A
bioenergetics approach for determining the effect of increased striped bass
population on its prey and health in the Chesapeake Bay
Report to:
Maryland Department
of Natural Resources
Fisheries Service
Tawes Office Building
Annapolis, MD 21401
By
Anthony S. Overton
(Graduate Research Assistant)
Eric B. May (Project
Coordinator)
Jennifer Griffin
(Graduate Research Assistant)
F. Joseph Margraf
(Principal Investigator)
Maryland Cooperative
Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
University of
Maryland Eastern Shore
1120 Trigg Hall
Princess Anne, MD
21853
This is a Cooperative
Program of the
U.S. Geological
Survey
Maryland Department
of Natural Resources
University of
Maryland Eastern Shore
U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service
Wildlife Management
Institute
April 1, 2000
The Chesapeake Bay Ecological Foundation, Inc. assisted in the collection of striped bass examined for this project and is making this report available on our web site at www.chesbay.org a final analysis of this study will be completed in 2001.
Executive Summary
The purpose of this study is to
determine the effects of the increased striped bass population on its prey,
develop an historical profile of the feeding habits and predatory demand of
striped bass from 1955 to 1970, and identify the influence of mycobateria on
the over all health of striped bass population in the Chesapeake Bay.Since the removal of the moratorium in 1990,
the striped bass population has been increasing in the Bay.This increase in striped bass biomass may
have adverse affects on the prey fish community. Changes in the relative abundance and composition of the prey
fish community may also influence the health of striped bass by rendering
striped bass more susceptible to bacterial infections.Understanding the historical feeding habits
of striped bass may provide key information to any changes in diet which may be
directly related to prey abundances. Several species of bacteria have been isolated from striped bass in the
Chesapeake Bay. Mycobacteria sp. is of particular interest to scientist because of
its association with large nodules (granulomas) or ulcers throughout many of
their tissues. The resulting disease
may be characterized by emaciation, inflammation of the skin, exophthalmia (Pop-eye),
ascites (Dropsy), open lesions, and ulceration. We examined the diet of striped bass to determine composition of
the diet and also provide information about the food habits of striped bass
from 1955 through 1970. These data were
used with bioenergetics modeling to estimate predatory demand of striped
bass. We also determine the extent of
Mycobacteria infection in striped bass and provide evidence of decreased overall condition of fish affected by this
bacteria.
Striped bass fed on a wide variety
of prey items. Sand shrimp were the most numerous (59%) of prey items found in
the diet followed by Bay anchovy (28%) ,Blue crab (5%),and Atlantic Menhaden
(3%).The highest SFI index was during the July-August sample period(7.42)and
the lowest during the May- June(1.00) period. Menhaden contributed the largest
portion to the biomass (48%) followed by gizzard shad (15%) bay anchovy (11%),
and blue crab (7%). The bay anchovy had the highest percent frequency of
occurrence (34%) and the highest IRI value of (45%). Individual consumption
increased with age. Bay anchovy contributed between 47-65% to the annual consumption.
Daily consumption of menhaden was significantly less than consumption in 1993
but blue crab consumption was significantly greater. During the period of 1955
through 1959 the most numerous prey items identified were bay anchovy (40%)
followed by Atlantic menhaden (40%). Almost 50% of the fish showed some sign of
external sores. Granulomas appeared in at least one organ in 53% of the fish in
our samples, regardless of the presence or absence of external sore. The Gran
scores from the spleen and heady kidney were significantly higher than either
the heart and liver and appeared to be most closely associated with the
presence of external sores. The condition factor was significantly higher for
stripped bass without sores (0.96) than those with sores (0.82). Condition
factors involving all fish clearly shows a trend, with NGNS at 0.99,GNS at 0.92
and GS at 0.81. Slopes of the regression loge weight (g) and loge
length (mm) for striped bass with sores was significantly higher than those
fish without sores. However the weight at length were more variable (lower r2)
in striped bass with sores than those fish without sores.
Introduction
General
overview- The Chesapeake Bay serves as a nursery area for many resident
and migratory species. This dynamic ecosystem supports multiple fisheries
including a striped bass fishery, which is both commercially and recreationally
important in the Chesapeake Bay. In the 1970’s and 1980’s striped bass stocks
in the Chesapeake Bay declined. Commercial landings peaked to 6,300 mtin 1973 and declined to 772 mtin 1983 (AFMFC 1983). In January of 1985,
the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (AFMFC) placed a moratorium on the
catch, sale or possession of striped bass, on the Atlantic coast in an effort
to restore the population. Toxic contaminants, starvation and predation of
larvae, overfishing, and competition for food and space were believed to be the
cause of striped bass population declines. Following evidence of successful
reproduction with the juvenile index exceeding a three year running average of
8, the AFMFC (1995) declared the Atlantic coast striped bass fully recovered in
1995. Management efforts have continued and the striped bass population is
increasing which is evident from commercial catch data. (Figure 1).
The striped bass is one of
many piscivorus estuarine species
(Manooch 1973;Chao and Musick 1977) and plays an important ecological role as a
predator. As such, striped bass are either affected by the abundance of prey
(bottom-up control) or can themselves serve to regulate prey abundance
(top-down control) (Carpenter et al. 1987). Stripe bass are opportunistic
feeders primarily feeding on soft-rayed fishes (Hollis 1952). The dominant prey
consumed varies with habitat depending on prey abundance, environmental
factors, habitat, and prey availability (Stevens 1958;Manooch 1973). Changes in
striped bass diets in the Chesapeake Bay may reflect to changes in its prey
populations (Hollis 1952). Bay anchovy and Atlantic menhaden were the dominant
prey for striped bass in the summer and fall, and juvenile spot and Atlantic
croaker were the dominant prey in winter (Hollis 1952). However in later
studies menhaden, bay anchovy and spot were the primary prey items throughout the
year (Hartman 1993). These apparent shifts in food habits of striped bass may
represent changes in prey abundance.
Recent studies
have focused on the predatory effect of stripped bass on its prey items in the
Chesapeake Bay. Such prey species as blue crab and Atlantic menhaden, support
an important commercial fishery in Maryland. Hartman (1993) found that stripped
bass collected near the Patuxent River consumed Atlantic menhaden which
increased with age with the annual incidence in striped bass diet rising from
33% at age 1 to 66% at age 6.
Bioenergetics
– Bioenergetics models are used by fisheries biologists in a variety of
ways to address many current ecological problems, but usually used to estimate food consumption based on growth,
diet, and temperature data. (Tyler and Calow 1985; Beauchamp et al.1989; Rice
and Cochran 1984;Minton and Mclean 1982). Bioenergetic models have also been
used to predict predation rates of fish (Kitchell 1983;Stewart and Ibarra 1991;
Hartman and Margraf 1992; Hartman1993) and have become increasingly useful in
understanding predator prey dynamics.
The basic use of boienergetics models is to predict consumption (daily) rates based on initial and final mass
of fish over time. It is essentially a balanced energy equation on which
consumption is equated to the sum of total metabolic activities.
Bioenergetic model requirements vary depending on the model
application. The model requires the input of environmental temperature of the
predator, energy densities (joules or calories) of predators and their prey.
Energy densities often differ over time and may vary seasonally with life
stage. A measure of growth to estimate consumption or a measure of consumption
to estimate growth is also needed as input data for the model.
There is an increasing emphasis on multi-species management
as an approach to maintain ecological balance, while at the same time providing
recreational and commercial fishing opportunities. This forces management
agencies to utilize different approaches to assess the effects of any one
species on food web dynamics, which may be particularly difficult in large
estuarine systems such as the Chesapeake Bay. This is made even more
complicated when the effects of the increased striped bass population in the
Chesapeake Bay have to be considered. Increased numbers of striped bass places
a greater demand on their primary and alternate prey. Because of this, there is
concern about the potential effect of the increased striped bass population on
blue crabs, out-migrating juvenile alosids and other important prey by striped
bass in the Chesapeake Bay Estuary.
Health Considerations- In addition to concerns related to the
potential predation on blue crabs and Atlantic menhaden, have been the appearance
of underweight striped bass and striped bass exhibiting external sores in the
Chesapeake Bay. The appearance of sores
on fish is not considered uncommon ( May and Sindermann, 1999),however since 1994 the occurrence of these
sores on striped bass has been increasing ( Unpublished Data, May 1998).When first reported in the Wicomico River (
Western Tributary of the Potomac) of Maryland, isolates of Edwardsiella tarda were obtained from fish exhibiting signs of the
condition ( Baya, et al., 1997). This
pathogen had never been linked to diseases in wild fish and was the first
report to suggest that E. tarda could
affect wild populations. By later
summer through fall of 1997, 10 % of striped bass sampled in the Chesapeake Bay
had observed lesions and nearly 13% through October 1998 (MDNR, 1998; Waller et
al. 1997). Prior to 1997, additional
isolates were obtained from striped bass showing clinical signs of infection, E. tarda could not be re-isolated,
however a variety of other gram negative enterics were isolated including Aeromonas, Pseudomonas, and Vibro sp. (MDNR, 1997; 1998).Including and since 1997 the most of
bacterial isolates identified from symptomatic striped bass have been Mycobacterium sp.It is believed that Mycobacteria were
responsible for many of the sores identified in the striped bass taken from the
Potomac in 1997 and 1998 (Vogelbiem et al., 1999).
