Status of Fish Health and Biosecurity Management Systems in Kenya's Aquaculture Production Units. A Case of Government Authenticated Fish Hatcheries.

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2430657/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Status of Fish Health and Biosecurity Management Systems in Kenya's Aquaculture Production Units. A Case of Government Authenticated Fish Hatcheries.

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2430657/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Kenya is currently Africa's fourth-largest producer of aquaculture. Ranked 66th among the top 100 countries in the world in aquaculture production. Because of insufficient quality fingerlings production systems, farmers have been forced to stock fingerlings whose quality cannot be verified. The government through Kenya fisheries service has initiated the process of authenticating and registering all fish seeds Hatcheries units in the country to ensure Biosecurity and fish health quality standard upholds and skewed towards the local farmer. The question that still remain un answered is, are the status of these hatcheries to the required quality standards? Research study was therefore conducted to unearth the current status of these Hatcheries on biosecurity and fish health management issues during fingerling production. Primary data was collected using questionnaires, direct interviews across 21 counties where these hatcheries are distributed between September to November 2022. Data was obtained from 61 hatchery managers from target population of 80 Hatcheries authenticated. Random sampling technique was used to identify the hatcheries. The data collected was analyzed through excel and presentation was purely by graphical and Tabulation methods for simplicity in interpretation to common fish farmer in Kenya. According to the findings majority of the hatcheries produced tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) fingerlings both monosex and mixed sex, African cat fish Clarias gariapinus fingerlings, trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Common carps (Cyprinus carpio) were also produced by some hatcheries. On biosecurity status It was observed that Record keeping, limiting visitors’ movement in the hatchery, cleaning of Hatchery units and removal of dead fries were perfect biosecurity measures undertaken by 58 Hatcheries (85.29%), 58 hatcheries (85.29%), 57 Hatcheries (83.82%), and 57 hatcheries (83.82%) respectively. on source of broodstock the hatchery managers obtained their broodstock mainly from Kenya marine fisheries research institute as indicated by 38 hatcheries (62.29%),13 Hatcheries (21.31%) obtained from other hatcheries. On diseases outbreak 52 hatcheries managers (86.66%) had so far recorded an incident of fish disease during the production cycle. Where majority of hatchery managers 55 Hatcheries (90.16%) report disease cases at the county government fisheries offices, 40 Hatchery managers (65.57%) reported to Kenya fisheries service offices. No cases of the Tilapia lake Virus disease have been so far reported in Kenyan Hatcheries. However, the most common disease was mainly nutrition-related diseases as recorded by 33 Hatchery managers (54.09%) followed by fish Gill rot, and Dropsy diseases by 23 Hatcheries (37.70%) and 22 hatcheries (36.06%) respectively. Financial problems were a major drawback for hatchery operations as reported by 61 hatchery managers (100%) followed by Lack of experienced manpower at the hatchery and lack of knowledge about diseases as indicated by 56 (91.80%). Inconclusion It is crucial to educate fish hatchery and farm owners specialized in fingerling production on the policies, procedures, and practices linked to biosecurity and fish health management in order to assure fish farmers of the best quality fingerling supply. The recommendation drawn was that Fish farmers should put into utilisation of the existing Hatcheries in the country as their number one source of quality fingerlings and brood stocks. The county government and Kenya fisheries service should also frequently organize trainings on emerging issues on fish health management and new disease outbreak

Biosecurity

Fish hatchery

Fish Disease

fish Health management

Kenya is currently Africa's fourth-largest producer of aquaculture. Ranked 66th among the top 100 countries in the world in aquaculture production (FAO, 2022). Until recently, 2009 to 2013 when the government-funded Economic Stimulus Program boosted fish farming across the country, the Kenyan aquaculture industry had experienced modest growth. In fact, national aquaculture production increased from 1,200 MT/y (or 2% of the nation's fish production) in 2005 to 16,000 MT/y (or 10% of the harvest) in 2013(SDF, 2016). For now, the Programme has aided in alleviating poverty, promoting local development, and encouraged Kenyan fish farmers to think more commercially. Aquaculture production's ability to improve is highly reliant on the reliable and swift supply of best fish seed. Earlier, the acquisition of naturally produced fry from semi - wild sources limited the supply of fish seed. Due to the impact of degradation of the environment and other societal ramifications, the natural sources of seeds are all in decline. (Ragasa, etal; 2016; Syanya & Mathia,2022). As a result, over the past 15 years, reliance on the production and dissemination of artificial fish seed has vastly increased (Nyonge, etal 2011). In Kenya, earthen and lined ponds, dams, and tanks are the most common types of aquaculture systems. The Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), which accounts for about 74% of production, is the most widely farmed fish species. It is followed by African catfish (Clarias gariepinus), which contributes about 22% of aquaculture production. (Bostock, etal;2010; Charo-Karisa, etal 2011). goldfish Carassius auratus, rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss, common carp Cyprinus carpio, and koi carp Cyprinus carpio carpi oar other common fish species in Kenya. (Opiyo, etal ,2015). At the National Aquaculture Research Development and Training Centre in Sagana, Kenyan researchers have just started raising local fish species like Labeo victorianus and Labeo cylindricus in culture (Opiyo, etal ,2015, Charo-Karisa, etal 2011, State Department of Fisheries ,2016). Apart from a lack of awareness of contemporary aquaculture technologies, the Kenyan aquaculture industry still faces a shortage of certified quality seed fish and feed. Numerous hatcheries have been set up throughout the country in order to meet current demand and take future potentials into account (Opiyo, etal; 2015). According to KFS (2022) currently, there are 81 Authenticated hatcheries in Kenya that have been given clean bill of health to supply fingerlings to farmers in the country. Fish hatcheries appear to be quite successful in producing a lot of fingerlings, but the quality of those seeds is still in doubt. (Hood, etal;2019; Jia, etal ;2017, Rimmer, etal; 2013). Farmers frequently complain about the twisted bodies, spinal deformities, stunted growth, and illness susceptibility of fry produced in this hatchery (, Rimmer, etal; 2013; Charo-Karisa, etal 2011, Muniesa, etal;2022, Liu, etal;2022 and Romerio, etal 2012). This gives the base for this research on conducting an assessment on the status of fish health management and biosecurity systems in aquaculture production units in Kenya with focus on the government authenticated fish hatcheries. Furthermore, one of the main obstacles to aquaculture is disease, which could eventually limit the commercial viability of the emerging fish hatcheries (Muniesa, etal;2022). The bulk of hatchery operators are still not familiar with the health and disease problems facing their establishments (Rimmer, etal; 2013; Opiyo, etal; 2015). To check the health state of fish brood and seed, Kenyan government still lack a health certification system and a diagnostic laboratory. Due to this, fish farmers are unable verify whether their fish were previously harboring diseases. It’s therefore crucial to establish biosecurity in aquaculture systems to stop or reduce the introduction and disease transmission between or within fish farming facilities. Creating a successful biosecurity system understanding of the aquaculture operation, fundamental concepts relating to disease transmission, and understanding of the fish kept in the facility is key (Hood, etal;2019). The poultry sector as seen in integrated poultry fish farming has deployed a bio secure system with success (Masters, etal; 2008). Aquaculture production in Kenya has grown tremendously in recent years quickly being such an important source of cheap protein for the country's rural poor (Charo-Karisa, etal 2011). The high profitability of fish farming attracts an overwhelming number of producers, who really are unaware about the risky nature of aquaculture farming. To effectively utilize and maintain fish genetic resources, quality seed production and brood stock management should be considered (Mzula, etal;2021, Akoll &Mwanja 2012). Many fish hatcheries exist in Kenya; however, some fish farmers still buy fish seed (Fingerlings) from other neighboring farmers for their ponds after the harvest (Opiyo and Charo-Karisa 2012). Most of the time, the fish seed collected from local farmers and unauthenticated hatcheries is stunted and unsuitable to satisfy the demands of the farmer (Charo-Karisa et al 2011). Due to seasonality, variations in sizes and quality, the potential for disease entrance, and the difficulties in estimating the age of the fingerlings, capturing fingerlings from the wild is also unreliable on government hatcheries to provide fingerlings is unsustainable due to insufficient infrastructure, the use of impure strains and low-quality brood stock, a lack of financing to implement effective quality control (Charo-Karisa et al 2012). The government through Kenya fisheries service has initiated the process of authenticating fish seeds Hatcheries production units to ensure Biosecurity and fish health and quality standard upholds. The question that still remain un answered is, are the status of these hatcheries monitored in relation to basic quality standards? Since fish farmers consider quick growth and high survival rates to be the most crucial characteristics of a good quality fish seed, an increase in hatcheries calls for proper brood stock management and quality control to ensure production of fingerlings of high quality (Oyieng et al 2013 and Hecht, 2006). According to reports, the issues with quality seed in aquaculture are caused by inadequate hatchery practices and a lack of genetic management, which has led to the performance of many farmed species being degraded through inbreeding, genetic drift, and uncontrolled hybridization (Bostock et al 2010; Opiyo, etal; 2015). There is a knowledge gap regarding the operations of Kenya's fish hatcheries, and little is known about the fish health management and Biosecurity systems of Kenya's fingerlings and brood stock production units. In the case of government-authorized fish hatcheries in Kenya, this study looks at the status of fish health management and biosecurity systems in aquaculture production units and the problems that need to be solved in order to produce high-quality fish seed. This information is necessary for establishing fish breeding and seed production structures, strengthening breeding programmes, and ensuring high-quality seed production in Kenya. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the status of fish health management and biosecurity systems in aquaculture production units in Kenya with reference to government authenticated fish hatcheries in the country. The Specific objectives were; to assess fish health management strategies in the government authenticated Hatcheries in relation to set fish quality standards in Kenya; to examine the status of government authenticated Hatcheries in terms of Sources of brood stock, operation and fingerling production level; and to assess the Biosecurity status and systems in authenticated hatcheries in Kenya.

