Aquaculture 546 (2022) 737285

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Aquaculture
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/aquaculture

Short communication

Use of chemicals and veterinary medicinal products (VMPs) in Pacific

whiteleg shrimp, P. vannamei farming in India
P.K. Patil a, *, R. Geetha a, T. Bhuvaneswari a, R. Saraswathi a, R. Ananda Raja a, S. Avunje a, H.
G. Solanki b, S.V. Alavandi a, K.K. Vijayan a
a
ICAR-Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, Chennai 600 028, Tamil Nadu, India
b
College of Fisheries, Navsari Agriculture University, Navsari 396445, Gujarat, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Aquaculture has become a significant food producing sector, the sustainability of which largely depends on
Veterinary medicinal products management of health of cultured species and the aquatic ecosystem. Aquaculturists resort to use of chemicals
P. vannamei and veterinary medicinal products (VMPs) to maintain water and soil quality parameters at optimal levels and
Shrimp farming
health of cultured species to achieve higher productivity. The present study reports the survey results (n = 867)
India
Chemicals
on the use of chemicals and VMPs in Indian shrimp aquaculture. The influence of the use of chemicals and VMPs
on the feed conversion ratio (FCR), survival (%), average size at harvest (g) and production (t) were evaluated.
Farms in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu were found to use similar amounts of chemicals and VMPs, 89.06 kg
t− 1 and 87.07 kg t− 1, respectively, while farmers from Gujarat used significantly low quantity (53.42 kg t− 1). The
products under the category disinfectants, soil and water probiotics and environmental modifiers were applied
directly to the pond as broadcasting while gut probiotics and nutritional supplements were applied orally as feed
top dressing. Among the compounds, more than half (50.62%) of the aquaculture inputs were environmental
modifiers, followed by probiotics (20.94%), disinfectants (6.99%) and nutritional supplements (3.41%). Use of
chemicals and VMPs, however, was shown to positively influence the stocking density, survival and production.
Usage of higher quantities of environmental modifiers and probiotics suggests the awareness about their utility in
maintaining optimal water and soil parameters thereby improving pond health, and reducing stress and disease
episodes.

1. Introduction despite advancements in breeding and nutrition, infectious diseases and

India is the second-largest aquaculture country globally; with fish
production of 7.06 million MT in 2018 (Bondad-Reantaso et al., 2012).
During 2020–21 frozen shrimp contributed 73% to the USD 6.68 billion
annual fish and fishery product export from the country. Pacific whiteleg
shrimp, P. vannamei, was the major species, farmed in 100,206 ha area
with annual average productivity of 7.10 ton ha− 1 during 2020–21.
(https://mpeda.gov.in/?page_id=651). Sustaining this growth mo­
mentum requires significant interventions in increasing productivity
through managing the health of the host, rearing pond and environment.
This growth trajectory in the country has been realised after the
introduction of Pacific whiteleg shrimp in 2009 and is supported by
scientific seed production, improved farming technologies, judicious use
of veterinary medicinal products (VMPs), and other chemicals for
improved health and production (Salunke et al., 2020). However,
poor farm soil and water quality continue to cause significant economic
losses to aquaculture (Lightner, 2011; Thitamadee et al., 2016; Asche
et al., 2020). Generally, chemical and microbial formulations are
applied in aquaculture to maintain the water and soil parameters at
optimal levels (Boyd, 2017). Disinfectants and antimicrobial agents are
used to prevent and control the spread of infectious agents (OIE, 2017;
Danner and Merrill, 2008). Similarly, prebiotics, probiotics, and nutri­
tional supplements are administered for enhanced digestibility,
improved health, growth and production (Gatesoupe, 1999; Irianto and
Austin, 2002). However, inappropriate use of these products has
attracted criticism in recent times due to the possible presence of vet­
erinary drug residues and the development of antibiotic resistance
among aquatic bacteria compromising the safety of the food originating
from aquaculture (Cabello, 2006; Cabello et al., 2016; Watts et al.,
2017). A survey on using veterinary medicines in aquaculture was

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: pkpatilvet@yahoo.com (P.K. Patil).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737285
Received 29 June 2021; Received in revised form 29 July 2021; Accepted 2 August 2021
0044-8486/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
P.K. Patil et al.
reported covering 29 countries (Alday-Sanz et al., 2012). Additionally,
the effects of these substances on non-target hosts and the possible
ecological degradation in the receiving environment have been high­
lighted (Rico et al., 2012).
Availability of information on the application of chemicals and VMPs
helps to improve the better management practices in shrimp farming
activities. FAO conducted a workshop on the prudent use of veterinary
medicines to improve the biosecurity in aquaculture (Bondad-Reantaso
et al., 2012). Use of veterinary medicinal products and pharmacologi­
cally active substances in aquaculture has been published from
Bangladesh (Shamsuzzaman and Biswas, 2012; Alam and Rashid, 2014;
Sharker et al., 2014; Ali et al., 2014, 2016; Rasul et al., 2017), China
(XinHua and Wen, 2012), Thailand (Baoprasertkul et al., 2012),
Philippines (Sonia et al., 2012), Vietnam (Tai, 2012; Chi et al., 2017)
and four major Asian countries involved in international trade of farmed
aquaculture produce (Rico et al., 2013). On the contrary, reports from
India are scanty except a technical report by the National Bank for
Agriculture and Rural Development (Pathak et al., 2000). Recently
Mishra et al. (2017) published the application of drugs, medicines and
chemicals in aquaculture based on a survey covering the freshwater
farming areas in the country. The main objective of the present study
was to assess the current usage patterns of chemicals and VMPs,
including feed supplements and probiotics, covering the major shrimp
farming regions of India.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area and farm interviews
The survey was carried out from April 2018 to Feb 2019, covering
the three major shrimp producing coastal states, Andhra Pradesh (n =
607), Tamil Nadu (n = 145) and Gujarat (n = 115) which contribute
more than 90% of the P. vannamei production in the country (Table 1).
Number of samples from each state was proportional to their contribu­
tion to the national production. Major shrimp producing districts in each
state were identified and survey was conducted using multistage strat­
ified random sampling method A total of 867 farms were surveyed by
aquaculture professionals through personal interview of farm owners/
managers; with the questionnaire comprising background information
about the farmers, farm management characteristics and usage pattern
of chemicals, biologicals and other health care products.
2.2. Classification of aquaculture inputs
Based on the purpose of their use, chemicals and VMPs reported in
the survey were grouped as disinfectants, probiotics, nutritional sup­
plements and environmental modifiers. Such farm inputs were further
classified based on their utility or mode of action. Some of the substances
which could not be classified in any of the above classes were grouped as
others. The principle active ingredients in the commonly used com­
mercial products and microbial isolates in probiotics were elucidated
through their labels or information available on the manufacturers’
website. As general practice, disinfectants, probiotics (soil and water
acting) and environmental modifiers were applied directly to the pond
as broadcasting while probiotics (gut acting) and nutritional supple­
ments were provided orally as feed top dressing.
Table 1
Farms surveyed and area under shrimp (P. vannamei) farming and production.
Andhra Pradesh Tamil Nadu Gujarat
Farming Area (ha) 39,800 7615 4154
Production (t) 295,332 44,453 32,946
Number of farm surveyed 607 145 115
Farm area surveyed (ha) 2426.8 1242 578
Source:www.mpeda.gov.in
2
Aquaculture 546 (2022) 737285
2.3. Estimation of the number of products used
The total quantity of each product category used per ton of shrimp
harvest was calculated based on the dosage and frequency of application
and the quantum of shrimp harvested at the end of the crop.
2.4. Statistical analysis
Relationship between dependent (education, experience, stocking
density, culture period, average body weight at harvest, survival and
production) and independent variable (quantity of chemicals and VMPs
used) was analysed using multiple linear regression in R software
version 15.0 (R Core Team., 2020).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Age, experience and educational background of farmers
The average age of farmers interviewed varied from 38 to 47.5 years,
with an overall average of 42.58. The higher percentage of farmers from
Gujarat (45.22%) had formal university education against 26.19% of
their counterparts in Andhra Pradesh. Farmers from Andhra Pradesh
(61.29%) and Gujarat (59.13%) had less than five years of experience in
farming, while the majority of farmers (62.07%) from Tamil Nadu were
involved in shrimp farming for more than a decade (Table 2).
3.2. Farm management practices
The stocking density of the shrimp (no. m− 2) was found to be highest
in the state of Andhra Pradesh (56.6 ± 0.5), followed by Tamil Nadu
(42.1 ± 0.7) and Gujarat (26.4 ± 0.7). On the other hand, the FCR
recorded was lowest (1.0 ± 1.1) in Andhra Pradesh, followed by Gujarat
(1.2 ± 1.8) and Tamil Nadu (1.3 ± 1.9). The survival (%), duration of
culture (days), average body weight at harvest (g) and production (t
ha− 1 y− 1) were 83.6 ± 0.6, 142 ± 0.02, 32.0 ± 1.5, 7.0 ± 0.2, respec­
tively the highest in farms of Gujarat (Table 3). Multiple regression es­
timates for parameters pertaining to farmers and farm management
have been estimated for the states Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and
Gujarat were described in supplementary data (Tables S1–S3).
3.3. Type and quantity of chemicals and VMPs used
3.3.1. Nutritional supplements
This category includes mainly the products containing vitamins,
minerals and binders administered as feed top dressing (Table 4) and the
constituents in those products are listed in Table S4. Among the states,
farmers from Andhra Pradesh used the highest quantity of vitamins and
minerals (3.54 kg t− 1) compared to their counterparts in Gujarat (1.69
kg t− 1) and Tamil Nadu (1.40 kg t− 1). Therefore, the higher stocking
density followed in Andhra Pradesh with better FCR (1.0 ± 1.1) might be
one of the factors attributed to higher nutritional supplements. The
quantity of feed supplements used by Indian farmers was much lower
than in China (8.56 kg t− 1) and Vietnam (5.56 kg t− 1) but higher than in
Bangladesh (0.87 kg t− 1) and Thailand (0.08 kg t− 1) (Rico et al., 2013).
In a similar survey, 21% of the farmers in Bangladesh were found to use
feed additives (Ali et al., 2016), and upto 40 different products con­
taining vitamins and minerals were sold in Vietnam (Chi et al., 2017);
though quantity of usage was not reported.
3.3.2. Disinfectants
Use of a higher quantity of disinfectants (8.68 kg t− 1) by the farmers
of Gujarat might be responsible for a higher survival rate, size at harvest
and the average production with a longer duration of culture compared
to other states (Table 4). The active ingredients in the disinfectants used
by Indian farmers are listed in Table S4. The average use of disinfectants
in Indian shrimp farming (6.23 kg t− 1) was much higher than in China
P.K. Patil et al. Aquaculture 546 (2022) 737285

