Biotechnology-Aquaculture Interface: The Site of Maximum Impact Workshop | |
|
Contents
Appendix
|
Workshop Report
-Preface
-Final Report
Report on the Workshop, March 5-7, 2001
Executive Summary
The U.S. is heavily dependent on imported seafood and is, after Japan, the worlds largest importer of fishery products. U.S. consumers spent an estimated $52.3 billion for fishery products in 1999. Imports of edible seafood products were valued at $9.0 billion in 1999. In contrast, U.S. exports were valued at $2.8 billion, thus generating a deficit of $6.2 billion in 1999.
Aquaculture in the U.S. has expanded steadily since the 1970s and reached $978 million (farm-gate value) in 1998. In 1974, the value of products produced was $45 million. Unfortunately, despite very positive trends, the U.S. ranks only 8th in production worldwide and behind such countries as China, India, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Vietnam. Worldwide, aquaculture is the fastest growing agri-industry, with an annual growth rate of 11 percent since 1984 and an estimated value of $47.1 billion 1998.
Biotechnology has grown to a U.S.-dominated worldwide industry contributing billions of dollars to the economy and producing products unattainable by other means. Yet, the revolution in biotechnology continues with greater speed and sophistication. Aquaculture has been practiced since antiquity but its current revitalization was brought about by economic and environmental realities and by an influx of new science and technology, especially biotechnology. The application of modern biotechnology to enhance aquaculture is now most timely for a number of purposes, including production of desired foods and allied products, animal health monitoring and maintenance, and waste minimization.
To examine the interface of biotechnology and aquaculture, a workshop was organized and convened by the USDA's Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and The Oceanic Institute (OI). The purpose of the workshop was to identify significant R&D opportunities that can be translated into commercial reality during the decade and define infrastructure and program needs. The primary focus was to provide advice and recommendations to the ARS. New areas of focus not previously covered in other agency or national plans include "Biocomplexity" and "Biosecurity." Others, such as "Genomics" and "Biocellular Technology," are partially covered in current ARS and USDA programs. The area of "Societal Issues" seeks to couple science and technology with commercial reality and science-based policy, something akin to an element found in the Human Genome Project.
Research and development is the lifeline to commercialization in any industry. Without basic and applied research (the core investment), commercialization (the return) is not possible. The following five areas were first identified and suggested by the members of the Steering and Program Committees and other scientists, administrators, and practitioners of aquaculture as having special merit for enhanced R&D efforts and consideration by ARS.
Genomics
Genomics refers to several different and evolving areas dealing with the entire genetic material in the chromosomes of an organism. Major recommendations are: Short-Term (1-3 years): (a) Collect, preserve, and use the germplasm of economically important species to improve production efficiency, product quality, and disease resistance; (b) Develop highly polymorphic markers (microsatellites and others) for economically important species; (c) Construct linkage maps using polymorphic loci with sufficient resolution to permit location, definition, and use of genes; and (d) Assemble researchers into teams. Mid-Term (4-7 years): (a) Map molecular markers including quantitative trait loci (QTL) and develop reliable techniques for genetic marker-assisted selection (MAS); (b) Develop microarray chips for the sequenced organisms (microbes and animals). Long-Term (8-10 plus years): (a)
Biocomplexity
Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that arise as a result of dynamic interactions that occur within biological systems, including humans, and between these systems and the physical environment. Aquaculture, as such, is representative of biocomplexity by the myriad of interactions that involve the aquatic animal, its varied life stages, co-populations of organisms (both synergistic and antagonistic), the feed, the environment, and production systems. Short-Term: (a) Prepare scientific assessment briefs on biocomplexity for key U.S. economically important aquaculture species; (b) Establish a national information resource base containing information and data on basic, applied, developmental, demonstration, and commercial systems where biocomplexity is especially important; (c) Develop and apply appropriate instrumentation to measure, monitor, and control biocomplexity; and (d) Decipher the critical components of shrimp-microbial community interactions. Mid-Term: (a) Apply biocomplexity concepts to control pathogenic and opportunistic organisms; (b) Perfect key economically important biocomplex production systems; and (c) Develop and apply modern sensing technology, especially nanotechnology. Long-Term: (a) Develop models to understand and control biocomplex aquaculture systems for large-scale production.
Biocellular Technology
Biocellular technology is defined as the applications of techniques to regulate the reproduction, development, growth, and maturation of aquatic species for aquacultural purposes. Short-Term: (a) Develop plant alternatives to marine fish-derived proteins in aquatic feed diets; (b) Explore use of genetically engineered proteins in corn seed to produce oral vaccines; (c) Control diseases by designing a DNA vaccine vector and developing new diagnostic techniques for detection of pathogens; and (d) Develop specific pathogen free (SPF) broodstock for economically important species. Mid-Term: (a) Further refine and develop biological containment technology; (b) Develop more effective methods for spawning desirable species; and (c) Develop effective biocontrol methods for disease prevention and enhancement of immune systems. Long-Term: (a) Establish a proteomics information resource and database focused on reproduction, development, growth, and maturation.
Biosecurity
Biosecurity encompasses issues ranging in scope from global, national, watershed, facility, tank, and finally to organism level. At the facility scale, biosecurity refers to producing aquatic species in a well-controlled environment that excludes the introduction or propagation of unwanted organisms and includes the prevention of escape of organisms back into the natural environment. Short-Term: (a) Increase multi-disciplinary research investment with a focus on biosecure production system design, operation and management; (b) Continue development of SPF source stocks for research and commercial production; (c) Develop cost-effective and reliable diagnostics for detecting and monitoring specifically listed pathogens; and (d) Continue to develop risk assessment models (biosecurity, bioterrorism, food safety) and evaluate acceptable potential outcomes with testable hypotheses. Mid-Term: (a) Develop superior (genetically improved) animals intended for candidate biosecure systems; and (b) Develop new diagnostics for existing pathogens and for emerging threats. Long-Term: (a) Create cooperative international system for certifying and reliably tracing the movement of aquatic products, organisms, stocks, strains and pathogens.
Societal Issues
Successful commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology will depend upon societys confidence that its full range of interests was respected. To resolve issues confronting the aquaculture industry, sound scientific inquiry will prove beneficial, if not critical. Issues include: safety of GMOs as foods and feeds, environmental safety of GMOs, regulatory oversight policy, intellectual property rights, bioethics, and consumer acceptance. Short term: (a) Sufficient support needs to be allocated for ethical, legal and social issues regarding commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology; (b) Evaluate and apply the principles of environmental release established for microbes and animals to aquatic species; (c) Evaluate the release of cage-produced, indigenous, non-GMO finfish on natural populations and the environment; and (d) The Council on Environmental Quality, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and other agencies including USDA should clarify regulatory policy, including applicable legal authorities and agency roles, and mandate agency consultation. Mid-term: (a) Support research developing genetically modified food and fiber products that clearly benefit consumers; (b) Support the international use of products derived from U.S. biotechnology; and (c) Devise new methods for assessing and monitoring environmental effects of new production systems. Long term: (a) Promote an adaptive approach to oversight of aquaculture biotechnology. USDA should support efforts to synthesize knowledge of benefits, risks, and regulatory experience relevant to development or revision of oversight policy.
Infrastructure
The identification and prioritization of specific R&D areas bring forth generic science and technology and infrastructure needs. Areas that need increased attention are: collaboration, R&D support, and manpower education and training. Short-Term: (a) Assist aquaculture research by supporting R&D tax credits, accelerated depreciation programs, SBA loans, and creation of an ARS National Aquaculture Biotechnology Collaboration Initiative (ARS NACBI); (b) Effectively coordinate programs with guidance from advisory groups that include members from academia, private research institutes, government and industry; (c) Create and maintain a centralized aquaculture germplasm stock center; and (d) Create a transgenic advisory board to cover technical and public issues. Mid-Term: (a) Team researchers with U.S. aquacultural farmers to promote a better understanding; and (b) Create programs for selective breeding and maintenance of key strains of important aquacultural species; (c) Sponsor a reassessment of new technologies every two years through a workshop or other means. Long-Term: (a) Continue to support basic and applied research.
