Open Access

Erratum to: The impact of co-infections on fish: a review

Veterinary Research201748:26

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13567-017-0432-7

Received: 16 March 2017

Accepted: 11 April 2017

Published: 19 April 2017

The original article was published in Veterinary Research 2016 47:98

1 Erratum to: Vet Res (2016) 47:98 DOI 10.1186/s13567-016-0383-4

Following publication of this article [1], an error was brought to our attention in the below paragraph.

In Chile, high mortalities were reported in Atlantic salmon farms following co-infection by Caligus rogercresseyi and Neoparamoeba perurans, the causative agent of amoebic gill disease (AGD). C. rogercresseyi was shown to play a vital role in the transmission of N. perurans resulting in several outbreaks [52]. Similarly, Lepeophtheirus salmonis, another salmon louse similar to C. rogercresseyi was also found to play a similar role as a vector in the transmission of N. perurans and influenced the epizootiology of the disease in Atlantic salmon and increased mortalities in Atlantic salmon farms in the USA [53].

The correct version should be read as follows:

“In Chile, the first outbreak of amoebic gill disease (a condition caused by Neoparamoeba perurans) in Atlantic salmon occurred in fish heavily infected with the sea louse Caligus rogercresseyi [52]. This suggested that C. rogercresseyi might have contributed to the outbreak. Alternatively, it is also possible that both parasites took advantage of a third factor, for example the poor overall health of the fish or the unusually high salinity of the water at the time of the outbreak as both parasites are known to thrive under such high salinity conditions [52].

DNA from N. perurans was identified in samples of the sea louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis from a location in the Puget Sound with a prior history of AGD [53]. This suggested that L. salmonis harboured the amoeba, possibly on its carapace and that it might play a role in its dispersion.

Interestingly, despite sea lice’s absence from Tasmania, AGD is a recurring problem in this region which signifies that the copepod is not essential for AGD outbreak [53].”

Notes

Declarations

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Clinical Division of Fish Medicine, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine
(2)
Department of Pathology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Assiut University

Reference

  1. Kotob MH, Menanteau-Ledouble S, Kumar G, Abdelzaher M, El-Matbouli M (2016) The impact of co-infections on fish: a review. Vet Res 47:98. doi:10.1186/s13567-016-0383-4 View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s) 2017

Advertisement