Table 2
Socioeconomic background of the farmers surveyed.
Education (%) Experience (%)

State Av. age Schooling Graduation Post-graduation <5 years 5–10 years >10 years

Andhra Pradesh 42 75.45 23.39 2.80 61.29 29.49 9.23

(n = 607)
Tamil Nadu (n = 145) 47.75 69.66 26.90 3.45 13.10 26.90 62.07
Gujarat 38 54.78 40.87 4.35 59.13 32.17 8.70
(n = 115)

Table 3
Farm management profile.
State Stocking density FCR Survival (%) Duration of culture Size of harvest Average production
(No. m− 2) (days) (g) (t ha− 1)

Andhra Pradesh 56.6 ± 0.5 1.0 ± 1.1 80.3 ± 0.2 101 ± 0.6 15.0 ± 0.2 6.8 ± 0.5
Tamil Nadu 42.1 ± 0.7 1.3 ± 1.9 78.4 ± 0.5 92 ± 0.01 16.4 ± 0.9 5.4 ± 0.3
Gujarat 26.4 ± 0.7 1.2 ± 1.8 83.6 ± 0.6 142 ± 0.02 32.0 ± 1.5 7.0 ± 0.2

kg t− 1). In the present study, the higher use of probiotics in shrimp farms
Table 4
1 of Andhra Pradesh might have been supporting in the practice of higher
VMPs and chemicals used in Indian shrimp aquaculture (kg t− production).
stocking density and bringing down the FCR. Higher average use of
Farm inputs Andhra Pradesh Tamil Nadu Gujarat probiotics by Indian shrimp farmers (16.31 kg t− 1) compared to
A. Disinfectants Bangladesh (0.23 kg t− 1), Vietnam (5.60 kg t− 1), China (9.35 kg t− 1) and
Oxidizing Agents 4.1 0.89 4.48 Thailand (14.09 kg t− 1) suggest the preference of biological agents over
Detergents 1.88 3.13 4.2
chemicals for effective management of soil and water quality, shrimp
Total A 5.98 4.02 8.68
health and production (Rico et al., 2013). In a recent survey, about 10%
B. Probiotics of the shrimp farmers in Bangladesh were recorded as using probiotics
Water Probiotics 2.95 7.75 7.25
(Ali et al., 2016) and 34 different brands of products containing pro­
Soil Probiotics 17.06 6.13 5.18
Gut Probiotics 1.12 1.16 0.33 biotics were used in northern Vietnam (Chi et al., 2017). Microbial
Total B 21.13 15.04 12.76 composition in the probiotics products used in India is listed in the
C. Nutritional supplements
Table S4.
Vitamins and Minerals 3.54 1.4 1.69
Binders 0 1.08 0.11 3.3.4. Environmental modifiers
Total C 3.54 2.48 1.8 The relationship between the environmental parameters on the
D. Environmental modifiers performance of farmed aquaculture species has been well established
Oxidizing agents 0 5.74 2.85 (Boyd, 2017). Application of mineral products for improved pond pro­
Ammonia controlling agents 0.41 4.17 0.1 ductivity constituted a significant portion (32.59 kg t− 1) of the envi­
pH modifiers 3 0.43 3.2
Minerals 30.03 43.83 23.91
ronmental modifiers (Table 4). Farmers from the state of Tamil Nadu
Total D 33.44 54.17 30.06 used the maximum quantity of minerals (54.17 kg t− 1), while farmers
E. Others 24.97 11.36 0.12 from Gujarat used the least (30.06 kg t− 1). Farmers of Gujarat cultured
Overall total (A þ B þ C þ D þ E) 89.06 87.07 53.42 with lesser stocking density and required lower quantity of environ­
mental modifiers to maintain the optimum water and soil parameters.
Interestingly the higher stocking density practiced in Andhra Pradesh
(0.66 kg t− 1), Bangladesh (0.46 kg t− 1), Thailand (3.62 kg t− 1), Vietnam
might require higher environmental modifiers to maintain the improved
4.82 kg t− 1) as reported by Rico et al. (2013). Higher usage of disin­
soil and water quality parameters. It can be noted that, higher usage of
fectants in Indian shrimp farming compared to the reported usage of
soil probiotics might be compensating for the chemicals required for
similar products in other shrimp farming countries in Asia might be due
maintaining the safe water and soil parameters. Chemical constituents in
to awareness about the biosecurity measures, knowledge and prevailing
the environmental modifiers applied in Indian shrimp farms are listed in
farming practices. Ali et al. (2016) reported 27% of shrimp farmers in
Table S4. Studies from other shrimp farming countries in Asia did not
Bangladesh using disinfectants, while Chi et al. (2017) reported more
report the use of soil and water treatment compounds as the major
than 50% of the shrimp farmers in Vietnam were using 20 different types
products (Rico et al., 2013; Ali et al., 2016), while Chi et al. (2017)
of disinfectants to purify water.
reported the use of 55 different products for soil and water quality
management and biosecurity in Northern Vietnam. Preference for use of
3.3.3. Probiotics
these products by Indian farmers reveals the importance given to soil
The utility of biological products in improving environmental quality
and water management for sustainable shrimp production.
and gut health has been reviewed earlier (Hossein et al., 2018; Jasmin
et al., 2020). Among the probiotic products, the soil probiotics for
maintenance of pond bottom were used in higher quantities (9.46 kg 3.4. Average use of aquaculture inputs
t− 1), followed by water probiotics (5.98 kg t− 1) for control of nitroge­
nous metabolites and gut probiotics (0.87 kg t− 1) for improved shrimp The total quantity of inputs used per tonne of production was found
immunity and disease prevention (Table 4). Farmers from Tamil Nadu to be highest in the state of Andhra Pradesh (89.06 kg t− 1), followed by
(7.75 kg t− 1) and Gujarat (7.25 kg t− 1) applied more water probiotics Tamil Nadu (87.07 kg t− 1) and Gujarat (53.42 kg t− 1). More than half
while Andhra Pradesh farmers used more soil probiotics (17.06 kg t− 1). (50.62%) of the aquaculture inputs were environmental modifiers, fol­
Overall, the farmers of Andhra Pradesh used a higher quantity of pro­ lowed by probiotics (20.94%), disinfectants (6.99%) and nutritional
biotics (21.13 kg t− 1) while farmers from Gujarat used the least (12.76 supplements (3.41%). Among the states, more than half of the

