Biotechnology-

Aquaculture
Interface:

The Site of
Maximum
Impact
Workshop
Contents Report on the Workshop, March 5-7, 2001
-Home
-Welcome Letter
-Purpose of Workshop Executive Summary
-Program
-Presentations The U.S. is heavily dependent on imported seafood and is, after
Japan, the worlds largest importer of fishery products. U.S.
Appendix consumers spent an estimated $52.3 billion for fishery products in
-Participants 1999. Imports of edible seafood products were valued at $9.0 billion
-Steering Committee
-Program Committee in 1999. In contrast, U.S. exports were valued at $2.8 billion, thus
generating a deficit of $6.2 billion in 1999.
Workshop Report
-Preface Aquaculture in the U.S. has expanded steadily since the 1970s and
-Final Report reached $978 million (farm-gate value) in 1998. In 1974, the value
of products produced was $45 million. Unfortunately, despite very
positive trends, the U.S. ranks only 8th in production worldwide and
behind such countries as China, India, Japan, Indonesia, Thailand,
Bangladesh, and Vietnam. Worldwide, aquaculture is the fastest
growing agri-industry, with an annual growth rate of 11 percent since
1984 and an estimated value of $47.1 billion 1998.

Biotechnology has grown to a U.S.-dominated worldwide industry

contributing billions of dollars to the economy and producing
products unattainable by other means. Yet, the revolution in
biotechnology continues with greater speed and sophistication.
Aquaculture has been practiced since antiquity but its current
revitalization was brought about by economic and environmental
realities and by an influx of new science and technology, especially
biotechnology. The application of modern biotechnology to enhance
aquaculture is now most timely for a number of purposes, including
production of desired foods and allied products, animal health
monitoring and maintenance, and waste minimization.

To examine the interface of biotechnology and aquaculture, a

workshop was organized and convened by the USDA's Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) and The Oceanic Institute (OI). The
purpose of the workshop was to identify significant R&D
opportunities that can be translated into commercial reality during
the decade and define infrastructure and program needs. The primary
focus was to provide advice and recommendations to the ARS. New
areas of focus not previously covered in other agency or national
plans include "Biocomplexity" and "Biosecurity." Others, such as
"Genomics" and "Biocellular Technology," are partially covered in
current ARS and USDA programs. The area of "Societal Issues"
seeks to couple science and technology with commercial reality and
science-based policy, something akin to an element found in the
Human Genome Project.

Research and development is the lifeline to commercialization in any

industry. Without basic and applied research (the core investment),
commercialization (the return) is not possible. This is amply
illustrated by the U.S. biotechnology industry as it exists today.
Without the decades and billions of dollars of support for core
disciplines and applications of basic discoveries in the life and
physical sciences by the federal government through the NIH, NSF,
DOD, and others, the U.S. biotechnology industry as we know it
now would not exist. There is also a key to timing an investment in
R&D and, in particular, to the biotechnology-aquaculture interface.
Major reasons for considering this now includes: capturing the fruits
of investments in biotechnology; taking the lead in environmental
responsibility; maintaining U.S. competitiveness; and fostering U.S.
entrepreneurship in an emerging global industry.

The following five areas were first identified and suggested by the
members of the Steering and Program Committees and other
scientists, administrators, and practitioners of aquaculture as having
special merit for enhanced R&D efforts and consideration by ARS.

Genomics

Genomics refers to several different and evolving areas dealing with

the entire genetic material in the chromosomes of an organism.
Major recommendations are: Short-Term (1-3 years): (a) Collect,
preserve, and use the germplasm of economically important species
to improve production efficiency, product quality, and disease
resistance; (b) Develop highly polymorphic markers (microsatellites
and others) for economically important species; (c) Construct
linkage maps using polymorphic loci with sufficient resolution to
permit location, definition, and use of genes; and (d) Assemble
researchers into teams. Mid-Term (4-7 years): (a) Map molecular
markers including quantitative trait loci (QTL) and develop reliable
techniques for genetic marker-assisted selection (MAS); (b) Develop
microarray chips for the sequenced organisms (microbes and
animals). Long-Term (8-10 plus years): (a) Developa
comprehensiveaquaculturedatabasetoallowsearchingandcomplex
queriesencompassingallgenomesequences,functionalgenomics,
proteomics,environmentaldata,andaquaculturestrategy.

Biocomplexity

Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that arise as a result of dynamic

interactions that occur within biological systems, including humans,
and between these systems and the physical environment.
Aquaculture, as such, is representative of biocomplexity by the
myriad of interactions that involve the aquatic animal, its varied life
stages, co-populations of organisms (both synergistic and
antagonistic), the feed, the environment, and production systems.
Short-Term: (a) Prepare scientific assessment briefs on
biocomplexity for key U.S. economically important aquaculture
species; (b) Establish a national information resource base
containing information and data on basic, applied, developmental,
demonstration, and commercial systems where biocomplexity is
especially important; (c) Develop and apply appropriate
instrumentation to measure, monitor, and control biocomplexity; and
(d) Decipher the critical components of shrimp-microbial
community interactions. Mid-Term: (a) Apply biocomplexity
concepts to control pathogenic and opportunistic organisms; (b)
Perfect key economically important biocomplex production systems;
and (c) Develop and apply modern sensing technology, especially
nanotechnology. Long-Term: (a) Develop models to understand and
control biocomplex aquaculture systems for large-scale production.

