Advertisement

Introduction

  • Sven Klimpel
  • Thomas Kuhn
  • Julian Münster
  • Dorian D. Dörge
  • Regina Klapper
  • Judith Kochmann
Chapter

Abstract

Seas and oceans represent the largest continuous ecosystem on our planet, comprising a total area of about 360 million km2 and an estimated volume of 1375 billion km3 (Hempel et al. 2006; Sommer 2005; Tardent 2005). They absorb and store considerable amounts of carbon dioxide and heat, thereby playing a key role in regulating the earth’s climate (Hoegh-Guldberg and Bruno 2010). Furthermore, they provide habitats for a large number of organisms and thus represent the most important biogenic resource for humans. For example, various micro- and macrophyta are used as food. However, first and foremost, fish and fishery products offer a valuable and inexpensive source of high-quality animal protein. The livelihood of many people depends on fish, especially in regions of the world designated as ‘developing countries’. Over the last decades, the overall demand for marine products has increased dramatically. About 65% of the world’s population live within 150 km of a coastline, and an estimated 54.8 million people earn their living from fishery products (Hewitt and Campbell 2007; FAO 2011). In 2009, fish accounted for 20% of the total animal protein intake for 3 billion people (FAO 2011). In 2010, 79,500,000 tonnes of marine fish were landed and processed for humans. According to current calculations by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the average demand for fishery products has risen from around 9.9 kg (live weight equivalent) per capita per year to 18.6 kg (average over the period 1961–2009) (FAO 2012). With an average growth rate of approx. 3.2% per year, the demand for fish is growing faster than the global human population with 1.7%. Fish and fishery products are not only the main resource for protein and micronutrients but are also of enormous economic importance, especially for the leading fish-exporting countries, with a total estimated value of US$ 217.5 billion (FAO 2011, 2012; Woo 2006). With the importance of fishery products for the daily human diet increasing, research into harmful organisms in fish products has also become more important. Besides a number of different viruses (e.g. Birnavirus, Paramyxovirus), bacteria (e.g. Vibrio spp., Flexibacter spp.) and fungi (e.g. Ichthyophonus hoferi, Exophiala spp.), unicellular (protozoic) and multicellular (metazoic) parasites have become of great public interest (Möller and Anders 1983; Muroga 2001; Woo 2006). In the aquatic sector, the level of knowledge about the global diversity of medically important species (pathogens, parasites) varies greatly. Fish are the most diverse vertebrate class in the sea, functioning as intermediate and final hosts for many parasites (Figs. 1 and 2). The high diversity of host species is paralleled by a high diversity of their parasites and has been illustrated in numerous parasite-host checklists for different aquatic ecosystems, in which the respective infection parameters are compared between fish species. Today, fish parasites make up a significant part of marine biodiversity. Based on current lists, three to four parasite species can be found in a single fish specimen (Klimpel et al. 2009). However, these values are determined by factors like habitat, geographical region, fish species, abiotic and biotic factors and their interactions. Thus, water movements, hydrostatic pressure, salinity, temperature and light conditions cannot only affect the composition of aquatic parasites in fish hosts but also food web structures, migration behaviour and predator-prey relationships. Parasites can also be used as biological indicators or markers, which can help evaluate a wide variety of ecological issues and anthropogenic influences on water bodies (Lafferty 1997; MacKenzie et al. 1995; Sasal et al. 2007). For example, they can be used to differentiate local fish stocks (Baldwin et al. 2012; Kijewska et al. 2009; Klapper et al. 2017; MacKenzie 2002; Mattiucci et al. 2007, 2008) or to describe the population dynamics of their hosts (e.g. Arthur and Albert 1993; Mattiucci 2006; Williams et al. 1992). In addition, they are valuable for monitoring environmental stressors such as eutrophication (e.g. Reimer 1995; Valtonen et al. 1997), heavy metal input (Sures et al. 1999; Sures 2003; Sures and Siddall 1999) or industrial pollutants (Madanire-Moyo et al. 2012). Due to their longevity and the fact that they are present in almost all marine food webs at all trophic levels, they can also be used to determine the role of their hosts in the food web (Klimpel et al. 2003a,b; Marcogliese 2002, 2005). A long retention time of their intermediate stages in the hosts enables important ecological information to be collected through a combination of stomach content and parasitological analyses. These include, for example, the type and origin of the individual food organisms or short-term ontogenetic changes in the diet of the host (e.g. Klimpel et al. 2003b; Klimpel and Rückert 2005; Münster et al. 2015). Using parasites as biological indicators is essential for the study of host organisms that do not allow in vivo analysis due to their habitats inaccessibility (e.g. Klimpel and Palm 2011; Lafferty et al. 2008). The co-evolution of marine fish parasites and their hosts benefits the study of important ecological questions using various methods. Depending on the type and the number of hosts required to complete the life cycle of a parasite, a distinction is made between monoxenous (one-host) and heteroxenous (multiple-hosts) parasites (Mehlhorn and Piekarski 2002, Table 1). The host specificity of a parasite, i.e. the degree of its specialisation with regard to the host, can be strict (stenoxenous) or loose (euryxenous). Thus, if the host spectrum of a certain parasite is known, the presence of a parasite can be taken as evidence for the presence of the respective intermediate and final hosts in a specific area, since these hosts are required for the completion of the parasite’s life cycle. Consumption of parasitised fishery products can lead to serious diseases in humans (e.g. Audicana and Kennedy 2008; Klimpel and Palm 2011; Mattiucci and Nascetti 2008). In a globalised world, with networks of trade, increased travel and cultural and demographic changes, the need for studies on the potential risk of fish parasites as pathogens for the host or for humans becomes more pressing.