Since 1996, fisherman from the Chesapeake Bay expressed
concern regarding the disappearance of many of the species utilized by striped
bass as forage, particularly menhaden. These observations have been supported by Maryland Department of Natural
Resource reports (Uphoff 1998) which suggest that populations of Atlantic
menhaden, silverside, spot, and other forage species have been declining based
on decreased harvest and reduced appearance in collections in MDNR annual
juvenile seine surveys. Uphoff (1998)
found a correlation between striped bass declining prey abundance and the
declining health of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay.He suggested that the decrease in the
strength of the length weight relationship and increased occurrence of external
lesions is because of the declining menhaden population in the bay and an
increased occurrence of unhealthy appearing striped bass.
Basis of Project Goals- If these observations are valid, then
if would mean that there has been a loss of or shift in the prey being utilized
by striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay. Based on the potential influence of striped bass on their prey and the
apparent relationship between underweight fish and skin sores, work was
initiated to examine the current dietary habits of striped bass and any
relationship with diseases that affect the skin.
Thus the intent of the bioenergetic component of this project
was to determine if there has been a change in the dietary demands of striped
bass since the early 1950’s when such data was first being collected.To do this a historical assessment of
predatory demand is needed which then can be compared with more current
estimates such as those by Hartman (1993) and studies being conducted under the
auspices of this project. To date, no study
had quantitatively assessed the role of striped bass predation on other
important Chesapeake Bay species during the period prior to the
moratorium. Without this benchmark it
would be difficult to determine or even suggest any shift in prey consumption
by striped bass or alteration in the bioenergetics as a consequence of
increased striped bass abundance. Concurrently, to address the relationship between striped bass diets and
the appearance of sores on the skin, gross and histological data were obtained
from the same fish as well as fish taken from other sources.
This report then is a compilation of three separate,
inter-related studies that addresses the historical food habits, the current
food habits, and the potential changes of these food habits on the health of
striped bass.
Relationship
Between Skin Sores on Striped Bass and Condition- The objectives for this
component were based on data from this study and a companion study, and were:
1.
Determine incidence of external sores throughout the Chesapeake
Bay
2.
Relate the appearance of sores to type infectious agent
affecting the fish
3.
For fish infected with Mycobateria, correlate degree of
infection with condition
Here we present evidence that daily consumption of prey items
particularly menhaden and blue crab has shifted over time.We also have evidence that striped bass in
the Chesapeake Bay that have become infected with organisms capable of inducing
a granulomatous response or exhibiting external sores have lowered mean
condition factor and demonstrate a greater variance in weight ranges at a given
length.
Methods
Striped
Bass were collected from April 1998 to December 1999 from the Maryland portion
of the Chesapeake Bay. Each sampling
site was identified by latitude and longitude coordinates (Figure 2) and
vertical CTD profiles were taken coincident with collections to provide data on
temperature, D.O., and salinity occupied by the predators.Most sample collection was during daylight
hours however some sampling extended into the night hours.Fish were collected by electroshocking (at
freshwater sites), drift gill nets, trawls (Age 1), and hook and line.Samples were collected cooperatively with
several other agencies including the Maryland Department of Natural Resources
(MDNR), US Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS), and Chesapeake Bay Ecological Foundation (CBEF).
Many anglers from commercial, sport, and recreational fishing community also provided additional
samples and also assistance in the field collections.
Diet
data collected in this study were used to estimate consumption with
bioenergetic model. Individual
predatory consumption (supply) was calculated for both the observed (supply)
and the potential (demand) from the bioenergetics model.We were interested in the changes in the
consumption rates from 1993 to the present. Present individual consumption estimates were compared to estimates in
1993 to examine any changes. We
concentrated on the consumption rates on menhaden, blue crab, and bay anchovy.
