Litopenaeus vannamei (whiteleg shrimp)
- Summary of Invasiveness
- Taxonomic Tree
- Distribution Table
- Habitat List
- Natural Food Sources
- Air Temperature
- Water Tolerances
- Natural enemies
- Pathway Causes
- Pathway Vectors
- Impact Summary
- Risk and Impact Factors
- Uses List
- Links to Websites
- Distribution Maps
Don't need the entire report?
Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.Generate report
PicturesTop of page
IdentityTop of page
Preferred Scientific Name
- Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone, 1931)
Preferred Common Name
- whiteleg shrimp
Other Scientific Names
- Penaeus vannamei Boone, 1931
International Common Names
- English: Pacific white shrimp; white-legged shrimp
- Spanish: camarón patiblanco
- French: crevette pattes blanches
Summary of InvasivenessTop of page
L. vannamei is a decapod crustacean which is native to the eastern Pacific coast of Central and South America from <_st13a_city _w3a_st="on">Tumbes, <_st13a_country-region _w3a_st="on">Peru in the south to <_st13a_place _w3a_st="on"><_st13a_country-region _w3a_st="on">Mexico in the north. It has been introduced widely around the world since the 1970s, but especially since 2000, as it has become the principle cultured shrimp species in <_st13a_place _w3a_st="on">Asia. The species itself is not considered a major threat to biodiversity, does not appear to have formed breeding populations, and has generally resulted in positive economic impacts in non-indigenous areas. Perhaps of more concern is that L. vannamei is known to carry a range of diseases (especially viral) that can affect both this species and the native shrimp (and other crustacean) species in countries where it has been introduced. This can have negative consequences on its culture and the culture of the indigenous species and possibly on wild stocks, although very little is known about this. However, it is suspected that diseases such as Taura syndrome virus, infectious myonecrosis virus and necrotizing hepatopancreatitis (and elements of the mondodon slow growth syndrome) have been brought into Asia from Latin America with introductions of L. vannamei.
Perhaps of more concern is that L. vannamei is known to carry a range of diseases (especially viral) that can affect both this species and the native shrimp (and other crustacean) species in countries where it has been introduced. This can have negative consequences on its culture and the culture of the indigenous species and possibly on wild stocks, although very little is known about this. However, it is suspected that diseases such as Taura syndrome virus, infectious myonecrosis virus and necrotizing hepatopancreatitis (and elements of the mondodon slow growth syndrome) have been brought into Asia from Latin America with introductions of L. vannamei.
Taxonomic TreeTop of page
- Domain: Eukaryota
- Kingdom: Metazoa
- Phylum: Arthropoda
- Subphylum: Crustacea
- Class: Malacostraca
- Subclass: Eumalacostraca
- Order: Decapoda
- Suborder: Dendrobranchiata
- Unknown: Penaeoidea
- Family: Penaeidae
- Genus: Litopenaeus
- Species: Litopenaeus vannamei
DescriptionTop of page
Shrimp of the family Penaeidae follow a similar body design to that of most Malacostracans. That is, they are laterally compressed, elongate decapods, with a well-developed abdomen adapted for swimming. Each somite (segment) is enclosed by a dorsal tergum and ventral sternum. It is usual to call the side plates (and any extensions thereof) of each somite the pleura (Dall et al., 1990).
In the Penaeidae the head (five somites) and thorax (eight somites) are fused into a cephalothorax, which is completely covered by the carapace. The pleura of the cephalothorax form the branchiostegite or gill cover. The carapace has characteristic ridges (carinae) and grooves (sulci). The rostrum is always prominent, with a high median blade bearing dorsal teeth and, in some genera, ventral teeth as well. The compound eyes are stalked and laterally mobile and the somites of the head bear, in order, pairs of antennules, antennae, mandibles, maxillules (maxillae 1) and maxillae (maxillae 2). The thorax has three pairs of maxillipeds and five pairs of pereiopods (legs), the first three being chelate and used for feeding, and last two simple (non-chelate) and used for walking. The abdomen consists of six somites, the first five with paired pleopods. The mouth is situated ventrally and the cephalic appendages surrounding it, plus the first and second maxillipeds and sometimes the third as well, may be referred to collectively as the ‘mouth parts’. The anus is on the ventral surface of the telson, towards its base (Dall et al., 1990).
