 165,000Bermuda 54 518 60,000 N/A 468 (shellfish only)Turks and Caicos 430 1,200 7,615 12,005 1,050

Puerto Rico 8,897 3,990 3,187,600 1,698,481 1,819U.S. Virgin Islands 449 1,972 95,000 1,200,000 1,272British Virgin Islands 202 4,579 12,574 120,054 692AngUilla 120 '4,493 8,615 7,422 760St. Martin 34 '4,493 25,598 221,544 1,000St. Barthelemy N/A '4,493 5,000 N/A N/ASaba 13 4,198 1,018 N/A '40St. Christopher-Nevis 261 '882 47,481 32,437 27

St. Eustatius 261 '882 1,342 N/A 40Antigua-Barbuda 441 2,533 78,000 86,627 800Montserrat 98 140 14,160 15,537 126Guadeloupe 1,760 1,864 324,530 118,078 4,990Dominica 751 470 70,302 13,651 500Martinique 1,100 1,273 324,832 158,375 2,167St. Lucia 616 545 109,928 90,070 2,200Barbados 430 320 251,272 369,924 1,579

St. Vincent andGrenadines 389 1,300 101,000 38,448 379

Grenada 344 2,000 111,184 29,389 900Aruba 193 206 159,067 188,831 '700Curacao 444 96 63,049 68,457 '850Bonaire 288 82 9,034 22,746 '100Trinidad and Tobago 5,218 20,400 1,162,000 194,898 4,322Cayman Islands 259 250 11,000 120,263 N/A

'Europa "ublications (1980). 1981 (1980 figure).'Manar (1974). 'FAO Fish. Rep. 278, supplement.3Shared jurisdiction, boundaries undeclared. 'G. van Buurt, Netherlands Antilles Department of"Caribbean Tourism Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Fisheries. Pars. commun., 1982.

known. The minImum lethal dose inmice is 45 x 10- 8g/kg.

Since most fishery development at­tempts involve capitalization of cen­tralized marketing mechanisms, liabil­ity associated with the sale ofciguatoxic fish also becomes an issue.In the Virgin Islands, fish has tradition­ally been marketed by the fishermenthemselves, and resolution of the liabil­ity question has been accomplishedthrough personal interaction. As mar­keting has evolved through the estab­lishment of cooperatives and fish mar­kets, resolution of liability conflicts as­sociated with fish poisoning has beenthrough the courts. Currently, fish mar­kets in the Virgin Islands carry expen­sive product liability insurance whichrequires the posting of warnings that"purchase of local fish may be hazard­ous to the customer's health." All ofthese costs are, of course, passed on tothe consumer. Several St. Thomas mar­kets no longer sell local fish and importall fish products sold, except for a verynarrow range of species caught fromspecific "safe" locales by fishermenwho have developed reputations forproduct reliability.

Ciguatera impacts can also be felt inthe tourist industry. The diversity andnovelty of local fishes frequently attracttourists. Many hotels, however, refuseto risk preparing locally caught fishsince poison victims may sue for dam­ages or, at best, make bad publicity.

Although these impacts are difficultto assess, we attempt to do so here. Torelate them to the utilization of easternCaribbean fishery resources, this dis­cussion will deal with the region's de­mand for and ability to produce marineprotein. We also analyze the incidenceand risk of fish poisoning in the VirginIslands, which is more or less typical inspecies composition to many of thesmall islands in the eastern Caribbean.Finally, we present some of the charac­teristics common to ciguatoxic fishwhich are used by the knowledgeablefish buyer to reduce the risk associatedwith consumption of locally caughtfish. Eastern Caribbean seafood con­sumers have acquired a considerablebody of local knowledge which theyemploy in order to avoid intoxication.

14

Eastern Caribbean Fisheries

The 31 island nations of the Antilleschain are located on 29 different islandplatforms. In addition, outlying sub­merged banks contribute an additionalarea for a total of around 300,000 km2

of fishable shelf. Although some islandnations (most notably Barbados) havesucceeded in harvesting significantquantities of pelagic species, most ofthe fish harvest depends on the islandplatform for its production.