Biotechnology-Aquaculture Interface:
The Site of Maximum Impact
Introduction
Biotechnology is the use of biological organisms or their cellular constituents in a human-controlled fashion for beneficial purposes. While biotechnology had been practiced for millennia when humans first fermented various materials to make beer and wine, modern biotechnology owes its advent to recombinant DNA technology invented in the early 1970s. From that time, biotechnology has grown to a U.S.-dominated worldwide industry contributing billions of dollars to the economy and producing products unattainable by other means. Yet, the revolution in biotechnology continues with greater speed and sophistication.
Aquaculture is the propagation and cultivation of aquatic organisms including fish, molluscs, crustaceans, and plants in controlled or selected aquatic environments for any commercial, recreational, or public use. Again, aquaculture has been practiced since antiquity but its current revitalization was brought about by economic and environmental realities and by an influx of new science and technology, especially biotechnology. The application of modern biotechnology to enhance aquaculture is now most timely for a number of purposes, including production of desired foods and allied products, animal health monitoring and maintenance, and waste minimization.
The site of maximum impact is at the interface of biotechnology and aquaculture.
Economic Importance of Aquaculture
The U.S. is heavily dependent on imported seafood and is, after Japan, the worlds largest importer of fishery products. U.S. consumers spent an estimated $52.3 billion for fishery products in 1999 (NMFS 2000). Per capita consumption rose to 15.3 pounds (lbs) of edible seafood in 1999, up 0.4 lbs from 1998.
Imports of edible seafood products were 1.8 million metric tons (mt) (3.9 billion lbs) valued at $9.0 billion in 1999 -- an increase of 240.9 million lbs and $840.7 million compared with 1998. In contrast, U.S. exports of edible fishery products were 889.6 mt (2.0 billion lbs), valued at $2.8 billion.
Thus the U.S. edible seafood deficit reached a record $6.2 billion in 1999, up from $5.9 billion in 1998. Shrimp continued to be the single most imported seafood at 331,707 mt (731.3 million lbs), valued at $3.1 billion. On the other hand, exports amounted to only 14,907 mt (32.9 million lbs), valued at $122.8 million. The trade deficit in seafood is the largest for any agricultural commodity and the second largest, after petroleum, for any natural resources product.
Aquaculture in the U.S. has expanded steadily since the 1970s and reached 358,209 mt (789.7 million lbs) in 1998, valued at $938.6 million (NMFS 2000). Weights and values represent sales to processors and dealers and not to final consumers. Another analysis gives the value of U.S. aquaculture products in 1998 as having reached $978 million (NASS 2000). In contrast, in 1974, the value of products produced was $45 million. Aquaculture is also a contributor to jobs and the general economy as fishery products move along the chain to consumers. U.S. aquaculture accounted for approximately 181,000 jobs in 1992 with a total economic impact of $5.6 billion (Dicks et al., 1996). Unfortunately, despite very positive trends for the United States, our nation ranks only 8th in production worldwide and behind such countries as China, India, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Vietnam.
Worldwide, aquaculture is the fastest growing agri-industry, with an annual growth rate of 11 percent since 1984. According to the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), global aquaculture reached
30.9 million mt in 1998, with an estimated value of more than $47.1 billion (FAO 2001, NMFS 2000). In comparison, capture fisheries accounted for 86.3 million mt. Taking into account trade or value added on the way to the consumer, the global fish industry (including aquaculture) is estimated at more than $250 billion (FAO 1998).
Purpose of Workshop and "White Paper"
The purpose of the workshop was to identify significant R&D opportunities that can be translated into commercial reality during the decade and define infrastructure and program needs. While the primary focus was to provide advice and recommendations to the ARS, insights gained may be useful to others in government, academia, and industry.
The workshop was an outgrowth of numerous discussions involving stakeholders from industry, academia and government. In particular, the Steering and Program Committee's deliberations and suggestions of topics and participants led to the workshop as constituted.
The outcomes were to be: (1) a succinct report of research priorities (2) a publication of scientific presentations made at the workshop. The identification of R&D areas were to result in a matrix of short-, mid- and long-term areas of focus and prioritization. The products of this workshop were to be made available to research scientists, engineers, students, managers, administrators, and farmers pursuing aquaculture in industry, academia, and government.
As one element of the process, a "white paper" was to be prepared to set the stage for further discussions among the participants before and during the workshop and to be used, as appropriate, for preparing a report to the agency. The aim was to define new opportunities as presented by scientific inquiry or economic opportunities in order to justify additional activities and support. Currently, the total federal investment in aquaculture is estimated to be $75-100 million annually.
