Recent Advances in Aquaculture Microbial Technology

By Ajay Kumar

Recent Advances in Aquaculture Microbial Technology emphasizes various topics on microbiology related technology for aquaculture development and discusses different types of microbiological applications, thus serving as an all-inclusive reference which consolidates microbial technologies adopted in the field. The book covers the history and development of microbial technology in aquaculture as well as aquaculture microbiology, diversity and the role of microbes in aquaculture systems. In addition, it presents the beneficial microbial communities in aquaculture and varying methods employed to study bacterial association in fish, microbes and fish diseases.

This resource will help improve research experiments and accomplishments in the area of aqua-culturally relevant microbial technology, making it useful for researchers and scientists in the field.

• Describes the history and development of microbial technology in aquaculture
• Presents scientific methods employed to study bacterial association in fish
• Includes applications of microbial derived nanomaterials in disease prevention and treatment
• Provides information and the use of probiotics and prebiotics in aquaculture

• Language: English
• Publisher: Academic Press
• Release date: Oct 20, 2022
• ISBN: 9780323906661

Book preview

Chapter 1

History and development of microbial technology in aquaculture

Sebastian Jose Midhun¹, ² and Damodaran Arun³,    ¹School of Biosciences (Microbiology), Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam, Kerala, India,    ²Department of Veterinary Pathology, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, SK, Canada,    ³Department of Biology, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada

Abstract

All organisms are influenced by their surrounding environments including both physical and biological. Microbes play a vital role in biological interactions between host and their environment. Microbes are ubiquitously found in the aquatic ecosystem, and every organism is under the influence of microbial entities throughout its life span. The association between microbes and organisms could be detrimental, beneficial, or neither of them. Microbes are the major candidate for this association because of their survivability and distribution throughout the water column. The interactions between microbes and organisms are quite important and necessary in the point of survival but sometimes may depart. The beneficial interactions of microbes can be utilized for the betterment of cultivable or commercially important organisms. This idea has been extensively used in aquaculture for the better and augmented production of fish and shellfish. A number of technologies use microbes, especially beneficial microbes, found in aquaculture. Probiotic development, fermentation, food production, water quality enhancement, vaccine production, wastewater treatment, etc. are some of the important aspects of microbial technology. The beneficial usage of microbes started several decades ago. The process and application of microbes have expanded since and are continuously developing. The present chapter gives an insight into the microbial interaction happening in the aquaculture system, history, development, and its commercial significance.

Keywords

Microbial interaction; aquaculture; beneficial microbes; microbial technology; history of microbial application

Contents

Outline

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 History and development of microbial applications in aquaculture 2

1.3 Microbial interactions in aquaculture for the benefit of microbial technology development in aquaculture 4

1.4 Commercial significance 6

1.5 Where we are now? 9

1.6 Conclusion 10

References 10

1.1 Introduction

Farming of aquatic organisms such as fish, shellfish, etc. on large scale to enhance their production is generally regarded as aquaculture. The farming of fish is the most common form of aquaculture. It involves raising fish commercially in tanks, ponds, or ocean enclosures, usually for food. Compared to another mode of fishing, aquaculture practices help global food security as well as meet global needs for edible and reliable food production (Tacon and Metian, 2013). Aquaculture production has been drastically increased in the past decades because of the enhanced contribution to world food production, pharmaceutical, as well as industrial raw material production, and stocking and ornamental trade of aquatic organisms (Daniel Merrifiel, 2014). Consequently, certain interventions are necessary for enhancing the production of aquaculture produces. Growth enhancers, antimicrobials, water quality controllers or enhancers, etc. have been used for increasing aquaculture productions (Olmos et al., 2020). Several novel methods or practices have been developed for augmented production. Among them, sustainable methods have received tremendous acceptance from aquaculture practitioners. Microbial interventions or microbial technology is one of the attractive eco-friendly methods widely accepted nowadays.