Penaeids are dioecious and the external structures of the genital system are the major dimorphic features. The male has two pairs of modified abdominal appendages on the first and second abdominal segments (the petasma and appendix masculina) that deliver sperm to the female's external receptacle (the thelycum) located between the bases of the fifth walking legs. The petasma, appendix masculine and thelycum are located on the ventral surface (Bailey-Brock and Moss, 1992).
The petasma is formed by the endopodites of the first pair of pleopods which are modified as interlocking structures for spermatophore transfer. The appendix masculina are on the endopodites of the second pair of pleopods and serve to separate the petasma into two component halves. The thelycum may be ‘open’ or ‘closed’, depending on the species. Closed thelyca are those where the spermatophore is placed by a male in the groove below the plates whereas the female is in the soft exoskeleton stage following moulting. The spermatophore is stored for some time before spawning. Open thelyca are not enclosed by plates, and the spermatophore must be placed on it by a male when the female's exoskeleton is hard; usually within hours of spawning. The presence of a spermatophore on the female is evidence that she has successfully mated. Open thelyca are found in some shrimp species endemic to the western hemisphere, such as P. stylirostris and P. vannamei; whereas closed thelyca are characteristic of most Asian species, such as P. monodon, P. chinensis, P. indicus and P. merguiensis (Bailey-Brock and Moss, 1992).
Internal organs of the male reproductive system include paired testes, vas deferens and terminal ampoules for spermatophore storage. The female reproductive system includes paired (but partially fused) ovaries that extend from the mid-thorax to the posterior end of the abdomen, and oviducts terminating adjacent to a single thelycum. (Bailey-Brock and Moss, 1992).
The morphology of the digestive tract in the Penaeidae is similar to that of most Decapoda. It is divided into a complex, cuticle-lined foregut region; a compact digestive (or midgut) gland at the beginning of the midgut region, followed by a long tubular, simple part; and a cuticle-lined hindgut region, consisting principally of the rectum (Dall et al., 1990).
The foregut has been variously called the ‘stomodaeal apparatus’ (ponderous, but technically correct); the ‘stomach’ (morphologically incorrect: it is part of the stomodaeum); the ‘proventriculus’ (derived from analogy with insects, where it is a region between the crop and midgut) (Dall et al., 1990).
The labrum and surrounding tissues are glandular, but the role of these glands is unknown. The mouth leads into a short vertical oesophagus, surrounded by contractile muscles, which can close it in a sphincter-like manner. The oesophagus opens into the lumen of the anterior of the proventriculus. The proventriculus is divided into two principal chambers. The anterior chamber is distensible, particularly in the anterior part; it is sometimes called the ‘food sac’. There are a pair of ventro-lateral, elongate plates, each of which bears a row of small teeth, which lead to the much heavier armature of the lateral teeth of the gastric mill and the single, dorsal median tooth. The posterior chamber is much narrower than the anterior chamber and is further divided into an upper compartment, which is a through-canal to the midgut, and a lower filter-press. The foregut cuticle ends where the latter opens ventrally into the digestive gland, which surrounds the lower posterior chamber and extends dorsally around it as far as the tip of the anterior diverticulum. Above the filter-press, the foregut cuticle extends backwards to the paired openings of the anterior diverticulum of the midgut, which are closed by a pair of lappets. The principal functions of the midgut are the secretion of digestive enzymes and absorption of nutrients. The remainder of the midgut is a straight tube, running from the cephalothorax dorsally through the abdomen to the rectum. It is lined by a folded, simple epithelium. At the anterior end, two lateral openings lead into the dorsal anterior diverticulum; at the posterior end, a dorsal opening leads into the posterior diverticulum. Histologically, both diverticula appear to be simple extensions of the midgut. The short muscular rectum is lined by six pad-like ridges, whose primary function appears to be for grasping the faecal pellet in the peritrophic membrane and extruding it (Dall et al., 1990).
The rostrum is armed with dorsal and usually, 2-4 (occasionally 5-8) ventral teeth, which are moderately long, and in young distinctly surpassing antennular peduncle. They are shorter in adults, sometimes reaching only to the mid-length of second antennular segment. Carapace has pronounced antennal and hepatic spines, and lacks orbital and pterygostomian spines. The post-ocular sulcus is absent. The post-rostral carina is of variable length, sometimes almost reaching posterior margin of carapace. The adrostral carina and sulcus short, extending to, or only slightly beyond epigastric tooth. Gastrofrontal carina are absent, whereas the gastro-orbital carina is relatively short, usually extending (at most) anteriorly about two-thirds of distance between hepatic spine and orbital margin. The orbito-antennal sulcus is well marked, with sharp cervical and hepatic carinae, and deep accompanying sulci (GSMFC, 2004).
Branchiocardiac carina are lacking and longitudinal and transverse sutures absent. The sixth abdominal somite bears three cicatrices, dorsolateral sulcus extremely narrow or absent. The telson is unarmed. Antennules lack a parapenaeid spine and antennular flagella are much shorter than the carapace. The palp of first maxilla is elongate, consisting of 3 or 4 articles, with distal ones together flagelliform. The basal article is produced into setose proximal lobes on the lateral and mesial margins, which bear 1 or 2 long distomesial spines, and distolateral row of spinules. Basial and ischial spines are present on first pereiopod, and a basial on second (Perez Farfante and Kensley, 1997).
In mature males the petasma is symmetrical, semi-open, not hooded, lacking distomedian projections, and has short ventral costae, not nearly reaching distal margin and distinctly gaping (Perez Farfante, 1975; Perez Farfante and Kensley, 1997). The spermatophores are extremely complex, consisting of a sperm mass encapsulated by a sheath and bearing various attachment structures (anterior wing, lateral flap, caudal flange, dorsal plate), as well as adhesive and glutinous materials (Chow et al., 1991). The mature female has an open thelycum and sternite XIV (14) bearing ridges, prominences, depressions, or grooves (Perez Farfante, 1975; Perez Farfante and Kensley, 1997).Life stages
L. vannamei has six nauplii stages, three protozeal stages, and three mysis stages in its pelagic larval life history (Kitani, 1986). Subsequently, it becomes a post-larva and adopts a benthic lifestyle.
The carapace length (CL) of L. vannamei postlarvae ranges from 0.88 to 3.00 mm (Kitani, 1993). The larval stages (1.95-2.73 mm CL) can be recognized by the lack of a thoracic spine on the seventh sternite, and relative rostral length against the length of eye plus eye stalk ranges from 2/5 to 3/5, rarely 4/5 (Kitani, 1994). The most distinguishable morphological character is the development of supraorbital spines in the second and third protozoea (Kitani, 1986).
The colour of L. vannamei is typically translucent-white. The body can display a bluish hue that is due to a predominance of blue chromatophores which are concentrated near the margins of the telson and uropods (Eldred and Hutton, 1960). Colour variations are also shown in cases of nutritional deficiencies. The legs of L. vannamei can often appear white; hence the common name, white-legged shrimp.
DistributionTop of page
L. vannamei typically occurs in the Gulf of Panama (Perez Farfante and Kensley, 1997). Its range in the eastern Pacific is from Sonora, Mexico, south to Tumbes, Peru (Perez-Farfante and Kensley, 1997). A suitable environment for outdoor pond culture of this species is any location in which water temperature remains within 26-32°C for at least one growout period and in which salinity does not rapidly change within 2-45 ppt. Any attempts at culture outside a salinity range of 15-35 ppt should be undertaken with adequate acclimation of postlarvae/juveniles to ambient conditions. Year-round outdoor culture is possible along the west coast of Mexico, Central America and South America in the western hemisphere from Sonora, Mexico, to Tumbes, Peru. These latitudes are also appropriate for the east coasts of Mexico, Central America and South America, but can also include islands in the Caribbean Sea and western Atlantic (e.g. the Bahamas), where the species must be introduced. Suitable areas for culture have been identified and are being increasingly used in South-East Asia and mainland China at similar latitudes; however, this has lead to transboundary movements of exotic diseases (e.g. monodon slow growth syndrome, Taura syndrome virus, infectious myonecrosis virus and necrotizing hepatopancreatitis), so future introductions warrant further scrutiny.
