Aquaculture Europe 2025

September 22 - 25, 2025

Valencia, Spain

Add To Calendar 24/09/2025 11:30:0024/09/2025 11:45:00Europe/ViennaAquaculture Europe 2025NEUROENDOCRINE STRESS RESPONSE TO STRESSORS OF DIFFERENT SEVERITY IN THE MUCOUSAL TISSUES OF Sparus aurataSM 1C+D, VCC - Floor 1The European Aquaculture Societywebmaster@aquaeas.orgfalseDD/MM/YYYYaaVZHLXMfzTRLzDrHmAi181982

NEUROENDOCRINE STRESS RESPONSE TO STRESSORS OF DIFFERENT SEVERITY IN THE MUCOUSAL TISSUES OF Sparus aurata

Nuria Ruiz*, Manuel Blonç , Lluis Tort

 Department of Cell Biology, Physiology and Immunology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain

 *Presenting author: Nuria.Ruiz.Iglesias@uab.cat



Introduction

 It is  known that  fish are subjected  to  different stressors in the aquaculture industry such as anoxia or density. These stressors can activate  a stress response, but t he level of this response will depend on the s everity of the stressor. Such severity may be due to different factors such as the species studied, the age ,  or duration, intensity and type of stressors among other factors.  In this case it was selected a stressor  of high severity such as anoxia where the fish must be out of the water, and a crowding stress which is less severe than anoxia. Moreover, crowding stress has an additional emotional component that anoxia does not have.  Also, the stress response can modulate other responses such as the immune or the endocrine and energetic response that can also have  further effects on fish health.  This is why the aim of this study was to investigate the  neuroendocrine  stress response of a juvenile s of S.aurata subjected to  two different  severe stressors such as anoxia and  crowding to understand how the severity can modulate the  activation level of the response.  Also,  another objective was to observe if the recovery time was affected by the severity of the stressor.

Materials and methods

A total of 48 g ilthead seabream juveniles were acclimated to AQUAB fish facilities (Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, UAB), After the acclimation period, f ish were randomly divided in 3 different treatment groups; control, anoxia, and crowding group that were sampled at 1 and 24 h after the stressor . The fish subj ected to anoxia were exposed to air for 3 min and then were placed back in thanks for 1 hour or 24 hours until the sampling. The crowding stress was performed by decreasing the water level from 20 L to 10 L,  remaining  like this for 30 min and then  restoring  the water  volume,  and  wait until sampling at 1 or 24 hours.  From each fish,  plasma was sampled for  haematological and biochemical analysis, and the mucosal tissues (gills, s kin, and gut) were sampled for  qPCR gene expression analysis .

Results

No differences were found in cortisol levels in plasma, but the parameters related with the oxidative stress changed in the groups subjected to stress compared with controls. Regarding the gene expression results,  it was observed a tissue-specific response, being the gills the  most affected one . What was relevant is that glucocorticoids receptors did not  show any difference compared with the control, but in the case of cfos  gene  there was an upregulation  that can be  clearly associated  to  the stress response. Moreover ,  the genes related with the immune and the  oxidative stress were  also affected. Another interesting discovery was that crowding stress  showed  more effects than anoxia, and the effects from the density  lasted  for  longer  time  in the fish.

Discussion

 As it was expected different severities had different effects on the fish (Figure 1), since anoxia did not cause  the upregulation of cfos , but the crowding stress caused an upregulation but after 24 hours. Despite glucocorticoids receptors were not significantly regulated, il1β in the case of the crowding group at 24h suffered an upregulation and an interesting  fact is that the anoxia exposure did not affect the immune genes in  gills. Also  it  is  relevant  to remark the tissue specific response,  as  this could be due to  the exposure of each tissue  to the stressors  and the main function of the tissue .  In the case of gills and the skin both tissues are in direct contact with the environment but the  main specific function of each tissue is completely different which may explain the different sensitivity of the response