Infectious diseases are a major problem in aquaculture. Worldwide, fish farming uses water from the river, estuary, and coastal areas, which makes it prone to external pollution, leading to loss of yield in aquaculture. Microbial infections are the major causes of mortality reported in the aquaculture system, since widespread disease outbreaks may lead to a complete loss of aquaculture produces (Elbashir et al., 2018). In most cases, disease outbreaks are associated with contaminants present in the water column. Loss of water quality put forth most of the adverse effects in fish farming. This will dwindle food security and human well-being. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, 2000) studies indicated that capture fisheries were becoming unsustainable, making aquaculture reliable and promising. Aquaculture is the fastest evolving food production sector in the world, with approximately 6.3% of average annual growth rate since 2000 (average 8.8% per year between 1980 and 2010), and in 2020, it accounted for approximately 47% of the world’s fish supply (FAO, 2020). Thus, any loss in aquaculture due to disease outbreaks will have a far-reaching adverse effect on the economy of a country (Allison et al., 2009).

In this regard, new eco-friendly methods for pathogen control are required to be achieved. One of the recent eco-friendly approaches for controlling diseases in fish farming is based on the applications of biocontrol agents in the aquaculture system. This kind of approach is developed based on fish–microbe interactions. Studies have been directed toward developing new dietary supplementation strategies using growth-promoting agents such as probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, photobiotic, and other functional dietary supplements (Denev, 2008). Most of the biocontrol agents used in aquaculture systems are probiotics or their derivatives. The application of probiotics in aquaculture is in practice for the last few decades, and a large number of studies are conducted in this field to make or identify new potential microbes that can be used as probiotics (Irianto and Austin, 2002a). Preventing diseases along with the enhanced growth and improved health status of the fish can enhance the yield and quality of the aquaculture products as well. This can be achieved by developing effective eco-friendly methods based on fish–microbe interactions.

1.2 History and development of microbial applications in aquaculture

Microbes are known to humankind since Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek’s discovery of microbes in 1676. He is considered the first microbiologist and regarded as the Father of Microbiology. The abundance and diversity of microorganisms can outnumber all other organisms present on the earth. They provide major ecosystem services and exist as the natural capital in the world. Thus, it is clear that microorganisms are the primary producers, and their presence or functioning is essential for the existence of life on earth. However, the knowledge of microbes remains limited, and we are not able to culture almost 99% of them (Saikia and Smith, 2005). Life on earth is mainly based on or given particular significance in co-evolution, especially the co-evolution of microbes and macro-organisms. Thus, the microbial interactions—beneficial or detrimental—always pave the path for microevolution rather than macroevolution (Raven et al., 1988).

The microecology concept was first formulated by the German Doctor Voeker Rusch in 1977. He remarked that microbial ecology, or microecology, is an ecological science that deals with codependence and association between microbes and their host’s cellular or molecular level (He, 1994; Mao et al., 2006). The history of microecology has been in light for less than 50 years. It was an elaborated concept to study and understand the microflora in the gastrointestinal tract of animals under the notions of micro-eco nutrition, microdysbiosis, micro-eco-prevention, and microeubiosis (He, 1994). Microecological agents, or microbes, associated with the host can be supplemented as normal microflora when the gut of an animal lacks its normal microflora and needs to regulate microflora in the animal and maintain its microeubiosis in the gut, to toughen immunological responses and to augment digestibility and absorption of micro- and macronutrients. It can also be used as prophylactic medicine in the absence of diseases or to treat diseases. In addition to that, it may increase the feed conversion ratio (FCR) of food or feed. Nevertheless, microecology exists all over the place not only in the guts of animals but also in plants.

Application of beneficial bacteria in aquaculture falls under the title probiotics application in aquaculture. The word probiotic is derived from the Greek words pro and bios meaning life (Schrezenmeir and Clinical, 2001). Elie Metchnikoff, in 1905, first described the beneficial role played by some bacteria in farming applications. However, the word probiotic was established by Lilly and Stillwell in 1965 (Lilly and Stillwell, 1965) as an amendment of the primordial word "probiotika." It was denoted as an agent that has the reverse effect of antibiotics. Parker, in 1974, used this term for describing a microbial feed/food supplement (Parker, 1974). The first experiential application of probiotics in aquaculture was established by Kozasa (1986). He used probiotic bacterium Bacillus toyoi spores as feed additive to increase the growth rate of yellowtail, Seriola quinqueradiata. Later, Fuller (AFRC, 1989) extended the definition to live microbial food additives, which improve the microbial balance of the body, thereby improving the health of the animal. Guarner and Schaafsma made an assumption that probiotics are live microbes that give health benefits when consumed in ample quantity (Guarner and Schaafsma, 1998).

