Gladstone Fish Health Investigation 2011 - 2012 - Western Basin ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 5.3c. Regional group means and significance‐difference testing.Trip 1 –Liver form %abnormalLiver %discolo uredParasites% > zeroMesentaryfat (%)Fitzroy R / Bundaberg 0.0 20.6 a 5.0 19.5 aCalliope R 14.3b14.3 0.0 28.6 aUpper & Lower Boyne R 0.0 0.0 b 0.0 2.5 bRodds Bay 10.0 50.0 a 0.0 22.5 aGladstone area (overall) 6.1 16.1 0.0 14.0Trip 2 –Fitzroy R / Bundaberg 9.1 b 13.6 a 0.0 1.1 bCalliope R 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 7.7 bUpper & Lower Boyne R 40.0 a 15.0 a 5.0 0.0 bRodds Bay 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 37.5 aGladstone area (overall) 20.0 7.50 2.50 11.3a,b,c Within columns and trips, means for the individual regions which do not have a common superscriptletter are significantly different (P < 0.05).#For the overall ‘Gladstone area’ means, those which are bolded are significantly different from the meanfor the pooled reference sites (Fitzroy R / Bundaberg).6. SEPARATE ANALYSES FOR MUDCRAB DATA6.1 OverviewShell condition (as measured at capture) had 1599 observations of which only 57 (3.6%) were classifiedas abnormal. These were then further classified according to their lesion grades. The sub‐samples (140individual crabs) were submitted to laboratory study for re‐checking the lesion gradings as well asmeasuring overall size (carapace width and weight) and hepatopancreas weight. Again, analyses of thelaboratory sample data were appropriately weighted to accurately reflect the observed damagedproportions in the overall sample.Crab class (defined as small females, large females, undersized males, and retained males) was included inall analyses, as this effect was always significant (P < 0.05). Carapace width and total weight were trialledseparately as a covariate for percentage damage, under the hypothesis of a positive relationship(increasing amounts of damage with increasing size). However, these relationship were nowhere nearsignificant (P > 0.20), and actually fitted as slightly negative, possibly due to ‘crab class’ capturing themajority of any effect here. Hence ‘crab class’ was retained in the final model but size was omitted.6.2 Comparing the laboratory and field assessmentsThe comparison between the lesion grade ratings showed a significant (P < 0.01) degree of association,with the counts listed in Table 6.1. There was agreement in 72% of these cases. Interestingly, the fieldassessment was higher than the laboratory assessment in 23% of these cases, whereas the reverse onlyoccurred in 5% of the crabs.Table 6.1. Highest lesion grade for each crab (Field = field assessment; Lab. = laboratory assessment).Field ‐ 0 1 2 3 4 5Lab. ‐ 0 88 2 7 6 7 01 3 1 2 0 2 12 1 1 2 0 1 13 0 0 0 1 0 04 0 0 1 0 1 25 0 0 0 0 1 5125
6.3 ResultsThere was no significant difference (P = 0.68) between the hepatosomatic index of normal and abnormalcrabs (0.057 ± 0.002 vs. 0.054 ± 0.002). Missing appendages (any vs. none) appeared to be randomoccurrences, with an overall mean rate of 16.9%, and not related to any of the design factors.The key variables analysed were the percentage abnormal (field‐assessed using all 1599 observations; aBinomial proportions model), the distribution of counts according to highest lesion class (a Poisson linearmodel), and hepatosomatic index (Normal model). In these analyses ‘crab category’ was always significant( P < 0.05), justifying its inclusion as a stratifying term, with the means shown in Table 6.2.Table 6.2. Mea n values and standard errors (s.e.) for the crab categories.Hepatosomatic index s.e. Percent abnorm al s.e.Female large 0.059 0.002 3.8 0.8Female small 0.064 0.004 1.8 0.7Male retained 0.043 0.003 7.1 1.7Male undersize 0.056 0.002 2.5 0.7Regarding locations and trips, the only significant (P < 0.01) effect was for the hepatosomatic index, wheretrip 2 (overall, 0.061 ± 0.002) was higher than trip 1 (0.050 ± 0.002). Despite the interaction betweenlocation and trip being non‐significant (P > 0.66) for all variables, it is the relationships amongst thesevalues that are of prime interest, and the two‐way means are presented here for consistency with theresults for the fish species. Table 6.3 lists these means, and the two‐dimensional spatial representation isshown in Figure 6.1. No principal components analysis was needed to summarise these results, as thereare only these two key continuous variates.Table 6.3. Mean values and average standard errors for locations and trips.Hepatosomatic index ‐ Percent abno rmal ‐Trip 1 Trip 2 Trip 1 Trip 2Fitzroy River 0.046 0.060 4.5 1.4Bundaberg 0.050 0.061 3.7 3.1The Narrows 0.055 0.059 3.2 5.2Port 0.057 0.068 8.8 4.4Hamilton Point 0.050 0.061 3.1 3.7Calliope River 0.049 0.063 5.8 2.7Rodds Bay 0.043 0.056 2.3 2.4(average s.e.) 0.004 (average s.e.) 2.0126
Page 1 and 2:
Department of Agriculture, Fisherie
Page 3 and 4:
ContentsTable of tables 1Table of f
Page 5 and 6:
Mullet (Mugilidae) 80Banana prawn (
Page 7 and 8:
Figure 7. Barramundi caught in the
Page 9 and 10:
Figure 38. Sharks caught in the Cal
Page 11 and 12:
Phase 1 (August 2011-February 2012)
Page 13 and 14:
The results in this study support t
Page 15 and 16:
ecognised expertise and research pu
Page 17 and 18:
Mr Mitchell reported high catches u
Page 19 and 20:
Figure 2. Sampling sites within the
Page 21 and 22:
Phase 2: Expanded Gladstone Fish He
Page 23 and 24:
Mud crab (Scylla serrata): Mud crab
Page 25 and 26:
For mud crabs, hepatopancreas, gill
Page 27 and 28:
Table 2. The number of fish, crusta
Page 29 and 30:
Significant findings and discussion
Page 31 and 32:
Commercial barramundi catch and cat
Page 33 and 34:
Figure 6. Eye condition observed in
Page 35 and 36:
Conditions observed in barramundi s
Page 37 and 38:
Figure 12. A barramundi caught in t
Page 39 and 40:
provided another environmental stre
Page 41 and 42:
was somewhat reduced because post-m
Page 43 and 44:
4,000Commercial effort (days fished
Page 45 and 46:
Size structure of mud crabs observe
Page 47 and 48:
Figure 21. Examples of shell abnorm
Page 49 and 50:
Of the 58 crabs observed to have sh
Page 51 and 52:
HistopathologyLipid storage vacuola
Page 53 and 54:
Commercial fishing effort for mulle
Page 55 and 56:
Figure 28. (a) Mullet caught in Rod
Page 57 and 58:
June/July: Mullet samples were coll
Page 59 and 60:
Sharks and raysThe monitoring progr
Page 61 and 62:
Observational findings Phase 1Phase
Page 63 and 64:
Encysted larval parasites were foun
Page 65 and 66:
in particular bull sharks, have bee
Page 67 and 68:
Commercial banana prawn catch for t
Page 69 and 70:
Observational findings Phase 2April
Page 71 and 72:
Laboratory testing Phase 1Seven riv
Page 73 and 74:
four displayed signs of redness. Th
Page 75 and 76:
Conditions observed in pelagic fish
Page 77 and 78:
FinfishObservational findingsDuring
Page 79 and 80: ConclusionsIn 2011, a wide range of
Page 81 and 82: Mud crabsFisheries Queensland did n
Page 83 and 84: Owens, L. 1983. Bopyrid isopod Epip
Page 85 and 86: Candidate speciesThe monitoring pro
Page 87 and 88: Table 1: Candidate species for each
Page 89 and 90: Sample processingSample processing
Page 91 and 92: Herring/grinner/Australian threadfi
Page 93 and 94: For example: the third specimen, re
Page 95 and 96: oooGonad - present/absentHepatopanc
Page 97 and 98: Cloudy eye,swollen,redness orhemorr
Page 99 and 100: Red pin pointmarks - nogeneral redn
Page 101 and 102: Lesion photos Description GradeThis
Page 103 and 104: L4continuedoperculumgrazing;cuts or
Page 105 and 106: Appendix A-3: Fish health assessmen
Page 107 and 108: Appendix B - Statistical report: Gl
Page 109 and 110: analyses, but this was not done for
Page 111 and 112: was a significant (P < 0.05) locati
Page 113 and 114: Percentage with fin condition > 015
Page 115 and 116: Table 3.6b. Effects of locations an
Page 117 and 118: Table 3.7d. Spleen categories - cou
Page 119 and 120: 32Bundy2Bundy1UpBoyne1UpBoyne2LwBoy
Page 121 and 122: Table 3.9c. Regional group means an
Page 123 and 124: Table 4.2c. Effects of locations an
Page 125 and 126: 4.5 Summarising by regionsThe means
Page 127 and 128: Ta ble 5.2a. Effects of locations a
Page 129: 5.5 Summarising by regionsThe means
Page 133 and 134: Table 6.5 lists the mean values whe
Page 135 and 136: Standardized residualsStandardized
Page 137 and 138: Table 2.3f. Muscle lesions.Lake Fit
Page 139 and 140: Table 4. 1f. Muscle lesions.Fitzroy
Page 141 and 142: Table 5.6. Regiona l m eans for the
Page 143 and 144: Contaminants in Tissue ofFish and C
Page 145 and 146: Contaminants in Tissue of Fish and
Page 151 and 152: Department of Science, Information
Page 181 and 182:
Department of Science, Information
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Appendix E - Time line BarraBy John
Page 205 and 206:
friends. Rapidly rising flood water
Page 207 and 208:
To make note - condition loss was e
Page 209 and 210:
May/June- FinsMy initial observatio
Page 211 and 212:
Thes e escapee were now also in awo
Page 213 and 214:
Figure N. Barramundi showing net ma
Page 215 and 216:
September- Deaths and SicknessFigur
Page 217 and 218:
There is numerous distinguishing fe
Page 219:
Department of Agriculture, Fisherie
show all

Gladstone Fish Health Investigation 2011 - 2012 - Western Basin ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?