3
P.K. Patil et al.
compounds used by farmers of Tamil Nadu (62.21%) and Gujarat
(56.27%) were environmental modifiers, while Andhra Pradesh farmers
used 37.55%. Similarly, the farmers of Gujarat used disinfectants four
times (16.25%) that of Tamil Nadu (4.62%) and almost three times that
of Andhra Pradesh (6.71%) farmers. On the other hand, the application
of probiotics in the shrimp farms of Tamil Nadu was lower (17.27%)
compared to their counterparts in Andhra Pradesh (23.73%) and Gujarat
(23.89%).
Lower stocking density (26.4 ± 0.7 no. m− 2), longer crop duration
(142 ± 0.02 days), higher survival (83.6 ± 0.6%), size at harvest (32.0
± 1.5 g) and production (7.0 ± 0.2 t ha− 1) with lower use of VMPs
(45.22%) in the state of Gujarat could be attributed to the higher per­
centage of farmers with higher educational qualifications (45.22%);
indicating their advantage over other farmers by following scientific
farming. Educated farmers tend to make informed decisions on
controlled farm intensification and disease preventive measures instead
of expensive treatments and reduced yields.
Analyses of the results reveal the significant difference in VMPs and
chemicals used in different shrimp farming states. Unlike Andhra Pra­
desh and Tamil Nadu, Gujarat farmers with lower stocking density and
longer culture period target production of larger size shrimp, requiring
fewer chemicals and VMPs. This variability in the usage pattern in the
different state suggests the role of geographical condition, climate and
farming practices by the fellow farmers and the type of products mar­
keted in the region. Similar to previous observation province/state
where the farm is located seems to influence the usage pattern of VMPs
(Rico et al., 2013; Ali et al., 2016). Though in comparison to other Asian
countries (Bangladesh: 0.48 kg t− 1, China:18.78 kg t− 1, Thailand:18.22
kg t− 1, and Vietnam:15.98 kg t− 1), Indian shrimp farmers seems to be
using more chemicals and VMPs (76.52 kg t− 1), majority of the com­
pounds included were environmental modifiers for better soil and water
quality.
The multiple regression analysis revealed that higher use of chem­
icals and VMPs was positively correlated to the stocking density (p <
0.1), survival (p < 0.01) and production (p < 0.01) (Tables S1–S3). A
similar correlation between biologicals and chemicals on improved
health and production was reported earlier from China, Thailand and
Vietnam (Rico et al., 2013) and Bangladesh (Ali et al., 2016). The ob­
servations of the earlier studies and the present study results suggest the
utility of biologicals and chemicals in improving the survival and pro­
duction and the possibility of increasing the stocking densities in shrimp
production. For economic sustainability, farmers are opting for higher
stocking densities in recent times. More intensive type of farming re­
quires the application of higher quantity of chemicals and VMPs for
maintaining the optimum water and soil quality parameters, better
shrimp health to achieve higher growth and production.
There was no use of antibiotics in any of the surveyed shrimp farms;
instead, farmers preferred to use disinfectants to manage infectious
diseases. However, in a similar study, shrimp farmers of Thailand,
Vietnam and China were found to use antibiotics (Holmström et al.,
2003; Le and Munekage, 2004; Tu et al., 2006; Rico et al., 2013; Chi
et al., 2017). The observed non-use of products containing antibiotic in
Indian shrimp farming could be due to awareness among the farmers
about the international trade restrictions on residues. We have previ­
ously reported a significant reduction in the rejections of Indian fish and
fishery products in the global market over the last one and a half decades
(Geetha et al., 2020). Since most of the shrimp farmed in India is
intended for the international market, the information on the usage
pattern of VMPs is of great importance to importing countries. The ob­
servations of the present study suggest the absence of any prohibited
compounds in the shrimp farming systems of India.
4. Conclusion
Chemicals for optimal environmental quality were the major com­
pounds followed by probiotics, disinfectants and nutritional
4
Aquaculture 546 (2022) 737285
supplements used in Indian shrimp farming operations. Pattern of their