According to Hill et al. (2014), probiotics are live microorganisms that when administered in adequate amounts, confer health benefits on the host. This definition has been further reiterated by Reid et al. (2019) with specific guidelines for the selection and establishment of a probiotic bacterial strain. According to his report, the probiotic microbe should be alive in an adequate number when administered. The strains must be identified genetically, classified using the latest terminology, and designated by numbers, letters, or names. Properly designed studies must be conducted to designate a strain as a probiotic for humans and other animals.

1.3 Microbial interactions in aquaculture for the benefit of microbial technology development in aquaculture

Every living being is associated with other organisms in their surroundings. Organisms are influenced by their surrounding environments including both physical and biological. The interactions (especially biological) between organisms are quite important and necessary from the perspective of survival but sometimes may depart. This is the same in the case of fish–microbe interactions. As an ecosystem, aquatic life is also prone to every kind of interaction or associateships—beneficial, harmful, or neither. Microbes are the major candidate for this association because of their survivability and distribution throughout the water column. Findings of various studies indicate the fact that fish possess bacterial populations on several parts of their body such as skin, gill, digestive tract, light-emitting organs, and vital internal organs such as kidney respiratory tracts, liver, spleen, etc. While the debate is going on in the case of muscle if it was devoid or not microbes. It is evident that all aquatic fauna, especially fish, is constantly exposed to microbes from different sources including aqua flora or sediments from sewage and feces (Sadeghi et al., 2021). Therefore, these organisms assuredly influence the entire microflora of fish in the vicinity. Its external surfaces including gills and digestive tracts as a common path of food and water are more prone to this kind of association. It is generally believed that a greater number of microbes could be seen in grown fish, but actually, that the association starts right from the beginning of larval development (Olafsen, 1998). Consequently, the microflora associated with the larva, egg, food, water, etc. will exert influence on the microflora of developing fish. We could thus modify or manipulate, to some extent, the microflora by administering prebiotics in the farm food ingredients that would favorably affect the host to improve in its growth by stimulating intestinal absorption, making the fish body more hospitable to beneficial symbionts (Burr et al., 2005). The probiotics that are administered as food supplements may colonize the fish body for the long term or short term depending upon its survivability and interaction (Robertson et al., 2000).

Conceptualizing published results indicate that the fate of the microbe that may interact with fish has mainly three likely scenarios. First, most of the organisms present in the surrounding closely interact with the external surface of the fish at first and concentrate on the worn-out parts, especially scale or their damaged and aberrated parts (Irianto and Austin, 2002a), because these parts are easiest to be accessed and quite low in the terms of self-defense. The anchoring of microbes to these areas becomes much easier than the rest of the body usually protected enough from the surrounding. Second, the organisms find the path along with water to the mouth and colonize in the digestive tract (Olafsen, 2001). Not all microbes can colonize and take advantage of it because some of the resident microbes in fish or compounds produced from fish itself as self-defense can inhibit the growth and proliferation of evading microorganisms, especially bacteria (Austin et al., 1995).

Each microbe that comes into contact with fish might not elicit any kind of interactive effects in fish but sometimes will take advantage of the host. Most of the microbes causing fish disease may not always cause the disease to every fish but target old and weak fish that are less disease tolerant and immune deficit. Most of the cases of disease outbreaks are associated with contaminants present in the water column. Loss of water quality put forth most of the adverse effects in fish farming. This will dwindle food security and human well-being. Food security is finding new dimensions and has gained importance nowadays because the human population is projected to rise to 7.5–10.5 billion by 2050 (UNDP, 2006). FAO (Netlolls, 1995) studies indicated that capture fisheries are becoming unsustainable, making aquaculture a reliable and promising field in this scenario. Aquaculture is the fastest evolving food production sector in the world, with an approximately 6.3% of average annual growth rate since 2000 (average 8.8% per year between 1980 and 2010) and accounts for approximately 47% of the world’s fish supply.