The primary objective of the study was to assess the condition of fish health management and biosecurity systems in Kenyan aquaculture production units in relation to the states legally permitted fish hatcheries. Understanding how fish seed producers approach challenges relating to fish health and biosecurity is vital in light of the recently enforced EU legislation on biosecurity measures for aquaculture export products to the EU countries from Kenya. This would guarantee that Kenya's aquaculture industry meets expectations in terms of providing empirical information on systems for reported fish health management and biosecurity measures in place. The hatcheries are distributed in aquaculture potential regions in Kenya. Figure 2.1.

The study was conducted for a period of two months from September to November, 2022 in 22 counties with operational authenticated fish Hatcheries in Kenya. The names of hatcheries targeted are published at the Kenya fisheries service website. Primary data was collected through questionnaires, and interviews across 21 counties where these hatcheries are distributed in collaboration with the area fisheries officers. Data was obtained from 61 hatchery owners/ Managers through random sampling of the target population of 80 Hatcheries authenticated. The questionnaire focused on general hatchery information, brood stock and hatchery management, disease problem, biosecurity intervention status and health management strategies in hatcheries. The questionnaire was pre tested twice at the Mwitoko Fish Hatchery and Aquaculture Training Centre in Vihiga County, one of the study region, for validation before the final set was developed and disseminated. The simple random sampling technique was used. Hatchery owners were interviewed at their hatchery facilities by the research team, and those who were unable to attend were sent a questionnaire designed using KOBO DATA COLLECT TOOL software. Using Microsoft Excel and the Kobo data tool software, the received data was coded, summarized, and processed for analysis. The data collected which included the hatchery's establishment year, the education level of its managers, the sources of its brood stock, its husbandry procedures, biosecurity measures, its inputs, fish diseases reporting techniques, and surveillance as well as problems experienced in the Hatcheries during fingerling production was codded and analyzed through excel. Data presentation was purely by graphical and Tabulation methods for simplicity in interpretation to common fish farmer in Kenya at local level

3.1. Hatchery status and nature of fingerling production.

Analyses have been done on data from 61 authenticated fish hatcheries that produce different species of fish fingerlings for Kenya’s aquaculture industry. The hatcheries were found to produce fingerlings for Monosex Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), Mixed sex Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), African Catfish (Clarias gariepinus) Common carps (Cyprinus carpio), and Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). The finding revealed that 44 hatcheries (72.13%) only produced Mono sex Nile tilapia fingerlings, 25 hatcheries (40.98%) produced Mixed sex Tilapia, 23 Hatcheries (37.70%), and 19 Hatcheries (31.14%) produced Clarias gariepinus + Monosex Tilapia and Carps + Monosex Tilapia respectively. 15 Hatcheries (24.59%) produced Trout fish with 16Hatcheries (26.22%) producing Clarias gariepinus fingerlings only. (Fig. 3. 1).

3.1.1. Year of Hatchery establishment

On the year of Hatchery establishment, the finding indicates that 27 Hatcheries (44.26%) were established back in 2016 and below. 14 Hatcheries (22.95%), 11hatcheries (18.03%), 6 Hatcheries (9.83%), and 3 Hatcheries ( 4.92%) were established in 2018,2019,2017, and 2021 respectively. No Hatchery was established in 2020. Table 3.1

Table 3.1

Year of Hatchery establishment
Year	Number of Hatcheries	Percentage
2016 and Below	27	44.26
2018	14	22.95
2019	11	18.03
2017	6	9.83
2021	3	4.92
2020	0	0
Total		100

3.1.2. Sources of broodstock

The finding indicates that the hatchery managers obtained their broodstock from various sources. 38 hatcheries (62.29%) obtained their broodstock from Kenya marine fisheries research institute KMFRI,13 Hatcheries (21.31%) obtained from other hatcheries around, and 4 ( 6.56%) Hatcheries indicated that they get their broodstock from private farmers. However, 6 Hatcheries outsourced online for broodstock and could not justify the source

Table 3.2

Source of Broodstock
Sources of broodstock	Number of Hatchery	percentage
Kenya marine fisheries research institute.	38	62.29
other hatcheries around	13	21.31
Private farmers	4	6.56
Other sources	6	9.83