Biocellular Technology

Biocellular technology is defined as the applications of techniques to

regulate the reproduction, development, growth, and maturation of
aquatic species for aquacultural purposes. Short-Term: (a) Develop
plant alternatives to marine fish-derived proteins in aquatic feed
diets; (b) Explore use of genetically engineered proteins in corn seed
to produce oral vaccines; (c) Control diseases by designing a DNA
vaccine vector and developing new diagnostic techniques for
detection of pathogens; and (d) Develop specific pathogen free
(SPF) broodstock for economically important species. Mid-Term: (a)
Further refine and develop biological containment technology; (b)
Develop more effective methods for spawning desirable species; and
(c) Develop effective biocontrol methods for disease prevention and
enhancement of immune systems. Long-Term: (a) Establish a
proteomics information resource and database focused on
reproduction, development, growth, and maturation.

Biosecurity

Biosecurity encompasses issues ranging in scope from global,

national, watershed, facility, tank, and finally to organism level. At
the facility scale, biosecurity refers to producing aquatic species in a
well-controlled environment that excludes the introduction or
propagation of unwanted organisms and includes the prevention of
escape of organisms back into the natural environment. Short-Term:
(a) Increase multi-disciplinary research investment with a focus on
biosecure production system design, operation and management; (b)
Continue development of SPF source stocks for research and
commercial production; (c) Develop cost-effective and reliable
diagnostics for detecting and monitoring specifically listed
pathogens; and (d) Continue to develop risk assessment models
(biosecurity, bioterrorism, food safety) and evaluate acceptable
potential outcomes with testable hypotheses. Mid-Term: (a) Develop
superior (genetically improved) animals intended for candidate
biosecure systems; and (b) Develop new diagnostics for existing
pathogens and for emerging threats. Long-Term: (a) Create
cooperative international system for certifying and reliably tracing
the movement of aquatic products, organisms, stocks, strains and
pathogens.

Societal Issues

Successful commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology will

depend upon societys confidence that its full range of interests was
respected. To resolve issues confronting the aquaculture industry,
sound scientific inquiry will prove beneficial, if not critical. Issues
include: safety of GMOs as foods and feeds, environmental safety of
GMOs, regulatory oversight policy, intellectual property rights,
bioethics, and consumer acceptance. Short term: (a) Sufficient
support needs to be allocated for ethical, legal and social issues
regarding commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology; (b)
Evaluate and apply the principles of environmental release
established for microbes and animals to aquatic species; (c) Evaluate
the release of cage-produced, indigenous, non-GMO finfish on
natural populations and the environment; and (d) The Council on
Environmental Quality, Office of Science and Technology Policy,
and other agencies including USDA should clarify regulatory policy,
including applicable legal authorities and agency roles, and mandate
agency consultation. Mid-term: (a) Support research developing
genetically modified food and fiber products that clearly benefit
consumers; (b) Support the international use of products derived
from U.S. biotechnology; and (c) Devise new methods for assessing
and monitoring environmental effects of new production systems.
Long term: (a) Promote an adaptive approach to oversight of
aquaculture biotechnology. USDA should support efforts to
synthesize knowledge of benefits, risks, and regulatory experience
relevant to development or revision of oversight policy.

Infrastructure

The identification and prioritization of specific R&D areas bring

forth generic science and technology and infrastructure needs. Areas
that need increased attention are: collaboration, R&D support, and
manpower education and training. Short-Term: (a) Assist aquaculture
research by supporting R&D tax credits, accelerated depreciation
programs, SBA loans, and creation of an ARS National Aquaculture
Biotechnology Collaboration Initiative (ARS NACBI); (b)
Effectively coordinate programs with guidance from advisory groups
that include members from academia, private research institutes,
government and industry; (c) Create and maintain a centralized
aquaculture germplasm stock center; and (d) Create a transgenic
advisory board to cover technical and public issues. Mid-Term: (a)
Team researchers with U.S. aquacultural farmers to promote a better
understanding; and (b) Create programs for selective breeding and
maintenance of key strains of important aquacultural species; (c)
Sponsor a reassessment of new technologies every two years through
a workshop or other means. Long-Term: (a) Continue to support
basic and applied research.

Biotechnology-Aquaculture Interface:

The Site of Maximum Impact

Introduction

Biotechnology is the use of biological organisms or their cellular

constituents in a human-controlled fashion for beneficial purposes.
While biotechnology had been practiced for millennia when humans
first fermented various materials to make beer and wine, modern
biotechnology owes its advent to recombinant DNA technology
invented in the early 1970s. From that time, biotechnology has
grown to a U.S.-dominated worldwide industry contributing billions
of dollars to the economy and producing products unattainable by
other means. Yet, the revolution in biotechnology continues with
greater speed and sophistication.

Aquaculture is the propagation and cultivation of aquatic organisms

including fish, molluscs, crustaceans, and plants in controlled or
selected aquatic environments for any commercial, recreational, or
public use. Again, aquaculture has been practiced since antiquity but
its current revitalization was brought about by economic and
environmental realities and by an influx of new science and
technology, especially biotechnology. The application of modern
biotechnology to enhance aquaculture is now most timely for a
number of purposes, including production of desired foods and allied
products, animal health monitoring and maintenance, and waste
minimization.

The site of maximum impact is at the interface of biotechnology and

aquaculture.

Economic Importance of Aquaculture

The U.S. is heavily dependent on imported seafood and is, after

Japan, the worlds largest importer of fishery products. U.S.
consumers spent an estimated $52.3 billion for fishery products in
1999 (NMFS 2000). Per capita consumption rose to 15.3 pounds
(lbs) of edible seafood in 1999, up 0.4 lbs from 1998.

Imports of edible seafood products were 1.8 million metric tons (mt)
(3.9 billion lbs) valued at $9.0 billion in 1999 -- an increase of 240.9
million lbs and $840.7 million compared with 1998. In contrast, U.S.
exports of edible fishery products were 889.6 mt (2.0 billion lbs),
valued at $2.8 billion.

Thus the U.S. edible seafood deficit reached a record $6.2 billion in
1999, up from $5.9 billion in 1998. Shrimp continued to be the
single most imported seafood at 331,707 mt (731.3 million lbs),
valued at $3.1 billion. On the other hand, exports amounted to only
14,907 mt (32.9 million lbs), valued at $122.8 million. The trade
deficit in seafood is the largest for any agricultural commodity and
the second largest, after petroleum, for any natural resources
product.

Aquaculture in the U.S. has expanded steadily since the 1970s and
reached 358,209 mt (789.7 million lbs) in 1998, valued at $938.6
million (NMFS 2000). Weights and values represent sales to
processors and dealers and not to final consumers. Another analysis
gives the value of U.S. aquaculture products in 1998 as having
reached $978 million (NASS 2000). In contrast, in 1974, the value
of products produced was $45 million. Aquaculture is also a
contributor to jobs and the general economy as fishery products
move along the chain to consumers. U.S. aquaculture accounted for
approximately 181,000 jobs in 1992 with a total economic impact of
$5.6 billion (Dicks et al., 1996). Unfortunately, despite very positive
trends for the United States, our nation ranks only 8th in production
worldwide and behind such countries as China, India, Japan,
Indonesia, Thailand, Bangladesh, and Vietnam.

Worldwide, aquaculture is the fastest growing agri-industry, with an

annual growth rate of 11 percent since 1984. According to the Food
and Agricultural Organization (FAO), global aquaculture reached

30.9 million mt in 1998, with an estimated value of more than $47.1

billion (FAO 2001, NMFS 2000). In comparison, capture fisheries
accounted for 86.3 million mt. Taking into account trade or value
added on the way to the consumer, the global fish industry
(including aquaculture) is estimated at more than $250 billion (FAO
1998).

Purpose of Workshop and "White Paper"

The purpose of the workshop was to identify significant R&D

opportunities that can be translated into commercial reality during
the decade and define infrastructure and program needs. While the
primary focus was to provide advice and recommendations to the
ARS, insights gained may be useful to others in government,
academia, and industry.

The workshop was an outgrowth of numerous discussions involving

stakeholders from industry, academia and government. In particular,
the Steering and Program Committee's deliberations and suggestions
of topics and participants led to the workshop as constituted.

The outcomes were to be: (1) a succinct report of research priorities

(2) a publication of scientific presentations made at the workshop.
The identification of R&D areas were to result in a matrix of short-,
mid- and long-term areas of focus and prioritization. The products of
this workshop were to be made available to research scientists,
engineers, students, managers, administrators, and farmers pursuing
aquaculture in industry, academia, and government.

As one element of the process, a "white paper" was to be prepared to

set the stage for further discussions among the participants before
and during the workshop and to be used, as appropriate, for
preparing a report to the agency. The aim was to define new
opportunities as presented by scientific inquiry or economic
opportunities in order to justify additional activities and support.
Currently, the total federal investment in aquaculture is estimated to
be $75-100 million annually.

This report, an outgrowth of the white paper, represents the

collective view of many who have been involved in the formulation
of the workshop and describes some areas for R&D attention. New
areas of focus not previously covered in other agency or national
plans include "Biocomplexity" and "Biosecurity." Others, such as
"Genomics" and "Biocellular Technology," are partially covered in
current ARS and USDA programs. These areas, in fact, have had
their origins in other federal agencies, but their application to
aquaculture is extremely relevant to the USDA. The area of "Societal
Issues" seeks to couple science and technology with commercial
reality and science-based policy at the federal and state levels,
something akin to an element found in the Human Genome Project.

Importantly, the aim of the workshop and "white paper" was to go

beyond "business as usual" and to elevate these activities, if deemed
appropriate, to a "critical mass." The intent was to enhance efforts in
aquaculture in the public and private sectors and build on current
programs at ARS as well as to explore new initiatives.

This workshop was purposely focused on U.S. aquaculture (seafood

protein) interests and did not cover plant aquaculture. It also did not
cover some topics that are now well recognized in aquaculture and
are currently mainstream government programs being advocated by
the Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture (JSA), the Cooperative State
Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and ARS
programs. The workshop was to be species neutral and focus on
generic concepts and principles. However it became apparent early
in the workshop that discussions were more fruitful when specific
species were considered.

Why R&D and Now?

Research and development is the lifeline to commercialization in any
industry. Without basic and applied research (the core investment),
commercialization (the return) is not possible. This is amply
illustrated by the U.S. biotechnology industry as it exists today.
Without the decades and billions of dollars of support for core
disciplines and applications of basic discoveries in the life and
physical sciences by the federal government through the NIH, NSF,
DOD, and others, the U.S. biotechnology industry as we know it
now would not exist. Investments in developing the knowledge base
and infrastructure are critical if future returns are expected.

There is also a key to timing an investment in R&D and, in

particular, to the biotechnology-aquaculture interface. Major reasons
for considering this now includes:

Capturing the Fruits of Investments in Biotechnology

The U.S. enjoys dominance in biotechnology as applied to the

industrial sectors of medicine, pharmaceuticals and plant agriculture.
The exciting discoveries and accumulated knowledge of many years
are now ripe for applications in aquaculture -- an industrial sector
that has much promise but one that has been neglected by
biotechnology when compared to the other industrial sectors. In fact,
the federal government not only has an opportunity to apply
biotechnology to aquaculture but an obligation to capture the
benefits before other nations do so. Already, the European Science
Foundation is designing a five-year, 250-million Euro program in
marine biotechnology with parts dedicated to aquaculture. Applying
biotechnology to aquaculture at this time will also capture benefits
brought forth by private-sector investments in generic aspects of
biotechnology during the last decade.

Taking the Lead in Environmental Responsibility

There is a now an imperative for sustainable and environmentally

responsible practices and processes in aquaculture as well as in other
industries. However, aquaculture as practiced in certain regions and
countries (but not necessarily the U.S.) has received the ire of
environmental groups and nongovernmental organizations -- and
justly so. Often, current practices are environmentally destructive
and cause catastrophic losses of products due to poor management
practices and the spread of disease. Biotechnology, by its very nature
of precise manipulation of DNA and other cellular constituents,
offers a more controlled way of producing animals and plants. Thus
the application of biotechnology to aquaculture in the entire chain --
from fertilized eggs to the finished consumer products -- can bring
significant environmental benefits. Biotechnology can also be
instrumental in addressing pollution from aquaculture through the
use of bioremediation. Environmentally sound, economically
superior, biotechnology-based aquaculture processes and products
will lead to their acceptance by other countries and will also increase
our nation's exports.

Maintaining U.S. Competitiveness

Biotechnology, like other high technology areas, is global and other

nations can take advantage of our investment before we do. Such a
situation would be disadvantageous to the U.S. taxpayer and
consumer. Other nations, more advanced in the practice of
commercial aquaculture, are mounting efforts on the application of
biotechnology, especially in genomics and other aspects of modern
DNA technology. If some of these nations (e.g., Japan, China)
combine their great practical know-how with advances in
biotechnology, the U.S. will be at a great disadvantage in realizing
economic benefits and returns from its investment in R&D.

Fostering U.S. Entrepreneurship in an Emerging Global

Industry

As with other major high tech U.S. industries, there is a need --

almost an obligation -- to foster American entrepreneurship through
small businesses that can revolutionize entire industries. Most often,
the entrepreneurs seminal to the formation of these new companies
have a base or come from academia or independent research
institutes. Certainly, biotechnology and, in particular, the Human
Genome Project have already changed the nature of the
pharmaceutical industry -- a consequence of entrepreneurs.
Aquaculture is on the "map of economic development" of our nation
and numerous other countries and there is an immense opportunity
as traditional capture fisheries decline worldwide. The transition in
seafood production that aquaculture represents -- from hunting and
gathering wild species to at-will sustainable production of high-
quality and high-health aquatic animals -- is a tremendous
opportunity for U.S. entrepreneurship that now needs to be catalyzed
further by federal efforts.

R&D Opportunities - Priority Areas

Areas for R&D in aquaculture have been identified and described
during the last five years by a number of organizations (JSA 2001,
JSA 1996, ARS 2001, ARS 2000, CSREES 2001, CSREES-NRI
2001, DOC 1999). Equally, there have been efforts to describe new
directions for biotechnology as it evolves further (NSTC 1995,
Nature Biotechnology 2000). There have also been efforts to
examine the application of biotechnology to aquaculture and marine
biotechnology, a recognized national priority, that includes
aquaculture (NSTC 1995, NABC 1999, ARS 2000). However, these
previous efforts, while laudable, did not capture some recent
advances in science and technology (e.g., genomics/proteomics,
biocomplexity) nor crystallized the thinking of stakeholders from
academia, government, and commerce into a matrix of well-defined
priorities for short-, mid-, and long-term action.

The following five areas were first identified and suggested by the
members of the Steering and Program Committees and others
(scientists, administrators, and practitioners of aquaculture) as
having special merit for enhanced R&D efforts and consideration by
ARS. These were then scrutinized further at the workshop through
sessions, group discussions, and general audience discussions. It is
important to recognize that these areas need to be viewed in relation
to already existing programs and, where possible and appropriate,
integrated into the framework of existing federal research programs.

An aquaculture biotechnology research program will need to

concentrate on the 3-5 most economically important species, and the
research objectives need to be defined and prioritized for each
species. The impact would be greatest if finfish, crustaceans, and
mollusks were all represented in the selected species. The research
program for each species should consist of research efforts in
reproduction, nutrition, quantitative and molecular genetics,
immunology, microbiology, meat science, and management systems.
Biotechnology research will be used to integrate information from
the multiple disciplines and develop improved production systems.

The development and implementation of biotechnology in

aquaculture will require partnerships between research communities,
farmers, and the aquaculture industry. The infrastructure for the
research community needs to grow to provide solutions to the
industrys problems in a reasonable time. This will require a much
larger human resource than what is currently available. Additional
training and education is needed to transfer the technology and fill
research and industry positions with properly trained employees.
Genomics

Genomics refers to several different and evolving areas and activities

dealing with the entire genetic material in the chromosomes of an
organism. Once information on whole genomes became available,
"functional genomics" was coined to describe the function of all
genes. The unique aspect of functional genomics is the ability to
monitor simultaneously potentially all events such as expression of
genes at the RNA or protein level (Nature 2000). Following the
completion of the sequence of the human and other genomes, a
crucial step in understanding living systems is the determination of
the structure and function of the entire set of gene products. Data
from genome projects have led to comparative protein sequence
analyses and numerous efforts to develop methodologies for the
identification of protein families. Utilization of computational
analyses with structural determinations by X-ray crystallography
and/or NMR techniques to study protein structural families
constitutes the new field of "structural genomics." Proteomics,
another term introduced in the lexicon of biology, refers to the
collective activities of cataloging and characterizing proteins,
comparing variations in their expression levels under different
conditions, interaction correlations, and identification of their
functional roles (Borman 2000). Since the sequencing of the first
genome (H. influenzae) in 1995, more than 30 nonhuman genomes
have been determined and another 99 are underway (Nelson et al.,
2000). A few aquatic species (e.g., zebra fish, tilapia, shrimp, catfish,
trout) are receiving increased attention (Alcivar-Warren and Kocher,
1999).

Multi-disciplinary team research is needed to conduct genomics

research. A number of research tools and genomic information need
to be developed for each species. DNA markers need to be
developed for each species and used to construct a genetic linkage
map. Short segments of genes (EST- expressed sequence tags) need
to be sequenced and mapped to develop a comparative map for each
species. A physical map (BAC map -- bacterial artificial
chromosomes) for each species should be constructed. Databases
and information systems will need to be developed to store, analyze
and interpret the genomic information. The linkage, comparative and
physical maps will be used to identify genes that influence
production traits. In the future, the genome of each species should be
sequenced to provide the ultimate physical and comparative map.
DNA markers for these genes will be used to select aquatic species
that are well adapted to production systems that are highly efficient,
profitable and environmental benign.

Recommendations for R&D are:

Short-Term (1-3 years)

Collect, preserve, and use the germplasm of economically

important species (finfish, crustaceans, molluscs) to improve
production efficiency, product quality, and disease resistance.

Develop highly polymorphic markers (microsatellites and

others) for economically important species.

Construct linkage maps using polymorphic loci with

sufficient resolution to permit location, definition, and use of
genes affecting economically important traits.

Assemble researchers into teams appropriate for species and

traits of interest. Critical team members include people with
expertise in quantitative genetics and statistics, molecular
biology, physiology, and bioinformatics. Foster
collaborations and cross-disciplinary training especially
between aquaculture researchers and genome scientists that
should include establishing programs to train aquaculture
postdocs in genomics and bioinformatics.

Determine a realistic priority list of organisms for genome

sequencing. This should include bacterial and viral pathogens
of economically important aquaculture species, genomes and
genome maps of aquaculture species, and microbes that may
help increase the productivity of aquaculture.

Support development of publicly available genome databases

to include tools valuable to aquaculture researchers. As
required, establish an aquaculture species genome
information resource and database and compare genetic maps
of aquatic and nonaquatic species.

Begin genome sequencing and annotation of the organisms

on the priority list.

Mid-Term (4-7 years)

Map molecular markers including quantitative trait loci

 (QTL) and develop reliable techniques for genetic marker-
assisted selection (MAS).

Establish a mechanism to evaluate new genomic technologies

and their usefulness in addressing the problems in
aquaculture.

Develop microarray chips for the sequenced organisms

(microbes and animals) and a mechanism to allow researches
access to both the chips and the data generated by other
researchers.

Develop new and/or apply existing methods to modify

aquatic animal genomes (e.g., nuclear transfer, stem cells,
and transgenics).

Long-Term (8-10 plus years)

Determine the organization of entire genomes, but especially

genes involved in important economic traits.

Developacomprehensiveaquaculturedatabasetoallow
searchingandcomplexqueriesthatwillencompassall
genomesequences,functionalgenomics,proteomics,
environmentaldata,andaquaculturestrategy.

Develop transgenic aquatic animals as bioreactors for

production of high-value bioproducts.

Biocomplexity

Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that arise as a result of dynamic

interactions that occur within biological systems, including humans,
and between these systems and the physical environment. From
individual cells to ecosystems, these systems exhibit properties that
depend not only on the individual actions of their components, but
also on the interactions among these components and between these
components and the environment (NSF 2001). NSF launched its
Biocomplexity in the Environment initiative three years ago, and the
program is currently funded at $75 million (Schulz 2001).

Aquaculture, as such, is representative of biocomplexity by the

myriad of interactions that involve the aquatic animal of choice, its
varied life stages, co-populations of organisms (both synergistic and
antagonistic), the feed, the environment, and production systems.
Additionally, the human factors of product quality, food safety, and
species preference are important considerations in any overall
aquaculture system.

Recommendations for R&D are:

Short-Term (1-3 years)

Prepare scientific assessment briefs on biocomplexity for key

U.S. economically important aquaculture species. A
"biocomplexity" viewpoint or holistic system approach has
not been considered to date and would serve as a model for
other aquatic production systems to be developed in the
future.

Establish a national information resource base containing

information and data on basic, applied, developmental,
demonstration, and commercial systems where
biocomplexity is especially important.

Develop and apply appropriate (real-time) instrumentation to

measure, monitor, and control the biocomplexity of
aquacultural systems.

Decipher the critical components of shrimp-microbial

community interactions in natural and closed environments
from a microbial and biochemical viewpoint. Identify
candidate "effective microorganisms" to use in a defined
inoculum to increase system productivity and profitability.

Mid-Term (4-7 years)

Apply biocomplexity concepts to control pathogenic and

opportunistic organisms in aquaculture systems.

Perfect key economically important biocomplex production

systems and develop best management strategies to maintain
the persistence of beneficial microbes.

Develop and apply modern sensing technology, especially

nanotechnology, to provide for miniaturized sensing,
monitoring and control systems.
Long-Term (8-10 plus years)

Develop mathematical models to understand and control

biocomplex aquaculture systems for large-scale production.

Biocellular Technology

Biocellular technology is defined as the applications of techniques to

regulate the reproduction, development, growth, and maturation of
aquatic species for aquacultural purposes. The approaches to be used
are dependent upon our knowledge of the life cycle of the various
organisms, which in many cases is incomplete. Biocellular
technology can be applied to hormonal control of spawning, cloning,
creation of transgenic animals, nutrition, aquatic animal health, and
the control of reproduction. The obvious methods of introducing
desirable traits, through transgenic animals, are long term until some
advocacy group is willing to take the necessary time (possibly 10
years) to organize the stakeholders and educate the public. It is
public perception that is retarding this development. USDA should
be a partner in this effort. However for the present, short term,
nontransgenic solutions appear to be more attractive.

The importance of this R&D area is to enable year-round production

and maturation on demand of gametes, fry, and juveniles of
important U.S. species and to attain species with desired
characteristics (increased survival, faster growth rates, better feed
conversion, and improved environmental tolerance).

To make aquaculture competitive in the U.S., we need to reduce

production costs, control disease and losses due to stress, and control
the reproductive life cycle. Several topics are highlighted.

Hormones

The application of hormones to control and enhance spawning and

ensure an uninterrupted supply of eggs and fry are now routine in
aquaculture. More recently hormones have been used to include
teleost sex control (reversal) measures, providing monosex lines, and
development of agents for smolt-enhancement, growth acceleration,
and enhanced feed conversion efficiency.

Nutrition and Oral Vaccines

One of the most exciting technologic developments has come from
the ability to manipulate the plant genome to produce products
economically for use in aquaculture. The use of genetically modified
crops to eliminate toxic products and increase specific nutrients
(limiting amino acids, n-3 fatty acids, etc.) is now possible. The
packaging of genetically engineered proteins in corn seed to produce
very inexpensive oral vaccines is also being pursued.

Control of Diseases

Biotechnology holds great promise in controlling diseases in

aquaculture. New promising approaches include designer DNA
vaccines vectors and their delivery systems, developing rapid and
accurate tests for the detection of major pathogens and exploring
nonspecific immunity potential in fish to protect themselves from
disease. Of great potential utility is the use of a new technique called
"signature tag mutagenesis", using transposons for Streptococcus
iniae, to increase our understanding of pathogen virulence and to
develop traditional and recombinant vaccines.

We need to understand more about the natural defense mechanisms

of aquatic animals to foreign microorganisms. This includes
knowledge about the peptide inhibitors of microorganisms
frequently found on these animals, and more about the normal
consortium of microorganisms present.

Transgenics

Although the commercial sale of transgenics in aquaculture in the

U.S. may be a few years away, we need to continue the basic studies
to produce transgenic strains to provide disease resistance, enhanced
somatic growth or desired properties (i.e., myostatin induced muscle
growth).

Non-Breeding Stocks

Recent experiences make it very unlikely that we will see expanded

marine aquaculture activities along the U.S. coastline. Such
increases will come about either developing inexpensive
recirculating systems or by biological containment in offshore cages
and pens. We need to support further research on effective biological
containment of some commercially important species by
combinations of ploidy control, sex determination, presence of non-
reproductive alleles, and addition of transgenes. Our information in
this area is very limited. This containment research should be
conducted in cooperation with concerned NGO groups so that
agreement can be reached on acceptable risk levels.

Recommendations for R&D are:

Short-Term (1-3 years)

Develop plant alternatives to marine fish-derived proteins in

aquatic feed diets.

Explore use of genetically engineered proteins in corn seed to

produce oral vaccines.

Control diseases by designing a DNA vaccine vector,

developing new diagnostic techniques for detection of
pathogens, identify candid nonspecific defenses in target
species, and use of signature tag mutagenesis to develop
vaccines.

Produce transgenic strains for disease resistance, enhanced

growth or specific properties.

Develop reliable specific pathogen free (SPF) broodstock for

economically important species.

Mid-Term (4-7 years)

Further refine and develop biological containment

technology.

Develop more effective methods for spawning economically

desirable species (current and emerging species).

Develop effective biocontrol methods for disease prevention

and enhancement of immune systems.

Identify biochemical targets for chemical or pharmaceutical

intervention.

Long-Term (8-10 plus years)

Establish a proteomics information resource and database

focused on proteins essential for reproduction, development,
 growth, and maturation.

Biosecurity

Biosecurity encompasses issues ranging in scope from global,

national, watershed, facility, tank, and finally to organism level. The
practice of aquaculture is making an accelerated transition from the
opportunistic culture of native stocks to the culture of highly
selected or even modified stocks that are significantly differentiated
from wild populations. Globalization of aquaculture production now
makes commonplace the scenario of seed stocks produced in the
U.S. to be shipped by air for production a hemisphere away, and then
marketed on a third continent.

At the largest scale there are both concerns and opportunities

presented by the ability to create and move genetic seed stocks
across large distances. Globally, opportunities exist to introduce or
explore alternative species, new strains or highly selected stocks that
represent substantial appeal to aquaculture. Movement of these
products and organisms presents challenges to resolve potential
interactions with the native ecology, the transfer of diseases to either
cultured or wild stocks and the potential transfer of contaminants or
pathogens of concern for human food safety.

At the facility scale, biosecurity refers to producing aquatic species

in a well-controlled environment that excludes the introduction or
propagation of unwanted organisms and includes the prevention of
escape or passage of organisms back into the natural environment
(Moss, 1998). The use of "specific pathogen free" (SPF) animals is a
mandatory starting point for such a system and requires that animals
that are free of specifically listed pathogens that can be reliably
identified and propagated. Biosecurity in this sense encompasses not
only the animal health, but also the design, location and operation of
the production systems, product quality and safety, environmental,
and economic aspects.

Although not commonly considered, the concepts of biosecurity may

well have application at the organism or level. The incorporation or
creation of vaccines, selected or natural resistance, probiotics,
general fitness for culture environments, sterility or reversible
metabolic attributes directly into an organism (or organism
consortia) may effectively resolve biosecurity issues that might
conventionally be resolved by cruder barriers at a larger scope.
Recommendations for R&D are:

Short-Term (1-3 years)

Increase multi-disciplinary research investment with a focus

on biosecure production system design, operation and
management.

Continue development of SPF source stocks for research and

commercial production.

Develop cost-effective and reliable diagnostics for detecting

and monitoring specifically listed pathogens for major
economically important species.

Continue to develop risk assessment models (biosecurity,

bioterrorism, food safety) and evaluate acceptable potential
outcomes with testable hypotheses.

Examine and leverage human or other agriculture approaches

to biosecurity and make immediate crosscutting applications
to aquaculture.

Develop criteria for research needs that recognize the

importance of precaution and fully realized application cost
at the farm level.

Incorporate education of consumers, producers, funders and

NGOs into research outcomes and program direction.

Mid-Term (4-7 years)

Develop superior (genetically improved) animals intended

for candidate biosecure systems.

Develop new diagnostics for existing pathogens (new

approaches and methods) and diagnostics for emerging
threats.

Develop cost-effective and reliable diagnostics for detecting

and monitoring general health and fitness for culture aquatic
stocks.

Apply biologically safe and controllable (such as reversible

DNA vaccines) attributes that improve fitness and efficiency
 of cultured animals.

Invest in research that will provide for intellectual and

biological security and continue to provide competitive
advantage for US agriculture

Long-Term (8-10 plus years)

Create cooperative international system for certifying and

reliably tracing the movement of aquatic products,
organisms, stocks, strains and pathogens.

Develop regionally appropriate production technology and

address emerging issues.

Monitor and evaluate long-term health of biosecure-produced

animals and derived products to consumers.

Societal Issues

Successful commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology will

depend upon societys confidence that its full range of interests was
respected. However, the production and use of genetically modified
organisms (GMOs) for food and feed purposes has emerged as an
area of controversy, involving a range of issues that first surfaced in
Europe, but now is global. Hence, the industry and USDA need to be
cognizant of the concerns of U.S. consumers and the public in
general regarding the products of aquaculture biotechnology and
methods used for their production. To resolve these issues
confronting the aquaculture industry, sound scientific inquiry will
prove beneficial, if not critical. These issues include: safety of
GMOs as foods and feeds, environmental safety of GMOs (including
risk assessment and risk management), regulatory oversight policy,
intellectual property rights (especially as regards to genomics),
bioethics, and consumer acceptance. In large measure, this priority
area parallels that of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI)
component of the Human Genome Project (HHS and DOE 1995,
ELSI 2001). As with the ELSI element, this priority area would
focus on aspects of science and technology, rather than on strictly
regulatory or economic aspects that perhaps are best handled by
other agencies or programs.

Another societal issue in this priority area regards enhancing the

discovery-to-commercialization pathway. Key issues include federal
support for basic and applied research, federal support for industry
innovation, increased clarity regarding the regulatory system, and
improved statistical databases supporting identification and
documentation of needs for products or services.

Recommendations for R&D are:

Short term (1-3 years)

Sufficient support perhaps as much as 4-6% of USDA's

biotechnology research budget needs to be allocated to
fund research into ethical, legal and social issues regarding
commercialization of aquaculture biotechnology.
Specifically, the USDA should support development of a
code of bioethics for creation and use of transgenic lines.
Sufficient support for biotechnology risk assessment and risk
management research is also needed.

The Council on Environmental Quality, Office of Science

and Technology Policy, and other agencies including USDA
should clarify regulatory policy, including applicable legal
authorities and agency roles, and mandate agency
consultation.

USDA should require adherence to the Performance

Standards for Safely Conducting Research with Genetically
Modified Fish and Shellfish among all bodies receiving its
support.

USDAs Agricultural Marketing Service should promote

seafood as healthy food.

Training for university, private-sector and USDA

investigators in intellectual property protection policy and
procedures needs to be enhanced.

Discussions with the private equity sector to increase

awareness and acceptance of aquaculture and biotechnology
needs to be organized.

Evaluate and apply the principles of environmental release

established for microbes and animals to aquatic species.

Evaluate the release of cage-produced, indigenous, non-

 GMO finfish on natural populations and the environment.

Mid-term (4-7 years)

Attach priority to support research developing genetically

modified food and fiber products that clearly benefit
consumers.

USDA should support the international use of products

derived from U.S. biotechnology.

Evaluate and monitor consumer reactions to new and

emerging aquaculture products.

Devise new methods for assessing and monitoring

environmental effects of new production systems.

Long term (8-10 years plus)

Promote an adaptive approach to oversight of aquaculture

biotechnology. USDA, other Federal and state agencies
should support efforts to synthesize knowledge of benefits,
risks, and regulatory experience relevant to development or
revision of oversight policy.

Evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of aquaculture

produced consumer products.

Assess long-term environmental effects of new aquaculture

production systems (biosecure).

Infrastructure

The identification and prioritization of specific R&D areas bring

forth generic science and technology and infrastructure needs. Some
areas that need increased attention are:

Collaboration in R&D

There is a need to establish more active linkages between the ARS

and other U.S. organizations of excellence in the named high priority
areas, some of which are already being pursued within the ARS.
Collaborative arrangements are suggested to minimize funding
requirements, yet at the same time maximize research results with
commercialization. Dedicated R&D "centers of excellence" focused
on biosecurity and biocomplexity are possible candidates for
enhanced collaboration. Other areas of merit for the establishment of
centers are species-specifics genomics, bioinformatics, proteomics,
and societal issues.

R&D Support

Aquaculture and biotechnology as applied to aquaculture are under-

funded in comparison to other federal programs for which there are
such significant economic returns. While there are several reasons
for this, the opportunities offered by an exploding science and
technology base can no longer be denied. The areas identified in the
"white paper" and now presented in the report represent emerging
areas of high priority, with some areas (in particular, Biocellular
Technology) having strong connections to existing programmatic
efforts within the ARS and USDA. However, to realize these
immense opportunities, additional funds are needed beyond those
now available or being requested by ARS (and USDA in its entirety).

One suggestion is to establish a new ARS program for a 10-year

period, with a suggested title of "ARS National Aquaculture
Biotechnology Collaboration Initiative" or ARS NABCI. Initial
funding for such a program should be at a minimal level of $50
million and should increase to a $125-150 million per year level
during years 4-5. This type of program seems most appropriate to
pursue many of the priority areas already identified plus those that
will become apparent with additional R&D and dramatic advances in
biotechnology. Such a program can easily be expanded to the USDA
and encompass CSREES.

Manpower Education and Training

Aquaculture is a multidisciplinary industrial sector with many

crosscutting areas of science, technology, and commerce. As such,
and especially if biotechnology is to achieve its full potential, there
is a need for a new cadre of personnel well versed in modern science
and commerce. Again, the situation is analogous to the
biotechnology industry that emerged largely out of the
pharmaceutical fermentation industry dealing with antibiotics and
other bioproducts. There is a need and opportunity to devise new
courses and programs designed for various levels -- undergraduate,
graduate, postgraduate and "practicing art" people already in
industry. Aquaculture also lends itself to education at the high school
and vocational art levels. Aquaculture often entails individuals with
limited rigorous scientific backgrounds and experience in
sophisticated analytical methodology. If aquaculture is to become a
recognized and credible U.S. high-tech business sector, a pool of
rigorous science-based manpower is essential.

Recommendations for infrastructure are:

Short-Term (1-3 years)

USDA should assist aquaculture research in all sectors by

supporting R&D tax credits, accelerated depreciation
programs, SBA loans, and creation of the ARS National
Aquaculture Biotechnology Collaboration Initiative (ARS
NACBI).

Research programs need to be more effectively coordinated

with guidance from multi-disciplinary advisory groups that
include members from academic, private research institutes,
government and industry.

Create and maintain a centralized aquaculture germplasm

stock center.

Create a transgenic advisory board to assist industry and

academics with both technical and public relation issues.

Create a funding mechanism to stimulate education and

research for aquaculture in the form of High School,
Undergraduate and Post Graduate fellowships, grants and
competitions.

Mid-Term (4-7 years)

Team researchers with U.S. aquacultural farmers to promote

a better understanding of the needs and potential of each
group.

Create long-range programs for selective breeding and

maintenance of key strains of important aquacultural species.

Offer a technical extension service to industry and academics

(focus on both genetics and engineering).

Technical developments will outpace our ability to plan.

Sponsor a reassessment of new technologies every two years
 through a workshop or other means.

Long-Term (8-10 plus years)

Continue to support basic and applied research in all sectors.

References

Alcivar-Warren, A., and Kocher, T. D., Proceedings of the

Aquaculture Species Genome Mapping Workshop, National
Resource, Agriculture and Engineering Service and Northeastern
Regional Aquaculture Center, 1999.

ARS 2001, Agricultural Research Service, National Programs,

www.nps.ars.usda.gov/programs.

ARS 2000, Aquaculture Research for the Future, Five-Year Research

Plan, 2000.

Borman, S., Proteomics: taking over where genomics leaves off,

C&E News, 31-37, July 31, 2000.

CSREES 2001, Cooperative State Research and Education and

Extension Service,
http://www.reeusda.gov/1700/programs/aqua.htm.

CSREES-NRI 2001, National Research Initiative, NRI 2001

Program Description, www.reeusda.gov/nri/programs.

Dicks, M. R., McHugh, R., and Webb, B., Economy-Wide Impacts of

U.S. Aquaculture, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, P-
946, May 1966.

DOC 1999, Department of Commerce Aquaculture Policy, August

1999.

ELSI 2001, Ethical, Legal and Social Implications Research

Program, http://www.nhgri.nih.gov/About_NHGRI/Der/Elsi/.

FAO 1998, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), World Fish

Trade: Changes in Quality Control Represent New Challenge for
Developing Countries, FAO Says; Global Fish Business is Estimated
at More Than US $250 Billion, Press Release, Jun 1998.
FAO 2001, Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), The State of
World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2000, FAO, 2001,
http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X8002E/X8002E00.htm.

HHS-DOE 1996, Understanding Our Genetic Inheritance, The U.S.

Human Genome Project: The First Five Years FY 1991-1995,
DOE/ER-0452P, 1995.

JSA 1996, Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture, Draft National

Aquaculture Development Plan of 1996, National Science and
Technology Council, 1996,
http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/publicat/govagen/usda/dnadp.htm.

JSA 2001, Aquaculture Research and Development Strategic Plan,

http://ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/jsa/Strategicplan.htm.

NABC 1999, National Aquaculture Biotechnology Consortium,

Applying the Tools of Biotechnology to Accelerate Development of
an Environmentally Sustainable and Economically Competitive
Aquaculture Industry in the 21st Century, January 1999.

NASS 2000, National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS),

Census of Aquaculture 1998, 1997 Census of Agriculture, Vol 3,
Special Studies, Part 3, February 2000.

Nature Biotechnology, Industry Trends, A Snapshot of

Biotechnology's Fastest Moving Fields, Vol. 18 Supplement, October
2000.

Nature, Insight: Functional Genomics, Vol. 45, No. 6788, 912-865,

June 15, 2000.

Nelson, K.E., Paulsen, I.T., Heidelberg, J.F., and Fraser, C.M., Status
of Genome Projects for Nonpathogenic Bacteria and Archaea,
Nature Biotechnology, 18, 1049-1054, 2000.

NMFS 2000, National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), Fisheries

of the United States 1999, October 2000.

NSF 2001, Biocomplexity in the Environment,

www.nsf.gov/home/crssprgm/be.

NSTC 1995, National Science and Technology Council (NSTC),

Biotechnology for the 21st Century: New Horizons, White House,
Office of Science and Technology Policy, July 1995.

Moss, S. M., editor, Proceedings of the US Marine Shrimp Farming

Program Biosecurity Workshop, The Oceanic Institute, February
1998.

Schulz, W., Biocomplexity for Chemists, C&E News, 19-20, Jan 8,

2001.