Advertisement

Optimal fish densities and farm locations in Norwegian fjords: a framework to use a PSO algorithm to optimize an agent-based model to simulate fish disease dynamics

  • Saleh AlaliyatEmail author
  • Harald Yndestad
  • Pål I. Davidsen
Article
  • 23 Downloads

Abstract

Risk of pathogen transmission in Norwegian fjords depends on two main factors: location of farms and the density of fish in each farm. This paper presents a novel method to find the optimal values of these two variables that yield the optimal aquaculture system with a minimum risk of spreading disease and high fish production. For this purpose, agent-based models (ABMs) are used to simulate and analyze fish disease dynamics within and between fish farms in Norwegian fjords. Moreover, a modified particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm is used to identify the optimal values of fish density and farm’s location for each farm. The objective function is defined as being the weighted sum between the fish density and the infection risk. We validated the PSO algorithm with the optimal objective function by demonstrating the capability of the algorithm to drive the system to produce an expected behavior and output in tested, known scenarios. The simulation results demonstrate the ability of the PSO algorithm to converge rapidly to the optimal solution. In only 18 iterations, it finds an optimal solution that is three times larger than the initial fish farm density and in a location that keeps the risk of infection at an accepted level. The use of the PSO algorithm in finding optimal parameter values of ABMs will open for new applications of the model in aquaculture industry management, such as planning for a sustainable aquaculture industry.