2) low cost of land
3) avoidance of restrictive coastal zone regulations.
L. vannamei has also been introduced to Asia. The first introduction apparently occurred in 1980 in the Philippines, followed by Taiwan in 1981 and mainland China in 1988. In 1996, mainland China and Taiwan started commercial production of L. vannamei and from there, aquaculture production spread rapidly to other nations in Asia, including Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and India (Rosenberry, 2004; Briggs et al., 2004). Asia (particularly China, Thailand and Indonesia) now produces 75% of the worlds L. vannamei, with only 25% being produced in its original Western hemisphere.
Distribution TableTop of page
The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.
|Continent/Country/Region||Distribution||Last Reported||Origin||First Reported||Invasive||Reference||Notes|
|Atlantic, Southwest||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Atlantic, Western Central||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Pacific, Eastern Central||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975|
|Pacific, Southwest||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Pacific, Western Central||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Cambodia||Present||Introduced||2000||SEAFDEC, 2005||Sinhanouk Ville|
|China||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|India||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Indonesia||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Akiyma , 1986|
|Iran||Present||Introduced||2006||Shrimp News, 2006||Bushehr province|
|Israel||Present||Introduced||Parnes et al., 2004|
|Korea, Republic of||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Malaysia||Widespread||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Philippines||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Taiwan||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Thailand||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Vietnam||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2004|
|Egypt||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||CAB ABSTRACTS Data Mining 2001|
|Mexico||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|USA||Present||Present based on regional distribution.|
|-Alabama||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Arizona||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Florida||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Georgia||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Hawaii||Widespread||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Louisiana||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Mississippi||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-South Carolina||Localised||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|-Texas||Widespread||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
Central America and Caribbean
|Aruba||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Bahamas||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Belize||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Costa Rica||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Cuba||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Dominican Republic||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|El Salvador||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Guatemala||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Honduras||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Jamaica||Present||Introduced||1994||Shrimp News, 2007|
|Nicaragua||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Panama||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Puerto Rico||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Saint Kitts and Nevis||Present||Introduced||1989||DIAS, 2007|
|United States Virgin Islands||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Brazil||Widespread||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Colombia||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Ecuador||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Peru||Present||Native||Not invasive||Perez Farfante , 1975; Perez and Kensley , 1997|
|Venezuela||Present||Introduced||Not invasive||Rosenberry , 2003|
|Netherlands||Present||Introduced||2007||Shrimp News, 2007||One re-circulated farm in Rotterdam|
|Fiji||Present||Introduced||1972||Briggs et al., 2004||Imported by Ifremer|
|French Polynesia||Present||Introduced||1972||Briggs et al., 2004||Imported by Ifremer|
|Guam||Localised||Introduced||2006||Shrimp News, 2006||Both Guam and Saipan have small broodstock-rearing facilities|
|New Caledonia||Present||Introduced||1972||Briggs et al., 2004||Imported by Ifremer|
Habitat ListTop of page
|Inland saline areas||Present, no further details||Productive/non-natural|
|Irrigation channels||Present, no further details||Productive/non-natural|
|Coastal areas||Principal habitat||Natural|
|Mud flats||Principal habitat||Natural|
|Salt marshes||Principal habitat||Natural|
|Benthic zone||Principal habitat||Natural|
|Coral reefs||Present, no further details||Natural|
|Inshore marine||Principal habitat||Natural|
Natural Food SourcesTop of page
|Food Source||Life Stage||Contribution to Total Food Intake (%)||Details|
