Share thisThe number of aquatic research facilities has increased considerably over the last decade. This facility type has had an “up and coming” status for quite some time. Now, aquatic-based research is starting to develop a permanent presence in the industry.
Zebrafish, with their relatively simple husbandry, short generation time, and transparent external embryo development have helped catapult aquatic animal research facilities into the mainstream.
Increasing attention has been paid in recent years to basic design strategies for these facilities. The unique characteristics and requirements of aquatic environments are beginning to be addressed. The resources for such information are still limited in their content and scope; nonetheless, the wheel of knowledge is now rolling and gaining momentum. In the next several years, as aquatic facilities expand their position in the animal laboratory industry, it is critical that more in-depth information be exchanged and the scope of discussion broadened. A topic that currently demands attention is the application of barrier and containment strategies to aquatic research facilities. Modern aquatic research facilities consistently fall short of “pathogen-free” status. Although many aquatic animal diseases are opportunistic and have a relatively low virulence, facility-wide outbreak of disease is of utmost concern for researchers.
At the facility level, barrier strategies for aquatic facilities mimic those of dry vivariums. Having proper quarantine facilities and protocol for incoming fish is paramount in preventing the influx of disease. Use of chemical foot mats and hand sanitizers are increasingly becoming incorporated into these facilities. Additionally, facility-wide air balancing and UV air sterilization technology helps to assure that facility air is contaminant-free. These barrier strategies have been brought over directly from other vivarium and laboratory types. Strategies for containment, however, cannot be directly translated in the same ways. They must be redefined to address the unique conditions of these new aquatic facilities.
Aquatic facilities are first and foremost “wet” facilities. The term, which in the past might have been associated with makeshift facilities characterized by leaky tanks, rusty racks, and water everywhere, can still be applied to today’s more modern aquatic facilities. It is nearly impossible to keep these facilities consistently dry. Water is spilled, dripped, or splashed (not to mention aerosolized) on a daily basis during standard procedures. Aquatic life support systems are nonspecific — supporting the growth of both beneficial and detrimental microorganisms. The very media that gives life to the research organisms also facilitates the spread of potential pathogens. Water, by its very nature, is difficult to contain. Herein lies the predicament for “wet” facilities: how does one contain the spread of disease?
With current protocols and existing fish room design, it is too much of a risk to have infected individuals in close proximity to the general population. Many modern single-room facilities lack the capacity to isolate fish or stocks within the room itself. Instead, these fish are usually removed to separate quarantine facilities or euthanized — either of which can be disastrous for the progress of the research. Many times there may be only a few individuals diagnosed, but the fear of an outbreak is so great in some facilities that entire stocks of fish are euthanized to protect the remaining population. Can strategies be developed to help limit facility-wide exposure?