Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39939283›Full record

ArticleJournal of fish diseases2025

Effects of Different Preservatives During Ecological Monitoring of Myxozoan Parasite Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae Causing Proliferative Kidney Disease (PKD) in Salmonids.

Duncan Philpott, Joacim Näslund, Serena Donadi, Oksana Burimski, Magnus Lauringson, Lilian Pukk, Anti Vasemägi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of fish diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Duncan PhilpottDepartment of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Freshwater Research, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Drottningholm, Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5520-6654
Joacim NäslundDepartment of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Freshwater Research, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Drottningholm, Sweden.
Serena DonadiDepartment of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Freshwater Research, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Drottningholm, Sweden.
Oksana BurimskiChair of Aquaculture, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Magnus LauringsonChair of Aquaculture, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4480-1825
Lilian PukkChair of Aquaculture, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia.
Anti VasemägiDepartment of Aquatic Resources, Institute of Freshwater Research, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Drottningholm, Sweden.

Funding

Svenska Forskningsrådet Formas
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective sample preservation is essential in large-scale population monitoring, particularly for molecular genetic analyses of pathogens, and for measuring disease symptoms in hosts. In such monitoring cases, disease symptoms can indicate poor habitat health, as they often coincide with elevated temperatures and suboptimal environmental conditions. This study examines the effect of two preservatives; 95% ethanol and 99% isopropanol on the assessment of proliferative kidney disease (PKD) in the renal tissue of young-of-the-year brown trout (Salmo trutta). Specifically, we studied the effect of preservatives on the physical measurement of a primary symptom of PKD, renal hyperplasia. Furthermore, we evaluated the effect of preservatives on the molecular detection and quantification of the causative PKD agent myxozoan parasite Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae. Our results indicate that isopropanol-preserved samples exhibit greater renal tissue shrinkage, with the most pronounced differences observed in smaller fish when compared to ethanol-preserved samples. This difference in shrinkage is great enough to disguise symptomatic fish when observing renal hyperplasia with mixed storage mediums. However, both preservatives were found to be suitable for DNA extraction of sufficient quality for detection and quantification of the parasite using qPCR with no statistically significant differences in DNA yield or parasite load due to the type of preservative. We found that while ethanol is preferable for ease of dissection, isopropanol is a suitable alternative for PKD monitoring in wild fish, especially where access to ethanol may be limited. Understanding the difference in tissue shrinkage caused by the two preservatives can enable compensatory adjustment and maintain higher standards of data accuracy when assessing the severity of Tetracapsuloides bryosalmonae infection.

Indexed as

Fish DiseasesKidney DiseasesMyxozoaParasitic Diseases, AnimalPreservatives, PharmaceuticalTrout2-PropanolAnimalsEthanolKidney2-PropanolEthanolPreservatives, Pharmaceuticalclimate changedisease monitoringepidemiologyethanolisopropanolPKDpreservativesSalmo truttaTetracapsuloides bryosalmonae

Identifiers

PMID39939283
PMCPMC12068842

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.