전체메뉴
검색
Article Search

JMB Journal of Microbiolog and Biotechnology

QR Code QR Code

Research article

Biotechnology and Bioengineering (BB)  |  Host-Microbe Interactions and Pathogenesis

Effects of Microplastic Exposure against White Spot Syndrome Virus Infection in Pacific White Shrimp (Penaeus vannamei)

Hye Jin Jeon1†, Sangsu Seo1†, Chorong Lee1, Bumkeun Kim1, Patharapol Piamsomboon2,3, Ji Hyung Kim4*, and Jee Eun Han1,5*

1Laboratory of Aquatic Biomedicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea
2Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
3Veterinary Medical Aquatic Animal Research Center of Excellence, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
4Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Gachon University, Seongnam 13120, Republic of Korea
5Institute for Veterinary Biomedical Science, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea

Correspondence to:
Ji Hyung Kim,         kzh81@gachon.ac.kr
Jee Eun Han,          jehan@knu.ac.kr

†These authors contributed equally to this work.
Received: February 1, 2024; Revised: March 5, 2024; Accepted: March 10, 2024

J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2024; 34(8): 1705-1710

Published August 28, 2024 https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2402.02001

Copyright © The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology.

Abstract

Plastic waste has emerged as a major environmental concern in recent years. As plastic waste discharged into the marine environment, it undergoes a breakdown process, eventually accumulating in aquatic organisms in the form of microplastics (MPs). To date, reduced food intake, nutritional absorption, and impaired immune system are known adverse effects of MPs-exposed aquatic organisms. This study aims to investigate whether MP exposure accelerated white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) infection in Pacific white shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) via laboratory tests. Briefly, experimental shrimp were divided into four groups; WSSV (group 1); MP (group 2); WSSV + MP (group 3); and Control (group 4). No mortality was observed in group 2, group 4, and even in group 1. However, group 3 showed a cumulative mortality of 50% during the experimental period. The PCR assay results showed no WSSV in the other three groups (groups 1, 2, and 4), but the dead and alive shrimp collected from group 3 were confirmed to be infected with the virus. Histopathological examination revealed normal structures in the hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle tissues of group 4, whereas numerous abnormally shaped nuclei were detected in the gill tissue of group 2. Moreover, group 1 showed minor WSSV-related lesions with few basophilic inclusion bodies in the gills, interestingly, group 3 exhibited severe lesions with numerous basophilic inclusion bodies in the gills. In conclusion, this study confirmed the correlation between the viral disease of shrimp and MPs, which can cause significant economic losses to the shrimp aquaculture industry.

Keywords

Aquaculture, histopathology, microplastics, marine pollution, shrimp

Graphical Abstract


Introduction

Crustaceans are among the most popular seafoods worldwide and contain beneficial nutrients for human health [1-3]. Shrimp are the most widely farmed crustaceans [4]. However, for several decades, shrimp farming has been threatened by viral diseases, which have caused significant economic losses worldwide [5-7]. White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) is one of the most severe viral pathogens affecting shrimp [8-10]. Its main symptom consists of distinct white spots (0.5–3.0 mm in diameter) under the shrimp’s carapace, and it has a high mortality of up to 100% within days [11]. Previous studies have confirmed that WSSV replication can be accelerated by various stress factors (e.g., physical and chemical changes in water), increasing infection rates [12, 13].

Recently, there has been a noticeable surge in the utilization of plastic, and as a result, the amount of plastic waste has also increased. Such waste is released into the environment, where it breaks down due to various chemical and physical processes [14], resulting in particles of different sizes, i.e., nanoplastics, microplastics (MPs), mesoplastics, and macroplastics [15]. Unfortunately, a considerable amount of plastic waste is discharged into the marine environment [16], after it undergoes multiple stages of degradation it is ingested and accumulated in marine organisms in the form of MPs [14, 17]. MP particles have a wide range of sizes (<5 mm) and a variety of shapes and colors due to differences in sources and production [15]. Once they have entered the food chain, MPs eventually bioaccumulate in species at higher trophic levels, such as mammalians [18, 19] or even humans [20]. As MPs degrade into smaller particles, they are more likely to be ingested by animals [17, 21, 22], resulting in a more severe impact [23, 24]. Moreover, MPs contribute significantly to environmental pollution, as they can adsorb pollutants such as antibiotics, heavy metals, and organic compounds in the water [25]. The adsorptive nature of MPs is a cause of even greater concern. The pollution of aquatic environments with plastic particles induces stress in aquatic organisms [26-28], which can disrupt their immune defense system [28, 29].

Numerous studies have investigated the tissue damage caused by MP accumulation in several aquatic organisms. For example, histopathological studies have examined the intestine of zebrafish [30], the brain tissue structure of crucian carp [31], the gills, hepatopancreas, and muscle of shrimp [32], and the liver and intestine of European sea bass [33] after exposure to MPs. In Penaeus vannamei (P. vannamei), known as Pacific white shrimp, histopathological changes in various organs, such as muscle, midgut gland, hepatopancreas, and gills, were observed after exposure to MPs at varying concentrations [32]. Recently, Shan et al. [34] have also reported a correlation between viral disease and MP exposure in shrimp; however, this correlation has not been yet confirmed based on histopathological examination. In this study, we hypothesized that MPs could accelerate viral disease in shrimp and tested this hypothesis by conducting a laboratory test. The experimental shrimp were infected with WSSV and then exposed to MPs. The correlation between the virus and MP exposure was then examined by determining mortality rates as well as by conducting a PCR assay and histopathological analysis.

Materials and Methods

Preparation for the Shrimp Test (Shrimp, WSSV Stock, and MPs)

Pacific white shrimp (P. vannamei) at the post-larval stage (approximately 0.6 g) were purchased from a local shrimp farm (Republic of Korea) and transported to the Laboratory of Aquatic Biomedicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University (Republic of Korea). The shrimp were reared to an average weight of 1.5 ± 0.05 g in 700-L maintenance tanks filled with aerated artificial seawater (25°C–28°C, 25 ppt salinity).

WSSV-tissue homogenates (WSSV stock, 1.62 × 108 copies/μl), which had also been previously used in Han et al. [35], were quantified by qPCR analysis [9] and frozen at −80°C until use.

Fluorescent polystyrene microspheres (FSFR005, concentration: 1%) in a liquid state, purchased from Bangs Laboratories, Inc. (USA), were used as MPs in this study. The particles were colorless and had a mean diameter of 2.07 μm.

Shrimp Test (WSSV and MP Exposure)

The experimental shrimp (average 1.5 ± 0.05 g, N = 32) were divided into four groups: group 1, WSSV; group 2, MP; group 3, WSSV + MP; and group 4, Control. The shrimp in each group (N = 8) were further divided into duplicates of four shrimp each and placed in different 12-L tanks (working water volume: 8 L). The artificial seawater in each tank was maintained as aforementioned rearing conditions. All tested shrimp were subjected to a 24-h fast before experimental infection.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 1 (WSSV) were exposed to WSSV once via a single feeding with the WSSV stock at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of 1× PBS was orally administered to each shrimp.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 2 (MP) were pre-exposed to the muscle of specific pathogen-free (SPF) shrimp once via a single feeding at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of MP solution was orally administered to each shrimp. MPs were previously diluted 20 times in 1× PBS (final concentration: 0.05%) and then mixed with yellow food dye (CHUN-WOO Co., Ltd, Republic of Korea) in a 1:1 v/v (yellow dye: MP) before administration.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 3 (WSSV + MP) were exposed to WSSV once via a single feeding with the WSSV stock at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of MP solution was orally administered to each shrimp.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 4 (Control) were exposed to the muscle of SPF shrimp once via a single feeding at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of 1× PBS was orally administered to each shrimp.

After exposure, the shrimp were fed three times a day with commercial shrimp feed containing 30% of crude protein at a total feed of 5% of their body weight for shrimp maintenance [36] and monitored every 12 h for 6 days. During the experiment, dead shrimp (on day 1 and day 3) and live shrimp (on day 6) were collected, and 30 mg of their gills were used for DNA extraction using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Germany). The WSSV PCR assay was conducted as described in Nunan and Lightner [37].

Histological Examination

At the end of the experiment (day 6), four moribund shrimp, one from each group, were fixed in Davidson’s AFA fixative (pH 3.0–4.0) [38] for 24 h and then transferred to 70% ethanol for histological examination. After dehydration in a graded ethanol series to absolute ethanol, the samples were embedded in paraffin and each tissue (hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle) was sectioned (4 μm thickness) following standard methods [39]. After staining with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E staining), the sections were analyzed by light microscopy. The severity of WSSV infection was determined on a scale from grade 1 (G1) to grade 4 (G4) [39, 40].

Results

Shrimp Test (WSSV and MP Exposure)

During the experiment, no mortality was observed in group 1 (WSSV), group 2 (MP), and group 4 (Control) until the last day (day 6). However, in group 3, shrimp mortality was observed within 24 h, cumulatively reaching 50% during the entire experimental period (6 days). The PCR assay confirmed WSSV infection in the dead shrimp collected from group 3 (WSSV + MP). We also analyzed the live shrimp collected from each group on day 6, and interestingly, WSSV was detected in the individuals from group 3 (WSSV + MP) but not in those from group 1 (WSSV) (Table 1 and Fig. 1).

Table 1 . Mortality rate (%), result of the white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) PCR assay, and observation of typical WSSV lesion by histological examination after exposure to WSSV and MPs.

GroupMortality (%)WSSV detection
PCR (dead)PCR (live)WSSV histology
Group 1 (WSSV)0NAa-+ (G1)b
Group 2 (MP)0NA--
Group 3 (WSSV+MP)50+++ (G4)
Group 4 (Control)0NA--

aNA: not applicable. bClassified to grades by histopathological lesion [38, 39].
Fig. 1. Result of WSSV PCR assay in dead shrimp during the experiment and live shrimp in each group on the last day (day 6). Lane M: 100-bp ladder; Lane 1: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 24 h after MP exposure; Lane 2: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 96 h after MP exposure; Lane 3: Live shrimp in group 1 (WSSV) on day 6; Lane 4: Live shrimp in group 2 (MP) on day 6; Lane 5: Live shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) on day 6; Lane 6: Live shrimp in group 4 (Control) on day 6; Lane N: Negative control (DEPC-water); Lane P: WSSV positive control (941-bp).

Histological Examination

We observed the histopathological effects of exposure to WSSV and MPs in the hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle tissues of the experimental shrimp. Normal structures of the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2A), gills (Fig. 2B), and muscle fibers (Fig. 2C) were observed in group 4 (Control). However, compared with the control, the individuals in group 2 (MP) exhibited collapsed tubular structures and B-cell losses (large vacuole in tubules; white arrow) in the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2D). Also, cytoplasmic effusion was observed in the gill tissue (Fig. 2E), and many nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrow) and slight lysis (yellow arrow) were observed in the muscle fibers (Fig. 2F).

Fig. 2. Photomicrographs of sections of shrimp tissues (hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle) for each experimental group. (A), (B), and (C): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 4 (Control), respectively; (D), (E), and (F): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 2 (MP); (G), (H), and (I): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 1 (WSSV); (J), (K), and (L): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP). All sections were stained with H&E. Scale bars = 50 μm.

The typical WSSV lesions were not observed in group 2 (MP) but were observed in group 1 (WSSV) and group 3 (WSSV + MP). In group 1 (WSSV), histopathological changes, including hypertrophied nuclei, were observed in the hepatopancreas (black arrowheads; Fig. 2G), and a few basophilic inclusion bodies in the gill tissue (black arrowheads; Fig. 2H), and along with few nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrow; Fig. 2I) were observed in the muscle fibers. However, in group 3 (WSSV + MP), hypertrophied nuclei (black arrowheads), and lumen separate from the basement membrane (red arrowheads) were observed in the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2J), and several basophilic inclusion bodies were observed in the gill tissue (black arrowheads; Fig. 2K). In addition, many nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrows), as well as infiltrated and dissolved muscle fibers (yellow arrows) were observed in the individuals of group 3 (Fig. 2L), but not in those of group 1 (WSSV). The histopathological examination revealed more severe WSSV lesions in group 3 (WSSV + MP) (G4) than in group 1 (WSSV) (G1).

Discussion

Several studies have been conducted on the negative impact of plastics on various aquatic crustaceans, including crab, langoustine, and shrimp species. For example, MPs were shown to have negative effects on the growth of the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) by inducing oxidative stress in the liver [41]. In the Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), the feeding rate, body mass, and metabolic rate as well as the catabolism of stored lipids were shown to be reduced after exposure to MPs [42]. In Pacific white shrimp (P. vannamei), after exposure to nanoplastics, there were changes in nutritional compositions including a decrease in the levels of some essential amino acids and fatty acids, and alterations in intestine microbial activity were observed [43]. After exposure to MPs, the promotion of stress and immune responses was confirmed in P. vannamei [27]. In addition, the accumulation of plastic debris in shrimp was shown to make them more susceptible to various disease and stress factors [44], which could eventually lead to reduced production. However, the correlation between MPs and infectious viral diseases has been rarely studied in crustaceans.