This report, an outgrowth of the white paper, represents the collective view of many who have been involved in the formulation of the workshop and describes some areas for R&D attention. New areas of focus not previously covered in other agency or national plans include "Biocomplexity" and "Biosecurity." Others, such as "Genomics" and "Biocellular Technology," are partially covered in current ARS and USDA programs. These areas, in fact, have had their origins in other federal agencies, but their application to aquaculture is extremely relevant to the USDA. The area of "Societal Issues" seeks to couple science and technology with commercial reality and science-based policy at the federal and state levels, something akin to an element found in the Human Genome Project.
Importantly, the aim of the workshop and "white paper" was to go beyond "business as usual" and to elevate these activities, if deemed appropriate, to a "critical mass." The intent was to enhance efforts in aquaculture in the public and private sectors and build on current programs at ARS as well as to explore new initiatives.
This workshop was purposely focused on U.S. aquaculture (seafood protein) interests and did not cover plant aquaculture. It also did not cover some topics that are now well recognized in aquaculture and are currently mainstream government programs being advocated by the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture (JSA), the Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and ARS programs. The workshop was to be species neutral and focus on generic concepts and principles. However it became apparent early in the workshop that discussions were more fruitful when specific species were considered.
Why R&D and Now?
Research and development is the lifeline to commercialization in any industry. Without basic and applied research (the core investment), commercialization (the return) is not possible. This is amply illustrated by the U.S. biotechnology industry as it exists today. Without the decades and billions of dollars of support for core disciplines and applications of basic discoveries in the life and physical sciences by the federal government through the NIH, NSF, DOD, and others, the U.S. biotechnology industry as we know it now would not exist. Investments in developing the knowledge base and infrastructure are critical if future returns are expected.
There is also a key to timing an investment in R&D and, in particular, to the biotechnology-aquaculture interface. Major reasons for considering this now includes:
The U.S. enjoys dominance in biotechnology as applied to the industrial sectors of medicine, pharmaceuticals and plant agriculture. The exciting discoveries and accumulated knowledge of many years are now ripe for applications in aquaculture -- an industrial sector that has much promise but one that has been neglected by biotechnology when compared to the other industrial sectors. In fact, the federal government not only has an opportunity to apply biotechnology to aquaculture but an obligation to capture the benefits before other nations do so. Already, the European Science Foundation is designing a five-year, 250-million Euro program in marine biotechnology with parts dedicated to aquaculture. Applying biotechnology to aquaculture at this time will also capture benefits brought forth by private-sector investments in generic aspects of biotechnology during the last decade.
There is a now an imperative for sustainable and environmentally responsible practices and processes in aquaculture as well as in other industries. However, aquaculture as practiced in certain regions and countries (but not necessarily the U.S.) has received the ire of environmental groups and nongovernmental organizations -- and justly so. Often, current practices are environmentally destructive and cause catastrophic losses of products due to poor management practices and the spread of disease. Biotechnology, by its very nature of precise manipulation of DNA and other cellular constituents, offers a more controlled way of producing animals and plants. Thus the application of biotechnology to aquaculture in the entire chain -- from fertilized eggs to the finished consumer products -- can bring significant environmental benefits. Biotechnology can also be instrumental in addressing pollution from aquaculture through the use of bioremediation. Environmentally sound, economically superior, biotechnology-based aquaculture processes and products will lead to their acceptance by other countries and will also increase our nation's exports.
Biotechnology, like other high technology areas, is global and other nations can take advantage of our investment before we do. Such a situation would be disadvantageous to the U.S. taxpayer and consumer. Other nations, more advanced in the practice of commercial aquaculture, are mounting efforts on the application of biotechnology, especially in genomics and other aspects of modern DNA technology. If some of these nations (e.g., Japan, China) combine their great practical know-how with advances in biotechnology, the U.S. will be at a great disadvantage in realizing economic benefits and returns from its investment in R&D.