usage was found to be influenced by stocking density, survival and
productivity. Shrimp farms located in the state of Andhra Pradesh and
Tamil Nadu were found to use higher quantity of chemicals and VMPs
compared to their counterparts in Gujarat. The use of prohibited phar­
macologically active substances was not found in the study farms.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge the All Indian Network Project on Fish
Health funded by Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR), Min­
istry of Agriculture and Farmer’s Welfare, Government of India.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737285.
References
Alam, M.A., Rashid, M.M., 2014. Use of aqua-medicines and chemicals in aquaculture in
Satkhira district, Bangladesh. J. Phar. Biol. Sci. 9 (6), 05–09.
Alday-Sanz, V., Corsin, F., Irde, E., Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., 2012. Survey on the use of
veterinarymedicines in aquaculture. In: Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Arthur, J.R.,
Subasinghe, R.P. (Eds.), Improving Biosecurity through Prudent and Responsible use
of Veterinary Medicines in Aquatic Food Production. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture
Technical Paper No. 547. FAO, Rome, pp. 29–44 (207 pp.).
Ali, M.M., Rahman, M.A., Hossain, M.B., Rahman, M.Z., 2014. Aquaculture drugs used
for fish and shellfish health management in the southwestern Bangladesh. Asian J.
Biol. Sci. 7, 225–232.
Ali, H., Rico, A., Murshed-e-Jahan, K., Belton, B., 2016. An assessment of chemical and
biological product use in aquaculture in Bangladesh. Aquaculture 454, 199–209.
Asche, F., Anderson, J.L., Botta, R., Kumar, G., Abrahamsen, E.B., Nguyen, L.T.,
Valderrama, D., 2020. The economics of shrimp disease. J. Invertebr. Pathol.
107397.
Baoprasertkul, P., Somsiri, T., Boonyawiwat, V., 2012. Use of veterinary medicines in
Thai aquaculture: current status. In: In: Improving Biosecurity through Prudent and
Responsible use of Veterinary Medicines in Aquatic Food Production.
Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Arthur, J.R., Subasinghe, R.P., 2012. Improving biosecurity
through prudent and responsible use of veterinary medicines in aquatic food
production. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 547. Rome, FAO
207 pp..
Boyd, C.E., 2017. Chapter 6 - General relationship between water quality and
aquaculture performance in Ponds. In: Jeney, Galina (Ed.), Fish Diseases. Academic
Press, pp. 147–166.
Cabello, F.C., 2006. Heavy use of prophylactic antibiotics in aquaculture: a growing
problem for human and animal health and for the environment. Environ. Microbiol.
8, 1137–1144.
Cabello, F.C., Godfrey, H.P., Buschmann, A.H., Dölz, H.J., 2016. Aquaculture as yet
another environmental gateway to the development and globalisation of
antimicrobial resistance. Lancet Infect. Dis. 16, e127–e133.
Chi, T.T.K., Clausen, J.H., Van, P.T., Tersbøl, B., Dalsgaard, A., 2017. Use practices of
antimicrobials and other compounds by shrimp and fish farmers in Northern
Vietnam. Aquacult. Rep. 7, 40–47.
Danner, G.R., Merrill, P., 2008. Disinfectants, disinfection and biosecurity in
aquaculture. In: Scarfe, A.D., Lee, C.S., O’Bryen, P.J. (Eds.), Aquaculture Biosecurity:
Prevention, Control and Eradication of Aquatic Animal Diseases. John Wiley & Sons,
p. 91.
Gatesoupe, F.J., 1999. The use of probiotics in aquaculture. Aquaculture 180, 147–165.
Geetha, R., Ravisankar, T., Patil, P.K., Avunje, S., Vinoth, S., Sairam, C.V., Vijayan, K.K.,
2020. Trends, causes, and indices of import rejections in international shrimp trade
with special reference to India: a 15-year longitudinal analysis. Aquac. Int. 28,
1341–1369.
Holmström, K., Gräslund, S., Wahlström, A., Poungshompoo, S., Bengtsson, B.E.,
Kautsky, N., 2003. Antibiotic use in shrimp farming and implications for
environmental impacts and human health. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 38, 255–266.
Hossein, H.S., Yun-Zhang, S., Anran, W., Zhigang, Z., 2018. Probiotics as means of
diseases control in aquaculture, a review of current knowledge and future
perspectives. Front. Microbiol. 9, 2429.
Irianto, A., Austin, B., 2002. Probiotics in aquaculture. J. Fish Dis. 25, 633–642.
Jasmin, M.Y., Syukri, F., Kamarudin, M.S., Karim, M., 2020. Potential of bioremediation