Apart from that, several reports indicate that some of the microbes that are pathogenic to humans can colonize fish, and thus, there is a great chance to evade those who directly interact with the infected fish or might board into commercial areas leading to infection in beneficiaries or customers. For mitigating these deleterious effects, most aquaculture practitioners use antimicrobials such as antibiotics and other synthetic or nonsynthetic products. Antibiotics are sometimes applied to the water prior to the introduction of fish to the aquaculture system to avoid pathogen outbreaks as a precautionary measure, which has been reported to be effective (Christian et al., 2014). This prophylactic measure is beneficial in the way that prevents the loss and augments fish growth, despite several pitfalls. It is well conceded that the problems of antimicrobial use in fish or animals are of global concern. International interdisciplinary cooperation is essential, and FAO, OIE World Organisation for Animal Health, and WHO (World Health Organization) have organized several consultations to address the issues related to antimicrobial use, the resultant emergence of resistant pathogens, and the potential public health impact. Previous negotiations have dictated that antimicrobial resistance is a problem related to all types of antimicrobial use, including use in humans and animals.

Fish–microbe interaction is inevitable, but utilizing these organisms in a better way to make better interaction for better outcome could be achieved by the administration of such organisms as probiotics (Fig. 1.1).

Figure 1.1 Beneficial microbial interactions in aquaculture.

As stated earlier, the application of probiotics in aquaculture is in practice for the last few decades, and a large number of studies are conducted in this field to make or identify new potential microbes that can be used as probiotics (Irianto and Austin, 2002b). Research has been directed toward developing new dietary supplementation strategies using growth-promoting agents such as probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, photobiotic, and other functional dietary supplements (Denev, 2008). New integrative methodologies involve everything mentioned before in a proper scaffold administered in proper dosages. We need extensive research and established practices in this field. Preventing diseases along with the advanced or superior quality of fish could not be achieved by means of a single approach, but instead, an integrative or cumulative way of approach will help us to achieve the greater goal in this field (Toranzo et al., 1993; Hagan et al., 2002).

1.4 Commercial significance

The major commercial significance of beneficial microorganisms is based on their sustainable and environment-friendly approach. According to the study published by Mitra (2021), the worldwide market for beneficial microbes, especially probiotic components, additives, and foods, almost attained $49.4 billion in 2018 and is projected to reach $69.3 billion by 2023. Recently, several commercial probiotic preparations have been presented, which contain single or consortia of live microorganisms, which have been used for supplementing aquatic organisms for augmented production and better health status.

Despite laboratory preparations, several commercially accessible products currently exist in the market. One of the first commercially available products was based on Bacillus isolates called Biostar. It was used in the production of cultured catfish (Queiroz and Boyd, 1998). Later in 1998, Moriarty described the application of the probiotic Bacillus spp. commercial strains, which were used to increase the quality and survivability of pond-cultured shrimp (Moriarty, 1999; Moriarty, 1998).

Chang and Liu (2002) studied the efficacy of Bacillus toyoi and Enterococcus faecium SF68 isolates found in Toyocerin and Cernivet LBC, respectively, to treat or stop the mortality of the Anguilla anguilla L due to edwardsielosis. Generally, E. faecium has been used as a potential probiotic for humans, and B. toyoi has been used primarily in terrestrial animals. El-Haroun et al. (2006) developed Biogen, a dietary probiotic containing B. subtilis for the increased growth performance in Oreochromis niloticus. Along with probiotics, some of the commercially available products in aquaculture contained prebiotics such as mannans, glucans, and yucca extract in their preparations for increased beneficial effects (El-Dakar et al., 2007; Martínez Cruz et al., 2012). Recently lactobacilli and enterobacteria have garnered massive attention from researchers. Several probiotic preparations are available in the market based on these two groups of bacteria. A recent study by Ringø et al. (2020) showed that lactic acid bacteria and bacilli probiotics are significant candidates for aquaculture. Another study conducted by Sonnenschein et al. (2021) revealed that bacteria belonging to the group Roseobacter, Phaeobacter act as a potent and safe probiotic solution for aquaculture.

At present, commercial products are presented in powdered or liquid forms, and a range of technologies are being developed for the improvement of products based on microbes. The primary technology used in microbial product development is fermentation. Recently, attention has been given to optimizing the fermentation conditions to augment the feasibility and efficacy of probiotics for large-scale production (Setta et al., 2020; Guan et al., 2021; Behera and Panda, 2020). Usually, the manufacturing is conducted in batch cultures because of the complexity of the industrial range function of continuous systems (Soccol et al., 2010)

Microencapsulation of probiotics for immobilization was developed for more feasibility and longevity (Zam, 2020). In this method, microbes at elevated concentrations are encapsulated in a colloidal matrix by means of CMC (carboxymethylcellulose), alginate, chitosan, or pectin to protect the microbe from physical and chemical alterations. The process generally adopted for microencapsulation of beneficial organisms is the adhesion to starch, emulsion, spray drying, and extrusion (Rokka and Rantamäki, 2010; Frakolaki et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2016). In view of the application to aquaculture, Rosas-Ledesma et al. (2012) successfully encapsulated Shewanella putrefaciens in calcium alginate, representing the endurance of encapsulating the bacterial cells through the gastrointestinal tract of Solea senegalensis.