As with other major high tech U.S. industries, there is a need -- almost an obligation -- to foster American entrepreneurship through small businesses that can revolutionize entire industries. Most often, the entrepreneurs seminal to the formation of these new companies have a base or come from academia or independent research institutes. Certainly, biotechnology and, in particular, the Human Genome Project have already changed the nature of the pharmaceutical industry -- a consequence of entrepreneurs. Aquaculture is on the "map of economic development" of our nation and numerous other countries and there is an immense opportunity as traditional capture fisheries decline worldwide. The transition in seafood production that aquaculture represents -- from hunting and gathering wild species to at-will sustainable production of high-quality and high-health aquatic animals -- is a tremendous opportunity for U.S. entrepreneurship that now needs to be catalyzed further by federal efforts.
R&D Opportunities - Priority Areas
Areas for R&D in aquaculture have been identified and described during the last five years by a number of organizations (JSA 2001, JSA 1996, ARS 2001, ARS 2000, CSREES 2001, The following five areas were first identified and suggested by the members of the Steering and Program Committees and others (scientists, administrators, and practitioners of aquaculture) as having special merit for enhanced R&D efforts and consideration by ARS. These were then scrutinized further at the workshop through sessions, group discussions, and general audience discussions. It is important to recognize that these areas need to be viewed in relation to already existing programs and, where possible and appropriate, integrated into the framework of existing federal research programs.
An aquaculture biotechnology research program will need to concentrate on the 3-5 most economically important species, and the research objectives need to be defined and prioritized for each species. The impact would be greatest if finfish, crustaceans, and mollusks were all represented in the selected species. The research program for each species should consist of research efforts in reproduction, nutrition, quantitative and molecular genetics, immunology, microbiology, meat science, and management systems. Biotechnology research will be used to integrate information from the multiple disciplines and develop improved production systems.
The development and implementation of biotechnology in aquaculture will require partnerships between research communities, farmers, and the aquaculture industry. The infrastructure for the research community needs to grow to provide solutions to the industrys problems in a reasonable time. This will require a much larger human resource than what is currently available. Additional training and education is needed to transfer the technology and fill research and industry positions with properly trained employees.
Genomics
Genomics refers to several different and evolving areas and activities dealing with the entire genetic material in the chromosomes of an organism. Once information on whole genomes became available, "functional genomics" was coined to describe the function of all genes. The unique aspect of functional genomics is the ability to monitor simultaneously potentially all events such as expression of genes at the RNA or protein level (Nature 2000). Following the completion of the sequence of the human and other genomes, a crucial step in understanding living systems is the determination of the structure and function of the entire set of gene products. Data from genome projects have led to comparative protein sequence analyses and numerous efforts to develop methodologies for the identification of protein families. Utilization of computational analyses with structural determinations by X-ray crystallography and/or NMR techniques to study protein structural families constitutes the new field of "structural genomics." Proteomics, another term introduced in the lexicon of biology, refers to the collective activities of cataloging and characterizing proteins, comparing variations in their expression levels under different conditions, interaction correlations, and identification of their functional roles (Borman 2000). Since the sequencing of the first genome (H. influenzae) in 1995, more than 30 nonhuman genomes have been determined and another 99 are underway (Nelson et al., 2000). A few aquatic species (e.g., zebra fish, tilapia, shrimp, catfish, trout) are receiving increased attention (Alcivar-Warren and Kocher, 1999).
Multi-disciplinary team research is needed to conduct genomics research. A number of research tools and genomic information need to be developed for each species. DNA markers need to be developed for each species and used to construct a genetic linkage map. Short segments of genes (EST- expressed sequence tags) need to be sequenced and mapped to develop a comparative map for each species. A physical map (BAC map -- bacterial artificial chromosomes) for each species should be constructed. Databases and information systems will need to be developed to store, analyze and interpret the genomic information. The linkage, comparative and physical maps will be used to identify genes that influence production traits. In the future, the genome of each species should be sequenced to provide the ultimate physical and comparative map. DNA markers for these genes will be used to select aquatic species that are well adapted to production systems that are highly efficient, profitable and environmental benign.
Recommendations for R&D are:
Short-Term (1-3 years)
Mid-Term (4-7 years)
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)
Biocomplexity
Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that arise as a result of dynamic interactions that occur within biological systems, including humans, and between these systems and the physical environment. From individual cells to ecosystems, these systems exhibit properties that depend not only on the individual actions of their components, but also on the interactions among these components and between these components and the environment (NSF 2001). NSF launched its Biocomplexity in the Environment initiative three years ago, and the program is currently funded at $75 million (Schulz 2001).