Fishery officials have estimated thatthe sustainable yield in the Caribbean is0.64 t/km 2 (CFMC3). Using this figure,fish production of the submerged plat-

3CFMC. 1981. Fishery management plan for shal­low water reef fishes. Unpubl. rep., 47 p., on filewith the Caribbean Fishery Management Coun­cil.

forms can then be calculated by multi­plying the shelf area times the produc­tion constant. The assumption is madethat sustainable yield levels cannot beexceeded without long-term reductionof the resource's ability to replenish it­self. In fact, however, some easternCaribbean fisheries resources are har­vested in excess of sustainable yield.Long-term implications of this strategyare presently unknown, The results pre­sented in Table 1 indicate that the totalpotential annual fish production whichmay be expected in the Caribbean is­lands is slightly under 200,000 t.

In Table 2 we have estimated the de­mand for marine protein as determinedfrom population estimates and percapita seafood consumption figuresfrom the literature. Total annual de­mand for seafood consumed in theAntilles is near 775,000 t, over three

Marine Fisheries Review

Table 2.-Demand for marine protein in the caribbean Islands. Table 3.-Comparison between island shelf potentialyield, fish landings, and demand for marine protein in

Resident Resident Tourist Total 1I1e caribbean.

consumption rate l fish consumption2 fish consumption 3 demandIsland/nation (kg/person/year) (Vyear) (Vyear) (Vyear) Poten-

Fish land- tial

Bahamas 5,446 235 5,681 ;ngs yield' Demand

Hispaniola Island/nation (t) (t) (t)

Dominican Republic 136.808 598 137,406Haiti 125,323 274 125,597 Bahamas '2,800 124.800 5,681

Jamaica '30.1 145,458 773 146,231 Hispaniola

Cuba 247,222 247,222 Dominican Republic 6,435 864 137,406

Bermuda 1,556 1,556 Haiti 2.500 125,231

Turks and Caicos 197 23 220 Jamaica 7,227 2,080 146,231Cuba 43.186 25,600 247,222

Puerto Rico '8.2 26,138 3,323 29,461 Bermuda '468 331 1,556

U.S. Virgin Islands '16.4 1,558 2,347 3,905 Turks and Caicos 1,050 768 220

Br~ish Virgin Islands '34.1 429 235 664Anguilla '23.6 203 15 218 Puerto Rico 1,819 2,553 29,461

SI. Martin 664 433 1,097 U.S. Virgin Islands 1,272 1,262 3,905

SI. Barthelemy 130 130 British Virgin Islands 692 2.930 664

Saba 26 26 Anguilla 760 2,875 218

St. Christopher-Nevis 1,230 63 1,293 SI. Martin 1.000 2,875 1,097SI. Barthelemy N/A 2.875 130

SI. Eustatius 37 37 Saba '40 2,686 26Antigua-Barbuda '25.9 2,020 169 2,189 St. Christopher-Nevis 27 564 1,293Montserrat 367 30 397Guadeloupe 8,411 231 8,642 SI. Eustatius 40 564 37Dominica '41.4 27 27 Antigua-Barbuda 800 1,621 2,189Martinique 8,424 310 8,734 Montserrat 126 90 397SI. Lucia '26.0 2,851 176 3,027 Guadeloupe 4,990 1,205 8,642Barbados "26.0 6,515 723 1,238 Dominica 500 301 27

Martinique 2,167 814 8,734SI. Vincent and SI. Lucia 2,200 349 3,027

Grenadines '27.7 2,797 75 2,872 Barbados 1,579 205 7,238Grenada 2,883 57 2.940Aruba 4,125 369 4,494 SI. Vincent andCuracao 1,635 134 1,769 Grenadines 379 832 2,872Bonaire 234 44 278 Grenada 900 1,280 2,940Trinidad and Tobago 30,134 981 31,115 Aruba '700 132 4,494Cayman Islands 205 235 440 Curacao '850 61 1,769

