Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science
-
Upload
flavia-hancock -
Category
Documents
-
view
33 -
download
3
description
Transcript of Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science
![Page 1: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Increasing Tolerance for Perkinsus marinus Among Natural Crassostrea virginica Populations
from Virginia Waters
Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson
Virginia Institute of Marine Science
![Page 2: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Perkinsus marinus (“Dermo”)
• Protistan parasite, directly transmissible among oysters in a population
• Enzootic from Maine to Texas
• Present in Chesapeake Bay since at least the 1940s
• Activity intensified in 1980s during droughts
• Currently the most destructive pathogen of Crassostrea virginica in mid-Atlantic waters
![Page 3: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Perception
• Resistance to dermo disease is documented in selected aquaculture lines (Ragone Calvo et al. 2003), but not in nature in the mid-Atlantic
• Bay populations sustained by reproductive contributions of
Susceptible oysters living in low salinity refuges
Young, doomed but pre-P. marinus individuals in enzootic waters (larger, older oysters dermo-ridden, effectively non-reproductive)
“Naturally occurring wild oysters which are resistant to the disease are not available in Chesapeake Bay . . .”
J.D. Andrews, 1984
2005
![Page 4: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Perception
• Resistance to dermo disease is documented in selected aquaculture lines (Ragone Calvo et al. 2003), but not in nature in the mid-Atlantic
• Bay populations sustained by reproductive contributions of
Susceptible oysters living in low salinity refuges
Young, doomed but pre-P. marinus individuals in enzootic waters (larger, older oysters dermo-ridden, effectively non-reproductive)
“Naturally occurring wild oysters which are resistant to the disease are not available in Chesapeake Bay . . .”
J.D. Andrews, 1984
2005
The perception that natural oysters are hopelessly susceptible to dermo disease (they “just die”) underlies regional oyster management strategies today . . .
![Page 5: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Reality?
Have natural oyster populations in P. marinus-enzootic waters not begun to “catch up with” hatchery-selected strains, especially following the dermo-intense 1999-2002 years?
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 20 40 60 80 100
H. nelsoni Prevalence (%)
P. m
ari
nu
s Weig
hte
d I
ncid
en
ce
Wild
Native controls
Selected
Naïve
Peak-season York-Mobjack samples, 2001-2005
![Page 6: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Observations I: Shell Bar Reef, Great Wicomico River
• September 2005: analysis of P. marinus in samples (each n = 25) of deployed DEBYs and naturally recruited C. virginica
0102030405060708090
100
Percent Prevalence
NaturalDEBY
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Weighted Prevalence
NaturalDEBY
![Page 7: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Observations II: Shell Bar Reef, Great Wicomico River
• June-September 2006: biweekly analysis of P. marinus in samples (each n = 25) of deployed DEBYs and naturally recruited C. virginica
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
6/8/06 6/22/06 7/6/06 7/20/06 8/3/06 8/17/06 8/31/06 9/14/06
NaturalDEBY
P. marinus Weighted Prevalence
![Page 8: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Observations III: York River
• Four oyster groups each deployed in triplicate to bags (~ 200/bag) on VIMS beach between 20 April-2 May 2006
DEBYs (resistant; 64.6 ± 5.4 mm (mean ± SD)) Ross Rock native (susceptible; 55.2 ± 4.5 mm) Wreck Shoal native (48.8 ± 8.0 mm) Aberdeen Rock native (56.9 ± 5.3 mm)
![Page 9: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Observations III: York River
• Monthly mortality estimates, sampling for histology & RFTM
![Page 10: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Observations III: York River
• Weighted prevalence of P. marinus higher in naïve Ross Rock oysters than in domesticated DEBYs
![Page 11: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Observations III: York River
• Weighted prevalence of P. marinus higher in naïve Ross Rock oysters than in domesticated DEBYs
• P. marinus profile of native Aberdeen Rock, Wreck Shoal oysters more similar to selected strain (DEBYs) than to naïve Ross Rocks
![Page 12: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Observations III: York River
• Cumulative mortality higher in Ross Rocks -- approaching 100% by September -- than in DEBYs (63% in October)
Mortality, York River, 2006
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5
Cu
mu
lati
ve M
ort
ality
(%
)
OctSeptAugJulyJune
![Page 13: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Observations III: York River
Mortality, York River, 2006
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1 2 3 4 5
Cu
mu
lati
ve M
ort
ality
(%
)
OctSeptAugJulyJune
• Cumulative mortality higher in Ross Rocks -- approaching 100% by September -- than in DEBYs (63% in October)
• Cumulative mortality in Aberdeen Rocks (58% by October) similar to DEBYs; Wreck Shoals slightly higher (72%; MSX disease?)
Disease performance of natural stocks is similar to selected strains
![Page 14: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
How Might Dermo Tolerance Arise in Chesapeake Bay?
• Reliance of populations on reproduction of oysters in low-salinity refuges, and by young pre-dermo individuals in enzootic waters, should tend to maintain a high inherent susceptibility
![Page 15: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
How Might Dermo Tolerance Arise in Chesapeake Bay?
• Reliance of populations on reproduction of oysters in low-salinity refuges, and by young pre-dermo individuals in enzootic waters, should tend to maintain a high inherent susceptibility
• Size-specific dermo disease impacts may hold a key P. marinus parasitism is more intense in older individuals . . . Right?
![Page 16: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
How Might Dermo Tolerance Arise in Chesapeake Bay?
• Reliance of populations on reproduction of oysters in low-salinity refuges, and by young pre-dermo individuals in enzootic waters, should tend to maintain a high inherent susceptibility
• Size-specific dermo disease impacts may hold a key P. marinus parasitism is more intense in older individuals . . . Right?
![Page 17: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
How Might Dermo Tolerance Arise in Chesapeake Bay?
• Reliance of populations on reproduction of oysters in low-salinity refuges, and by young pre-dermo individuals in enzootic waters, should tend to maintain a high inherent susceptibility
• Size-specific dermo disease impacts may hold a key P. marinus parasitism is more intense in older individuals . . . Right?
![Page 18: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
A Closer Look: Lynnhaven River, October 2006
• Oysters collected from dermo-intense Pleasure House Creek, assigned to four size “bins” for evaluation of size-specific P. marinus parasitism: Small (45.7 ± 8.3 mm) Submarket (66.7 ± 9.7 mm) Market (90.7 ± 8.6 mm) Large (109.8 ± 11.5 mm)
• Processed for histology, RFTM
![Page 19: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
A Closer Look: Lynnhaven River, October 2006
• P. marinus weighted prevalence highest in the “submarkets”, lowest in the “small” and “large” groups
• Heaviest infections restricted to intermediate size classes--the most significant source of parasite cells
Many larger (older) oysters were only lightly infected--presumably healthy and fecund
![Page 20: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Contribution of Older Oysters
• Larger, older and still healthy and very fecund oysters do exist in natural populations from dermo-enzootic Chesapeake Bay waters
![Page 21: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Contribution of Older Oysters
• Larger, older and still healthy and very fecund oysters do exist in natural populations from dermo-enzootic Chesapeake Bay waters
• It is possible that these oysters have survived repeated dermo disease challenges by virtue of some heritable resistance or tolerance -- whatever its nature
![Page 22: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Contribution of Older Oysters
• Larger, older and still healthy and very fecund oysters do exist in natural populations from dermo-enzootic Chesapeake Bay waters
• It is possible that these oysters have survived repeated dermo disease challenges by virtue of some heritable resistance or tolerance -- whatever its nature
• A large reproductive contribution by these very fecund oysters may drive the evolution of dermo tolerance in natural populations
![Page 23: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Contribution of Older Oysters
• Larger, older and still healthy and very fecund oysters do exist in natural populations from dermo-enzootic Chesapeake Bay waters
• It is possible that these oysters have survived repeated dermo disease challenges by virtue of some heritable resistance or tolerance -- whatever its nature
• A large reproductive contribution by these very fecund oysters may drive the evolution of dermo tolerance in natural populations
• Still working against the evolution of this tolerance may be the pre-dermo contribution of numerous small but susceptible and doomed individuals
![Page 24: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Contribution of Older Oysters
• Larger, older and still healthy and very fecund oysters do exist in natural populations from dermo-enzootic Chesapeake Bay waters
• It is possible that these oysters have survived repeated dermo disease challenges by virtue of some heritable resistance or tolerance -- whatever its nature
• A large reproductive contribution by these very fecund oysters may drive the evolution of dermo tolerance in natural populations
• Still working against the evolution of this tolerance may be the pre-dermo contribution of numerous small but susceptible and doomed individuals
Is this scenario valid? Does it also characterize the more recruitment-strong environments and oyster populations of
the Southeast and Gulf?
![Page 25: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Conclusions
Data point to evolution of dermo tolerance in Chesapeake Bay oyster populations, and a possible mechanism
Suggest that the assumption that individuals in natural oyster populations have no value as broodstock -- which underlies “genetic rehabilitation”/oyster eugenics models (Allen et al.
2003), is not valid
Preservation of some natural stocks in sanctuaries, rather than complete elimination through intensive harvest with
establishment instead of reefs of domesticated broodstocks, may have merit as a component of regional restoration
strategies
![Page 26: Ryan B. Carnegie and Eugene M. Burreson Virginia Institute of Marine Science](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062422/5681348c550346895d9b7092/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Acknowledgments
• Rita Crockett and Susan Denny (VIMS Shellfish Pathology Laboratory)
• Melissa Southworth
• P.G. Ross
• Brian Barnes
• Jessica Moss
• Paul Oliver
• Jim Wesson, VMRC