|aquatic and benthic phytoplankton||Adult/Fry/Larval||variable||e.g. diatoms|
ClimateTop of page
|A - Tropical/Megathermal climate||Preferred||Average temp. of coolest month > 18°C, > 1500mm precipitation annually|
|B - Dry (arid and semi-arid)||Tolerated||< 860mm precipitation annually|
|BS - Steppe climate||Tolerated||> 430mm and < 860mm annual precipitation|
|BW - Desert climate||Tolerated||< 430mm annual precipitation|
|C - Temperate/Mesothermal climate||Tolerated||Average temp. of coldest month > 0°C and < 18°C, mean warmest month > 10°C|
|Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year||Tolerated||Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year|
|Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer||Tolerated||Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers|
|Cw - Warm temperate climate with dry winter||Tolerated||Warm temperate climate with dry winter (Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry winters)|
Air TemperatureTop of page
|Parameter||Lower limit||Upper limit|
|Mean annual temperature (ºC)||18||35|
|Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC)||28||35|
|Mean minimum temperature of coldest month (ºC)||12|
Water TolerancesTop of page
|Parameter||Minimum Value||Maximum Value||Typical Value||Status||Life Stage||Notes|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.4||Optimum||Adult||highly variable reports, acute change is more harmful than upper level, not a real problem in outdoor growout|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.4||Optimum||Broodstock||highly variable reports, acute change is more harmful than upper level, not a real problem in outdoor growout|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.1||Optimum||<1 tolerated, both values apply to PL/juveniles in the wild|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.4||Optimum||Egg||highly variable reports, acute change is more harmful than upper level, not a real problem in outdoor growout|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.4||Optimum||Larval|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||<0.4||Optimum||Fry|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||0.4||2.0||Harmful||Adult|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||0.4||2.0||Harmful||Broodstock|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||0.4||2.0||Harmful||Egg|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||0.4||2.0||Harmful||Larval|
|Ammonia [unionised] (mg/l)||0.4||2.0||Harmful||Fry|
|Ammonium [ionised] (mg/l)||<1||Optimum||<10 tolerated, both values apply to PL/juveniles in the wild|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||<60||Optimum||Adult||seldom a problem|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||<60||Optimum||Broodstock||seldom a problem|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||<60||Optimum||Fry||seldom a problem|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||>60||Harmful||Adult||seldom a problem|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||>60||Harmful||Broodstock||seldom a problem|
|Carbon Dioxide (mg/l)||>60||Harmful||Fry||seldom a problem|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||<0.9||Optimum||Larval||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||<1.7||Optimum||Fry||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||<2||Optimum||Adult||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||<2||Optimum||Broodstock||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||>0.9||Harmful||Larval||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||>1.7||Harmful||Fry||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||>2||Harmful||Adult||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Chlorine (mg/l)||>2||Harmful||Broodstock||widely-used disinfectant in ponds, hatcheries; residual toxic to larvae, marine|
|Conductivity (µmhos/cm)||500-2000||Optimum||200-50,000 tolerated in the wild|
|Depth (m b.s.l.)||0-60||Optimum||<100 tolerated in the wild|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||2||Harmful||Adult||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||2||Harmful||Fry||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4||Harmful||Broodstock||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4.5||6.0||Optimum||Adult||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4.5||6.0||Optimum||Broodstock||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4.5||6.0||Optimum||Egg||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4.5||6.0||Optimum||Larval||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||4.5||6.0||Optimum||Fry||>50% saturation in most cases, not really important for eggs|
|Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)||>3||Optimum||> 1 tolerated, in the wild, for sub-adults/adults|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||<50||Harmful||Adult||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||<50||Harmful||Broodstock||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||<50||Optimum||Fry||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||>50||Optimum||Adult||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||>50||Optimum||Broodstock||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||>50||Harmful||Fry||not often monitored|