References

  1. Anderson RC (2000) Nematode parasites of vertebrates. Their development and transmission, 2nd edn. CAB International, Wallingford. 650 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. Arthur JR, Ahmed ATA (2002) Checklist of the parasites of fishes of Bangladesh. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No 369/1:1–77Google Scholar
  3. Arthur JR, Albert E (1993) Use of parasites for separating stocks of Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) in the Canadian Northwest Atlantic. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:2175–2181Google Scholar
  4. Arthur JR, Arai HP (1984) Annotated checklist and bibliography of parasites of herring (Clupea harengus L.). Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 70:1–26Google Scholar
  5. Arthur JR, Lumanlan-Mayo S (1997) Checklist of the parasites of fish of the Philippines. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 369:1–102Google Scholar
  6. Audicana MT, Kennedy MW (2008) Anisakis simplex: from obscure infectious worm to inducer of immune hypersensitivity. Clin Microbiol Rev 21:360–379PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Audicana MT, Ansotegui IJ, de Corres L, Kennedy MW (2002) Anisakis simplex: dangerous – dead and alive? Trends Parasitol 18(1):20–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bakker TCM, Mazzi D, Zala S (1997) Parasite-induced changes in behaviour and color make Gammarus pulex more prone to fish predation. Ecology 78(4):1098–1104Google Scholar
  9. Baldauf SA, Thünken T, Frommen JG, Bakker TCM, Heupel O, Kullmann H (2007) Infection with an acanthocephalan manipulates an amphipod’s reaction to a fish predator’s odours. Int J Parasitol 37(1):61–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Baldwin RE, Banks MA, Jacobson KC (2012) Integrating fish and parasite data as a holistic solution for identifying the elusive stock structure of Pacific sardines (Sardinops sagax). Rev Fish Biol Fish 22:137–156Google Scholar
  11. Cox FEG (2002) History of human parasitology. Clin Microbiol Rev 15(4):595–612PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Cruickshank RH, Paterson AM (2006) The great escape: do parasites break Dollo’s law? Trends Parasitol 22(11):509–515PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Duhamel G, Hulley P-A, Causse R, Koubbi P, Vacchi M, Pruvost P, Vigetta S, Irisson J-O, Mormède S, Belchier M, Dettai A, DEtrich HW, Gutt J, Jones DC, Kock K-H, Lopez Abellan LJ, Van de Putte AP (2014) Biogeographic patterns of fish. In: De Broyer C, Koubbi P, Griffiths HJ, Raymond B, Udekem d’Acoz C d’ et al (eds) Biogeographic Atlas of the Southern Ocean. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, Cambridge, pp 328–362Google Scholar
  14. Enigk K (1986) Geschichte der Helminthologie im deutschsprachigen Raum. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart. 356 ppGoogle Scholar
  15. FAO (2011) Review of the state of worlds marine fishery resources. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 569:354 pGoogle Scholar
  16. FAO (2012) The state of the world fisheries and aquaculture. FAO, Rome. 230 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. Foster WD (1965) A history of parasitology. Livingston, Edingburgh. 202 ppGoogle Scholar
  18. Froese R, Pauly D (2018) Fishbase. World Wide Web electronic publication. Version (02/2018)Google Scholar
  19. Grove DI (1990) A history of human helminthology. CAB International, Wallingford. 848 ppGoogle Scholar
  20. Hemmingsen W, MacKenzie K (1993) A checklist of the protozoan and metazoan parasites reported from the Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua L. Bull Eur Assoc Fish Pathol 13:134–137Google Scholar
  21. Hempel G, Hempel I, Schiel S (2006) Faszination Meeresforschung. Ein ökologisches Lesebuch. Hauschild, Bremen. 464 ppGoogle Scholar
  22. Hewitt CL, Campbell ML (2007) Mechanisms for the prevention of marine bioinvasions for better biosecurity. Mar Pollut Bull 55:7–9Google Scholar
  23. Hoegh-Guldberg O, Bruno JF (2010) The impact of climate change on the world’s marine ecosystems. Science 328:1523–1528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hoursten AS, Haegele CW (1980) Herring on Canadian Pacific coast. Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 48. 23 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Jütte R (1987) Schon im Jahre 1582 gab es eine Wurmkrise. Das Fischerblatt 35(11):303–306Google Scholar
