Thumbnail Image

Checklist of the parasites of fishes of Latvia.










Kirjušina, M.; Vismanis, K. Checklist of the parasites of fishes of Latvia. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper. No. 369/3. Rome, FAO. 2007. 106p.


Also available in:
No results found.

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (series)
    Checklist of the parasites of fishes of Viet Nam 2006
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    This publication is a checklist summarizing information on the parasites of Vietnamese fishes contained in world literature dating from the earliest known record (Billet 1898) to the end of 2003. Information is presented in the form of parasite-host and host-parasite lists and contains 453 named species of parasites (not including 4 nomina nuda), distributed among the higher taxa as follows: Protozoa - 48, Myxozoa - 33, Digenea - 151, Monogenoidea - 112, Cestoda - 16, Nematoda - 53, Acanthocepha la - 21, Hirudinea - 2, Branchiura - 3, Copepoda - 12 and Isopoda - 2. Many records of parasites not identified to species level are also included. The parasite-host list is organized on a taxonomic basis and provides information for each parasite species on the environment (freshwater, brackish water, marine), the location (site of infection) in or on its host(s), the species of host(s) infected, the known geographic distribution (by administrative division) in Viet Nam and the published source s for each host and locality record. The host-parasite list is organized according to the taxonomy of the hosts, and includes, for each host, the English language and local (Vietnamese) common names, environment (freshwater, brackish water, marine), status in Viet Nam (native or exotic) and information on the known distribution in Viet Nam of the parasites. Both lists are accompanied by remarks and footnotes, as warranted, giving specific information on points of systematics, nomenclature, possi ble misidentifications, introductions, etc. Citations are included for all references, as well as parasite and host indices. The following new taxonomic combinations are made: Elongoparorchis siamensis (Oshmarin, 1965) n. comb.; Capillaria ariusi (Parukhin, 1989) n. comb., Falcaustra babei (Ky, 1971) n. comb. and Neocamallanus trichogasterae (Pearse, 1933) n. comb. The parasite fauna of fishes of Viet Nam has received considerable attention, particularly by scientists of the former Soviet Union, in the marine environment, and by Vietnamese and Czech freshwater scientists. Nevertheless, parasites have been recorded from only about 10 percent of the more than 1 300 species of marine and freshwater fish occurring in the waters of Viet Nam. Knowledge of freshwater fauna is hampered by a lack of descriptive work and by many probable misidentifications of parasites, owing to the tendency of Vietnamese workers to report European species from the local fish fauna.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (series)
    Checklist of the parasites of fishes of the Philippines. 1997
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    This checklist summarizes information on the parasites of Philippine fishes contained in the world literature dating from the earliest known record (de Blainville 1822) to the end of 1996. Information is presented in the form of parasite-host and host-parasite lists. Included are 201 named species of parasites, distributed among the higher taxa as follows: Apicomplexa - 1, Ciliophora - 16, Mastigophora - 2, Microspora - 1, Myxozoa - 9, Trematoda - 90, Monogenea - 22, Cestoda - 6, Nematoda - 20, Acanthocephala - 5, Mollusca - 1, Branchiura - 2, Copepoda - 21 and Isopoda - 5. Also included are many records of parasites not identified to species level. Parasites have been reported from 172 of the more than 2030 species of marine and freshwater fish occurring in Philippine waters, and from another 17 species of freshwater aquarium fish examined in the Philippines but not found in natural waters. The Parasite-Host List is organized on a taxonomic basis and provides information for each para site species on the environment (fresh water, brackish water, marine), the location (site of infection) in or on its host(s), the species of host(s) infected, the known geographic distribution (by island) in the Philippines, and the published sources for each host and locality record. The Host-Parasite List is organized according to the taxonomy of the hosts, and includes for each host, the English language and local (typically Tagalog) common names, environment (fresh water, brackish water, mar ine), status in the Philippines (native or exotic), and information on the known Philippine distribution of the parasites. Both lists are accompanied by remarks and footnotes, as warranted, giving specific information on points of systematics, nomenclature, possible misidentifications, introductions, pathogenicity, etc. Citations are included for all references and a supplementary list of references contains other literature on Philippine fish parasites. Parasite and host indices are included. T he following new taxonomic combinations are made: Prosorhynchoides philippinorum (Velasquez, 1959) n. comb., for Bucephaloides philippinorum Velasquez, 1959; Prosorhynchoides sibi (Yamaguti, 1940) n. comb., for Bucephaloides sibi (Yamaguti, 1940); Genolinea awa (Yamaguti, 1965) n. comb., for Pseudobunocotyla awa Yamaguti, 1965; and Procamallanus (Spirocamallanus) philippinensis (Velasquez, 1980) n. comb., for Spirocamallanus philippinensis Velasquez, 1980.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (series)
    Regional review on status and trends in aquaculture development in Europe – 2020 2022
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    This review reports on aquaculture development trends and challenges during 2000–2018 in the European Region covering 51 countries including European Union member states. Aquaculture production in the European Region is composed of marine molluscs and diadromous, marine and freshwater fish. It reached 3.4 million tonnes in 2018, while having a value of USD 16.6 billion. Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout combine to give nearly two million tonnes, with molluscs providing 0.7 million tonnes; marine fish species supplied 0.4 million tonnes and freshwater fish 0.3 million tonnes. In Europe, the strongest aquaculture growth has been seen in non-European Union states (e.g. Norway, Turkey, Russian Federation) while several European Union states have diminished production (e.g. France, Netherlands, Italy). The growth in value (5.8 percent) is higher than production (0.9 percent), which is now dominated by salmonids (nearly 60 percent), primarily Atlantic salmon. Mediterranean marine fish farming is mainly for gilthead seabream and European seabass. European cyprinid production in freshwater has increased slightly, where the Russian Federation, Czechia and Poland are the biggest producers. Mussels are the principal shellfish reared, led by Spain, followed by oysters in France and clams in Italy. While publicly quoted companies have led salmon development in Northern Europe, elsewhere aquaculture is done, with few exceptions, by SMEs and micro-enterprises. Mechanisms for financial support exist for aquaculture development throughout Europe but these have notnbeen matched by anticipated results. When unpredictable and time-consuming licensing procedures are combined with extreme competition for space and strict environmental regulations, both growth and investments are discouraged. Technology development focus has been given to structures appropriate for marine off-shore or ‘open ocean’ operation. The use of recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) for large operations has also developed, both for hatcheries and for farms. Treatment for diseases and parasites remains problematic. Use of the same vaccines, veterinary treatments and disinfectants is not standardised, restricting the best health and welfare practices. Access to appropriate and efficient ingredients for formulated feeds remains a key issue for European fish farming, directly influencing productivity and profitability. The European Union is the world’s largest single market for seafood and the most important destination for European aquaculture production. With preferences declared for wild products vs. farmed, the habits of the European consumer have been studied, indicating evolving influences on purchase decisions. These include the use of additives, food miles, climate change, acceptance of manufacturing practices, cost and access as well as health benefits.

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.