Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5657/KFAS.2021.0585

Consideration for Classification of Pathogens in Aquatic Animals  

Cho, Miyoung (Research Planning Division, National Institute of Fisheries Science)
Min, Eun Young (Research Cooperation Division, National Institute of Fisheries Science)
Choi, Hye Sung (Pathology Division, National Institute of Fisheries Science)
Jung, Sung Hee (National Institute of Fisheries Science)
Publication Information
Korean Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences / v.54, no.5, 2021 , pp. 585-595 More about this Journal
Abstract
Even though most of aquatic animal pathogens are considered opportunistic and many pose a low direct risk to personnel, all personnel working with aquatic pathogens and facilities using these organisms must comply with the regulation to prevent the release of the pathogen into the environment and causing disease in aquatic animals. First of all, in order to establish a biosafety system for aquatic pathogen, the list of microorganisms that can infect aquatic animals and humans should be drawn up according to the microorganisms encountered within national boundaries. Second, risk assessment guideline for diseases of livestock and aquatic environment is desperately needed. Third, microorganisms should be classified into risk group based on their potential impact on human and aquatic environment. Fourth, facilities handling aquatic pathogens should ensure that these pathogens are securely contained and safely handled for experimental or commercial development purposes. In conclusion, classification is based on the pathogenicity, mode of transmission and host range of the aquatic microorganisms, availability of effective preventative measures and treatments. Furthermore, risk group of aquatic pathogens should be correlated with physical containment facility requirements according to domestic characteristics.
Keywords
Aquatic microorganisms; Culture collection; Risk group; Biosafety;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Canadian Biosafety Guideline. 2018. Conducting a biosecurity risk assessment. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en.public-health/services/canadian-biosafety-standardsguidelines/guidance.html on Jul 8, 2021.
2 ePATHogen. 2021. Risk group database. Retrieved from https://health.canada.ca/en/epathogen on Jul 14, 2021.
3 KDCPA(Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency). 2018. Korea biosafety standard and guideline. First edition. KDCPA, Cheonju, Korea, 484-534.
4 Lee JY, Eun SJ, Park KD, Kim JK, Im JS, Hwang YS and Kim YI. 2005. Biosafety of microbiological laboratories in Korea. J Prev Med Public Health 38, 449-456.
5 Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. 2019. Survey on the status of domestic bio-industry in 2018. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Seoul, Korea, 35-43.
6 Song SJ, Lee KM and Hwang KJ. 2015. Essential to "Act on the promotion of collection, management, and exploitation of pathogen resources". Public H, earth Weekly Report 8, 1068-1071.
7 WFCC (World Federation for Culture Collections). 2021. WFCC guidelines for the establishment and operation of collections of microorganisms. Retrieved from http://www.wfcc.info/guidelines/ on Aug 7, 2021.
8 Yoon Y. 2019. Risk group and biosafety level of biological agents. M.S. Thesis, Sun Moon University, Asan, Korea.
9 Belgian Biosafety Server. 2021. Tool-Belgian classification for micro-organisms based on their biological risks. Revised lists of pathogens and their corresponding class of biological risk. Retrieved from https://www. Belgian Biosafety Server/biosafety on Jul 8, 2021.
10 ABSA(American Biological Safety Association). 2021. Risk group classifications for infectious agents. Retrieved from https://ABSA.org on Jul 8, 2021.
11 Yoon YS and Lee HC. 2019. Risk Groups of biological agents and biosafety level applications. Korean Soc Biotechnol Bioeng J 34, 352-358. https://doi.org/10.7841/ksbbj.2019.34.4.352.   DOI
12 Heo MS, Kim CM, Hwang SY and Lee HJ. 2016. Optimization of fermentation processes for microbial resources. Microorganism resources division biological resources research department. National institute of biological resources, Incheon, Korea, 1-2.
13 Marine Bio-Resource Information System. 2021. Designated marine bio-resource. Retrieved from http://rank.mbris.kr/designation/main on Sep 19, 2021.
14 KDCPA(Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency). 2013. Korea centers for disease control and prevention. KDCPA, Cheonju, Korea, 174-178.
15 KDCPA(Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency). 2021. Korea biosafety standard and guideline. Second edition. KDCPA, Cheonju, Korea, 596-659.
16 KIOST(Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology). 2017. Report of the marine microbial culture collection in South Korea. KIOST, Seoul, Korea, 13.
17 Makkonen J, Vesterbacka A, Martin F, Jussila J, DieguezUribeondo J, Kortet R and KoKKo H. 2016. Mitochodrial genomes and comparative genomics of Aphanomyces astasi and Aphanomyces invadans. Sci Rep 6, 36089. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep36089.   DOI
18 NBPRC (National Biotech Policy Research Center). 2020. Predictions for the global life sciences industry. Retrieved from https://www.bioin.or.kr on Jul 8, 2021.
19 WDCM (World Data Centre for Microorganisms). 2021. Culture collections information worldwide. Retrieved from http://www.wfcc.info/ccinfo/ on Aug 7, 2021.
20 WHO (World Health Organization). 2004. Laboratory biosafety manual. Third edition (revised). Retrieved from https://www.patho.org/en/documents/laboratory-biosafety-manual-3rd-edition-who-2005 on Aug 7, 2021.
21 University of Tasmania. 2021. Aquatic risk groups. Retrieved from https://www.utas.edu.au/research-admin/research-integrity-and-ethics-unit-rieu/biosafety/risk-groups/aquatic-riskgroups on Aug 7, 2021.
22 NIAS (National Institute of Agricultural Sciences). 2017. Preservation, characterization, database and collective management for agricultural microbial resources. NIAS, Wanju, Korea, 7.