  26. Kahl W (1936) Über den Befall des Stintes mit Larven des Fadenwurmes Porracaecum decipiens. Der Fischmarkt 4:177–181Google Scholar
  27. Kijewska A, Dzido J, Rokicki J (2009) Mitochondrial DNA of Anisakis simplex s.s. as a potential tool for differentiating populations. J Parasitol 95:1364–1370PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Klapper R, Bernreuther M, Wischnewski J, Klimpel S (2017) Long-term stability of Sphyrion lumpi abundance in beaked redfish Sebastes mentella of the Irminger Sea and its use as biological marker. Parasitol Res 116(5):1561–1572PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Klimpel S, Palm HW (2011) Anisakid nematode (Ascaridoidea) life cycles and distribution: increasing zoonotic potential in the time of climate change? Parasitol Res Monogr 2:201–222Google Scholar
  30. Klimpel S, Rückert S (2005) Life cycle strategy of Hysterothylacium aduncum to become the most abundant anisakid fish nematode in the North Sea. Parasitol Res 97:141–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Klimpel S, Seehagen A, Palm HW, Rosenthal H (2001) Deep-water metazoan fish parasites of the world. Logos Verlag, Berlin. 316 ppGoogle Scholar
  32. Klimpel S, Palm HW, Seehagen A (2003a) Metazoan parasites and food composition of juvenile Etmopterus spinax (L., 1758) (Dalatiidae, Squaliformes) from the Norwegian deep. Parasitol Res 89:245–251PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Klimpel S, Palm HW, Seehagen A (2003b) Metazoan parasites and feeding behavior of four small-sized fish species from the central North Sea. Parasitol Res 91:290–297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Klimpel S, Palm HW, Rückert S, Piatkowski U (2004) The life cycle of Anisakis simplex in the Norwegian deep (northern North Sea). Parasitol Res 94:1–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Klimpel S, Palm HW, Busch MW, Kellermanns E, Rückert S (2006) Fish parasites in the Arctic deep-sea: poor diversity in pelagic fish species vs. heavy parasite load in a demersal fish. Deep Sea Res Part I 53(7):1167–1181Google Scholar
  36. Klimpel S, Kellermanns E, Palm HW, Moravec F (2007) Zoogeography of fish parasites on the pearlside (Maurolicus muelleri), with genetic evidence of Anisakis simplex (s.s.) from the Mid-Atlantic-Ridge. Mar Biol 152:725–732Google Scholar
  37. Klimpel S, Busch MW, Kellermanns E, Kleinertz S, Palm HW (2009) Metazoan deep-sea fish parasites, Acta Biologica Benrodis, Supplement. II. Verlag Natur & Wissenschaft, Solingen. 384 ppGoogle Scholar
  38. Kock KH (2005) Antarctic icefishes (Channichthyidae): a unique family of fishes. A review, Part II. Polar Biol 28:897–909Google Scholar
  39. Lafferty KD (1997) Environmental parasitology: What can parasites tell us about human impacts on the environment? Parasitol Today 13:251–255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Lafferty KD, Allesina S, Arim M, Briggs CJ, De Leo G, Dobson AP, Dunne JA, Johnson PTJ, Kuris AM, Marcogliese DJ, Martinez ND, Memmott J, Marquet PA, McLaughlin JP, Mordecai EA, Pasual M, Poulin R, Thieltges DW (2008) Parasites in the food webs: the ultimate missing links. Ecol Lett 11:533–546PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Lile NK (1998) Alimentary tract helminths of four pleuronectid flatfish in relation to host phylogeny and ecology. J Fish Biol 53:945–953Google Scholar
  42. Lucius R, Loos-Frank B (2008) Biologie von Parasiten. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg. 552 ppGoogle Scholar
  43. MacKenzie K (2002) Parasites as biological tags in population studies of marine organisms: an update. Parasitology 124:153–163Google Scholar
  44. MacKenzie K, Williams HH, Williams B, McVicar AH, Siddall R (1995) Parasites as indicators of water quality and the potential use of helminth transmission in marine pollution studies. Adv Parasitol 35:85–144PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Madanire-Moyo GN, Luus-Powell WJ, Oliver PA (2012) Diversity of metazoan parasites of the Mozambique tilapia, Oreochromis mossambicus (Peters, 1852), as indicators of pollution in the Limpopo and Olifants river systems. Onderstepoort J Vet Res 79:1–9Google Scholar
