Fish and other aquatic animals are subject to a broad variety of stressors because their homeostatic mechanisms are highly dependent on prevailing conditions in their immediate surroundings. Yet few studies have addressed stress as a potential confounding factor for bioassays that use fish as test subjects. Common stressors encountered by captive fish include physical and mental trauma associated with capture, transport, handling, and crowding; malnutrition; variations in water temperature, oxygen, and salinity; and peripheral effects of contaminant exposure or infectious disease. Some stress responses are detectable through gross or microscopic examination of various organs or tissues; as reported in the literature, stress responses are most consistently observed in the gills, liver, skin, and components of the urogenital tract. In addition to presenting examples of various stressors and corresponding morphologic effects, this review highlights certain challenges of evaluating stress in fish: (1) stress is an amorphous term that does not have a consistently applied definition; (2) procedures used to determine or measure stress can be inherently stressful; (3) interactions between stressors and stress responses are highly complex; and (4) morphologically, stress responses are often difficult to distinguish from tissue damage or compensatory adaptations induced specifically by the stressor. Further investigations are necessary to more precisely define the role of stress in the interpretation of fish research results.

The zebrafish (Danio rerio) has become a very important animal model in biomedical research. In contrast to other models, such as mice, there has been relatively little documentation or control of subclinical disease in zebrafish research facilities. Several infectious and non-infectious conditions are consistently detected by histopathology in apparently healthy D. rerio. The most commonly observed infectious agent in zebrafish is Pseudoloma neurophilia, which is a microsporidian organism that targets the central nervous system, peripheral nerves, and occasionally other tissues. Mycobacteriosis, caused by M. chelonae and other species, is also a frequent finding. Less commonly encountered agents include Pseudocapillaria tomentosa, which can cause extensive proliferative enteritis, and a myxozoan (Myxidium sp.) that inhabits the urinary tract, but appears to cause few if any pathological changes. Non-infectious diseases that are often clinically unapparent in zebrafish include hepatic megalocytosis, bile and pancreatic ductal proliferation, and neoplasms of the ultimobranchial gland, gastrointestinal tract, and testis. To date there is little information on the degree to which these conditions may impact research in subclinically affected fish, but there is reason to believe that they should be considered as potentially significant causes of non-protocol variation in experiments. Therefore, it is imperative that research facilities monitor their stocks for the presence of these occult diseases, and be aware of their existence when interpreting study results. Furthermore, for underlying disease conditions that cannot be readily eradicated, it is essential to determine the physiological and immunological changes that they elicit in zebrafish. Understanding the cause, modes of transmission, and distribution of the pathogens would provide useful information for the development of control and prevention strategies.

Concerns about infectious diseases in fish used for research have risen along with the dramatic increase in the use of fish as models in biomedical research. In addition to acute diseases causing severe morbidity and mortality, underlying chronic conditions that cause low-grade or subclinical infections may confound research results. Here we present recommendations and strategies to avoid or minimize the impacts of infectious agents in fishes maintained in the research setting. There are distinct differences in strategies for control of pathogens in fish used for research compared to fishes reared as pets or in aquaculture. Also, much can be learned from strategies and protocols for control of diseases in rodents used in research, but there are differences. This is due, in part, the unique aquatic environment that is modified by the source and quality of the water provided and the design of facilities. The process of control of pathogens and infectious diseases in fish research facilities is relatively new, and will be an evolving process over time. Nevertheless, the goal of documenting, detecting, and excluding pathogens in fish is just as important as in mammalian research models.

No abstract

Over the past several decades, a number of fish species, including the zebrafish, medaka, and platyfish/sword-tail, have become important models for human health and disease. Despite the increasing prevalence of these and other fish species in research, methods for health maintenance and the management of diseases in laboratory populations of these animals are underdeveloped. There is a growing realization that this trend must change, especially as the use of these species expands beyond developmental biology and more towards experimental applications where the presence of underlying disease may affect the physiology animals used in experiments and potentially compromise research results. Therefore, there is a critical need to develop, improve, and implement strategies for managing health and disease in aquatic research facilities. The purpose of this review is to report the proceedings of a workshop entitled “Animal Health and Disease Management in Research Animals” that was recently held at the 5th Aquatic Animal Models for Human Disease in September 2010 at Corvallis, Oregon to discuss the challenges involved with moving the field forward on this front.