3.1.3. Equipment and facilities present and functioning at the Hatchery

Hatchery facilities are paramount for quality fingerling production. On this matter the finding indicates that 60 hatcheries (98.36%) had oxygen cylinders, scoop nets, and packaging bags available in 59 Hatcheries out of the 61 (96.72%. similarly, seine nets, Hapa nets, screens for inlet and outlet, weighing balance, water holding facilities, and water quality meters were available in 58, (95.08), 58,( 95.08), 54, (88.52), 54, (88.52), 54, (88.52), and 51( 83.60%) Hatcheries respectively. Incubation facilities were only available in 44 hatcheries (72.13%). Table 3.3

Table 3.3

Equipment and facilities present and functioning at the Hatchery
Equipment and facility	Number of hatcheries	Percentage
Oxygen cylinders	60	98.36
Scoop nets and perforators:	59	96.72
Packaging bags:	59	96.72
Seine Net:	58	95.08
Hapa nets	58	95.08
Screens for inlets and outlets	54	88.52
Weighing Balance:	54	88.52
Water holding facilities	54	88.52
Water quality meter	51	83.60
Incubation facilities	44	72.13

3.1.4. Status of Nursery ponds Breeding ponds and Holding ponds in the Hatcheries.

The finding of this research unearthed that 27 Hatcheries (40.52%) have between 1 to 4 ponds for their activities, 19 hatcheries (28.72%) had 5 to 9 pond holding facilities, 11 (16.52%) have 10 to 14 facilities. 7 hatcheries (10%) and 4 Hatcheries (6%) had 15 to 19 and above 20 pond facilities respectively. Figure 3.3.

3.2. Hatcheries Biosecurity status

An assessment was also done on hatcheries’ Biosecurity through selected measures that were commonly practiced to prevent disease outbreaks and spread to other farms. the findings were summarized in table 3.4.

Table:3.4. Biosecurity measures are maintained at the Hatchery.

Biosecurity measures at the farm	Number of Hatcheries	Percentage
Record keeping	58	85.29
Limiting the Movement of Visitors	58	85.29
Cleaning of Hatchery units	57	83.82
Removal of dead frys	57	83.82
Maintenance of Hatchery Hygiene	55	80.88
Stocking of disease-free broodstock	54	79.41
Use of protective clothing	54	79.41
Disinfection of equipment	53	77.94
Use of foot bath	53	77.94
Use of good water source	52	76.47
Maintenance of proper water temperature	52	76.47
Disease monitoring at the Hatchery	52	76.47
Supply a Balance diet to broodstock	52	76.47
Quarantine procedures	52	76.47
Water quality monitoring	51	75
Use of Vaccination	28	41.18

Based on the findings Record keeping, limiting visitors’ movement in the hatchery, cleaning of Hatchery units and removal of dead fries were perfect biosecurity measures undertaken by 58 Hatcheries(85.29%), 58 hatcheries (85.29%), 57 Hatcheries (83.82%), and 57 hatcheries ( 83.82%) respectively. 55 Hatcheries (79.41%) had good maintenance of hatchery hygiene, similarly stocking of disease-free broodstock, and use of protective clothing was practiced by 54 hatcheries (79.41%). Disinfection of equipment and use of foot bath as a biosecurity measure was similarly practiced by 53 Hatcheries (77.94%). However, the use of good water quality on the farm, water temperature maintenance, disease surveillance and monitoring, supply of broodstock with a balanced feed diet, and clear Quarantine procedures as biosecurity were common in 52 Hatcheries (76.47%). Water quality monitoring and the use of Vaccines in the hatchery were only reported in 58 hatcheries (75%) and 28 hatcheries (41.18%) respectively.

3.2.1. Reporting of diseases and treatment by the hatchery managers

According to the findings, 52 hatcheries managers (86.66%) had so far recorded an incident of fish disease during the production cycle. On disease case reporting criteria, it was found that the majority of hatchery managers 55 Hatcheries (90.16%) report disease cases at the county government fisheries offices nearby, 40 Hatchery managers (65.57%) reported to Kenya fisheries service offices, 38 Hatcheries (62.29%) reported their case at Kenya marine fisheries research institute. However only 15 (24.59%) Hatchery managers report disease cases from their hatcheries to local NGOs dealing with aquaculture projects such as Musingi, FAO, and farm Africa Table 3.5

Table 3.5

Where Disease problems in the Hatchery are reported
Where to report fish diseases	Number of Hatchery	Percentage
County Government fisheries office	55	90.16
Kenya fisheries service	40	65.57
Kenya Marine fisheries research institute KMFRI	38	62.29
Local NGOs dealing with aquaculture	15	24.59

3.2.2. Type of fish diseases and infections at the Hatchery.

According to the finding, No cases of the Tilapia lake Virus have been so far reported in Kenyan Hatcheries., However, the most common disease was mainly nutrition-related diseases as recorded by 33 Hatchery managers (54.09%) followed by fish Gill rot, and Dropsy diseases by 23 Hatcheries (37.70%) and 22 hatcheries (36.06%) respectively. Argulosis case was reported in 9 Hatcheries (14.75%) Table 3.6