Aquaculture, as such, is representative of biocomplexity by the myriad of interactions that involve the aquatic animal of choice, its varied life stages, co-populations of organisms (both synergistic and antagonistic), the feed, the environment, and production systems. Additionally, the human factors of product quality, food safety, and species preference are important considerations in any overall aquaculture system.
Recommendations for R&D are:
Short-Term (1-3 years)
Mid-Term (4-7 years)
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)
Biocellular Technology
Biocellular technology is defined as the applications of techniques to regulate the reproduction, development, growth, and maturation of aquatic species for aquacultural purposes. The approaches to be used are dependent upon our knowledge of the life cycle of the various organisms, which in many cases is incomplete. Biocellular technology can be applied to hormonal control of spawning, cloning, creation of transgenic animals, nutrition, aquatic animal health, and the control of reproduction. The obvious methods of introducing desirable traits, through transgenic animals, are long term until some advocacy group is willing to take the necessary time (possibly 10 years) to organize the stakeholders and educate the public. It is public perception that is retarding this development. USDA should be a partner in this effort. However for the present, short term, nontransgenic solutions appear to be more attractive.
The importance of this R&D area is to enable year-round production and maturation on demand of gametes, fry, and juveniles of important U.S. species and to attain species with desired characteristics (increased survival, faster growth rates, better feed conversion, and improved environmental tolerance).
To make aquaculture competitive in the U.S., we need to reduce production costs, control disease and losses due to stress, and control the reproductive life cycle. Several topics are highlighted.
Hormones
The application of hormones to control and enhance spawning and ensure an uninterrupted supply of eggs and fry are now routine in aquaculture. More recently hormones have been used to include teleost sex control (reversal) measures, providing monosex lines, and development of agents for smolt-enhancement, growth acceleration, and enhanced feed conversion efficiency.
Nutrition and Oral Vaccines
One of the most exciting technologic developments has come from the ability to manipulate the plant genome to produce products economically for use in aquaculture. The use of genetically modified crops to eliminate toxic products and increase specific nutrients (limiting amino acids, n-3 fatty acids, etc.) is now possible. The packaging of genetically engineered proteins in corn seed to produce very inexpensive oral vaccines is also being pursued.
Control of Diseases
Biotechnology holds great promise in controlling diseases in aquaculture. New promising approaches include designer DNA vaccines vectors and their delivery systems, developing rapid and accurate tests for the detection of major pathogens and exploring nonspecific immunity potential in fish to protect themselves from disease. Of great potential utility is the use of a new technique called "signature tag mutagenesis", using transposons for Streptococcus iniae, to increase our understanding of pathogen virulence and to develop traditional and recombinant vaccines.
We need to understand more about the natural defense mechanisms of aquatic animals to foreign microorganisms. This includes knowledge about the peptide inhibitors of microorganisms frequently found on these animals, and more about the normal consortium of microorganisms present.
Transgenics
Although the commercial sale of transgenics in aquaculture in the U.S. may be a few years away, we need to continue the basic studies to produce transgenic strains to provide disease resistance, enhanced somatic growth or desired properties (i.e., myostatin induced muscle growth).
Non-Breeding Stocks
Recent experiences make it very unlikely that we will see expanded marine aquaculture activities along the U.S. coastline. Such increases will come about either developing inexpensive recirculating systems or by biological containment in offshore cages and pens. We need to support further research on effective biological containment of some commercially important species by combinations of ploidy control, sex determination, presence of non-reproductive alleles, and addition of transgenes. Our information in this area is very limited. This containment research should be conducted in cooperation with concerned NGO groups so that agreement can be reached on acceptable risk levels.
Recommendations for R&D are:
Short-Term (1-3 years)
Mid-Term (4-7 years)
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)
Biosecurity
Biosecurity encompasses issues ranging in scope from global, national, watershed, facility, tank, and finally to organism level. The practice of aquaculture is making an accelerated transition from the opportunistic culture of native stocks to the culture of highly selected or even modified stocks that are significantly differentiated from wild populations. Globalization of aquaculture production now makes commonplace the scenario of seed stocks produced in the U.S. to be shipped by air for production a hemisphere away, and then marketed on a third continent.