in treating aquaculture sludge: review article. Aquaculture 519, 734905.
P.K. Patil et al.
Le, T.X., Munekage, Y., 2004. Residues of selected antibiotics in water and mud from
shrimp ponds in mangrove areas in Viet Nam. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 49, 922–929.
Lightner, D.V., 2011. Status of shrimp diseases and advances in shrimp health
management. In: Diseases in Asian Aquaculture VII. Fish Health Section, Asian
Fisheries Society, Selangor, Malaysia, pp. 121–134.
Mishra, S.S., Das, R., Das, B.K., Choudhary, P., Rathod, R., Giri, B.S., Swain, P., 2017.
Status of aqua-medicines, drugs and chemicals use in India: a survey report.
J. Aquac. Fish. 1, 4.
OIE, 2017. Disinfection of Aquaculture Establishments and Equipment. https://www.oie.
int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Health_standards/aahc/current/chapitre_disinfection.pdf.
Pathak, S.C., Ghosh, S.K., Palanisamy, K., 2000. The use of chemicals in aquaculture in
India. In: Arthur, J.R., Lavilla-Pitogo, C.R., Subasinghe, R.P. (Eds.), Use of Chemicals
in Aquaculture in Asia : Proceedings of the Meeting on the Use of Chemicals in
Aquaculture in Asia 20–22 May 1996, Tigbauan, Iloilo, Philippines. Aquaculture
Department, Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre, Tigbauan, Iloilo,
Philippines, pp. 87–112.
R Core Team, 2020. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R
Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
Rasul, M.G., Majumdar, B.C., Akter, T., 2017. Aqua-chemicals and antibiotics used in
freshwater aquaculture of Sylhet, Bangladesh. J. Agri. Sci. Eng. 3, 20–26.
Rico, A., Satapornvanit, K., Haque, M.M., Min, J., Nguyen, P.T., Telfer, T.C., Van den
Brink, P.J., 2012. Use of chemicals and biological products in Asian aquaculture and
their potential environmental risks: a critical review. Rev. Aquac. 4, 75–93.
Rico, A., Phub, T.M., Satapornvanit, K., Min, J., Shahabuddinf, A.M., Patrik, J.G.,
Paul, J., 2013. Van den Brink Use of veterinary medicines, feed additives and
probiotics in four major internationally traded aquaculture species farmed in Asia.
Aquaculture 412, 231–243.
Salunke, M., Kalyankar, A., Khedkar, C.D., Shingare, M., Khedkar, G.D., 2020. A review
on shrimp aquaculture in India: historical perspective, constraints, status and future
Aquaculture 546 (2022) 737285
implications for impacts on aquatic ecosystem and biodiversity. Rev. Fish. Sci. 28,
283–302.
Shamsuzzaman, M.M., Biswas, T.K., 2012. Aqua chemicals in shrimp farm: a study from
south-west coast of Bangladesh. Egypt. J. Aquat. Res. 38, 275–285.
Sharker, M.R., Sumi, K.R., Alam, M.J., Rahman, M.M., 2014. Drugs and chemicals used
in aquaculture activities for fish health management in the coastal region of
Bangladesh. Int. J. Life Sc. Bt & Pharm. Res. 3, 49–58.
Sonia, S.S., Joselito, R.S., Simeona, E.R., 2012. Use of veterinary medicines in Philippine
aquaculture: Current Status. In: In: Improving Biosecurity through Prudent and
Responsible use of Veterinary Medicines in Aquatic Food Production.
Tai, M.V., 2012. Use of veterinary medicines in Vietnamese aquaculture: current status.
In: Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Arthur, J.R., Subasinghe, R.P. (Eds.), Improving
Biosecurity through Prudent and Responsible Use of Veterinary Medicines in Aquatic
Food Production. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 547. FAO,
Rome, p. 207.
Thitamadee, S., Prachumwat, A., Srisala, J., Jaroenlak, P., Salachan, P.V.,
Sritunyalucksana, K., Itsathitphaisarn, O., 2016. Review of current disease threats
for cultivated penaeid shrimp in Asia. Aquaculture 452, 69–87.
Tu, H.T., Phuong, N.T., Silvestre, F., Douny, C., Tao, C.T., Maghuin-Rogister, G.,
Kestemont, P., 2006. Investigation on the use of drugs and chemicals in shrimp
farming and the kinetics of enrofloxacin and furazolidone in black tiger shrimp
(Penaeus monodon). CTUJS. 1, 70–78 (In Vietnamese).
Watts, J.E.M., Schreier, H.J., Lanska, L., Hale, M.S., 2017. The rising tide of antimicrobial
resistance in aquaculture: sources, sinks and solutions. Mar. Drugs 158, 1–16.
XinHua, Y., Wen, C., 2012. Use of veterinary medicines in Chinese aquaculture: current
status. In: Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Arthur, J.R., Subasinghe, R.P. (Eds.), FAO
Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 547, pp. 51–67.