Table 3.6

Nature of diseases recorded in broodstock
Nature of Diseases recorded in the Hatchery	Number of Hatcheries	Percentage
Nutritional diseases	33	54.09
Gill rot	23	37.70
Dropsy	22	36.06
others please specify	18	29.50
Argulosis	9	14.75
Tilapia lake Virus	0	0.00

3.2.3. Disease treatment and management at the Hatchery

Lime and potassium permanganate are the most commonly available chemical used as a disinfectant in most hatcheries in Kenya as reported by 51 Hatchery managers (83.60%). 44 hatchery managers (72.13%) also use lime and potash in disease case treatment. Lime and salt mixed together were reported to be used by 38 Hatcheries (62.29%) for disease handling. However, 30 Hatcheries (49.18%) and 18 hatcheries (29.50%) used lime, and salt mixed with potash and Lime combined with antibiotics respectively for disease treatment at the hatcheries. Dipterax chemical is not commonly used in Kenyan Hatcheries as cased by only 2 hatcheries (3.27%). Sumithion is totally not used as none of the hatchery managers reported having used the chemical for aquaculture production. Table 3.7.

Table 3.7

Chemicals used for disease treatment in the Hatchery
Chemicals used in disease treatment	Number of Hatcheries	Percentage
Lime and permanganate	51	83.60
lime and potash	44	72.13
Lime and salt	38	62.29
Lime, salt and potash	30	49.18
lime and antibiotics	18	29.50
Dipterax	2	3.27
Sumithion	0	0.00

3.2.4. Problems in fish Biosecurity and fish health management

The hatcheries managers identified several problems they encounter during the fingering production cycle. According to the findings, most of the hatcheries have dire financial problems that influence their operations as reported by all the respondents 61 hatchery managers (100%). Lack of experienced manpower at the hatchery and lack of knowledge about diseases are also among the major problems experienced by hatchery management units in Kenya as indicated by 56 (91.80%) Hatchery managers and 55 (90.16%) hatchery managers respectively. Lack of proper medicine and lack of knowledge of medicine application were the least problems identified during the study by 48 Hatchery managers (78.68%) and 27 hatchery respondents (44.26%) respectively. Figure 3.3.

3.4. Result Discussion

The current research examined the biosecurity and fish health management practices at selected government-authenticated fish hatcheries in Kenya. Limiting the intrusion of any invading disease and pathogens into an aquaculture facility is the main objective of a biosecurity program in an aquaculture system. Tilapia according to findings is main fish species whose fingerling are on high production among the reported hatcheries both monosex and mixed sex Tilapia. This is followed by Clarias gariapinus fingerlings as well as trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), Common carps (Cyprinus carpio) are only produced by handful of hatcheries located in the central Kenya. Furthermore, the biosecurity issue was evaluated by the following approaches: availability of recordkeeping, daily cleaning of hatchery units and maintenance of Hatchery hygiene, stocking disease-free broodstock, use of foot bath and protective clothing, Disinfection of hatchery equipment, Maintenance of proper water quality parameters, Disease surveillance and monitoring, supply of balance diet to broodstock, use of Quarantine facilities and procedure, and possible use of vaccines in the hatchery. All the biosecurity parameters were above the optimal required level by the government quality inspection unit at the Kenya fisheries service.

Although the hatchery managers had limited awareness of biosecurity procedures, their level of biosecurity was nevertheless pretty acceptable.

The bedrock of sustainable aquaculture is the generation of high-quality fish seeds (Rimmer, etal 2013, and Jia etal 2017). Kenya has been self-sufficient in the large-scale production of fingerlings of different fish species to fish farmers over the past 10 years since the introduction of economic stimulus programs., but the fish seed quality has declined after the devolution of the aquaculture sector to the county governments (Nyonje etal, 2011). This has been attributed to Inbreeding, poor broodstock management, and negative brood selection, particularly in private hatcheries. Therefore

the structures and facilities of a hatchery are crucial for producing quality fish seed that is bio-secure. The hatchery should be located in an area with an adequate water supply and all necessary facilities for hatchery operation, such as facilities for incubations and quarantine, circular tanks for breeding and hatching, good water supply, overhead separate hatchery buildings, office spaces for staff, and storage areas (Hood, et al 2019, Muniesa, et al 2022, and Bernoth, 2008). However, A according to the findings majority of Hatcheries operating in the country has basic infrastructure and facilities in place nearly all but not limited to oxygen cylinders for aerations, packaging bags, scoop nets and perforators, Holding Hapa nets, water holding facilities, incubation facilities and water quality meters for measuring water quality. This is an indication of elaborate biosecurity measures in place among the government-authenticated fish hatcheries mandated to supply fish farmers with quality fingerlings in Kenya which is in line with Hood, et al (2019), Muniesa, et al (2022), and Bernoth, (2008) findings on the need to have an elaborate hatchery infrastructure and facilities in place for sustainable seed aquaculture production.

On the quality of broodstock in the current study, it was discovered that the hatchery managers had kept enough broodstock in good condition. The hatchery staff used healthy, disease-free broods and made sure that they were the right age and weight for spawning. The majority of the hatchery managers obtained their broodstock from the Kenya Marine fisheries and research institute. This might be one of the factors that enabled them to make high-quality fries and make them somehow disease free. Other hatcheries supplied some managers with broodstock, others could even obtain it from private farmers with very little knowledge of biosecurity and disease surveillance measures. This explains the presence of diseases recorded in some hatcheries.

According to Lekang, (2013). Most hatchery owners keep their facilities clean and sterilize their equipment on a regular basis. Fish infections can spread from the holding facility to the holding unit via fish and rearing waters, as well as through common equipment and staff. In relation to this author, the finding showed that most hatchery managers take disease treatment very seriously. As majority 83.60% commonly use lime and potassium permanganate for sterilization and disease treatment. Other chemicals commonly used include lime and potash, salt mixed with potash, and Lime combined with antibiotics. Dipterax and Sumithion being chemicals are not preferably used by the majority of the hatchery operators. This is a clear indication that they are moving away from the use of chemicals in aquaculture production for sustainability. This is also in line with the report made by Syanya, &Munala (2022) That the use of chemicals in aquaculture production in developing countries is on the decline due to quality issues initiated by EU export regulations for aquaculture products.

The availability of pathogen-free water sources to hatcheries is a crucial illness prevention strategy (Bernoth,2008, Subasinghe,2019, Moyo, & Rapatsa,2021). With reference to these author’s views, nearly all of the hatcheries in the current study used good-quality water. Furthermore, the majority of hatcheries took regular measurements of water quality parameters such as pH, dissolved oxygen levels, and water temperature. It was discovered that no hatchery owners had used Sumithion and fish vaccines This was a clear indication given the limited number of fish disease vaccines now in use, The administration of vaccines does not stop the spread of diseases. But only have side effects for the user in long run (Liu etal 2022, and Toranzo,etal, 2005).

On the disease outbreak, none of the hatchery managers reported a case of tilapia virus diseases. This is because the government has high surveillance and is on high alert for the entry of Tilapia lake virus disease in the country. However, the most common disease experienced by the majority of hatcheries in the country is nutrition related. Other diseases such as Dropsy, gill rot, and fungal infection were equally reported. Therefore, one of the most significant biosecurity measures is disease surveillance. Owners of hatcheries frequently checked the fish and spawn for any infections. However, owners of fish hatcheries reported very few infections, which may be because they were unaware of fish diseases and there were no reporting locations or diagnostic labs available. In this study, diseases such as argulosis, fungal infection, gill rot, dropsy, and nutritional disorders were discovered in brood fish in some hatcheries. Other researchers such as Pridgeon,, & Klesius,(2012), Hernández, etal, (2009), and Master, et al, (2008) also reported experiencing similar disease conditions in Hatcheries in their studies. Moyo, & Rapatsa, (2021) has recently documented the myriad problems that Hatcheries facilities and fish farmers face during fish production. Which includes a lack of extension services, a lack of information on emerging fish farming technologies, disease management, lack of market for their fish product. Similarly, according to the finding of this study, all hatchery managers reported that they are facing financial problems to expand their hatcheries and for the smooth running of the farm. In addition to finances, lack of experienced manpower on the farm, lack of knowledge about diseases, and lack of proper medicine are some of the foreseen drawbacks in the Hatchery management units in the country.

3.5. Conclusion and recommendations.

In conclusion, the present study analyzed the state of biosecurity and fish health management procedures in government-authenticated fish hatcheries in Kenya. It is crucial to educate fish hatchery and farm owners specialized in fingerling production on the policies, procedures, and practices linked to biosecurity and fish health management in order to assure fish farmers of the best quality fingerling supply for sustainable aquaculture production in the country. Based on the study findings the following recommendations were made.

Fish farmers should put into utilisation of the existing Hatcheries in the country as their number one source of quality fingerlings and brood stocks based on the recommended fish health and Biosecurity measures in these government authenticated hatcheries distributed in their respective counties.
For quality seeds production for Kenyan aquaculture sector the hatcheries and their managers should keep and maintain the biosecurity measures without compromising on quality set standards by the Kenya fisheries service quality Assurance unit.
The county government and Kenya fisheries service should frequently organize trainings on emerging issues on fish health management and new disease outbreak to the Hatchery managers so that they can be able to cope with the required everchanging quality standard for sustainable aquaculture production globally.

3.6.1 Ethics approval and consent to participate

“Not applicable’’ Since no animal or human data or tissues are reported on or used in this work.

3.6.2. Consent for publication.

‘’Not applicable,’’ since no individual personal data is used in any form.

3.6.3. Availability of data and material.

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available in the KOBO DATA Collectiontool database link https://kf.kobotoolbox.org/#/forms/aEiikbYg7ksceKcFH7CpjJ/data/report

3.6.3. Competing interests.

"The authors (Syanya, F.J. corresponding author, and Mathia, W.M, second author) declare that they have no competing interests" in this work.

3.6.4. Funding

The author(s) received No financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Data collection was done by the researchers. Data was collected by the assistance of the second author himself, and data analysis and work write-up were done by the first author using personal stipend funds program from the university. No additional funds were directly channelled toward this work.

3.6.5. Authors' contributions.

Mathia W.M., the second author helped in developing the questionnaire on the Kobo data collection tool and assisted in the recruitment of a research assistant during the data collection process. Syanya F.J. analyzed and interpreted data submitted by the second author and was a major contributor to writing the manuscript. All authors proofread and approved the final manuscript.

3.6.6.Acknowledgements.

I would like to use this opportunity to publicly thank everyone who helped to make this research possible. I want to convey my gratitude to Prof. M. Harikrishnan, my immediate guide, at the school of industrial fisheries Cochin University of Science and Technology for his continuous support throughout this research endeavor as well as for providing me with direction and leadership throughout my research work. In addition, I want to thank all fisheries officers who helped in the coordination of the data collection process from 21 Counties in Kenya. I also want to express my gratitude to Mr. Sifuna Imbofu Fisheries officer Kakamega county, Mr. Joel Anyula Fisheries officer Vihiga county, Samuel Njoroge Fisheries officer Kiambu County, Moses Wambua Mwangangi, fisheries officer Machakos county, Zackary Winamu, Officer Homabay County, Mr., Wambua fisheries officer Embu County, Geoffrey Thuranira, Meru county, Ann Kibera Nyeri county, George Akunga, Elizabeth Abanji fisheries officer Busia county, Kisii county and many more farm managers who participated in the work.

My family (Rukia, Aisha, Ibrahim, and Salim), coworkers, and colleagues at the Directorate of fisheries in Vihiga County, particularly the County Director of fisheries (Mr. Wilson Munala Mathia), Octavian Jonathan, and Mr. Charles Kalerwa, who offered inspiration during the research process and suggestions for improvement for the development of this research, deserve my sincere gratitude.