Classification
of Granulomas- To determine the degree to which a given organ was
affected of if granulomas were present, each section of an organ was examined,
four fields randomly selected, and at 10x, all granulomas counted.A granuloma had to lie completely with in
the field to be counted. If there was not enough tissue to be examined
the sample was not included in the analysis. From these counts a granuloma (Gran) score for each organ (the average
number of granulomous nodules in each field) was generated.The decision to classify a fish as having or
not having granulomas rested on finding a granuloma in any of the four organs
examined. If a granuloma was found, the
fish was designated as having a granuloma i.e. granuloma no sore GNS or granuloma
sore (GS). If no granulomas were found in any of the four organs, the fish was
designated as not having a granuloma i.e. no granuloma no sore NGNS or no
granuloma sore (NGS). These categories are presented in table 5.
Calculation
of Condition Factor- We calculated Fulton Condition factor to compare
the condition of fish in all assigned categories using the equation below:
K=weight (g)/length (mm)3
Statistical Analysis- For statistical purposes two assumptions
were made; (1) fish which did not exhibit granulomas in any of the organs or
external sores were healthy fish, and (2) because spatial distribution was not considered,
all fish were susceptible to bacterial infection to the same degree and when
exposed infected at the same rate.
Nonparametric
statistical tests were used for comparisons due to non-normal distributions of
Gran scores from adult striped bass. (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary NC). Granuloma scores were ranked according to sample (organ) and analyzed by
the Kruskall-Wallis test against the null hypothesis that granuloma (Gran)
scores (with respect to organ) would not differ between fish with and without
skin lesions. Tukey’s multiple
comparison test was used after a significant detection of differences between
medians. Significance was set at
p<0.05 in all runs. We used an
analysis of covariance and compared the slopes of the line for the momgeneity
of slopes of the line for homogeneity of slopes of length and weight between
with external and no external lesions.
We
used an ANOVA to compare condition factor (K) (log transformed) between fish
with or without external lesions and also between fish with or without
granulomous. As with granulomous score,
Tukey’s multiple comparison test was used to detect differences following
significance.
Striped
bass condition. Striped bass
weight-at-length was used to determine
whether differences existed between striped bass with or without external
sores.
Current
Status- To date we have weight and length data from 5988 adult striped
bass taken from 1954 to 1970. This
data was provided by MDNR. Most of the
diet data are from fish collected during 1955 through 1959 and 1968 and
1969. However, the 1968 and 1969 data
only records a full or empty status and therefore were not included in the diet
analysis. A synopsis of data collected
are given in Table 11. Mean, minimum
and maximum total length (mm) and weight (g) for all fish collected in each
year are given in Table12. Data on diet
composition were identified for 905 striped bass ages 1 through 18.Of these, 514 had material in their stomachs. During this period the most numerous prey items identified were
bay anchovy (40%) followed by Atlantic menhaden (40%).Specific diet data for 1955 through 1959 of
stomach content are summarized in tables 13 through 17.
Relationship
Between Skin Sores on Striped Bass and Condition
Categorical Assignment Based on Granulomas- Histological examination of the granulomas stained
with both hematoxylin and eosin (HE) and Zeil-Nielsen (ZN) revealed that in the
35 samples where granulomas were designated to be induced by mycobacterial
infections, all granulamas designated
as microbacterial induced contained acid fast positive organisms.These organisms stained intensely with the
stain and morphologically resembled Mycobacterium sp. (Frerichs
1993). The characteristics for
designating a granuloma as being induced by mycobacteria were the aggregation the
of epitheliod cells around a core of necrotic debres.
We
had varied results in the categorical assignment of the fish in our samples.As expected all fish which showed signs of
external sores did not have granuloma present in any of the organs.Almost 50% of the fish showed some sign of
an external sore. Granulomas appeared
in al least one organ in 53% of the fish in our samples regardless of the presence
or absence of external sores. The fish with granulomas were further divided
into 16% and 37% for the GNS and GS categories respectively (Table 18). Thirty –two
percent of our samples were assigned to the NGNS and the remaining 15% into the
NGS group.
