Administration of the antibacterial agents flumequine and oxolinic acid to small turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.) by bath

Abstract

Summary Administration of flumequine and oxolinic acid to turbot, Scophthalmus maximus L., by bath resulted in significant levels of both drugs in the muscle tissue. Bath treatment using 150 mg L−1 of flumequine and 200 mg L−1 of oxolinic acid for 72 h gave muscle concentrations of 10.2 and 6.2 μg g−1, respectively. Excretion of both antibacterials was rapid, reaching concentrations of 0.8 and 0.9 μg g−1, respectively, for flumequine and oxolinic acid 24 h after the end of treatment. At day 3 post‐treatment the concentration of flumequine was below the limit of quantitation (0.1 μg g−1) of the analytical method. Based on a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 0.0625 μg ml−1 for susceptible strains, bath treatment maintain muscle levels in excess of 0.5 μg ml−1, corresponding to eight times the MIC‐value for approximately 118 h for oxolinic acid and 104 h for flumequine.

Viral and bacterial diseases of Atlantic cod Gadus morhua, their prophylaxis and treatment: a review

“…At the end of treatment, the average plasma concentration was 0.13 µg ml -1 , showing that flumequine is poorly absorbed from seawater; therefore, to obtain adequate concentrations, a higher dose needs to be administered over a longer period of time. The need for a higher concentration in the bath and an extended treatment period were shown in small turbot by Samuelsen (2003). Using a bath concentration of 150 mg l -1 for 72 h, muscle concentrations of 7 µg g -1 after 12 h, increasing to 10.2 µg g -1 after 72 h, were obtained in turbot of 1 to 2 g. The pharmacokinetic properties of flumequine were also studied in cod following oral (per 0.5, p.o.)…”

Depletion study and estimation of the withdrawal period for enrofloxacin in pacu (Piaractus mesopotamicus)

“…However, individual injection of fish is costly in time and labor and is only used to treat fish with high individual value, such as broodstock or ornamental fish. Bath treatment, although easy to perform with agents that are highly soluble in water, is restricted to recirculating systems or tanks of limited size and is, therefore, used mainly in the treatment of small fish suffering from systemic, skin, or gill infections (Hiney et al ., ; Samuelsen & Lunestad, ; Samuelsen, ). Oral administration makes the treatment of large numbers of adult fish relatively easy at a low cost in labor and this method has become the primary route of fish medication.…”

Treatment of vibriosis in European sea bass larvae, Dicentrarchus labrax L., with oxolinic acid administered by bath or through medicated nauplii of Artemia franciscana (Kellogg): efficacy and residual kinetics

“…2003; Toranzo, Magariños & Romalde 2005). The treatment for these bacterial diseases in the larval stages of fish is by the administration of antibiotics either by bath (Samuelsen 2003) or by using a carrier such as the live feed Artemia to deliver the drugs to the target organism (Duis et al. 1995; Touraki et al.…”

“…1996, 2010). Although bath treatments have been considered more effective because they provide the same amount of antibiotic to all fish, overcoming the problem of reduced appetite of diseased fish (Samuelsen 2003), the application of antimicrobials in the water column might be implicated in the development of microbial resistance in the vicinity of fish farms, with severe environmental effects (Spangaard et al. 1993; Samuelsen et al.…”

“…2000), turbot, Scophthalmus maximus (L.) (Duis et al. 1995; Poher & Blanc 1998; Samuelsen 2003) and corkwing wrasse, Symphodus melops (L.) (Samuelsen et al. 2000; Samuelsen & Ervik 2001).…”