|Hardness (mg/l of Calcium Carbonate)||75-150||Optimum||50-500 tolerated in the wild|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||<0.01||Optimum||Adult||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||<0.01||Optimum||Broodstock||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||<0.01||Optimum||Egg||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||<0.01||Optimum||Larval||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||<0.01||Optimum||Fry||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||0.01||0.05||Harmful||Adult||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||0.01||0.05||Harmful||Broodstock||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||0.01||0.05||Harmful||Egg||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||0.01||0.05||Harmful||Larval||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Hydrogen sulphide (mg/l)||0.01||0.05||Harmful||Fry||mainly a problem in extensive and semi-intensive ponds|
|Illumination (Lux illuminance)||12000||Harmful||Broodstock||primarily important for broodstock|
|Illumination (Lux illuminance)||2500||Optimum||Broodstock||primarily important for broodstock|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||>4.5||Harmful||Fry||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||>4.5||Harmful||Larval||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<4.5||Optimum||Egg||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<4.5||Optimum||Larval||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<4.5||Optimum||Fry||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||>4.5||Harmful||Adult||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||>4.5||Harmful||Broodstock||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||>4.5||Harmful||Egg||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<0.1||Optimum||<4.5 tolerated in the wild, both values apply to PL/juveniles|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<4.5||Optimum||Adult||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Nitrite (mg/l)||<4.5||Optimum||Broodstock||problem for recirculating systems, seldom for ponds|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||>40||Harmful||Fry||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||32||Harmful||Broodstock||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||32||Harmful||Egg||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||32||Harmful||Larval||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||34||Harmful||Adult||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||10||40||Optimum||Fry||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||27||31||Optimum||Adult||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||27||31||Optimum||Broodstock||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||27||31||Optimum||Egg||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||27||31||Optimum||Larval||controlled in hatchery, less controlled outdoors|
|Salinity (part per thousand)||10-25||Optimum||0.5-40 tolerated in the wild, both values apply to sub-adults/adults|
|Spawning temperature (ºC temperature)||<27||>32||Harmful||Broodstock||controlled in maturation facility|
|Spawning temperature (ºC temperature)||28||30||Optimum||Broodstock||controlled in maturation facility|
|Turbidity (JTU turbidity)||30||Optimum||Adult||mainly a pond growout issue|
|Turbidity (JTU turbidity)||<25||>40||Harmful||Adult||mainly a pond growout issue|
|Turbidity (JTU turbidity)||10-50||Optimum||0-100 tolerated in the wild|
|Velocity (cm/h)||0-10000||Optimum||<50,000 tolerated in the wild|
|Water pH (pH)||<7.5||>8.4||Harmful||Adult||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||<7.5||>8.4||Harmful||Broodstock||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||<7.5||>8.4||Harmful||Fry||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||<8.0||>8.2||Harmful||Egg||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||<8.0||>8.2||Harmful||Larval||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||7.5||8.4||Optimum||Adult||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||7.5||8.4||Optimum||Broodstock||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||7.5||8.4||Optimum||Fry||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||8.0||8.2||Optimum||Egg||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||8.0||8.2||Optimum||Larval||slightly basic preferred, important for broodstock systems|
|Water pH (pH)||7-8||Optimum||6.5-9.5 tolerated in the wild|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||30||Optimum||Adult|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||<25||>34||Harmful||Adult|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||<26||>32||Harmful||Fry|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||<27||>31||Harmful||Larval|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||<27||>32||Harmful||Broodstock|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||<27||>32||Harmful||Egg|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||27||31||Optimum||Larval|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||28||30||Optimum||Broodstock|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||28||30||Optimum||Egg|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||28||32||Optimum||Fry|
