Aquatic disease diagnostics

Selection of the various laboratory tests under the quality management system will influence the validity of the results obtained. This process is similar whether the laboratory is part of a fuUy accredited scheme or not. Importance can be placed on the internationally approved but also the scientific acceptance of the different laboratory tests employed. The methodology does not always have to be the most modem method used and in fact, often traditional, simple tests can be more cost effective within a rural aquatic disease diagnostic laboratory. 

Abstract Quality assurance (QA) is becoming more important within the field of aquaculture and aquatic disease diagnosis, but at present a single one-size-fits-all approach does not exist. There is a need to raise awareness for a simple, cost-effective QA approach, which could be implemented by even the most basic aquatic diagnostic facility. This chapter will describe the various aspects required for an effective QA system within an aquatic disease diagnosis facility and discuss the benefits derived when working within a quality management scheme. 

All tests performed within the disease diagnostic facility should be valid, irrespective of their purpose. The validation process determines that the assay flt-for-purpose, it ensures that it has been properly developed, optimised and standardised for the intended purpose. This is described in more detail in chapter 1.1.2 in the OIE manual for diagnostic tests in aquatic animals (www.oie.int). Emphasis is placed on the purpose of the assay, which should be clearly defined by the diagnostic laboratory, irrespective of where this has been developed. 

Various QA management systems and their benefits have been discussed, where adoption of an accreditation system is a viable option for any disease diagnostic laboratory, particularly if it has a high input of samples. This may be considered as a more formal recognition of QA. There are various types or levels of accreditation but in general a third party is employed to verify and check that the laboratory is conforming to the selected standards which are part of the accreditation scheme chosen by the laboratory. A list of the most common accreditation bodies within aquatic animal health is provided in Table 6.2. 

OIE 2000c. Diagnostic Manual for Aquatic Animal Diseases, Third edition. Office International des Epizooties, Paris. 

BONDAD-REANTASO, M.G., S.E. MCGLADDERY, I. EAST, and R.P. SUBASINGHE. 2001. Asia Diagnostic Guide to Aquatic Animal Diseases. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 402/2, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy. 

ERICKSON, H.S., M. ZARiN-HERZBERG, and D.V. UGHTNER. 2002. Detection of Tanra syndrome virus (TSV) strain differences using selected diagnostic methods diagnostic implications in penaeid shrimp. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 52 1-10. 

WALKER, P., and R. SUBASINGHE, editors. 2000. DNA-based Molecular Diagnostic Techniques. Research Needs for Standardization and Validation of the Detection of Aquatic Animal Pathogens and Diseases. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 395. Report and Proceedings, Bangkok, Thailand, February 7-9,1999. 

---