  46. Marcogliese DJ (2002) Food webs and the transmission of parasites to marine fish. Parasitology 124:83–99Google Scholar
  47. Marcogliese DJ (2005) Transmission of marine parasites. In: Rhode K (ed) Marine parasitology. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 280–286Google Scholar
  48. Marcogliese DJ, Price J (1997) The paradox of parasites. Glob Biodivers 7(3):7–15Google Scholar
  49. Margolis L, Arthur JR (1979) Synopsis of the parasites of fishes of Canada. Bull Fish Res Board Can 199. 269 ppGoogle Scholar
  50. Mattiucci S (2006) Parasites as biological tags in population studies of demersal and pelagic fish species. Parassitologia 48:23–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Mattiucci S, Nascetti G (2008) Advances and trends in the molecular systematics of anisakid nematodes, with implications for their evolutionary ecology and host-parasite co-evolutionary processes. Adv Parasitol 66:47–148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Mattiucci S, Abaunza P, Damiano S, Garcia A, Santos MN, Nascetti G (2007) Distribution of Anisakis larvae, identified by genetic markers, and their use for stock characterization of demersal and pelagic fish from European waters: an update. J Helminthol 81:117–127PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Mattiucci S, Farina V, Campbell N, Mackenzie K, Pinto AL, Abaunza P, Nascetti G (2008) Anisakis spp. Larvae (Nematoda: Anisakidae) from Atlantic horse mackerel: their genetic identification and use as biological tags for host stock characterization. Fish Res 89:146–151Google Scholar
  54. McDonald T.E., Margolis L. (1995) Synopsis of the parasites of fishes of Canada: Supplement (1978–1993). Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences No. 122, 265 ppGoogle Scholar
  55. Mehlhorn H (2016) Encyclopedia of parasitology, 4th edn. Springer, Berlin. 3084 ppGoogle Scholar
  56. Mehlhorn H, Piekarski G (2002) Grundriss der Parasitenkunde. Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg. 516 ppGoogle Scholar
  57. Milinski M (1985) Risk of predation of parasitized sticklebacks (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.) under competition for food. Behaviour 93:203–216Google Scholar
  58. Möller H, Anders K (1983) Krankheiten und Parasiten der Meeresfische. Verlag Heino Möller, Kiel. 258 ppGoogle Scholar
  59. Moravec F (1994) Parasitic nematodes of freshwater fishes of Europe. Academia, Praha. 601 ppGoogle Scholar
  60. Münster J, Klimpel S, Fock HO, MacKenzie K, Kuhn T (2015) Parasites as biological tags to track an ontogenetic shift in the feeding behaviour of Gadus morhua off West and East Greenland. Parasitol Res 114(7):2723–2733PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Münster J, Kochmann J, Klimpel S, Klapper R, Kuhn T (2016) Parasite fauna of Antarctic Macrourus whitsoni (Gadiformes: Macrouridae) in comparison with closely related macrourids. Parasit Vectors 9:403PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Muroga K (2001) Viral and bacterial diseases of marine fish and shellfish in Japanese hatcheries. Aquaculture 202:23–44Google Scholar
  63. Ott J (1996) Meereskunde: Einführung in die Geographie und Biologie der Ozeane. Ulmer Verlag, Stuttgart. 424 ppGoogle Scholar
  64. Palm HW (2004) The Trypanorhyncha Diesing, 1863. PKSPL-IPB Press, Bogor. 710 ppGoogle Scholar
  65. Palm HW, Klimpel S (2007) Evolution of parasitic life in the ocean. Trends Parasitol 23(1):10–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Palm HW, Klimpel S (2008) Metazoan fish parasites of Macrourus berglax Lacepède, 1801 and other macrourids of the North Atlantic: invasion of the deep sea from the continental shelf. Deep Sea Res Part II 55(1–2):236–242Google Scholar
  67. Palm HW, Reimann N, Spindler M, Plötz J (1998) The role of the rock cod Notothenia coriiceps Richardson, 1844 in the life-cycle of Antarctic parasites. Polar Biol 19:399–406Google Scholar
  68. Palm HW, Klimpel S, Bucher C (1999) Checklist of metazoan fish parasites of German coastal waters. Berichte aus dem Institut für Meereskunde 307:1–148Google Scholar
  69. Palm HW, Klimpel S, Walter T (2007) Demersal fish parasite fauna around the South Shetland Islands: high species richness and low host specificity in deep Antarctic waters. Polar Biol 30:1513–1522Google Scholar