Akoll, P., & Mwanja, W. W. (2012). Fish health status, research and management in East Africa: Past and present. African Journal of Aquatic Science, 37(2), 117–129. https://doi.org/10.2989/16085914.2012.694628
Bernoth, E. M. (2008). Aquaculture Biosecurity: The View and Approaches of the OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health) Regarding Prevention and Control of Aquatic Animal Diseases. Aquaculture Biosecurity: Prevention, Control, and Eradication of Aquatic Animal Disease, 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470376850.CH1
Bostock J, McAndrew B, Richards R, Jauncey K, Telfer T, Lorenzen K, Little D, Ross L, Handisyde N, Gatward I and Corner R (2010) Aquaculture: global status and trends. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Biological Sciences, 365(1554):2897-912.
Charo-Karisa H, Munguti J, Ouma H, Masai M D, Opiyo M A, Okechi J K and Orina S P(2011) A fish farmer’s Manual: For beginners, Students and hatchery managers, KMFRI, River brooks Communication Network, Nairobi, Kenya
Charo-Karisa H, Gichuri M W, Opiyo M A, Mbugua H, Ngugi C C and Ntiba J M (2012)The Role of Government in Promoting Commercial Aquaculture in Africa: Examples from East Africa In: Accelerating Economic growth and food security in Africa: The contribution of capture and Aquaculture Fisheries, Eds., Onyango PO, Chimatiro S, Sumaila R. Sixth Biennial Conference of the International Institute of Fisheries Economics, 111 pp.
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2022)The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture: Opportunities and challenges, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 234pp.
Hernández, E., Figueroa, J., & Iregui, C. (2009). Streptococcosis on a red tilapia, Oreochromis sp., farm: A case study. Journal of Fish Diseases, 32(3), 247–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1365-2761.2008.00981.X
Hecht T (2006) Regional review on aquaculture development 4. Sub-Saharan Africa – 2005. FAO Fisheries Circular. No. 1017/4. Rome, FAO. 96 pp
Hood, Y., Sadler, J., Poldy, J., Starkey, C. S., & Robinson, A. P. (2019). Biosecurity system reforms and the development of a risk-based surveillance and pathway analysis system for ornamental fish imported into Australia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 167, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.11.006
Jia, B., St-Hilaire, S., Singh, K., & Gardner, I. A. (2017). Biosecurity knowledge, attitudes and practices of farmers culturing yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco) in Guangdong and Zhejiang provinces, China. Aquaculture, 471, 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.01.016
Kenya fisheries service (2022) Review list of authenticated Hatcheries in Kenya for seed production. https://kefs.go.ke/
Lekang, O. I. (2013). Aquaculture hatchery water supply and treatment systems. Advances in Aquaculture Hatchery Technology, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857097460.1.3
Hadfield, C. A., & Clayton, L. A. (2011). Fish quarantine: Current practices in public zoos and aquaria. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 42(4), 641–650. https://doi.org/10.1638/2011-0034.1
Liu, Z., Zhou, T., & Gao, D. (2022). Genetic and epigenetic regulation of growth, reproduction, disease resistance and stress responses in aquaculture. Frontiers in Genetics, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/FGENE.2022.994471
Masters, A. L., Vinci, B. J., Brazil, B., Creaser, D. A., & Summerfelt, S. T. (2008). Performance characterization of influent and effluent treatment systems: A case study at Craig Brook National Fish Hatchery. Aquacultural Engineering, 38(1), 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AQUAENG.2007.10.002
Moyo, N. A. G., & Rapatsa, M. M. (2021). A review of the factors affecting tilapia aquaculture production in Southern Africa. Aquaculture, 535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.736386
Muniesa, A., Furones, D., Rodgers, C., & Basurco, B. (2022). An assessment of health management and biosecurity procedures in marine fish farming in Spain. Aquaculture Reports, 25, 101199. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AQREP.2022.101199
Mzula, A., Wambura, P. N., Mdegela, R. H., & Shirima, G. M. (2021). Present status of aquaculture and the challenge of bacterial diseases in freshwater farmed fish in Tanzania; A call for sustainable strategies. Aquaculture and Fisheries, 6(3), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AAF.2020.05.003
Nyonje B M Charo-Karisa H, Macharia S K and Mbugua M (2011) Aquaculture development in Kenya: Status, potential and challenges. Samaki news, 5(1): 8-11.
Opiyo M, Nyonje B and Omollo B, (2015) Report on Hatchery authentication and seed quality assessment. SDF& BE, Nairobi. 20pp. (Unpublished)
Oyieng E P, Charo-Karisa H, Kahi A K and Ojango J M K (2013).Characterization of fish production and marketing practices under Small-holder fish farming systems of Eastern Kenya. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Volume 25. Article #32,http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd25/2/oyie25032.htm
Pridgeon, J. W., & Klesius, P. H. (2012). Major bacterial diseases in aquaculture and their vaccine development. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources, 7. https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20127048
Ragasa, C., Ulimwengu, J., Randriamamonjy, J., & Badibanga, T. (2016). Factors Affecting Performance of Agricultural Extension: Evidence from Democratic Republic of Congo. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 22(2), 113–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2015.1026363
Romero, J., Gloria, C., & Navarrete, P. (2012). Antibiotics in Aquaculture – Use, Abuse and Alternatives. Health and Environment in Aquaculture. https://doi.org/10.5772/28157
Rimmer, M. A., Sugama, K., Rakhmawati, D., Rofiq, R., & Habgood, R. H. (2013). A review and SWOT analysis of aquaculture development in Indonesia. Reviews in Aquaculture, 5(4), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/RAQ.12017
Subasinghe, R. P., Delamare-Deboutteville, J., Mohan, C. v., & Phillips, M. J. (2019). Vulnerabilities in aquatic animal production. Revue Scientifique et Technique (International Office of Epizootics), 38(2), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.20506/RST.38.2.2996
Syanya F.J. &Mathia W.M (2022) Moving Toward Sustainable Aquaculture for Rural Sustainability and Development in Kenya. A Case of Vihiga County; https://doi.org/10.47191/ijcsrr
State Department of Fisheries (SDF) (2016) Kenya Fish Farming Enterprise Productivity Capacity Assessment and Gap Analysis Report (2016) Directorate of Aquaculture Technologies Development, Kenya. 68pp. (Unpublished).
Toranzo, A. E., Magariños, B., & Romalde, J. L. (2005). A review of the main bacterial fish diseases in mariculture systems. Aquaculture, 246(1–4), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2005.01.002

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Status of Fish Health and Biosecurity Management Systems in Kenya's Aquaculture Production Units. A Case of Government Authenticated Fish Hatcheries.

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

1.0. Introduction

2.0. Materials And Methods

3.0. Results

3.1. Hatchery status and nature of fingerling production.

3.1.1. Year of Hatchery establishment

3.1.2. Sources of broodstock

3.1.3. Equipment and facilities present and functioning at the Hatchery

3.1.4. Status of Nursery ponds Breeding ponds and Holding ponds in the Hatcheries.

3.2. Hatcheries Biosecurity status

3.2.1. Reporting of diseases and treatment by the hatchery managers

3.2.2. Type of fish diseases and infections at the Hatchery.

3.2.3. Disease treatment and management at the Hatchery

3.2.4. Problems in fish Biosecurity and fish health management

3.4. Result Discussion

3.5. Conclusion and recommendations.

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1