Research from the last two decades suggests that fish are sentient and conscious organisms, and they can also experience pain (Jarvis et al., 2021). Moreover, there is an increasing public concern about fish welfare and a scientific interest for understanding the physiological and behavioural bases of stress responsiveness. Also, it is well known that to meet the increasing demand of consumers for fish, the aquaculture sector has intensified its production (Li et al., 2022; FAO, 2022a) and multiplied events and conditions that can cause stress to the farmed fish. For instance, fish welfare may be compromised by several common stressors such as stocking density, handling, transportation, vaccination, grading procedures and so on (Martos-Sitcha et al., 2020). In this context, standardized protocols for assessing fish welfare are necessary (Weirup et al., 2022) both for ethical reasons and for improving productivity and reducing economic losses. The aim of this work is to highlight the state-of-the-art of fish welfare monitoring in aquaculture sector and review the most recent findings in fish welfare assessment methods. Translation of this knowledge to the aquaculture industry was also considered. A keyword-based reference search was undertaken to identify papers published between 2003-2023, where fish welfare and assessment methods were discussed. According to the typology of the proposed assessment methods, they can be first classified into a) direct and b) indirect. Secondly, fish welfare indicators may be classified as: animal-based (direct) and environmental-based (indirect) indicators. In turn, animal-based indicators can be divided into individual-based indicators (e.g., gill beat rate, emaciation state, deformed opercula), group-based indicators (e.g., mortality rate, appetite, behaviour) and blood-based indicators (e.g., cortisol, glucose, lactate). The environmental-based indicators can be divided into water quality indicators (e.g., dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature) and rearing system indicators (e.g., stocking density, water current speed, lighting) (Stien et al., 2020). These indicators may be helpful to define a standardized protocol to assess fish welfare at single farm level and for the entire aquaculture sector. The use of indicators belonging to different categories is highly suggested.
Review on fish welfare and assessment methods in aquaculture
Chiara Sangiacomo;Lorenzo Rossi;Carlo Bibbiani;Baldassare Fronte
2023-01-01
Abstract
Research from the last two decades suggests that fish are sentient and conscious organisms, and they can also experience pain (Jarvis et al., 2021). Moreover, there is an increasing public concern about fish welfare and a scientific interest for understanding the physiological and behavioural bases of stress responsiveness. Also, it is well known that to meet the increasing demand of consumers for fish, the aquaculture sector has intensified its production (Li et al., 2022; FAO, 2022a) and multiplied events and conditions that can cause stress to the farmed fish. For instance, fish welfare may be compromised by several common stressors such as stocking density, handling, transportation, vaccination, grading procedures and so on (Martos-Sitcha et al., 2020). In this context, standardized protocols for assessing fish welfare are necessary (Weirup et al., 2022) both for ethical reasons and for improving productivity and reducing economic losses. The aim of this work is to highlight the state-of-the-art of fish welfare monitoring in aquaculture sector and review the most recent findings in fish welfare assessment methods. Translation of this knowledge to the aquaculture industry was also considered. A keyword-based reference search was undertaken to identify papers published between 2003-2023, where fish welfare and assessment methods were discussed. According to the typology of the proposed assessment methods, they can be first classified into a) direct and b) indirect. Secondly, fish welfare indicators may be classified as: animal-based (direct) and environmental-based (indirect) indicators. In turn, animal-based indicators can be divided into individual-based indicators (e.g., gill beat rate, emaciation state, deformed opercula), group-based indicators (e.g., mortality rate, appetite, behaviour) and blood-based indicators (e.g., cortisol, glucose, lactate). The environmental-based indicators can be divided into water quality indicators (e.g., dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature) and rearing system indicators (e.g., stocking density, water current speed, lighting) (Stien et al., 2020). These indicators may be helpful to define a standardized protocol to assess fish welfare at single farm level and for the entire aquaculture sector. The use of indicators belonging to different categories is highly suggested.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
