Premium
The efficacy of A qui‐ S vet. (iso‐eugenol) and metomidate as anaesthetics in E uropean eel ( A nguilla anguilla L .), and their effects on animal welfare and primary and secondary stress responses
Author(s) -
Iversen Martin H,
Økland Finn,
Thorstad Eva B,
Finstad Bengt
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
aquaculture research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.646
H-Index - 89
eISSN - 1365-2109
pISSN - 1355-557X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2109.2012.03140.x
Subject(s) - eugenol , fight or flight response , biology , fish <actinopterygii> , anesthesia , zoology , fishery , medicine , chemistry , biochemistry , organic chemistry , gene
The effects of 40 mg/L metomidate and 300 mg/L iso‐eugenol (i.e. 600 mg/L A qui‐ S vet.) anaesthesia on the stress response in E uropean silver eel during a process of complete anaesthesia, recovery and long‐term survival were studied. Metomidate is a hypnotic agent with no analgesia, whereas A qui‐ S vet. is a true anaesthetic. There was no difference between fish exposed to A qui‐ S vet. and metomidate, with respect to time to anaesthesia (mean 3.8 and 2.6 min respectively) and recovery (mean 7.6 and 6.5 min respectively). For the metomidate group, the plasma cortisol concentration increased to a peak during the recovery phase, and was significantly higher than for the A qui‐ S vet. group, which showed no such increase. Fish were kept in tanks with seawater for monitoring of long‐term survival (4 months) after anaesthesia treatment, and no mortality was observed in either group. The results indicate that metomidate is a potential stressor to E uropean eels during exposure, and we do not recommend using metomidate in this species. A qui‐ S vet., however, seems promising as a stress‐reducing anaesthetic for E uropean eel, and if used properly could improve animal welfare and survivability during and after common ecology‐related procedures, as capture, tagging and size measuring.