White spot disease (WSD), which is caused by WSSV, is a notable viral infection primarily affecting farmed shrimp. When infected with this virus, shrimp develop white spots on the exoskeleton, which is unsightly, and the disease itself is highly infectious. WSD is recognized for its severity and is listed in the World Organization for Animal Health list of aquatic animal diseases [45, 46]. Moreover, WSD caused economic losses after the first outbreak in 1992, resulting in a production loss of over US$ 2 billion in China in three years [11]. Ecuador, the outbreak occurred in 1999 and resulted in losses of over US$ 1 billion from 1998 to 2001 [47], and over 100 million US$ in Panama, over 70 million US$ in Peru over 3 years [11]. The present study was conducted to evaluate whether MPs accelerate WSSV infection or mortality in juvenile P. vannamei.

Shan et al. [34] revealed that shrimp (larvae and adults) exposed to MP exhibited an increased susceptibility to WSSV and increased mortality; however, the study did not involve any histopathological examination. A previous study by Hsieh et al. [32], described histopathological examination of the shrimp tissues after MP exposure. However, shrimp were exposed to a small amount of MP using intramuscular injection, which is an unnatural exposure route for shrimp. The results of the histopathological examination conducted in the present study confirmed an accelerated WSSV infection in juvenile shrimp (1.5 ± 0.05 g) as well as increased mortality after MP exposure by oral administration. In line with Mohan et al. [48], the extent of tissue lesions is related to mortality data. In the present study, group 1 (WSSV) showed suspected WSSV-related lesions, but group 3 (WSSV + MP) showed serious WSSV-related lesions, and a higher mortality rate was observed in group 3 with severe WSSV-related lesions. The same WSSV stock with the same viral concentration (1.62 × 108 copies/μl) was used to induce infection in both group 1 and group 3. However, group 1 did not show clinical symptoms or mortality, whereas group 3 exhibited a cumulative mortality of 50% by the 6th day after infection. This indicated that MP exposure amplified WSSV infection.

The results of this study highlighted the increased risk of infection that may result from exposure to MPs in shrimp and the consequent potentially elevated risk of significant economic losses in this aquaculture industry. The present study may contribute to research on the correlation between MP exposure and diseases in shrimp, as well as to raising awareness about protecting the marine environment. In addition, further studies will be necessary to obtain reliable data through long-term experiments based on the observation of histopathological changes due to MP exposure. Follow-up research is expected to confirm the correlation between MPs and other major diseases in shrimp farms as a potential factor for disease exacerbation.

Ethics Approval

The animal experiment was approved by the Ethics Committee of Kyungpook National University (KNU 2021‐0050).

Author Contributions

Hye Jin Jeon: Writing – original draft, Sangsu Seo: Data curation, Chorong Lee: Data curation, Bumkeun Kim: Formal analysis, Patharapol Piamsomboon: Supervision, Ji Hyung Kim: Supervision, and Jee Eun Han: Supervision.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF2019R1C1C1006212 and NRF2022R1I1A3066435). The work was also supported by the Development of technology for biomaterialization of marine fisheries by-products of the Korea Institute of Marine Science & Technology Promotion (KIMST) funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (KIMST-20220128).