At the largest scale there are both concerns and opportunities presented by the ability to create and move genetic seed stocks across large distances. Globally, opportunities exist to introduce or explore alternative species, new strains or highly selected stocks that represent substantial appeal to aquaculture. Movement of these products and organisms presents challenges to resolve potential interactions with the native ecology, the transfer of diseases to either cultured or wild stocks and the potential transfer of contaminants or pathogens of concern for human food safety.
At the facility scale, biosecurity refers to producing aquatic species in a well-controlled environment that excludes the introduction or propagation of unwanted organisms and includes the prevention of escape or passage of organisms back into the natural environment (Moss, 1998). The use of "specific pathogen free" (SPF) animals is a mandatory starting point for such a system and requires that animals that are free of specifically listed pathogens that can be reliably identified and propagated. Biosecurity in this sense encompasses not only the animal health, but also the design, location and operation of the production systems, product quality and safety, environmental, and economic aspects.
Although not commonly considered, the concepts of biosecurity may well have application at the organism or level. The incorporation or creation of vaccines, selected or natural resistance, probiotics, general fitness for culture environments, sterility or reversible metabolic attributes directly into an organism (or organism consortia) may effectively resolve biosecurity issues that might conventionally be resolved by cruder barriers at a larger scope.
Recommendations for R&D are:
Short-Term (1-3 years)
Mid-Term (4-7 years)
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)
Societal Issues
Successful commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology will depend upon societys confidence that its full range of interests was respected. However, the production and use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for food and feed purposes has emerged as an area of controversy, involving a range of issues that first surfaced in Europe, but now is global. Hence, the industry and USDA need to be cognizant of the concerns of U.S. consumers and the public in general regarding the products of aquaculture biotechnology and methods used for their production. To resolve these issues confronting the aquaculture industry, sound scientific inquiry will prove beneficial, if not critical. These issues include: safety of GMOs as foods and feeds, environmental safety of GMOs (including risk assessment and risk management), regulatory oversight policy, intellectual property rights (especially as regards to genomics), bioethics, and consumer acceptance. In large measure, this priority area parallels that of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) component of the Human Genome Project (HHS and DOE 1995, ELSI 2001). As with the ELSI element, this priority area would focus on aspects of science and technology, rather than on strictly regulatory or economic aspects that perhaps are best handled by other agencies or programs.
Another societal issue in this priority area regards enhancing the discovery-to-commercialization pathway. Key issues include federal support for basic and applied research, federal support for industry innovation, increased clarity regarding the regulatory system, and improved statistical databases supporting identification and documentation of needs for products or services.
Recommendations for R&D are:
Short term (1-3 years)
Mid-term (4-7 years)
Long term (8-10 years plus)
Infrastructure
The identification and prioritization of specific R&D areas bring forth generic science and technology and infrastructure needs. Some areas that need increased attention are:
There is a need to establish more active linkages between the ARS and other U.S. organizations of excellence in the named high priority areas, some of which are already being pursued within the ARS. Collaborative arrangements are suggested to minimize funding requirements, yet at the same time maximize research results with commercialization. Dedicated R&D "centers of excellence" focused on biosecurity and biocomplexity are possible candidates for enhanced collaboration. Other areas of merit for the establishment of centers are species-specifics genomics, bioinformatics, proteomics, and societal issues.
Aquaculture and biotechnology as applied to aquaculture are under-funded in comparison to other federal programs for which there are such significant economic returns. While there are several reasons for this, the opportunities offered by an exploding science and technology base can no longer be denied. The areas identified in the "white paper" and now presented in the report represent emerging areas of high priority, with some areas (in particular, Biocellular Technology) having strong connections to existing programmatic efforts within the ARS and USDA. However, to realize these immense opportunities, additional funds are needed beyond those now available or being requested by ARS (and USDA in its entirety).
One suggestion is to establish a new ARS program for a 10-year period, with a suggested title of "ARS National Aquaculture Biotechnology Collaboration Initiative" or ARS NABCI. Initial funding for such a program should be at a minimal level of $50 million and should increase to a $125-150 million per year level during years 4-5. This type of program seems most appropriate to pursue many of the priority areas already identified plus those that will become apparent with additional R&D and dramatic advances in biotechnology. Such a program can easily be expanded to the USDA and encompass CSREES.