When
all fish are examined the Gran scores from the spleen and head kidney were
significantly higher than either the heart and liver and appeared to be most
closely associated with the presence of external sores.Gran scores for the GNS and GS categories
were similar for the spleen and head kidney and both were significantly higher
than the liver and heart (Figure 10). There was a trend suggesting that the spleens had higher gran scores
than the head kidney on the average, there was no significant difference
between the two organs. The GS gran
score (2.11) was routinely higher that the GNS (0.59) treatment.When legal (greater than 457mm) and sublegal
(less than or equal to 457) striped bass were separated (Figure 11) both showed
similar patterns as above, however for legal fish there was a better
association of the Gran score for the spleen and sores that the head kidney and
sores.
Figure 11. Gran scores for each gross condition category for both legal and sublegal striped bass from Chesapeake Bay. Granulomas were not present in the fish from the categories NGNS and NGS so their gran score was 0.
 |
 |
Condition
Factor- When all of the fish were combined (legal and sublegal) the
condition factor was significantly higher for striped bass without sores (0.96)
than those with sores (0.82) (Tables 19 and 20; Figure 12).Histologically, granulomas could not be
identified in any of the organs of the NGS category of fish, and based on
previous work (MDNR 1997) it must be assumed that the cause for the sores
involves another infectious agent. For
this reason comparisons of condition factor between NGNS and NGS categories
will be limited to the combined sample (legal and sublegal) and no comparisons
with the GNS or GS categories made.
Condition
factors involving all fish clearly shows a trend, with NGNS at 0.99, GNS at
0.92 and GS at 0.81 (Table 19; Figure 13). The NGNS and GNS condition factors were not significantly different
(p<0.05) from one another, but both were significantly different from GS
category (p<0.05). When the sample
was separated into legal and sublegal fish, this trend continued for the
sublegal fish (Table 20; Figure14) but not for the legal fish.The legal fish had condition factors for the
NGNS and GNS categories that were very similar, with the GS category condition
factor lower than the other two, but not significantly so (Table 20; Figure
14).
Figure 14.
 |
Discussion
Current
Profile of Striped Bass Feeding Habits in the Chesapeake Bay
The current diets of striped
bass were diverse and usually reflected the spatial and temporal abundance of
prey items. Bay anchovy are distributed
throughout the Chesapeake Bay and are accessible to most resident striped bass
during the year. They contributed to
28% of the numerical and 11% of the total biomass. Bay anchovy were most numerous in the diet during the July-August
sampling period. This also coincided
with the highest period of the SFI. During this period we observed striped bass actively feeding on bay
anchovy near the surface of the water. Most fish collected contained greater than 15 individual bay anchovy in their
stomach. Some fish observed contained greater than 30 individual bay anchovy. This was the only time of the year when we
collected striped bass feeding on the surface that contained such and abundance
of bay anchovy in their stomachs. This
may represent the time of the year when bay anchovy are most numerous and
available to resident striped bass.
Although
menhaden consisted of 3% of the numerical diet, it contributed to almost one
half of the total diet biomass. Menhaden contributions to biomass was greatest during the
November-December sampling period. We
collected many of our larger striped bass (>635mm) during this time many of
which had 1 to 2 menhaden greater than 250mm. Young menhaden migrate into the tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay in
early May. These young-of-year (YOY)
fish are available to striped bass however many fish in our samples in those
areas did not contain YOY menhaden from May through mid September.In July and August menhaden contributed to
only 0.49% of the biomass. It was
during September and October when contributions of menhaden to biomass
increased to 39%. MDNR juvenile index
for Atlantic menhaden has been declining since 1985. The low abundance of YOY menhaden could be the possible reason
for the absence in the diet from May through mid September.In our study mean daily consumption of
menhaden for all age groups was consistently less than during 1993.In 1993 menhaden contributions to production
ranged from 37-66% whereas during the current study contributions ranged from
12-27%. These differences may be
because of the decline in recruitment of menhaden along the Atlantic
coast. One may argue whether the
decline in menhaden is because of the increase in the total consumption of the
increasing striped bass population. Hence striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay have the ability to control
their prey abundance. Striped bass are
capable of controlling their prey abundance’s in large reservoirs (Moore,
1988). However it is unclear if striped
bass can have the same influence on its prey items in the Chesapeake Bay.
Although the stripped bass is a top piscviore, other predators rely on menhaden
as a source of food (Hartman 1993). Thus the consumption habits of top predators must be considered in
assessing the predation on menhaden. Declines in this once abundant prey species of striped bass may lead to
shifts towards other nontraditional prey species or directly influence other
commercially important species.
Striped
bass have been known to consume blue crabs however their full potential
influence on the fishery has not been assessed. Hartman 1993 estimated that two million age-2 striped bass annual
consumption could equivalent to that harvested in Maryland in 1998.Daily consumption of blue crabs was significantly
higher that estimated in 1993. Blue
crab consumption by age 1 and 2 was less than one percent.Older fish depended more on blue crabs for
production. This increase in
consumption could possibly be contributed to the reduction of menhaden
available in the Chesapeake Bay. If
this is true striped bass could potentially reduce the blue crab population
significantly. Spot and Atlantic
croaker have traditionally been important to the diets of striped bass (Hollis
1952). MDNR juvenile index survey of those
two species have remained constant for the past ten years.We would assume that any shifts in diet
would be towards fish such as spot, Atlantic croaker, or other fish
species. However these two species were
present in very low numbers in our data.
We
examined individual consumption and did not make estimates of consumption at
the population level. Although
estimates of individual consumption are important and may change from year to
year, changes in predator populations should show the true influences of
predation on prey species. The interest
of fishery managers for the Chesapeake Bay is the effect of the increased
striped bass population on fish species.
Striped
bass diets, growth, predation, and consumption are influenced by changes in the
density of striped bass, which may influence the relative abundance and
composition of the prey fish community. The predatory affect of striped bass in the Chesapeake Bay Estuary in
unclear. We hope to provide information
leading to a better understanding of the role of striped bass in the Chesapeake
Bay. These estimates will allow
managers to more effectively deal with other resource user groups and provide
reliable estimates of the results of management decisions for striped bass on
other Bay resources.
Input
data for bioenergetic models are important to the accuracy of the output of the
model. We also used an age-length key
to age our fish. True readings of age
are needed to increase the accuracy of the consumption estimates on the cohort
level. The use of an age-length key may
have led to the minimal differences in consumption as a function of temperature
observed in ages 2-4. The completion of
the aging of striped bass will allow us to estimate the predation of striped
bass to quantify the predatory demand more accurately at the individual,
cohort, and population level.
Historical
Profile of Striped Bass Feeding Habits in the Chesapeake Bay
During
the period from 1955 through 1959 bay anchovy and Atlantic menhaden dominated
the diet of striped bass. These two
species contributed equally to the diet during this period.We have not been able to collect the desired
amount of food habit data on striped bass from 1960-1970.However to complete this we will be
contacting other sources for information specific to the diets of striped bass
for inclusion into the bioenergetics model.
Relationship
Between Skin Sores on Striped Bass and Condition
There
is general agreement that systemic microbial infections in fish, particularly
bacteria, lead to a combination of weight loss and the appearance of sores on
the skin (Ferguson 1990; Roberts 1989; May and Sindermann 1999).What is not understood is why since 1994
there has been the repeated seasonal appearance of sores on striped bass.Early diagnostic work implicated E.
tarda as the primary agent responsible for the condition (Baya, et al. 1997).
A variety of bacteria have been isolated from striped bass exhibiting skin
sores since 1997 (MDNR, 1998). The data
from this study would suggest that at least 15% of the fish taken exhibited
sores that were the result of non-mycobacterial infection.
From
1997 to the present the focus has been on Mycobacterium
sp. because it has been this group of bacteria that have been consistently
isolated from striped bass resident to the Chesapeake Bay.Mycobacterium
sp. are acid fast bacteria belonging to the Mycobacteriaceae family.Characteristics of this group are that they
are slow growing and extremely fastidious when cultured, making them difficult
at best to isolate and identify (Frerichs 1993). Several members of the group have been found to infect fish, M. marinum, M. fortuitum, and M. chelonae
(Frerichs 1993). More recent work by
the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) has shown that possibly 7
species could be involved, greatly complicating the picture (Vogelbiem et al.,
1999).
Experimental
evidence with mycobacterial infections has repeatedly shown that once
infections are established, they are progressive leading to emaciation,
appearance of sores, and ultimately death (Reimschuessel, 1997). The only experience with wild striped bass infected with Mycobacteria sp. was in the late 1980’s
involving resident populations in the San Fransisco Harbor area (Sakanari et
al. 1983), our understanding of how this genus of bacteria will affect striped
bass in the wild is very poor. The wide
spread distribution of the condition in striped bass since 1997 did, however,
lead fishery managers to consider the possibility that the skin lesions were
the consequence of infections which were brought on by the lack of available
prey. This possibility was considered
based on the number of emaciated appearing striped bass and the apparent
relation between emaciation and the appearance of sores.
This
phase of the study was designed to answer those questions which would be of
importance to fishery managers in understanding what the potential influences
of this condition are, and they are: (1) what is the degree to which the
population is affected by either the infective agent, condition or both; (2) which
came first, the infection or starvation what will be the final outcome of the
infection or condition (will the fish survive) and (3) what will be the final
outcome of the infection or condition (will the fish survive).
The
incidence of sores from the fish taken during 1998 and 1999 was nearly 50%, of
which 15% were represented by striped bass exhibiting sores for which the cause
could not be attributed to mycobacteria. Fifty three percent of the striped bass taken in 1998 and 1999 had
granulomas attributable to mycobacteria in one or more organs.This suggest an extremely high rate of
infection. This rate is consistent with
that seen in California and Oregon Waters in the early 1980’s with 25-68%
infection in California, the highest in the San Francisco Bay area, and 46% in
Oregon Water (Sakanari et. al. 1983).
Experimental
work in the past has shown that otherwise healthy goldfish, when injected with Mycobacteria sp., will exhibit a
progressively debilitating disease with death the ultimate outcome
(Reimschuessel 1997). Similarly
naturally infected populations of yellow perch, cod, farm-raised turbot and
flounder exhibited the same progression with emaciation and death the outcome
(Dalsgaard, et al. 1992; Daust, et al. 1989; Lama, et al. 1996; Vethaak and Jol
1996). The outbreak in San Francisco
Harbor area was intensively studied but the final conclusions were not able to
suggest that the affected fish died even though the authors felt that the
condition would probably lead to death (Sakarnari et al. 1983).The results presented from this study to
confirm the experimental work and the inferences of Sakanari et. al. (1983)
that death is the outcome after mycobaterial infections.The condition becomes systemic and the
bacteria appear primarily in the head kidney and spleen.When legal and sublegal individuals are
compared there is a significantly higher level of splenic involvement,
suggesting an age dependency. This is
supported by a lower condition factor among legal fish as compared with
sublegal, and the higher incidence of fish with both granulomas and sores among
the legal sized striped bass. If
comparisons are considered between the NGNS, GNS, and GS categories the trend
is toward a significantly lower condition factor in the GS category as compared
with NGNS and GNS categories. In legal
fish this difference is not as apparent as in the sublegal fish.
General
Relationships
It
is clear from this work that bioenergetics is a useful tool in identifying
changes in predator prey relationships, particularly when adequate benchmarks
are available. Comparisons of results
from the study by Hartman (1993) and those from this study indicate
changes. Limitations do exist,
particularly in addressing populations with extraordinary rates of infection by
bacterial pathogens. Healthy fish were
defined by the absence of granulomas and sores should be used for final
assessments. The bioenergetics model
used in this study did not take infections into account. Future analyses will
be conducted to identify changes in the growth rates based on age data.The age data, when coupled with infection
intensity may indicate how Mycobacterium
sp. alter growth rates. This
information will help eliminate the individuals used as part of the data base
for the bioenergetics model.
The
usefulness of diet studies, which are the basis of the bioenergetics model is
underscored by the fact that if there has been a shift in prey for the striped
bass populations resident to the Chesapeake Bay, then logically there will have
been shifts in the types of micro and macro nutrients available.It is strongly suggested that emaciation
among striped bass is because of the disease process, the condition(s) which
result in an increased predilection of striped bass for becoming infected with Mycobacterium sp. may lie with altered
diets. It is well know that nutritional
shifts have deleterious effects on fish, and in many situations affect the
immune status (Steffens 1989). This is
not to say that this is the only possible cause for the condition, but is one
of many possible origins of ulcerative dermatitis in striped bass.
Our
assumption that the disease is progressive ( Figure 15) is in part based on the
conceptual model of granulomatous inflammation by Adams (1983) and modified by
Sindermann (1999) which suggests that there are three possible outcomes;
resolution, mature granulomas, or death (Sindermann 1999).From our data and the model presented by
Sindermann (1999), we would suggest that mycobacterial infections of striped
bass begin in the Chesapeake Bay estuary and from the moment of infection
progresses until death occurs in a large portion of the resident striped
bass. From the fish taken during some
of the age 1 and many of the age 2 fish were confirmed to have mycobacterial
infections. Older fish were infected,
and scale analyses will show how many of these fish were infected and to what
intensity.
Figure 15.
 |