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. Gunalan BSNT, Nina TS, Soundarapandian P, Anand T. 2013. Nutritive value of cultured white leg shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. Int. J. Fish. Aquacult. 5: 166-171.
  2. Venugopal V. 2019. Nutrients and Nutraceuticals from Seafood. In Mérillon JM, Ramawat K (eds.), Bioactive Molecules in Food. Reference Series in Phytochemistry. Springer, Cham.
  3. FAO. 2020. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. Sustainability in action. Rome, Italy: FAO.
  4. FAO. 2022. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Towards Blue Transformation. Rome, FAO.
  5. Chen SN, Chang PS, Kou GH. 1989. Observation on pathogenicity and epizootiology of Penaeus monodon baculovirus (MBV) in cultured shrimp in Taiwan. Fish Pathol. 24: 189-195.
    CrossRef
  6. Lightner DV, Redman RM, Poulos BT, Nunan LM, Mari JL, Hasson KW. 1997. Risk of spread of penaeid shrimp viruses in the. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz 16: 146-160.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Stentiford GD, Neil DM, Peeler EJ, Shields JD, Small HJ, Flegel TW, et al. 2012. Disease will limit future food supply from the global crustacean fishery and aquaculture sectors. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 110: 141-157.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Otta SK, Shubha G, Joseph B, Chakraborty A, Karunasagar I. 1999. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) in cultured and wild crustaceans in India. Dis. Aquat. Org. 38: 67-70.
    CrossRef
  9. Durand SV, Lightner DV. 2002. Quantitative real time PCR for the measurement of white spot syndrome virus in shrimp. J. Fish Dis. 25: 381-389.
    CrossRef
  10. Tsai JM, Wang HC, Leu JH, Wang AHJ, Zhuang Y, Walker PJ, et al. 2006. Identification of the nucleocapsid, tegument, and envelope proteins of the shrimp white spot syndrome virus virion. J. Virol. 80: 3021-3029.
    Pubmed PMC CrossRef
  11. Bir J, Howlader P, Ray S, Sultana S, Khalil SI, Banu GR. 2017. A critical review on white spot syndrome virus (WSSV): a potential threat to shrimp farming in Bangladesh and some Asian countries. Int. J. Microbiol. Mycol. 6: 39-48.
  12. Lo CF, Ho CH, Peng SE, Chen CH, Hsu HC, Chiu YL, et al. 1996. White spot syndrome baculovirus (WSBV) detected in cultured and captured shrimp, crabs and other arthropods. Dis. Aquat. Org. 27: 215-225.
    CrossRef
  13. Lo CF, Kou GH. 1998. Virus-associated white spot syndrome of shrimp in Taiwan: a review. Fish Pathol. 33: 365-371.
    CrossRef
  14. Xu S, Ma J, Ji R, Pan K, Miao AJ. 2020. Microplastics in aquatic environments: occurrence, accumulation, and biological effects. Sci. Total Environ. 703: 134699.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. 2019. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53: 1039-1047.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  16. Moore CJ. 2008. Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing, long-term threat. Environ. Res. 108: 131-139.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  17. Andrady AL. 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62: 1596-1605.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  18. Nelms SE, Galloway TS, Godley BJ, Jarvis DS, Lindeque PK. 2018. Investigating microplastic trophic transfer in marine top predators. Environ. Pollut. 238: 999-1007.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Scherer C, Weber A, Lambert S, Wagner M. 2018. Interactions of microplastics with freshwater biota. Freshwater Microplastics. Springer, Cham, pp. 153-180.
  20. Wang W, Gao H, Jin S, Li R, Na G. 2019. The ecotoxicological effects of microplastics on aquatic food web, from primary producer to human: a review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 173: 110-117.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Browne MA, Niven SJ, Galloway TS, Rowland SJ, Thompson RC. 2013. Microplastic moves pollutants and additives to worms, reducing functions linked to health and biodiversity. Curr. Biol. 23: 2388-2392.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Sharma VK, Ma X, Lichtfouse E, Robert D. 2022. Nanoplastics are potentially more dangerous than microplastics. Environ. Chem. Lett. 1-4.
    CrossRef
  23. Karbalaei S, Hanachi P, Walker TR, Cole M. 2018. Occurrence, sources, human health impacts and mitigation of microplastic pollution. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25: 36046-36063.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Kögel T, Bjorøy, Toto B, Bienfait AM, Sanden M. 2020. Micro-and nanoplastic toxicity on aquatic life: determining factors. Sci. Total Environ. 709: 136050.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  25. Tang Y, Liu Y, Chen Y, Zhang W, Zhao J, He S, et al. 2021. A review: research progress on microplastic pollutants in aquatic environments. Sci. Total Environ. 766: 142572.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Dhawan A, Pandey A, Sharma V. 2011. Toxicity assessment of engineered nanomaterials: resolving the challenges. J. Biomed Nanotechnol. 7: 6-7.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Han JE, Choi SK, Jeon HJ, Park JK, Han SH, Jeong J, et al. 2021. Transcriptional response in the whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) to short-term microplastic exposure. Aquac. Rep. 20: 100713.
    CrossRef
  28. Mao X, Xu Y, Cheng Z, Yang Y, Guan Z, Jiang L, Tang K. 2022. The impact of microplastic pollution on ecological environment: a review. Front. Biosci. 27: 46.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  29. Greven AC, Merk T, Karagöz F, Mohr K, Klapper M, Jovanović B, et al. 2016. Polycarbonate and polystyrene nanoplastic particles act as stressors to the innate immune system of fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35: 3093-3100.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  30. Lei L, Wu S, Lu S, Liu M, Song Y, Fu Z, et al. 2018. Microplastic particles cause intestinal damage and other adverse effects in zebrafish Danio rerio and nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Sci. Total Environ. 619: 1-8.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  31. Franzellitti S, Canesi L, Auguste M, Wathsala RH, Fabbri E. 2019. Microplastic exposure and effects in aquatic organisms: a physiological perspective. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 68: 37-51.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Hsieh SL, Wu YC, Xu RQ, Chen YT, Chen CW, Singhania RR, et al. 2021. Effect of polyethylene microplastics on oxidative stress and histopathology damages in Litopenaeus vannamei. Environ. Pollut. 288: 117800.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  33. Espinosa C, Esteban MÁ, Cuesta A. 2019. Dietary administration of PVC and PE microplastics produces histological damage, oxidative stress and immunoregulation in European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax L.). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 95: 574-583.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  34. Shan LP, Hu Y, Hu L, Liu HW, Liu L, Chen J. 2023. Involvement of microplastics in the conflict between host immunity defense and viral virulence: promoting the susceptibility of shrimp to WSSV infection. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57: 11634-11642.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  35. Han JE, Kim JE, Jo H, Eun JS, Lee C, Kim JH, et al. 2019. Increased susceptibility of white spot syndrome virus exposed Penaeus vannamei to Vibrio- parahaemolyticus causing acute hepatopancreatic necrosis disease. Aquaculture 512: 734333.
    CrossRef
  36. Kureshy N, Davis DA. 2002. Protein requirement for maintenance and maximum weight gain for the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquaculture 204: 125-143.
    CrossRef
  37. Nunan LM, Lightner DV. 2011. Optimized PCR assay for detection of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV). J. Virol. Methods 171: 318-321.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  38. Bell TA, Lightner DV. 1988. A handbook of normal penaeid shrimp histology. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, LA, pp. 114.
  39. Lightner DV. 1996. A handbook of shrimp pathology and diagnostic procedures for diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp.
  40. Durand SV, Redman RM, Mohney LL, Tang-Nelson K, Bonami JR, Lightner DV. 2003. Qualitative and quantitative studies on the relative virus load of tails and heads of shrimp acutely infected with WSSV. Aquaculture 216: 9-18.
    CrossRef
  41. Yu P, Liu Z, Wu D, Chen M, Lv W, Zhao Y. 2018. Accumulation of polystyrene microplastics in juvenile Eriocheir sinensis and oxidative stress effects in the liver. Aquat. Toxicol. 200: 28-36.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  42. Welden NA, Cowie PR. 2016. Long-term microplastic retention causes reduced body condition in the langoustine, Nephrops norvegicus. Environ. Pollut. 218: 895-900.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  43. Chae Y, Kim D, Choi MJ, Cho Y, An YJ. 2019. Impact of nano-sized plastic on the nutritional value and gut microbiota of whiteleg shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei via dietary exposure. Environ Int. 130: 104848.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  44. Timilsina A, Adhikari K, Yadav AK, Joshi P, Ramena G, Bohara K. 2023. Effects of microplastics and nanoplastics in shrimp: mechanisms of plastic particle and contaminant distribution and subsequent effects after uptake. Sci. Total Environ. 894: 164999.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Lightner DV, Redman RM, Pantoja CR, Tang KFJ, Noble BL, Schofield P, et al. 2012. Historic emergence, impact and current status of shrimp pathogens in the Americas. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 110: 174-183.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Patil PK, Geetha R, Ravisankar T, Avunje S, Solanki HG, Abraham TJ, et al. 2021. Economic loss due to diseases in Indian shrimp farming with special reference to Enterocytozoon hepatopenaei (EHP) and white spot syndrome virus (WSSV). Aquaculture 533: 736231.
    CrossRef
  47. Chakraborty S, Ghosh U. 2014. White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) in crustaceans: an overview of host-pathogen interaction. J. Mar. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. 31. doi:10.4172/2324-8661.1000121.
    CrossRef
  48. Mohan CV, Corsin F, Thakur PC, Padiyar PA, Madhusudan M, Turnbull JF, et al. 2002. Usefulness of dead shrimp specimens in studying the epidemiology of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) and chronic bacterial infection. Dis. Aquat. Org. 50: 1-8.
    Pubmed CrossRef

Related articles in JMB

More Related Articles

Article

Research article

J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2024; 34(8): 1705-1710

Published online August 28, 2024 https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2402.02001

Copyright © The Korean Society for Microbiology and Biotechnology.

Effects of Microplastic Exposure against White Spot Syndrome Virus Infection in Pacific White Shrimp (Penaeus vannamei)

Hye Jin Jeon1†, Sangsu Seo1†, Chorong Lee1, Bumkeun Kim1, Patharapol Piamsomboon2,3, Ji Hyung Kim4*, and Jee Eun Han1,5*

1Laboratory of Aquatic Biomedicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea
2Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
3Veterinary Medical Aquatic Animal Research Center of Excellence, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand
4Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Gachon University, Seongnam 13120, Republic of Korea
5Institute for Veterinary Biomedical Science, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea

Correspondence to:Ji Hyung Kim,         kzh81@gachon.ac.kr
Jee Eun Han,          jehan@knu.ac.kr

†These authors contributed equally to this work.

Received: February 1, 2024; Revised: March 5, 2024; Accepted: March 10, 2024

Abstract

Plastic waste has emerged as a major environmental concern in recent years. As plastic waste discharged into the marine environment, it undergoes a breakdown process, eventually accumulating in aquatic organisms in the form of microplastics (MPs). To date, reduced food intake, nutritional absorption, and impaired immune system are known adverse effects of MPs-exposed aquatic organisms. This study aims to investigate whether MP exposure accelerated white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) infection in Pacific white shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) via laboratory tests. Briefly, experimental shrimp were divided into four groups; WSSV (group 1); MP (group 2); WSSV + MP (group 3); and Control (group 4). No mortality was observed in group 2, group 4, and even in group 1. However, group 3 showed a cumulative mortality of 50% during the experimental period. The PCR assay results showed no WSSV in the other three groups (groups 1, 2, and 4), but the dead and alive shrimp collected from group 3 were confirmed to be infected with the virus. Histopathological examination revealed normal structures in the hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle tissues of group 4, whereas numerous abnormally shaped nuclei were detected in the gill tissue of group 2. Moreover, group 1 showed minor WSSV-related lesions with few basophilic inclusion bodies in the gills, interestingly, group 3 exhibited severe lesions with numerous basophilic inclusion bodies in the gills. In conclusion, this study confirmed the correlation between the viral disease of shrimp and MPs, which can cause significant economic losses to the shrimp aquaculture industry.

Keywords: Aquaculture, histopathology, microplastics, marine pollution, shrimp

Introduction

Crustaceans are among the most popular seafoods worldwide and contain beneficial nutrients for human health [1-3]. Shrimp are the most widely farmed crustaceans [4]. However, for several decades, shrimp farming has been threatened by viral diseases, which have caused significant economic losses worldwide [5-7]. White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) is one of the most severe viral pathogens affecting shrimp [8-10]. Its main symptom consists of distinct white spots (0.5–3.0 mm in diameter) under the shrimp’s carapace, and it has a high mortality of up to 100% within days [11]. Previous studies have confirmed that WSSV replication can be accelerated by various stress factors (e.g., physical and chemical changes in water), increasing infection rates [12, 13].

Recently, there has been a noticeable surge in the utilization of plastic, and as a result, the amount of plastic waste has also increased. Such waste is released into the environment, where it breaks down due to various chemical and physical processes [14], resulting in particles of different sizes, i.e., nanoplastics, microplastics (MPs), mesoplastics, and macroplastics [15]. Unfortunately, a considerable amount of plastic waste is discharged into the marine environment [16], after it undergoes multiple stages of degradation it is ingested and accumulated in marine organisms in the form of MPs [14, 17]. MP particles have a wide range of sizes (<5 mm) and a variety of shapes and colors due to differences in sources and production [15]. Once they have entered the food chain, MPs eventually bioaccumulate in species at higher trophic levels, such as mammalians [18, 19] or even humans [20]. As MPs degrade into smaller particles, they are more likely to be ingested by animals [17, 21, 22], resulting in a more severe impact [23, 24]. Moreover, MPs contribute significantly to environmental pollution, as they can adsorb pollutants such as antibiotics, heavy metals, and organic compounds in the water [25]. The adsorptive nature of MPs is a cause of even greater concern. The pollution of aquatic environments with plastic particles induces stress in aquatic organisms [26-28], which can disrupt their immune defense system [28, 29].

Numerous studies have investigated the tissue damage caused by MP accumulation in several aquatic organisms. For example, histopathological studies have examined the intestine of zebrafish [30], the brain tissue structure of crucian carp [31], the gills, hepatopancreas, and muscle of shrimp [32], and the liver and intestine of European sea bass [33] after exposure to MPs. In Penaeus vannamei (P. vannamei), known as Pacific white shrimp, histopathological changes in various organs, such as muscle, midgut gland, hepatopancreas, and gills, were observed after exposure to MPs at varying concentrations [32]. Recently, Shan et al. [34] have also reported a correlation between viral disease and MP exposure in shrimp; however, this correlation has not been yet confirmed based on histopathological examination. In this study, we hypothesized that MPs could accelerate viral disease in shrimp and tested this hypothesis by conducting a laboratory test. The experimental shrimp were infected with WSSV and then exposed to MPs. The correlation between the virus and MP exposure was then examined by determining mortality rates as well as by conducting a PCR assay and histopathological analysis.

Materials and Methods

Preparation for the Shrimp Test (Shrimp, WSSV Stock, and MPs)

Pacific white shrimp (P. vannamei) at the post-larval stage (approximately 0.6 g) were purchased from a local shrimp farm (Republic of Korea) and transported to the Laboratory of Aquatic Biomedicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kyungpook National University (Republic of Korea). The shrimp were reared to an average weight of 1.5 ± 0.05 g in 700-L maintenance tanks filled with aerated artificial seawater (25°C–28°C, 25 ppt salinity).

WSSV-tissue homogenates (WSSV stock, 1.62 × 108 copies/μl), which had also been previously used in Han et al. [35], were quantified by qPCR analysis [9] and frozen at −80°C until use.

Fluorescent polystyrene microspheres (FSFR005, concentration: 1%) in a liquid state, purchased from Bangs Laboratories, Inc. (USA), were used as MPs in this study. The particles were colorless and had a mean diameter of 2.07 μm.

Shrimp Test (WSSV and MP Exposure)

The experimental shrimp (average 1.5 ± 0.05 g, N = 32) were divided into four groups: group 1, WSSV; group 2, MP; group 3, WSSV + MP; and group 4, Control. The shrimp in each group (N = 8) were further divided into duplicates of four shrimp each and placed in different 12-L tanks (working water volume: 8 L). The artificial seawater in each tank was maintained as aforementioned rearing conditions. All tested shrimp were subjected to a 24-h fast before experimental infection.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 1 (WSSV) were exposed to WSSV once via a single feeding with the WSSV stock at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of 1× PBS was orally administered to each shrimp.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 2 (MP) were pre-exposed to the muscle of specific pathogen-free (SPF) shrimp once via a single feeding at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of MP solution was orally administered to each shrimp. MPs were previously diluted 20 times in 1× PBS (final concentration: 0.05%) and then mixed with yellow food dye (CHUN-WOO Co., Ltd, Republic of Korea) in a 1:1 v/v (yellow dye: MP) before administration.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 3 (WSSV + MP) were exposed to WSSV once via a single feeding with the WSSV stock at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of MP solution was orally administered to each shrimp.

The experimental shrimp (N = 8) of group 4 (Control) were exposed to the muscle of SPF shrimp once via a single feeding at 3% of the shrimp's average body weight on day 0. On day 2, 100 μl of 1× PBS was orally administered to each shrimp.

After exposure, the shrimp were fed three times a day with commercial shrimp feed containing 30% of crude protein at a total feed of 5% of their body weight for shrimp maintenance [36] and monitored every 12 h for 6 days. During the experiment, dead shrimp (on day 1 and day 3) and live shrimp (on day 6) were collected, and 30 mg of their gills were used for DNA extraction using the DNeasy Blood & Tissue Kit (Qiagen, Germany). The WSSV PCR assay was conducted as described in Nunan and Lightner [37].

Histological Examination

At the end of the experiment (day 6), four moribund shrimp, one from each group, were fixed in Davidson’s AFA fixative (pH 3.0–4.0) [38] for 24 h and then transferred to 70% ethanol for histological examination. After dehydration in a graded ethanol series to absolute ethanol, the samples were embedded in paraffin and each tissue (hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle) was sectioned (4 μm thickness) following standard methods [39]. After staining with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E staining), the sections were analyzed by light microscopy. The severity of WSSV infection was determined on a scale from grade 1 (G1) to grade 4 (G4) [39, 40].

Results

Shrimp Test (WSSV and MP Exposure)

During the experiment, no mortality was observed in group 1 (WSSV), group 2 (MP), and group 4 (Control) until the last day (day 6). However, in group 3, shrimp mortality was observed within 24 h, cumulatively reaching 50% during the entire experimental period (6 days). The PCR assay confirmed WSSV infection in the dead shrimp collected from group 3 (WSSV + MP). We also analyzed the live shrimp collected from each group on day 6, and interestingly, WSSV was detected in the individuals from group 3 (WSSV + MP) but not in those from group 1 (WSSV) (Table 1 and Fig. 1).

Table 1 . Mortality rate (%), result of the white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) PCR assay, and observation of typical WSSV lesion by histological examination after exposure to WSSV and MPs..

GroupMortality (%)WSSV detection
PCR (dead)PCR (live)WSSV histology
Group 1 (WSSV)0NAa-+ (G1)b
Group 2 (MP)0NA--
Group 3 (WSSV+MP)50+++ (G4)
Group 4 (Control)0NA--

aNA: not applicable. bClassified to grades by histopathological lesion [38, 39]..
Figure 1. Result of WSSV PCR assay in dead shrimp during the experiment and live shrimp in each group on the last day (day 6). Lane M: 100-bp ladder; Lane 1: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 24 h after MP exposure; Lane 2: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 96 h after MP exposure; Lane 3: Live shrimp in group 1 (WSSV) on day 6; Lane 4: Live shrimp in group 2 (MP) on day 6; Lane 5: Live shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) on day 6; Lane 6: Live shrimp in group 4 (Control) on day 6; Lane N: Negative control (DEPC-water); Lane P: WSSV positive control (941-bp).

Histological Examination

We observed the histopathological effects of exposure to WSSV and MPs in the hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle tissues of the experimental shrimp. Normal structures of the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2A), gills (Fig. 2B), and muscle fibers (Fig. 2C) were observed in group 4 (Control). However, compared with the control, the individuals in group 2 (MP) exhibited collapsed tubular structures and B-cell losses (large vacuole in tubules; white arrow) in the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2D). Also, cytoplasmic effusion was observed in the gill tissue (Fig. 2E), and many nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrow) and slight lysis (yellow arrow) were observed in the muscle fibers (Fig. 2F).

Figure 2. Photomicrographs of sections of shrimp tissues (hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle) for each experimental group. (A), (B), and (C): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 4 (Control), respectively; (D), (E), and (F): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 2 (MP); (G), (H), and (I): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 1 (WSSV); (J), (K), and (L): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP). All sections were stained with H&E. Scale bars = 50 μm.

The typical WSSV lesions were not observed in group 2 (MP) but were observed in group 1 (WSSV) and group 3 (WSSV + MP). In group 1 (WSSV), histopathological changes, including hypertrophied nuclei, were observed in the hepatopancreas (black arrowheads; Fig. 2G), and a few basophilic inclusion bodies in the gill tissue (black arrowheads; Fig. 2H), and along with few nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrow; Fig. 2I) were observed in the muscle fibers. However, in group 3 (WSSV + MP), hypertrophied nuclei (black arrowheads), and lumen separate from the basement membrane (red arrowheads) were observed in the hepatopancreas (Fig. 2J), and several basophilic inclusion bodies were observed in the gill tissue (black arrowheads; Fig. 2K). In addition, many nuclei showing hemocytic infiltration (red arrows), as well as infiltrated and dissolved muscle fibers (yellow arrows) were observed in the individuals of group 3 (Fig. 2L), but not in those of group 1 (WSSV). The histopathological examination revealed more severe WSSV lesions in group 3 (WSSV + MP) (G4) than in group 1 (WSSV) (G1).

Discussion

Several studies have been conducted on the negative impact of plastics on various aquatic crustaceans, including crab, langoustine, and shrimp species. For example, MPs were shown to have negative effects on the growth of the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) by inducing oxidative stress in the liver [41]. In the Norway lobster (Nephrops norvegicus), the feeding rate, body mass, and metabolic rate as well as the catabolism of stored lipids were shown to be reduced after exposure to MPs [42]. In Pacific white shrimp (P. vannamei), after exposure to nanoplastics, there were changes in nutritional compositions including a decrease in the levels of some essential amino acids and fatty acids, and alterations in intestine microbial activity were observed [43]. After exposure to MPs, the promotion of stress and immune responses was confirmed in P. vannamei [27]. In addition, the accumulation of plastic debris in shrimp was shown to make them more susceptible to various disease and stress factors [44], which could eventually lead to reduced production. However, the correlation between MPs and infectious viral diseases has been rarely studied in crustaceans.

White spot disease (WSD), which is caused by WSSV, is a notable viral infection primarily affecting farmed shrimp. When infected with this virus, shrimp develop white spots on the exoskeleton, which is unsightly, and the disease itself is highly infectious. WSD is recognized for its severity and is listed in the World Organization for Animal Health list of aquatic animal diseases [45, 46]. Moreover, WSD caused economic losses after the first outbreak in 1992, resulting in a production loss of over US$ 2 billion in China in three years [11]. Ecuador, the outbreak occurred in 1999 and resulted in losses of over US$ 1 billion from 1998 to 2001 [47], and over 100 million US$ in Panama, over 70 million US$ in Peru over 3 years [11]. The present study was conducted to evaluate whether MPs accelerate WSSV infection or mortality in juvenile P. vannamei.