Bonaire '100 52 278'Rate assumed at 25.9 kg/person/year unless otherwise ment Bank, Bridgetown, Barbados. Trinidad and Tobago 4,322 13.056 31,115noted. 'D. A. Olsen and J. C. Ogden. 1981. Management planning Cayman Islands N/A 160 440'Computed by multiplying the population by consumption for Anguilla's fishing industry. Eastern Caribbean Naturalrate. Areas Program, Christiansted. SI. Croix, 43 p. Unpubl. rep. 88,947 193,785 774,540'Computed based on 7-day average stay and 46.3 kg/ 'COB. 1979. Appraisal report on fisheries development-tourist/year consumption rate. Antigua, 46 p. On file at Caribbean Development Bank, 'Available yield = shelf area x 0.64 Vkm' (CFMC, text foot-'Cole (1976). Bridgetown, Barbados. nole 3).'CFMC (text footnote 3). 'J. Wylie. 1977-78. Pers. commun. 2Nassau only.'COB. 1980. Appraisai report on fisheries deveiopment- ,oAdams (1980). 'Shellfish only.British Virgin Islands, 43 p. On file at Caribbean Develop- 'G. van Buurt. Netherlands Antilles Department of Agricul-

ture and Fisheries, 1982. Pars. commun.

times the sustainable yield. This de­mand figure is compared in Table 3 tothe actual landings and the sustainableyield available for harvest.

Table 3 demonstrates several facts.First, few of the islands are currentlysupplying their own demand for sea­food. Second, although current land­ings constitute less than 50 percent ofthe yield, most of that underexploitedarea is on the Bahama Bank. If theBahama Bank is deleted from consider­ation, current landings of 87,000 t ex­ceed the 66,000 t sustainable yieldfigure for the region. Thus, althoughlocal areas of potential expansion mayexist, any increase in landings mustcome from expansion into currentlyunexploited resources.

46(1)

Occurrence of Ciguaterain the Caribbean

Surveys of Halstead (1970), more re­cently by Bagnis4

, and our own surveyshave supported statements that cigua­tera is more prevalent in the islandsnorth of Martinique. Areas of ciguaterarisk in the eastern Caribbean are shownin Figure 1. Three primary centers ofthe toxin are shown. The first occurs inthe area of Redondo between Antiguaand Montserrat and was responsible fora significant outbreak of poisonings in

'Bagnis, R. 1978. Report of the Mission to theAntilles and Easter Island August 15 - September25,1978. Institute of Medical Research, Papeete,Tahiti, 58 p., unpubl.

Antigua in 1980. The second area oc­curs between the eastern edge of theSaba Bank and along the southern edgeof the Anguilla Bank. Fish from thisarea are almost certainly responsible forthe intoxication of nearly 70 persons inSt. Croix in early 1981 (Lewis et aI.,1981). The final center of toxicity oc­curs along the narrow shelf south ofNorman and Peter Islands in the BritishVirgin Islands.

Figure 1also shows that large areas ofthe southern Virgin Islands shelf, theAnguilla Bank, the Antigua-BarbudaBank, and some of the other islandsconsistently produce toxic fish. Theremaining shelf area is generally free oftoxic fish, with some exceptions. Thisfigure demonstrates the universality of

/5

Figure 1.-Areas of ciguateric fish poison­ing in the eastern Caribbean.

(]SI. Lucia

Barbados

~Martinique

....... 't:?~. Tobago

~,\.~ Guadeloupe..~ Dominica

•

nTrinid~~

These general ities are consistentwith the body of knowledge accumulat­ing on Gambierdiscus toxicus, the as­sumed ciguatoxin biogenitor (Bagnis etaI., 1980). Following is an ecologicalmodel which explains the epidemiol­ogy of ciguatera.

Gambierdiscus toxicus is foundabundantly as an epiphyte on the sessilealgae such as Dictyota. Turbinaria.Acanthophora, and Spyridia making upthe mixed community present on deadcoral and other hard substrates in shal­low water. As herbivorous speciesgraze on the algae, they ingest the di­noflagellates and the toxin enters thefood web. Depending on position in thefood web, most members of the coralreef community are exposed to some of

of any species than when eating smallindividuals of the same species.

.............................

Aves

o

KEY

Virgin Islands

~•.;. ....'...••,~:~:" ,.Anguillaw..:n...."....~_J!~.. SI. Martin,.

E?) ;:··Sati~'·li.·.""· "'~I...;.~::;;:'~ ",~;,,:'/,,:,::: Barbuda..:.;:::::. ~ :.' ~~

··;·~t Kitts -~,,j. ,\~: AntiguaNeVIS '. 0 .,"'~•.

t.t Montserrat_ Infrequent pOIsoning

~ frequent pOISOning

Ci::J hIgh fiSk area

Venezuela

a

..........:..: ...~.. _.,

Caribbean Sea

species nearby may be relatively free ofciguatoxin. As an example, the southcoast of St. Thomas is highly suspect,while the north coast is considered to besafe, as is St. Croix 40 miles to thesouth.

3) An area previously free of fishpoisoning may suddenly give rise to anoutbreak of toxic fish, then eventuallyreturn to a safe condition. Althoughdocumented only in the Pacific (Banner,1967), circumstantial evidence for asimilar phenomenon in the Caribbeanis known to the authors.

4) Toxic fish are generally high inthe food chain and are generally fish­eating predators. In the Caribbeanwhere all species of fish are eaten,plant-eating, plankton-eating, andcoral-eating fish tend not to be toxic.

5) A greater risk of intoxication isincurred when eating large individuals

Which Fish Are Poisonous?

Several generalities can be used tosummarize the body of information onwhich fishes tend to poison in theCaribbean. These are:

1) Toxic fish are generally as­sociated with the island shelf benthicfood chain. Pelagic fishes like dolphinand tuna are rarely, if ever, implicatedin ciguatera intoxications (Randall,1958).

2) Fishes in one local area may havea high level of toxicity, but the same

risk assumed by seafood consumers inthe Caribbean.

Historically, one "solution" to avoidpoisoning has been to consume fishfrom only low-risk areas. Traditionally,fish buyers knew (or learned) whichfishermen fished in these areas and al­tered their buying patterns accordingly.However, with the advent of more ag­gressive marketing practices, thisfamiliarity is no longer feasible. Addi­tionally, fish market owners frequentlyfind that local fishermen are not suffi­ciently reliable in their supply and havebegun to import fish from other areas.As our previous analysis has shown,surplus production is available onlyfrom the Anguilla Shelf, the Antigua­Barbuda Bank, and the Saba-Nevisarea. As is shown in Figure I, ciguaterais present on these shelves.

Another factor which has resulted inan increase in the presence of toxic fishin the market has been the relativelyrecent increase in "distant seas" fishingby Puerto Rican and St. Croix fisher­men who fish throughout the northeastCaribbean. Until the mid-1970's, sea­food consumers in these islands weregenerally certain that they were pur­chasing fish caught on their own islandplatform. Since that time, considerableinvestment has resulted in a fleet ofPuerto Rican fishing boats which fishthroughout much of the Caribbean. St.Croix fishermen, limited by the rela­tively small island shelf, have alsobegun to fish the Saba Bank. As a result,both islands have begun to receive fishlanded from distant areas where fisher­men may be unfamiliar with the inci­dence of toxicity.

16 Marine Fisheries Review

the toxin. Since the toxin is extremelystable, and is accumulated throughoutthe life of the fish, it leads to higherconcentrations in larger and older indi­viduals, with more toxin present in theliver than in muscle tissue. As ex­pected, species high in the food chainare more likely to carry large amountsof toxin. Individual food preference andavailability can greatly alter thesegeneralities: A large carnivorous fishmay contain no significant toxin (Ran­dall, 1958), while a small omnivoremay produce a clinical case of poison­ing. Certain species, because of dietpreferences, may pose a high risk oftoxicity, while closely allied species donot. Some examples from Division ofFish and Wildlife research will serve todemonstrate the above:

I) Greater amberjack, Serioladumerili, is a highly suspect species;yet, a 23-pound individual from an areawith a high incidence of ciguatoxicfishes proved nontoxic in a mongoosebioassay of its liver and subsequenthuman consumption.

2) Mutton snapper, Lutjanus analis,and dog snapper, L. jocu, commonlyhave overlapping home ranges, yet theformer is considered to be toxin free,while the latter is commonly responsi­ble for ciguatera intoxication.

3) The gastropod Cittarium pica is aprized and regularly consumed item ofseafood considered to be free ofciguatoxin; yet, one of the authors con­tracted a suite of neurologicalsymptoms characteristic of ciguateraafter several consecutive meals of C.pica collected near the previously men­tioned Norman Island center ofciguatoxin. (C. pica grazes primarilyon shallow sessile algae.)

We believe that ecological conditionsmay support a continuous population ofdinoflagellates, resulting in an area witha high level of ciguatoxic fishes. A tran­sient supply of nutrients or suitable sub­strate might result in a bloom of G. taxi­cus, which creates a pulse of toxin intothe food chain. As this toxin reaches thecarnivorous fish consumed by humans, ashort-term epidemic of ciguatera couldoccur in a previously safe area (Banner,1967).

46( /)

The final point to be made involvesthe generally accepted idea that specificknowledge of which fishes are mostoften toxic will allow consumers to re­duce risk of poisoning. In the VirginIslands, many fish importers, throughcareful selection of species andsources, are convinced that they areeliminating risk. Although most fishconsumers in the Caribbean are awareof the more common fish which poison(great barracuda, Sphyraena bar­racuda; greater amberjack, etc.), manyare unaware of the widespread distribu­tion of ciguatoxin throughout the foodchain. Although they may certainly besuccessful in reducing risks, the lack ofa definitive test for toxins precludes riskelimination.

To demonstrate the wide distributionof ciguatoxin, we have presented inTable 4 a list of the fish landings in St.Thomas and indicated high-riskspecies, frequent poisoners, infrequentpoisoners, and generally safe species.This Iist is derived largely from inter­views and information acquired fromVirgin Islands fishermen. In St.Thomas, high-risk species are gener­ally not landed and are under­represented on this Iist. Table 4 showsthe complexity of the choice facingconsumers between species desirablefor eating and those safe for consump­tion, as they choose from among the 85species which appear in this list. Thesummary results indicate that only 44percent of the landings by poundageand 50 percent of the species can beconsidered to be effectively withoutrisk. It should also be noted that manyof these "safe" species are among theless desirable. A considerable abil ity toidentify species is required to selectsafely among those more highly prized,such as the snappers and groupers.

Summary

The following observations wouldappear to characterize the fishery im­pact of ciguatera in the eastern Carib­bean. First, fish is an important stapleof the eastern Caribbean diet. Demandfor it far outstrips both current catchlevels and the potential of the resourcesto supply it. Consequently, any action

or phenomenon which reduces theamount of harvestable marine proteinmay nutritionally affect the populationsof less developed nations and economi­cally exacerbate undesirable balance­of-payments problems when substitutesources are imported.

Secondly, ciguatera reduces the ex­portability of fish from the few areaswhich could conceivably export surplusavailable yield in exchange for foreigncurrency. The amount of this reductionhas been estimated at between 2 and 15percent of the available yield. In St.Thomas, as much as 64 percent of thepoundage landed bears some risk of in­toxication.

It follows, then, that improvement ofthe situation will require one of twoevents. The first, only remotely possi­ble, would be the development oftechniques to limit or predict an intro­duction of the toxin into the marinesystem. The second would be the de­velopment of a universally applicablefield test to determine whether or notany given fish is toxic. In this wayciguatoxic fish poisoning may be sub­stantially reduced as a major circum­tropical health problem.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge theunpublished information we gatheredat the National Marine Fisheries Ser­vice workshop on ciguatera held in SanJuan, Puerto Rico, in 1981.