  70. Poulin R, Rohde K (1997) Comparing the richness of metazoan ectoparasite communities of marine fishes: controlling for host phylogeny. Oecologia 110:278–283PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Price PW (1980) Evolutionary biology of parasites. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  72. Reimer LW (1995) Parasites especially of piscean hosts as indicators of the eutrophication in the Baltic Sea. Appl Parasitol 36:124–135Google Scholar
  73. Rohde K (1993) Ecology of marine parasites, 2nd edn. CAB International, Wallingford. 298 ppGoogle Scholar
  74. Rohde K (2002) Ecology and biogeography of marine parasites. Adv Mar Biol 43:1–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Rohde K (2005) Marine parasitology. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne und CAB International, Wallingford. 592 ppGoogle Scholar
  76. Rohde K, Hayward CJ (2000) Oceanic barriers as indicated by scombrid fishes and their parasites. Int J Parasitol 30:579–583PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Sasal P, Mouillot D, Fichez R, Chifflet S, Kulbicki M (2007) The use of fish parasites as biological indicators of anthropogenic influences in coral-reef lagoons: a case study of Apogonidae parasites in New-Caledonia. Mar Pollut Bull 54:1697–1706PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Schnack D (1996) Fischerei. In: Rheinheimer G (ed) Meereskunde der Ostsee, 2. Auflage edn. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  79. Sommer U (2005) Biologische Meereskunde. Springer, Heidelberg. 432 ppGoogle Scholar
  80. Sures B (2003) Accumulation of heavy metals by intestinal helminths in fish: an overview and perspective. Parasitology 126:53–60Google Scholar
  81. Sures B, Siddall R (1999) Pomphorhynchus laevis: the intestinal acanthocephalan as a lead sink for its fish host, chub (Leuciscus cephalus). Exp Parasitol 93:66–72PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Sures B, Siddall R, Taraschewski H (1999) Parasites as accumulation indicators of heavy metal pollution. Parasitol Today 15:16–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Tardent P (2005) Meeresbiologie: Eine Einführung. Thieme, Stuttgart, 308 ppGoogle Scholar
  84. Valtonen ET, Holmes JC, Koskivaara M (1997) Eutrophication, pollution, and fragmentation: effects on parasite communities in roach (Rutilus rutilus) and perch (Perca fluviatilis) on four lakes in central Finland. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 54:572–585Google Scholar
  85. Valtonen ET, Pulkkinen K, Poulin R, Julkunen M (2001) The structure of parasite component communities in brackish water fishes of the northeastern Baltic Sea. Parasitology 122:471–481PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Walter T, Palm HW, Piepiorka S, Rückert S (2002) Parasites of the Antarctic rattail Macrourus whitsoni (Regan, 1913) (Macrouridae, Gadiformes). Polar Biol 25:633–640Google Scholar
  87. Wenk P, Renz A (2003) Parasitologie – Biologie der Humanparasiten. Thieme, Stuttgart. 348 ppGoogle Scholar
  88. Williams HH, MacKenzie K, McCarthy AM (1992) Parasites as biological indicators of the population biology, migrations, diet and phylogenetics of fish. Rev Fish Biol Fish 2:144–176Google Scholar
  89. Windsor DA (1998) Controversies in parasitology. Most of the species on Earth are parasites. Int J Parasitol 28:1939–1941PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Woo PTK (2006) Fish diseases and disorders, Volume 1: protozoan and metazoan infections. CABI Publishing, Wallingford. 816 ppGoogle Scholar
  91. Zander CD (1998) Parasit-Wirt-Beziehungen. Springer, Heidelberg. 184 ppGoogle Scholar
  92. Zander CD, Reimer LW (2002) Parasitism at the ecosystem level in the Baltic Sea. Parasitology 124:119–135Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sven Klimpel
    • 1
  • Thomas Kuhn
    • 2
  • Julian Münster
    • 1
  • Dorian D. Dörge
    • 1
  • Regina Klapper
    • 3
  • Judith Kochmann
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Ecology, Evolution and Diversity and Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research CentreGoethe-UniversityFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.GeldernGermany
  3. 3.Department of Safety and Quality of Milk and Fish ProductsMax Rubner-InstituteHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations