Alter lighting

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Commercial salmon farms are susceptible to outbreaks of sea lice. Traditionally, control of sea lice has involved pesticide use, either through oral administration or as a bath treatment. Light has been investigated as an alternative to pesticides as a control agent.

Key messages

A replicated, controlled study in Norway reported lower numbers of lice on salmon kept in low intensity artificial light or natural lighting. The more intense the artificial light was, the higher the number of lice found on fish.

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

In 1996, a replicated, controlled study in Norway (Hevrøy et al., 2003) found salmon, Salmo salar, kept under intense artificial light had higher lice numbers than those kept under low intensity artificial or natural light. Salmon kept under medium and high artificial light intensities had the highest number of lice increasing from three to a maximum of 26 lice per fish over the full sampling period. Salmon in low artificial and natural light conditions both had an average of between 5 and 10 lice per fish by the end of sampling. Four salmon cages, each containing 2,300 salmon, were used in the study. Three were lit with continuous artificial light at low (0.24 W/m²), medium (1.9–4.1 W/m²) and high (22.2 W/m²) intensity from January until harvest in June, 1996. The fourth group was kept under natural light conditions for the duration of the experiment. All groups were given a single chemical treatment for sea lice infection in March and May. Azamethiphos at a concentration of 0.2 parts per million was applied. Samples of salmon were inspected for lice started on day 76. Every third week, 20–30 fish from each cage were inspected for numbers of lice.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Hevrøy E.M., Boxaspen K., Oppedal F., Taranger G.L. & Holm J.C. (2003) The effect of artificial light treatment and depth on the infestation of the sea louse Lepeophtheirus salmonis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) culture. Aquaculture, 220, 1-14.

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

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Sustainable Aquaculture

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Alter lighting Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Breed for resistance traits Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Use of probiotics and immunostimulants Action Link	Awaiting assessment	2	Synopsis Link