Aquaculture is a multidisciplinary industrial sector with many crosscutting areas of science, technology, and commerce. As such, and especially if biotechnology is to achieve its full potential, there is a need for a new cadre of personnel well versed in modern science and commerce. Again, the situation is analogous to the biotechnology industry that emerged largely out of the pharmaceutical fermentation industry dealing with antibiotics and other bioproducts. There is a need and opportunity to devise new courses and programs designed for various levels -- undergraduate, graduate, postgraduate and "practicing art" people already in industry. Aquaculture also lends itself to education at the high school and vocational art levels. Aquaculture often entails individuals with limited rigorous scientific backgrounds and experience in sophisticated analytical methodology. If aquaculture is to become a recognized and credible U.S. high-tech business sector, a pool of rigorous science-based manpower is essential.
Recommendations for infrastructure are:
Short-Term (1-3 years)
.
Mid-Term (4-7 years)
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)
References
Alcivar-Warren, A., and Kocher, T. D., Proceedings of the Aquaculture Species Genome Mapping Workshop, National Resource, Agriculture and Engineering Service and Northeastern Regional Aquaculture Center, 1999.
ARS 2001, Agricultural Research Service, National Programs, www.nps.ars.usda.gov/programs.
ARS 2000, Aquaculture Research for the Future, Five-Year Research Plan, 2000.
Borman, S., Proteomics: taking over where genomics leaves off, C&E News, 31-37, July 31, 2000.
CSREES 2001, Cooperative State Research and Education and Extension Service, http://www.reeusda.gov/1700/programs/aqua.htm.
CSREES-NRI 2001, National Research Initiative, NRI 2001 Program Description, www.reeusda.gov/nri/programs.
Dicks, M. R., McHugh, R., and Webb, B., Economy-Wide Impacts of U.S. Aquaculture, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, P-946, May 1966.
DOC 1999, Department of Commerce Aquaculture Policy, August 1999.
ELSI 2001, Ethical, Legal and Social Implications Research Program, http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/About_NHGRI/Der/Elsi/.
FAO 1998, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), World Fish Trade: Changes in Quality Control Represent New Challenge for Developing Countries, FAO Says; Global Fish Business is Estimated at More Than US $250 Billion, Press Release, Jun 1998.
FAO 2001, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2000, FAO, 2001, http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X8002E/X8002E00.htm.
HHS-DOE 1996, Understanding Our Genetic Inheritance, The U.S. Human Genome Project: The First Five Years FY 1991-1995, DOE/ER-0452P, 1995.
JSA 1996, Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture, Draft National Aquaculture Development Plan of 1996, National Science and Technology Council, 1996, http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/publicat/govagen/usda/dnadp.htm.
JSA 2001, Aquaculture Research and Development Strategic Plan, http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/jsa/Strategicplan.htm.
NABC 1999, National Aquaculture Biotechnology Consortium, Applying the Tools of Biotechnology to Accelerate Development of an Environmentally Sustainable and Economically Competitive Aquaculture Industry in the 21st Century, January 1999.
NASS 2000, National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Census of Aquaculture 1998, 1997 Census of Agriculture, Vol 3, Special Studies, Part 3, February 2000.
Nature Biotechnology, Industry Trends, A Snapshot of Biotechnology's Fastest Moving Fields, Vol. 18 Supplement, October 2000.
Nature, Insight: Functional Genomics, Vol. 45, No. 6788, 912-865, June 15, 2000.
Nelson, K.E., Paulsen, I.T., Heidelberg, J.F., and Fraser, C.M., Status of Genome Projects for Nonpathogenic Bacteria and Archaea, Nature Biotechnology, 18, 1049-1054, 2000.
NMFS 2000, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Fisheries of the United States 1999, October 2000.
NSF 2001, Biocomplexity in the Environment, www.nsf.gov/home/crssprgm/be.
NSTC 1995, National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), Biotechnology for the 21st Century: New Horizons, White House, Office of Science and Technology Policy, July 1995.
Moss, S. M., editor, Proceedings of the US Marine Shrimp Farming Program Biosecurity Workshop, The Oceanic Institute, February 1998.
Schulz, W., Biocomplexity for Chemists, C&E News, 19-20, Jan 8, 2001.