Presently, commercial preparations in the lyophilized form are widely used because of their advantages for effective storage and transportation. However, the circumstances for reconstitution of lyophilized forms in terms of moisture, temperature, and osmolarity of the solution are crucial for the survival of the beneficial microbes (Kumar et al., 2016; Muller et al., 2009; Jérôme, 2020). The process of microbial product development includes four major steps, namely, identification and characterization of potential microbial strains, production and processing, storage, and marketing (Fig. 1.2).

Figure 1.2 Process of production and commercialization of beneficial microbes.

It is imperative to underline the fact that commercial products must offer a health advantage to the host and should have the capability to endure storage conditions. Furthermore, it should colonize in the gut of the aquatic species for effective action (Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, these preparations must be safe to use, that is, they should belong to the category of GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe by The United States Food and Drug Administration) and efficient in protecting the well-being of aquatic animals (Wang et al., 2008; Narla and Lim, 2020).

1.5 Where we are now?

The aquaculture sector is a significant food production sector and is fulfilling the nutritional requirement of a constantly budding population. For mitigating excessive use of chemicals and other therapeutic modes that may harm consumers, sustainable and eco-friendly methods are adopted (Dawood and Koshio, 2020). One of the major technological approaches is the beneficial use of microbes. Since the discovery of microbial use in a beneficial way in aquaculture, a steady increase in the application, as well as technology development, has been witnessed in this area. The major application of beneficial bacteria is collectively summarized under probiotics. Other than probiotic application, a number of alternative purposes have been reported (Wang et al., 2020; Pugazhendi et al., 2021; Algar et al., 2020). A few of these are enumerated below:

• Microbe-derived nutrient production; micro- and macronutrient production.

• Antispoilage agents.

• Vaccine production.

• Water quality improver.

• Fermentation technology for food and other value-added product development.

• Biosynthesis of nanoparticles for aquaculture use.

• Aquaculture device development; cleaning equipment coating, cage preparation, etc.

• Recirculating aquaculture system.

• Ex-situ biofloc formation.

• Bioenergy production.

• Sediment microbial fuel cell preparation; saline anode microbial fuel cell under saline condition.

• Surface display system for probiotics for better production of beneficial biomolecules.

Apart from beneficial activities and applications of probiotics, few problems persist in aquaculture and mariculture. One of the major problems is associated with farmers who do not differentiate microecology from the normal ecology of microbes. Farmers generally lack knowledge concerning the microbial application as probiotics or other means and thus depend on age-old technologies.

At present, successfully introduced or established microbe-derived products are very few. In this scenario, we need more products that are based on microbes because of their environment-friendly approach and sustainability. Projection of beneficial microbe research is hopeful. The present status describes that its beneficial microbial applications cannot meet up the requirement of fish and shellfish culture and water or environment requirements. Therefore, further studies are required for utilizing beneficial microbes for developing consistent and conventional technologies for aquaculture.

1.6 Conclusion

The aquaculture industry is an important area of business as well as a continuously developing field. The recent explosion of population and nutrient requirements largely depends on aquaculture and maritime cultures. Due to diseases and other dreadful effects, aquaculture industry faces unprecedented losses. Chemicals, antibiotics, and other means of intervention make the field unsustainable. Consequently, new eco-friendly sustainable methods are needed to be achieved. This approach is developed based on the fish–microbe interactions present in the aquatic system. Research has been strengthened in developing new microbial technologies in the field of aquaculture. It has been a long time since microbial technologies are being used in aquaculture, but the needs are increasing gradually. Thus, the field of beneficial microbial application and technology development is quite important and needs to be explored further.

References

AFRC, 1989 AFRC RF. Probiotics in man and animals. The Journal of Applied Bacteriology. 1989;66:365–378 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.1989.tb05105.x.

