Use vaccinations

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

  • Two controlled studies from Iceland and Norway found higher survival rates in vaccinated salmon compared to unvaccinated control groups. This was post exposure to the disease-causing bacteria, Aeromonas salmonicida spp.achromogenes and Yersinia ruckeri, respectively.
  • Two controlled studies in Australia and Canadia reported higher survival in salmon infected with marine flexibacteriosis and bacterial kidney disease, post vaccination.
  • Two controlled studies in Norway reported similar results for salmon vaccinated against infectious salmon anaemia.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. In 1997, a replicated, controlled study in Iceland (Gudmundsdottir and Gudmundsdottir, 1997) found that vaccinating salmon, Salmo salar, with IBOO improved survival rates of fingerlings when exposed to a disease-causing bacteria, Aeromonas salmonicida spp. achromogenes. After 16 days, the lowest level of mortality (51%) was observed in groups vaccinated with IBOO compared with the unvaccinated control groups (81% mortality). Infection with the bacteria leads to the development of furunculosis in salmon. Vaccines were made from A.salmonicida spp. achromogenes strain M108-91, furunculosis vaccine and an oil adjuvant. Salmon were exposed to A.salmonicida spp. achromogenes 70 days post vaccination.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. In 2005, a replicated, controlled study in Norway (Mikalsen et al., 2005) found that the pEGFP-HE vaccine increased survival in salmon, Salmo salar, exposed to infectious salmon anaemia virus. Mortality levels in groups given the vaccine were lower than the unvaccinated control groups (16.3% and 25% versus 45% and 41.3%, respectively). Fingerling salmon were injected with a dose of a DNA vaccine expressing the virus. Dosage was repeated after week three and six. Three weeks after the final immunisation, salmon were exposed to infectious salmon anaemia virus and mortality levels were recorded for 54 days.

    Study and other actions tested
  3. In 2007, a randomised, replicated, controlled study in Tasmania, Australia (van Gelderen et al., 2009) found vaccination against marine flexibacteriosis increased survival rates in salmon, Salmo salar. Salmon injected with a vaccine and adjuvant showed significantly lower mortality levels (11%) than a group given the vaccine only (39%), a group given the adjuvant only (54%) and an unvaccinated control group (50%). Four groups of salmon (32-38 individuals in each) were given different treatments: a vaccine against marine flexibacteriosis, a vaccine and an adjuvant, an adjuvant only and no injection. Salmon were exposed to marine flexibacteriosis eight weeks after vaccination. Fish were placed in 100l seawater tanks and exposed for one hour. Mortality levels were recorded.

    Study and other actions tested
  4. In 2010, a randomised, replicated, controlled study in Canada (Burnley et al., 2010) found the vaccine, Lipogen Forte V1, increased salmon, Salmo salar, survival during an outbreak of bacterial kidney disease when compared with an industry standard. Four other vaccines were not successful, relative to the industry standard vaccine. Groups of salmon were given one of four commercially available vaccines: Lipogen Forte V1, Renogen, Bayovac 5.1 Vet and Alpha Ject 4000. Mortality was measured weekly or biweekly for eight months.

    Study and other actions tested
  5. In 2011, a replicated, controlled study in Tasmania, Australia (Costa et al., 2011) found increased survival rates in salmon, Salmo salar, vaccinated (using Yersinivac-B) and then exposed to the disease-causing bacteria, Yersinia ruckeri. Vaccinated salmon showed higher rates of survival than the unvaccinated control group. A trypsinated version of the Yersinivac-B vaccine produced higher survival rates than an untrypsinated vaccine (65% and 52% survival respectively). Y. Ruckeri causes yersiniosis. Groups of salmon were given one of two vaccinations; either Yersinivac-B or a trypsinated version of Yersinivac-B.  A control group received no vaccination. Six weeks after vaccination, salmon from each treatment were exposed to Y.ruckeri and mortality levels were monitored for 14 days.

    Study and other actions tested
  6. In 2011, a randomised, controlled study conducted in Norway (Lauscher et al., 2011) found that vaccinated salmon, Salmo salar, showed increased levels of survival after exposure to infectious salmon anaemia compared to an unvaccinated control group. Survival levels were lower with increasing strength of vaccine. After 45 days, mortality levels in the vaccinated groups were 55.0%, 28.3% and 10.0% respectively, for vaccines at strengths of 4%, 20% and 100%. Three groups were given one of three different strengths of vaccine at 100%, 20% and 4%. Two control groups were given a mock vaccine and saline. Six weeks after vaccination, all groups were infected with the infectious salmon anaemia virus and mortality was recorded daily for 45 days.

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Jones, A.C., Mead, A., Austen, M.C.V.  & Kaiser, M.J. (2013) Aquaculture: Evidence for the effects of interventions to enhance the sustainability of aquaculture using Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) as a case study. Bangor University


Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Sustainable Aquaculture

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Sustainable Aquaculture
Sustainable Aquaculture

Sustainable Aquaculture - Published 2013

Atlantic salmon Aquaculture Synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust