Cited by 12Aquaculture disease management and microbiotaCrustacean biology and ecologyAnimal Virus Infections Studies

Natural, in ovo, vertical transmission of the RNA viruses, Chequa iflavirus and Athtab bunyavirus, but not Cherax reovirus in redclaw crayfish Cherax quadricarinatus

Jaroenram, Wansadaj, Owens, Leigh, Hayakijkosol, Orachun, Elliman, Jennifer·2021·Aquaculture

Abstract

The first molecular evidence for natural, in ovo, vertical transmission of Chequa iflavirus and Athtab bunyavirus from farmed female redclaw crayfish ( Cherax quadricarinatus ) cultured in northern Queensland, Australia is presented. Cherax reovirus was also examined, but evidence that this is spread via in ovo vertically transmission is very limited. Amongst 57 broodstock-derived pools of fertilized eggs, 38 (66.7%), 34 (59.6%) and 6 (10.5%) were positive for Chequa iflavirus, Athtab bunyavirus and Cherax reovirus respectively with the respective average loads of 6.56 × 10 4 , 2.33 × 10 3 and 1.03 × 10 1 copies/μl of tested samples. Grouping samples by farm origins, all viruses in most farms were statistically similar ( P > 0.05) for viral loads. As two viruses are transovarial transmitted, surface sterilizing practices would be ineffective and the load remains high as is seen in Chequa iflavirus and Athtab bunyavirus, but extremely low on surface-treated eggs as appears with Cherax reovirus. Our evidence, plus the literature, supports the general rule that if the virus is in the gut, most of the vertical transmission is faecal /oral and can be drastically reduced by efficient egg surface sterilization. If the virus is spread in ovo, then RT-qPCR testing coupled with therapeutic methods and selection of resistant crayfish families or detection of viral negative, geographically isolated populations of crayfish is the way forward for the removal of Chequa iflavirus and Athtab bunyavirus.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.736285

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 16 · Cited by 12

Authors
Jaroenram, W., Owens, L., Hayakijkosol, O., & Elliman, J.
Affiliations
James Cook University (AU)
Corresponding author
Owens, Leigh
Venue
Aquaculture
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-03
Volume
534
Pages
736285
ISSN
0044-8486 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3111722932
Cited by
12
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 5
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Aquaculture (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Crustacean biology and ecology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Virus Infections Studies
Keywords
Cherax quadricarinatus, vertical transmission, transovarial transmission, viral load, fecal-oral transmission, crustacean viral disease, RT-qPCR detection

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review