Keywords

Risk of infection Particle swarm optimization (PSO) Agent-based modeling Fish farming 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Alaliyat S, Osen OL, Kvile KO (2013) An agent-based model to simulate pathogen transmission between aquaculture sites in the Romsdalsfjord, Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Modeling and Simulation. Aalesund, Norway, pp 46–52Google Scholar
  2. Alaliyat, S. (2014), Ecosystem-based approach to Norwegian aquaculture management, Eur Sci J v(2), pp. 250-260. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e638/01d1a46ea7ef657dab45c2a2a0c1a5a5214a.pdf. Accessed 10 Mar 2019
  3. Alaliyat, S., Yndestad, H. and Sanfilippo, F. (2014) Optimization of Boids swarm model based on genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization algorithm (comparative study), Proceedings of the 28th European Conference on Modeling and Simulation. Brescia pp. 643–650Google Scholar
  4. Alaliyat S, Yndestad H (2015a) An agent-based model to simulate infectious disease dynamics in an aquaculture facility, Proceedings of UKSIM-AMSS 17th international conference on modelling and simulation, Cambridge, pp 131-136Google Scholar
  5. Alaliyat S, Yndestad H (2015b) An aqua agent-based model to simulate fish disease dynamics with reference to Norwegian aquaculture, Proceedings of 11th international conference on innovations in information technology (IIT′15), Dubai, pp 350-355Google Scholar
  6. Alaliyat S, Yndestad H (2015c) An agent-based model to simulate contagious disease dynamics in fish populations. Int J Simul Syst Sci Technol vol. 16 (3).  https://doi.org/10.5013/IJSSST.a.16.03.08
  7. Alaliyat S, Yndestad H, Davidsen P (2019) An agent-based approach for predicting patterns of pathogen transmission between aquaculture sites in the Norwegian fjords. Aquaculture 505:98–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aldrin M, Storvik B, Frigessi A, Viljugrein H, Jansen P a (2010) A stochastic model for the assessment of the transmission pathways of heart and skeleton muscle inflammation, pancreas disease and infectious salmon anaemia in marine fish farms in Norway. Prev Vet Med 93:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Amirpour Haredasht S, Tavornpanich S, Jansen M, Lyngstad T, Yatabe T, Brun E and Martínez-López B (2018) A stochastic network-based model to simulate the spread of pancreas disease (PD) in the Norwegian salmon industry based on the observed vessel movements and seaway distance between marine farms. Prev Vet Med.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.05.019
  10. Arduin H, Domenech de Celles M, Guillemot D, Watier L, Opatowski L (2017) An agent-based model simulation of influenza interactions at the host level: insight into the influenza-related burden of pneumococcal infections. BMC Infect Dis 17:382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bjørnstad O. (2005) SEIR model, Retrieved from http://www.stat.colostate.edu/~rdavis/ey680/sir.pdf. Accessed 17 Dec 2018
  12. Brueckner S, Parunak HVD (2003) Resource-aware exploration of the emergent dynamics of simulated systems. AAMAS 2003:781–788Google Scholar
  13. Calvez B, Hutzler G (2006) Automatic tuning of agent-based models using genetic algorithms. In: Sichman JS, Antunes L (eds) In Multi-agent-based simulation VI. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, pp 41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ciofi degli Atti ML, Merler S, Rizzo C, Ajelli M, Massari M, Manfredi P, Furlanello C, Scalia Tomba G, Iannelli M (2008) Mitigation measures for pandemic influenza in Italy: an individual based model considering different scenarios. PLoS One 3:e1790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Diekmann, Heesterbeek JAP, Metz JAJ (1990) On the definition and the computation of the basic reproduction ratio R0 in models for infectious diseases in heterogeneous populations. J Math Biol 28(4):356–382.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00178324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ervik A, Hansen PA, Aure J, Stigebrandt A, Johannessen P, Jahnsen T (1997) Regulating the local environmental impact of intensive marine fish farming I. The concept of the MOM system (modelling—ongrowing fish farms—monitoring). Aquaculture 158(1–2):85–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0044-8486(97)00186-5
  17. Fiskeridirektoratet. (2018). Statistics for aquaculture. [online] Available at: https://www.fiskeridir.no/English/Aquaculture/Statistics Accessed 5 Jun 2018
  18. FKD (ed), (2009) Norwegian ministry of fisheries and coastal affairs, strategy plan, 2009 “strategy for an environmentally sustainable Norwegian aquaculture industry”, The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries (before, The Norwegian Ministry of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs), Oslo, Norway. Viewed. 31 Dec 2013. http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/FKD/Vedlegg/Diverse/2009/strategy%20for%20an%20sustainable%20aquaculture.pdf
  19. Green DM (2010) A strategic model for epidemic control in aquaculture. Prev Vet Med 94:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grefsrud ES, Glover K, Grøsvik BE, Husa V, Karlsen Ø., Kristiansen T, Kvamme BO, Mortensen S, Samuelsen OB, Stien LH and Svåsand T (2018) Risikorapport norsk fiskeoppdrett 2018. Fisken og havet, særnr. 1-2018. Available at: https://www.imr.no/filarkiv/2018/02/risikorapport_2018.pdf/nb-no. Accessed 10 Mar 2019
  21. Gregory A (2008) A qualitative assessment of the risk of introduction of viral haemorrhagic septicaemia virus into the rainbow trout industry Scotland. Aberdeen, UKGoogle Scholar
  22. Hunter, E., Mac Namee, B. and Kelleher, J. (2017). A taxonomy for agent-based models in human infectious disease epidemiology. J Artif Soc Soc Simul, 20(3)Google Scholar
  23. Institute of Marine Research. (2018). Fjords—water exchange and currents. [online] Available at: http://www.imr.no/temasider/kyst_og_fjord/fjorder_vannutskiftning_og_strom/en Accessed 29 Jun 2018
  24. Islam M, Sokolova E, Hofstra N (2018) Modelling of river faecal indicator bacteria dynamics as a basis for faecal contamination reduction. J Hydrol 563:1000–1008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jain L, Palade V, Srinivasan D (2007) Advances in evolutionary computing for system design. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Joyce KE, Hayaska S, Laurienti PJ (2012) A genetic algorithm for controlling an agent-based model of the functional human brain. Biomed Sci Instrum 48:210–217Google Scholar
  27. Khalil KM, Abdel-Aziz M, Nazmy TT, Salem A-BM (2010) An agent-based modeling for pandemic influenza in Egypt, informatics and systems (INFOS), the 7th international conference on, vol., no., pp.1,7, 28–30 MarchGoogle Scholar
  28. Kocabas V, Dragicevica S (2006) Assessing cellular automata model behaviour using a sensitivity analysis approach. Comput Environ Urban Syst 30:921–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kristoffersen AB, Viljugrein H, Kongtorp RT, Brun E, Jansen PA (2009) Risk factors for pancreas disease (PD) outbreaks in farmed Atlantic salmon and rainbow trout in Norway during 2003–2007. Prev Vet Med 90:127–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Krkošek M (2017) Population biology of infectious diseases shared by wild and farmed fish. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 74(4):620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. MATLAB version R2015a, (2015), (computer software), TheMathWorks Inc., Natick, Massachusetts, 5 Mar 2015 http://www.mathworks.com.
  32. Millet B, Pinazo C, Banaru D, Pagès R, Guiart P, Pairaud I (2018) Unexpected spatial impact of treatment plant discharges induced by episodic hydrodynamic events: modelling Lagrangian transport of fine particles by Northern Current intrusions in the bays of Marseille (France). PLoS One 13(4):e0195257.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195257 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Milne GJ, Kelso JK, Kelly HA, Huband ST, McVernon J (2008) A small community model for the transmission of infectious diseases: comparison of school closure as an intervention in individual-based models of an influenza pandemic. PLoS One 3:e4005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. MODS (2012), Strømmodellering og smitte-spredning, http://mods.sinmod.no/. Accessed 10 Mar 2019
  35. Murray AG, Peeler EJ (2005) A framework for understanding the potential for emerging diseases in aquaculture. Prev Vet Med 67:223–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Murray AG (2009) Using simple models to review the application and implications of different approaches used to simulate transmission of pathogens among aquatic animals. Prev Vet Med 88:167–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Naka S, Genji T, Yura T, Fukuyama Y (2003) A hybrid particle swarm optimization for distribution state estimation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst:60–68Google Scholar
  38. Olaussen J (2018) Environmental problems and regulation in the aquaculture industry. Insights from Norway. Mar Policy 98:158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Qian W, Li M (2017) Convergence analysis of standard particle swarm optimization algorithm and its improvement. Soft Comput 22(12):4047–4070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rose AS, Ellis AE, Munro ALS (1989) The infectivity by different routes of exposure and shedding rates of Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. salmonicida in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., held in sea water. J Fish Dis 12:573–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Salama N, Murray A (2011) Farm size as a factor in hydrodynamic transmission of pathogens in aquaculture fish production. Aquac Environ Interact 2:61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Skov-Petersen H (2008), “The role of agent-based simulation in recreational management and planning”, In Proceeding of the fourth international conference on monitoring and management of visitor flows in recreational and protected areas management for protection and sustainable development Montecatini Terme, Tuscany, Italy, October 14Google Scholar
  43. Stene A (2013) Transmission of pancreas disease in marine salmon farming in Norway doctoral dissertation, PhD thesis. Norwegian School of Veterinary Sciences, OsloGoogle Scholar
  44. Stene A, Bang Jensen B, Knutsen Ø, Olsen A, Viljugrein H (2014) Seasonal increase in sea temperature triggers pancreas disease outbreaks in Norwegian salmon farms. J Fish Dis 37:739–751.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jfd.12165 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Taranger GL, Karlsen Ø, Bannister RJ, Glover KA, Husa V, Karlsbakk E, Kvamme BO et al (2015) Risk assessment of the environmental impact of Norwegian Atlantic salmon farming. ICES J Mar Sci 72:997–1021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tavornpanich S, Paul M, Viljugrein H, Abrial D, Jimenez D, Brun E (2012) Risk map and spatial determinants of pancreas disease in the marine phase of Norwegian Atlantic salmon farming sites. BMC Vet Res 8(1):172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. The Norwegian Aquaculture Act (2005), Available at: www.lovdata.no. Accessed 17 Dec 2018
  48. Urquhart K, Murray AG, Gregory A, O’Dea M, Munro LA, Smail DA, Shanks AM, Raynard RS (2008) Estimation of infectious dose and viral shedding rates for infectious pancreatic necrosis virus in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L, post-smolts. J Fish Dis 31:879–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Venkatramanan S, Lewis B, Chen J, Higdon D, Vullikanti A, Marathe M (2018) Using data-driven agent-based models for forecasting emerging infectious diseases. Epidemics 22:43–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.epidem.2017.02.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Viljugrein H, Staalstrøm A, Molvaelr J, Urke HA, Jansen PA (2009) Integration of hydrodynamics into a statistical model on the spread of pancreas disease (PD) in salmon farming. Dis Aquat Org 88:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Werkman M, Green DM, Murray AG, Turnbull JF (2011) The effectiveness of fallowing strategies in disease control in salmon aquaculture assessed with an SIS model. Prev Vet Med 98:64–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilensky, Uri (1999). Netlogo. https://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. The center for connected learning (CCL) and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Accessed 09 Dec 2018
  53. Yang Y, Lu T, Lin H, Chen C, Liao C (2018) Assessing the population transmission dynamics of tilapia lake virus in farmed tilapia. J Fish Dis 41(9):1439–1448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang, Y. (2019) A narrative review of the use of agent-based modeling in health behavior and behavior intervention. Transl Behav Med.  https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/iby132
  55. Yndestad H (2010) Agents and landscapes in complex systems. Aalesund University College, AalesundGoogle Scholar
  56. Ögüt H (2001) Modeling of fish disease dynamics: a new approach to an old problem. Turk J Fish Aquat Sci 1:67–74Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyAalesundNorway
  2. 2.University of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations