We tested if it is technically feasible to monitor fish in real-time in full-scale commercial fish farms using acoustic telemetry. 31 Atlantic salmon were equipped with acoustic transmitter tags containing depth sensors. Tagged fish were monitored for three months in two industrial scale sea-cages containing 180000 and 150000 fish, respectively. Each cage was fitted with two prototype acoustic receiver units designed to collect, interpret and store the information transmitted by the acoustic transmitter tags. Ten in each cage were also equipped with Data Storage Tags (DSTs) containing depth sensors to record individual-based datasets for comparison with the acoustically transmitted datasets. After compensation for sample loss caused by expected acoustic interference between the transmitter tags, the resulting dataset revealed that the receiver units collected 90–95% of the signals in both cages. Acoustic communication conditions in the sea-cages were not strongly impaired by factors such as fish density and local noise. Further, the dataset from the acoustic transmitters had comparable resolution and quality to that produced by the DSTs. However, acoustic tags provide data in real time and enable farmers to respond to the received information with farm management measures, whereas archival tags such as DSTs need to be retrieved and downloaded and hence have no real-time applications. We conclude that acoustic telemetry is feasible as a method to monitor the depth of fish in real-time commercial aquaculture. 相似文献
This approach maximizes sensitivity of serology-based monitoring systems by considering spatial clustering of herds classified as false positive by herd testing, allowing outbreaks to be detected in an early phase. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether swine herds infected with influenza viruses cluster in space, and if so, where they cluster. The secondary objective was to investigate the combining of a multivariate spatial scan statistic with herd test results to maximize the sensitivity of the surveillance system for swine influenza. We tested for spatial clustering of swine influenza using the Cuzick–Edwards test as a global test. The location of the most likely spatial clusters of cases for each subtype and strain in a sample of 65 sow and 72 finisher herds in 2001 (Ontario, Canada), and 76 sow herds in 2003 (Ontario, Canada) was determined by a spatial scan statistic in a purely spatial Bernoulli model based on single and multiple datasets.
A case herd was defined by true herd-disease status for sow or finisher herds tested for H1N1, and by apparent herd-disease status for sow herds tested for two H3N2 strains (A/Swine/Colorado/1/77 (Sw/Col/77) and A/Swine/Texas/4199-2/98 (Sw/Tex/98)). In sow herds, there was no statistically significant clustering of H1N1 influenza after adjustment for pig-farm density. Similarly, spatial clustering was not found in finisher herds. In contrast, clustering of H3N2 Sw/Col/77 (prevalence ratio = 12.5) and H3N2 Sw/Tex/98 (prevalence ratio = 15) was identified in an area close to a region with documented isolation of avian influenza isolates from pigs.
For the H1N1 subtype tested by ELISA, we used an approach that minimized overall misclassification at the herd level. This could be more applicable for detecting clusters of positive farms when herd prevalence is moderate to high than when herd prevalence is low. For the H3N2 strains we used an approach that maximized herd-level sensitivity by minimizing the herd cut-off. This is useful in situations where prevalence of the pathogen is low. The results of applying a multivariate spatial scan statistic approach, led us to generate the hypothesis that an unknown variant of influenza of avian origin was circulating in swine herds close to an area where avian strains had previously been isolated from swine. Maximizing herd sensitivity and linking it with the spatial information can be of use for monitoring of pathogens that exhibit the potential for rapid antigenic change, which, consequently, might then lead to diminished cross-reactivity of routinely used assays and lower test sensitivity for the newly emerged variants. Veterinary authorities might incorporate this approach into animal disease surveillance programs that either substantiate freedom from disease, or are aimed at detecting early incursion of a pathogen, such as influenza virus, or both. 相似文献
ObjectiveTo assess accuracy of noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measured by oscillometric device Sentinel compared to invasive blood pressure (IBP) in anaesthetized horses undergoing surgery. To assess if differences between the NIBP measured by the Sentinel and IBP are associated with recumbency, cuff placement, weight of the horse or acepromazine premedication and to describe usefulness of the Sentinel.Study designProspective study examining replicates of simultaneous NIBP and IBP measurements.AnimalsTwenty-nine horses.MethodsInvasive blood pressure was measured via a catheter in the facial artery, transverse facial artery or metatarsal artery. NIBP was measured using appropriate size cuffs placed on one of two metacarpal or metatarsal bones or the tail in random order. With both techniques systolic (SAP), mean (MAP), and diastolic (DAP) arterial blood pressures and heart rates (HR) were recorded. A mixed effects model compared the IBP to the NIBP values and assessed potential effects of catheter placement, localisation of the cuffs in combination with recumbency, weight of the horse or acepromazine premedication.ResultsNoninvasive blood pressure yielded higher measurements than IBP. Agreement varied with recumbency and cuff position. Estimated mean differences between the two methods decreased from SAP (lateral recumbency: range -5.3 to -56.0 mmHg; dorsal recumbency: range 0.8 to -20.7 mmHg), to MAP (lateral recumbency: range -1.8 to -19.0 mmHg; dorsal recumbency: range 13.9 to -16.4 mmHg) to DAP (lateral recumbency: range 0.5 to -6.6 mmHg; dorsal recumbency: range 21.0 to -15.5 mmHg). NIBP measurement was approximately two times more variable than IBP measurement. No significant difference between IBP and NIBP due to horse's weight or acepromazine premedication was found. In 227 of 1047 (21.7%) measurements the Sentinel did not deliver a result.Conclusion and clinical relevanceAccording to the high variability of NIBP compared to IBP, NIBP measurements as measured by the Sentinel in the manner described here are not considered as an appropriate alternative to IBP to measure blood pressure in anaesthetized horses. 相似文献