Shan et al. [34] revealed that shrimp (larvae and adults) exposed to MP exhibited an increased susceptibility to WSSV and increased mortality; however, the study did not involve any histopathological examination. A previous study by Hsieh et al. [32], described histopathological examination of the shrimp tissues after MP exposure. However, shrimp were exposed to a small amount of MP using intramuscular injection, which is an unnatural exposure route for shrimp. The results of the histopathological examination conducted in the present study confirmed an accelerated WSSV infection in juvenile shrimp (1.5 ± 0.05 g) as well as increased mortality after MP exposure by oral administration. In line with Mohan et al. [48], the extent of tissue lesions is related to mortality data. In the present study, group 1 (WSSV) showed suspected WSSV-related lesions, but group 3 (WSSV + MP) showed serious WSSV-related lesions, and a higher mortality rate was observed in group 3 with severe WSSV-related lesions. The same WSSV stock with the same viral concentration (1.62 × 108 copies/μl) was used to induce infection in both group 1 and group 3. However, group 1 did not show clinical symptoms or mortality, whereas group 3 exhibited a cumulative mortality of 50% by the 6th day after infection. This indicated that MP exposure amplified WSSV infection.

The results of this study highlighted the increased risk of infection that may result from exposure to MPs in shrimp and the consequent potentially elevated risk of significant economic losses in this aquaculture industry. The present study may contribute to research on the correlation between MP exposure and diseases in shrimp, as well as to raising awareness about protecting the marine environment. In addition, further studies will be necessary to obtain reliable data through long-term experiments based on the observation of histopathological changes due to MP exposure. Follow-up research is expected to confirm the correlation between MPs and other major diseases in shrimp farms as a potential factor for disease exacerbation.

Ethics Approval

The animal experiment was approved by the Ethics Committee of Kyungpook National University (KNU 2021‐0050).

Author Contributions

Hye Jin Jeon: Writing – original draft, Sangsu Seo: Data curation, Chorong Lee: Data curation, Bumkeun Kim: Formal analysis, Patharapol Piamsomboon: Supervision, Ji Hyung Kim: Supervision, and Jee Eun Han: Supervision.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF2019R1C1C1006212 and NRF2022R1I1A3066435). The work was also supported by the Development of technology for biomaterialization of marine fisheries by-products of the Korea Institute of Marine Science & Technology Promotion (KIMST) funded by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (KIMST-20220128).

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to declare.

Fig 1.

Download
Figure 1.Result of WSSV PCR assay in dead shrimp during the experiment and live shrimp in each group on the last day (day 6). Lane M: 100-bp ladder; Lane 1: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 24 h after MP exposure; Lane 2: Dead shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) within 96 h after MP exposure; Lane 3: Live shrimp in group 1 (WSSV) on day 6; Lane 4: Live shrimp in group 2 (MP) on day 6; Lane 5: Live shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP) on day 6; Lane 6: Live shrimp in group 4 (Control) on day 6; Lane N: Negative control (DEPC-water); Lane P: WSSV positive control (941-bp).
Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2024; 34: 1705-1710https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2402.02001

Fig 2.

Download
Figure 2.Photomicrographs of sections of shrimp tissues (hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle) for each experimental group. (A), (B), and (C): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 4 (Control), respectively; (D), (E), and (F): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 2 (MP); (G), (H), and (I): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 1 (WSSV); (J), (K), and (L): hepatopancreas, gill, and muscle of shrimp in group 3 (WSSV+MP). All sections were stained with H&E. Scale bars = 50 μm.
Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 2024; 34: 1705-1710https://doi.org/10.4014/jmb.2402.02001

Table 1 . Mortality rate (%), result of the white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) PCR assay, and observation of typical WSSV lesion by histological examination after exposure to WSSV and MPs..

GroupMortality (%)WSSV detection
PCR (dead)PCR (live)WSSV histology
Group 1 (WSSV)0NAa-+ (G1)b
Group 2 (MP)0NA--
Group 3 (WSSV+MP)50+++ (G4)
Group 4 (Control)0NA--

aNA: not applicable. bClassified to grades by histopathological lesion [38, 39]..