Algar et al., 2020 Algar CK, Howard A, Ward C, Wanger G. Sediment microbial fuel cells as a barrier to sulfide accumulation and their potential for sediment remediation beneath aquaculture pens. Scientific Report. 2020;10:1–12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-70002-4.

Allison et al., 2009 Allison EH, Perry AL, Badjeck MC, et al. Vulnerability of national economies to the impacts of climate change on fisheries. Fish and Fisheries. 2009;10:173–196 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2008.00310.x.

Austin et al., 1995 Austin B, Stuckey LF, Robertson PAW, Effendi I, Griffith DRW. Aprobiotic strain of Vibrio alginolyticus effective in reducing diseases caused by Aeromonas salmonicida, Vibrio anguillarum and Vibrio ordalii. Journal of Fish Diseases. 1995;18:93–96.

Behera and Panda, 2020 Behera SS, Panda SK. Ethnic and industrial probiotic foods and beverages: efficacy and acceptance. Current Opinion in Food Science. 2020;23:29–36 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2020.01.006.

Burr et al., 2005 Burr G, Gatlin D, Ricke S. Microbial ecology of the gastrointestinal tract of fish and the potential application of prebiotics and probiotics in Finnish aquaculture. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. 2005;36:425–436 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-7345.2005.tb00390.x.

Chang and Liu, 2002 Chang CI, Liu WY. An evaluation of two probiotic bacterial strains, Enterococcus faecium SF68 and Bacillus toyoi, for reducing edwardsiellosis in cultured European eel, Anguilla anguilla L. Journal of Fish Diseases. 2002;25:311–315 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2761.2002.00365.x.

Christian et al., 2014 Christian B, Georgian T, Vizireanu AC. Effect of probiotic bacillus species in aquaculture—an overview. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati. 2014;38:9–17.

Daniel Merrifiel, 2014 Daniel Merrifiel ER. Aquaculture Nutrition: Gut Health, Probiotics and Prebiotics Edited Wiley 2014.

Dawood and Koshio, 2020 Dawood MAO, Koshio S. Application of fermentation strategy in aquafeed for sustainable aquaculture. Reviews in Aquaculture. 2020;12:987–1002 https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12368.

Denev, 2008 Denev, S.A., 2008. Ecological Alternatives of Antibiotic Growth Promoters in the Animal Husbandry and Aquaculture (D.Sc. thesis). Trakia University, Stara Zagora, Bulgaria, p. 294.

Elbashir et al., 2018 Elbashir S, Parveen S, Schwarz J, Rippen T, Jahncke M, DePaola A. Seafood pathogens and information on antimicrobial resistance: a review. Food Microbiology. 2018;70:85–93 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2017.09.011.

El-Dakar et al., 2007 El-Dakar AY, Shalaby SM, Saoud IP. Assessing the use of a dietary probiotic/prebiotic as an enhancer of spinefoot rabbitfish Siganus rivulatus survival and growth. Aquaculture Nutrition. 2007;13:407–412 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2095.2007.00491.x.

El-Haroun et al., 2006 El-Haroun ER, Goda AMAS, Kabir Chowdhury MA. Effect of dietary probiotic Biogen® supplementation as a growth promoter on growth performance and feed utilization of Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (L.). Aquaculture Research. 2006;37:1473–1480 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2109.2006.01584.x.

FAO, 2000 FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2000.

FAO, 2020 FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020 Sustainability in Action Rome: FAO; 2020; https://doi.org/10.4060/ca9229en.

Frakolaki et al., 2020 Frakolaki G, Giannou V, Kekos D, Tzia C. A review of the microencapsulation techniques for the incorporation of probiotic bacteria in functional foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2020;61:1515–1536 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1761773.

Guan et al., 2021 Guan Q, Xiong T, Xie M. Influence of probiotic fermented fruit and vegetables on human health and the related industrial development trend. Engineering. 2021;7:212–218 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2020.03.018.

Guarner and Schaafsma, 1998 Guarner F, Schaafsma G. Probiotics. International Journal of Food Microbiology. 1998;39(3):237–238.

Hagan et al., 2002 Hagan P, Projan S, Rosamond J. A Trends guide to infectious diseases. Trends in Microbiology. 2002;10.

He, 1994 He M. Animal Micro-Ecology Beijing: Agriculture publisher; 1994.

Hill et al., 2014 Hill C, Guarner F, Reid G, et al. Expert consensus document: the international scientific association for probiotics and prebiotics consensus statement on the scope and appropriate use of the term probiotic. Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology. 2014;11:506–514 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrgastro.2014.66.

Irianto and Austin, 2002a Irianto A, Austin B. Probiotics in aquaculture. Journal of Fish Diseases. 2002a;25:633–642 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2761.2002.00422.x.

Irianto and Austin, 2002b Irianto A, Austin B. Use of probiotics to control furunculosis in rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). Journal of Fish Diseases. 2002b;25:333–342.

Jérôme, 2020 Jérôme G. Prophage in phage manufacturing: is the risk overrated compared to other therapies or food. Antibiotics. 2020;9:1–8 https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9080435.

Kozasa, 1986 Kozasa M. Toyocerin (Bacillus toyoi) as growth promotor for animal feeding. Microbiologie, Aliments, Nutrition. 1986;4:121–135.

Kumar et al., 2016 Kumar V, Roy S, Kumar D, et al. Application of probiotics in shrimp aquaculture: importance, mechanisms of action, and methods of administration. Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture. 2016;24:342–368 https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2016.1193841.

Lilly and Stillwell, 1965 Lilly DM, Stillwell RH. Probiotics: growth-promoting factors produced by microorganisms. Science (80-.). 1965;147:747–748 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.147.3659.747.

Liu et al., 2020 Liu J, Cook B, Roux S. The challenges in commercialisation of Probiotic API manufacturing. Microbiology Australia. 2020;41:82–85 https://doi.org/10.1071/MA20021.

Mao et al., 2006 Mao J, Zhou G, Chen B, Du X. The effects of compound microorganisms on improving water quality. Journal of Aquaculture. 2006;27:25–27.

Martínez Cruz et al., 2012 Martínez Cruz P, Ibáñez AL, Monroy Hermosillo OA, Ramírez Saad HC. Use of probiotics in aquaculture. ISRN Microbiology. 2012;2012:1–13 https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/916845.

Mitra, 2021 Mitra A. Thought of alternate aquafeed: conundrum in aquaculture sustainability?. Proceedings of the Zoological Society. 2021;74:1–18 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12595-020-00352-4.

Moriarty, 1998 Moriarty DJW. Control of luminous Vibrio species in penaeid aquaculture ponds. Aquaculture (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 1998;351–358 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(98)00199-9.

Moriarty, 1999 Moriarty DJW. Disease Control in Shrimp Aquaculture with Probiotic Bacteria Halifax, Canada: Atlantic Canada Society for Microbial Ecology; 1999.

Muller et al., 2009 Muller JA, Ross RP, Fitzgerald GF, Stanton C. Manufacture of probiotic bacteria. Prebiotics and Probiotics Science and Technology New York: Springer; 2009;725–759 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79058-9_18.

Narla and Lim, 2020 Narla S, Lim HW. Sunscreen: FDA regulation, and environmental and health impact. Photochemical & Photobiological Sciences: Official Journal of the European Photochemistry Association and the European Society for Photobiology. 2020;19:66–70 https://doi.org/10.1039/c9pp00366e.

Netlolls, 1995 Netlolls, U., 1995. FAO aquaculture newsletter 11. Manager.

Olafsen, 1998 Olafsen, J., 1998. Interactions between hosts and bacteria in aquaculture. Proc. from US-EC Work. Mar. Microorg. Res. Issues Biotechnol.

Olafsen, 2001 Olafsen JA. Interactions between fish larvae and bacteria in marine aquaculture. Aquaculture (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2001;223–247 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(01)00702-5.

Olmos et al., 2020 Olmos J, Acosta M, Mendoza G, Pitones V. Bacillus subtilis, an ideal probiotic bacterium to shrimp and fish aquaculture that increase feed digestibility, prevent microbial diseases, and avoid water pollution. Archives of Microbiology. 2020;202:427–435 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00203-019-01757-2.

Parker, 1974 Parker RB. Probiotics, the other half of the antibiotic story. Animal Nutrition & Health. 1974;29:4–8.

Pugazhendi et al., 2021 Pugazhendi A, Alreeshi GG, Jamal MT, Karuppiah T, Jeyakumar RB. Bioenergy production and treatment of aquaculture wastewater using saline anode microbial fuel cell under saline condition. Environmental Technology & Innovation. 2021;21:101331