Literature CitedAdams, J. E. 1980. Fish preferences and prej­

udices in a small Caribbean island: A study offish consumption patterns in St. Vincent basedon a household survey. Proc. Gulf Caribb.Fish. Inst. 32: 15-34.

Bagnis, R., S. Chanteau, E. Chungue, J. M.Hurtel, T. Yasumoto, and A. Inoue. 1980. Ori­gins of ciguatera fish poisoning: A new di­noflagellate, GambierdisclIs toxiclIs Adachiand Fukuyo, definitely involved as a causalagent. Toxicon 18: 199-208.

Banner, A. H. 1967. Marine toxins from thePacific. I.-Advances in the investigation offish toxin. III Animal toxins, Pergamon Press,N.Y.

Cole, R. C. 1976. Fishery training needs in theWestern Central Atlantic. WECAFC Rep. 1,71p., Rome.

Europa Publications. 1980. Europa yearbook,vol. 2. Europa Pub!. Ltd., Lond., 1,838 p.

Halstead, B. W.1970. Resultsofafieldsurveyonfish poisoning in the Virgin and Leeward Is-

/7

Table 4.-Composition of Virgin Islands commercial fish catch in percent of pounds landed.

Per- Per- Per-cent cent cent

Family of Family of Family ofGenus, species, Rank land- Genus, species, Rank iand- Genus, species, Rank land-and common name risk 1 ings2 and common name risk 1 ings2 and common name risk 1 ings2

Dasyatidae L. synagris, lane snapper 4 0.03 S. chrysopterum, redtail parrotlish 4 1.47Dasyatis americana, southern Ocyurus chrysurus, yellowtail snapper 4 2.89 S. radians, bucktooth parrotfish 4

stingray 4 Pristipomoides aquilonaris, wenchman 4 1.92 S. rUbripinne, redfin parrotfish 4S. viride, stoplight parrotlish 4 3.99

Orectoiobidae MuraenidaeGinglymostoma cirratum, nurse shark 4 Gymnothorax funebris, green moray 2 Labridae

G. moringa, spotted moray 2 Bodianus rufus, Spanish hogfish 2 0.12Belonidae Halichoeres radiatus, puddingwife 4

Tylosurus crocodi/us, houndfish 3 0.45 Haemulidae Lachnolaimus maximus, hogfish 3 1.06Grunts (unidentified) 6.61

Holocentridae Anisotremus surinamensis, black AcanthuridaeSquirrelfishes 4.84 margate 3 Acanthurus bahianus, ocean surgeon 4 0.12Holocentrus adscensionis, squir- A. virginicus, porkfish 3 A. chirurgus. doctorfish 4 3.73

relfish 3 Haemulon album, margate 3 1.06 A. coeruleus, blue tang 4 0.02H. coruscus, reef squirrelfish 3 H. aurolineatum, tomtate 3H. rufus, longspine squirrelfish 3 H. bonariense, black grunt 3 Sphyraenidae

H. flavolineatum, French grunt 3 0.07 Sphyraena barracuda, great barra-Serranidae H. me/anurum, cottonwick 3 0.04 cuda

Sea basses and grouper 0.60 H. plumieri, white grunt 3 0.35Epinephelus adscensionis, rock hind 2 2.31 H. sciurus, bluestriped grunt 3 0.05 ScorpaenidaeE. afer, mutton hamlet 4 0.60 Scorpaena plumieri, spotted scor-E. cruentatus, graysby 3 Sparidae pionfish 2E. fulvus, coney 4 2.37 Porgies (unidentified) 3.48E. guttatus, red hind 3 8.71 Calamus calamus, saucereye porgy 3 0.15 Bothidae, left-eye floundersE. morio I red grouper 2 0.84 C. penna, sheepshead porgy 4E. striatus, Nassau grouper 4 2.25 C. pennatula, pluma 4 BalistidaeMycteroperca venenosa, yellowfin Aluterus scriptus, scrawled filefish 4

grouper 2 0.58 Mullidae Balistes vetula, queen trigger fish 2 29.68Hypoplectrus unicolor, butter Mulloidichthys martinicus, yellow Cantherhines pUllus, orangespotted(black) hamlet 4 0.60 goatfish 4 0.25 filefish 4

Pseudupeneus maculatus, spotted Monacanthus ciliatus, fringed file-Carangidae goatfish 0.74 fish 4 0.40

Seriola dumerili, greater am-berjack Chaetodontidae Ostraciidae

Caranx crysos, blue runner Chaetodon capistratus, foureye but- Lactophrys bicaudalis, spottedC. latus, horse-eye jack 0.37 terflyfish 4 trunkfish 3 0.08C. lugubris, black jack C. sedentarius, reef butterfly fish 4 L. polygonia, honeycomb cowtish 3 0.16C. ruber, bar jack 0.75 C. striatus, banded butterfly fish 4 L. quadricornis I scrawled cowfish 3 0.27

L. triqueter, smooth trunkfish 3 0.21Scombridae Pomacanthidae

Scomberomorus cavalJa, kingfish 2 2.34 Ho/acanthus ciliaris, queen angelfish 4 020 DiodontidaeEuthynnus alletteratus, little) H. Isabelita, blue angelfish 4 0.07 Diodon holacanthus, balloonfish 3

tunny) 3 3.43 H. tricolor, rock beauty 4 0.20 D. hystrix, porcupinefish 3Sarda sarda, Atlantic bonito) Pomacanthus arcuatus, gray angel-

fish 4 3.03 SciaenidaeLutjanidae P paru, French angelfish 4 0.53 Equetus lanceolatus, jackknife-fish 4

Apsilus dentatus, black snapper 3 0.07 E. punctatus, spotted drum 4

Lutjanus analis, mutton snapper 4 0.13 ScaridaeL. apodus, schoolmaster 2 0.28 Scarus coeru/eus, blue parrotfish 4 1.84 EphippidaeL. buccanella, blackfin snapper 2 0.81 S. croicensis, striped parrotfish 4 0.12 Chaetodipterus faber, Atlantic spade-L. campechanus, red snapper 3 S. taeniopterus, princess parrotfish 4 0.09 fishL. griseus, gray snapper 3 0.76 S. vetula, queen parrotfish 4 0.10L. jocu, dog snapper 1 0.45 Sparisoma aurotrenatum, redband PomacentridaeL. mahogoni, mahogany snapper 2 parrotfish 0.19 Abudefduf saxatilus, sergeant major 4

% of landings (Ib) %of specieslRank risk: 1 High risk of poisoning 0.37% 3.5%

2. Frequent poisoners 33.05 10.53. Infrequent poisoners 21.88 36.54. Seldom poison 44.70 49.5

100.00% 100.0%

'No figure = less than 0.01 percent.

lands during 7-18 January 1970. FAO Dep.Fish., Rome, 16 p.

Lewis, J_, O. Caines, C. Christian, and R.Schneider, 1981. Ciguatera fish poisoning ­SI. Croix, Virgin Islands of the United States.Morb_ Mortal. Weekly Rep. 30:138-139.

18

Manar, T. A_ (editor). 1974_ Exploratory fishingin the Caribbean. Mar. Fish. Rev. 36(9):1-87.

McMillan, J. P., H. R_ Granade, and P. Hoffman_1980. Ciguatera fish poisoning in the U.S. Vir­gin Islands. J. Coil. VI. 6:84-107.

Price, R_ 1966. Caribbean fishing and fishermen:

An historical sketch. Am. AnthropoL68(6): 1363-1383.

Randall, J. E. 1958. A review of ciguatera, tropi­cal fish poisoning, with a tentative explana­tion of its cause_ Bull. Mar. Sci. Gulf.Caribb. 8(3):236-267.

Marine Fisheries Review