References

  1. Gunalan BSNT, Nina TS, Soundarapandian P, Anand T. 2013. Nutritive value of cultured white leg shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. Int. J. Fish. Aquacult. 5: 166-171.
  2. Venugopal V. 2019. Nutrients and Nutraceuticals from Seafood. In Mérillon JM, Ramawat K (eds.), Bioactive Molecules in Food. Reference Series in Phytochemistry. Springer, Cham.
  3. FAO. 2020. The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. Sustainability in action. Rome, Italy: FAO.
  4. FAO. 2022. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022. Towards Blue Transformation. Rome, FAO.
  5. Chen SN, Chang PS, Kou GH. 1989. Observation on pathogenicity and epizootiology of Penaeus monodon baculovirus (MBV) in cultured shrimp in Taiwan. Fish Pathol. 24: 189-195.
    CrossRef
  6. Lightner DV, Redman RM, Poulos BT, Nunan LM, Mari JL, Hasson KW. 1997. Risk of spread of penaeid shrimp viruses in the. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz 16: 146-160.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  7. Stentiford GD, Neil DM, Peeler EJ, Shields JD, Small HJ, Flegel TW, et al. 2012. Disease will limit future food supply from the global crustacean fishery and aquaculture sectors. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 110: 141-157.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  8. Otta SK, Shubha G, Joseph B, Chakraborty A, Karunasagar I. 1999. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) in cultured and wild crustaceans in India. Dis. Aquat. Org. 38: 67-70.
    CrossRef
  9. Durand SV, Lightner DV. 2002. Quantitative real time PCR for the measurement of white spot syndrome virus in shrimp. J. Fish Dis. 25: 381-389.
    CrossRef
  10. Tsai JM, Wang HC, Leu JH, Wang AHJ, Zhuang Y, Walker PJ, et al. 2006. Identification of the nucleocapsid, tegument, and envelope proteins of the shrimp white spot syndrome virus virion. J. Virol. 80: 3021-3029.
    Pubmed KoreaMed CrossRef
  11. Bir J, Howlader P, Ray S, Sultana S, Khalil SI, Banu GR. 2017. A critical review on white spot syndrome virus (WSSV): a potential threat to shrimp farming in Bangladesh and some Asian countries. Int. J. Microbiol. Mycol. 6: 39-48.
  12. Lo CF, Ho CH, Peng SE, Chen CH, Hsu HC, Chiu YL, et al. 1996. White spot syndrome baculovirus (WSBV) detected in cultured and captured shrimp, crabs and other arthropods. Dis. Aquat. Org. 27: 215-225.
    CrossRef
  13. Lo CF, Kou GH. 1998. Virus-associated white spot syndrome of shrimp in Taiwan: a review. Fish Pathol. 33: 365-371.
    CrossRef
  14. Xu S, Ma J, Ji R, Pan K, Miao AJ. 2020. Microplastics in aquatic environments: occurrence, accumulation, and biological effects. Sci. Total Environ. 703: 134699.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  15. 2019. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53: 1039-1047.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  16. Moore CJ. 2008. Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing, long-term threat. Environ. Res. 108: 131-139.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  17. Andrady AL. 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62: 1596-1605.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  18. Nelms SE, Galloway TS, Godley BJ, Jarvis DS, Lindeque PK. 2018. Investigating microplastic trophic transfer in marine top predators. Environ. Pollut. 238: 999-1007.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  19. Scherer C, Weber A, Lambert S, Wagner M. 2018. Interactions of microplastics with freshwater biota. Freshwater Microplastics. Springer, Cham, pp. 153-180.
  20. Wang W, Gao H, Jin S, Li R, Na G. 2019. The ecotoxicological effects of microplastics on aquatic food web, from primary producer to human: a review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 173: 110-117.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  21. Browne MA, Niven SJ, Galloway TS, Rowland SJ, Thompson RC. 2013. Microplastic moves pollutants and additives to worms, reducing functions linked to health and biodiversity. Curr. Biol. 23: 2388-2392.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  22. Sharma VK, Ma X, Lichtfouse E, Robert D. 2022. Nanoplastics are potentially more dangerous than microplastics. Environ. Chem. Lett. 1-4.
    CrossRef
  23. Karbalaei S, Hanachi P, Walker TR, Cole M. 2018. Occurrence, sources, human health impacts and mitigation of microplastic pollution. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 25: 36046-36063.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  24. Kögel T, Bjorøy, Toto B, Bienfait AM, Sanden M. 2020. Micro-and nanoplastic toxicity on aquatic life: determining factors. Sci. Total Environ. 709: 136050.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  25. Tang Y, Liu Y, Chen Y, Zhang W, Zhao J, He S, et al. 2021. A review: research progress on microplastic pollutants in aquatic environments. Sci. Total Environ. 766: 142572.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  26. Dhawan A, Pandey A, Sharma V. 2011. Toxicity assessment of engineered nanomaterials: resolving the challenges. J. Biomed Nanotechnol. 7: 6-7.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  27. Han JE, Choi SK, Jeon HJ, Park JK, Han SH, Jeong J, et al. 2021. Transcriptional response in the whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) to short-term microplastic exposure. Aquac. Rep. 20: 100713.
    CrossRef
  28. Mao X, Xu Y, Cheng Z, Yang Y, Guan Z, Jiang L, Tang K. 2022. The impact of microplastic pollution on ecological environment: a review. Front. Biosci. 27: 46.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  29. Greven AC, Merk T, Karagöz F, Mohr K, Klapper M, Jovanović B, et al. 2016. Polycarbonate and polystyrene nanoplastic particles act as stressors to the innate immune system of fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 35: 3093-3100.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  30. Lei L, Wu S, Lu S, Liu M, Song Y, Fu Z, et al. 2018. Microplastic particles cause intestinal damage and other adverse effects in zebrafish Danio rerio and nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Sci. Total Environ. 619: 1-8.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  31. Franzellitti S, Canesi L, Auguste M, Wathsala RH, Fabbri E. 2019. Microplastic exposure and effects in aquatic organisms: a physiological perspective. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 68: 37-51.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  32. Hsieh SL, Wu YC, Xu RQ, Chen YT, Chen CW, Singhania RR, et al. 2021. Effect of polyethylene microplastics on oxidative stress and histopathology damages in Litopenaeus vannamei. Environ. Pollut. 288: 117800.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  33. Espinosa C, Esteban MÁ, Cuesta A. 2019. Dietary administration of PVC and PE microplastics produces histological damage, oxidative stress and immunoregulation in European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax L.). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 95: 574-583.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  34. Shan LP, Hu Y, Hu L, Liu HW, Liu L, Chen J. 2023. Involvement of microplastics in the conflict between host immunity defense and viral virulence: promoting the susceptibility of shrimp to WSSV infection. Environ. Sci. Technol. 57: 11634-11642.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  35. Han JE, Kim JE, Jo H, Eun JS, Lee C, Kim JH, et al. 2019. Increased susceptibility of white spot syndrome virus exposed Penaeus vannamei to Vibrio- parahaemolyticus causing acute hepatopancreatic necrosis disease. Aquaculture 512: 734333.
    CrossRef
  36. Kureshy N, Davis DA. 2002. Protein requirement for maintenance and maximum weight gain for the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquaculture 204: 125-143.
    CrossRef
  37. Nunan LM, Lightner DV. 2011. Optimized PCR assay for detection of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV). J. Virol. Methods 171: 318-321.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  38. Bell TA, Lightner DV. 1988. A handbook of normal penaeid shrimp histology. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, LA, pp. 114.
  39. Lightner DV. 1996. A handbook of shrimp pathology and diagnostic procedures for diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp.
  40. Durand SV, Redman RM, Mohney LL, Tang-Nelson K, Bonami JR, Lightner DV. 2003. Qualitative and quantitative studies on the relative virus load of tails and heads of shrimp acutely infected with WSSV. Aquaculture 216: 9-18.
    CrossRef
  41. Yu P, Liu Z, Wu D, Chen M, Lv W, Zhao Y. 2018. Accumulation of polystyrene microplastics in juvenile Eriocheir sinensis and oxidative stress effects in the liver. Aquat. Toxicol. 200: 28-36.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  42. Welden NA, Cowie PR. 2016. Long-term microplastic retention causes reduced body condition in the langoustine, Nephrops norvegicus. Environ. Pollut. 218: 895-900.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  43. Chae Y, Kim D, Choi MJ, Cho Y, An YJ. 2019. Impact of nano-sized plastic on the nutritional value and gut microbiota of whiteleg shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei via dietary exposure. Environ Int. 130: 104848.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  44. Timilsina A, Adhikari K, Yadav AK, Joshi P, Ramena G, Bohara K. 2023. Effects of microplastics and nanoplastics in shrimp: mechanisms of plastic particle and contaminant distribution and subsequent effects after uptake. Sci. Total Environ. 894: 164999.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  45. Lightner DV, Redman RM, Pantoja CR, Tang KFJ, Noble BL, Schofield P, et al. 2012. Historic emergence, impact and current status of shrimp pathogens in the Americas. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 110: 174-183.
    Pubmed CrossRef
  46. Patil PK, Geetha R, Ravisankar T, Avunje S, Solanki HG, Abraham TJ, et al. 2021. Economic loss due to diseases in Indian shrimp farming with special reference to Enterocytozoon hepatopenaei (EHP) and white spot syndrome virus (WSSV). Aquaculture 533: 736231.
    CrossRef
  47. Chakraborty S, Ghosh U. 2014. White spot syndrome virus (WSSV) in crustaceans: an overview of host-pathogen interaction. J. Mar. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. 31. doi:10.4172/2324-8661.1000121.
    CrossRef
  48. Mohan CV, Corsin F, Thakur PC, Padiyar PA, Madhusudan M, Turnbull JF, et al. 2002. Usefulness of dead shrimp specimens in studying the epidemiology of white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) and chronic bacterial infection. Dis. Aquat. Org. 50: 1-8.
    Pubmed CrossRef