|Water temperature (ºC temperature)||20-32||Optimum||18-35 tolerated in wild|
Natural enemiesTop of page
Pathway CausesTop of page
|Aquaculture||Imported into non-native countries in the Americas. Asian importers sourced from stocks from Hawaii||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
|Breeding and propagation||Stocks from native countries used to establish domesticated strains||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004; Oceanic Institute, 2007|
|Food||Frozen and processed exports sent worldwide||Yes||Yes||Globefish, 2007|
|Research||Research institutes have moved this species worldwide||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
|Smuggling||Has occurred, especially in Asian countries which still ban its culture||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
|Stocking||Post-larvae and juveniles have been moved worldwide for stocking ponds||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
Pathway VectorsTop of page
|Aircraft||All stages from live broodstock, to larvae and adults||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
|Aquaculture stock||Broodstock, eggs, larvae and adults transferred for stocking aquaculture facilities||Yes||Yes||Briggs et al., 2004|
|Live seafood||Live adults transferred locally and internationally for food, especially in China||Yes||Yes||Globefish, 2007|
Impact SummaryTop of page
Risk and Impact FactorsTop of page Invasiveness
- Has a broad native range
- Abundant in its native range
- Highly adaptable to different environments
- Is a habitat generalist
- Tolerates, or benefits from, cultivation, browsing pressure, mutilation, fire etc
- Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
- Highly mobile locally
- Long lived
- Fast growing
- Has high reproductive potential
- Has high genetic variability
- Changed gene pool/ selective loss of genotypes
- Host damage
- Modification of natural benthic communities
- Modification of nutrient regime
- Negatively impacts aquaculture/fisheries
- Threat to/ loss of native species
- Competition - monopolizing resources
- Pest and disease transmission
- Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
- Highly likely to be transported internationally illegally
- Difficult/costly to control
Uses ListTop of page
Animal feed, fodder, forage
- Attractant in fish/shrimp feed
- Live feed
- Capital accumulation
- Laboratory use
- Research model
Human food and beverage
- Canned meat
- Cured meat
- Fresh meat
- Frozen meat
- Live product for human consumption
- Meat/fat/offal/blood/bone (whole, cut, fresh, frozen, canned, cured, processed or smoked)
ReferencesTop of page
Abdel-Rahman SH; Kanazawa A; Teshima S, 1979. Effects of dietary carbohydrates on the growth and levels of the hepatopancreas glycogen and serum glucose of prawn. Bull. Jap. Soc. Scien. Fish., 12:1491-1494.
Adiyodi KG; Adiyodi RG, 1970. Endocrine control of reproduction in decapod crustacea. Biol. Rev., 45:121-165.
Adiyodi RG; Subramoniam T, 1983. Arthropoda-crustacea. In: Adiyodi KG, Adiyodi RG, eds. Reproductive Biology of Invertebrates. Vol. I: Oogenesis, Oviposition, and Oosorption. Chichester, New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 443-495.
Akiyama DM; Coelho SR; Lawrence AL; Robinson EH, 1989. Apparent digestibility of feedstuffs by the marine shrimp Penaeus vannamei Boone. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi = Bulletin of the Japanese Society of Scientific Fisheries, 55(1):91-98; 28 ref.
Akiyma DM, 1986. The development of a purified diet and nutritional requirement of lysine in penaeid shrimp. PhD Thesis. Texas, USA: Texas A&M University College Station.
Alcivar-Warren A, 2004. US Marine Shrimp Farming Industry Report. Online at www.usmsfp.org. Accessed 30 September 2004.
Alikunhi KH; Poernomo A; Adisufresno S; Budiono M; Busman S, 1975. Preliminary observations on induction of maturity and spawning in Penaeus monodon (Fabricius) and Penaeus merquiensis (de Man) by eyestalk extirpation. Bull. Shrimp Cult. Res. Cent. Jepara, 1(1):1-11.
Allan GL; Smith DM, 1998. Recent nutrition research with Australian penaeids. Reviews in Fisheries Science, 6(1-2):113-127.
Andrew RD; Saleuddin ASM, 1979. Two dimensional electrophoresis of neurosecretory polypeptides in crustacean eyestalk. J. Comp. Physiol. B., 134(4):303-314.
AQUACOP French Polynesia Centre Oceanologique du Pacifique, 1979. Penaeid reared brood stock: closing the cycle of P. monodon, P. stylirostris and P. vannamei. Proceedings of the World Mariculture Society, 10:445-452.
AQUACOP, 1975. Maturation and spawning in captivity of penaeid shrimp: P. merguiensis de Man, P. japonicus Bate, P. aztecus Ives, MetaP. ensis de Haan, and P. semiculcatus de Haan. Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting of the World Mariculture Society, 6:123-132.
Aquacop, 1977. Observations on the maturation and reproduction of penaeid shrimp in captivity in a tropical medium. Aquaculture Workshop, ICES, May 1977, Brest, France.
Aquacop, 1978. Study of nutritional requirements and growth of Penaeus merguensis in tanks by means of purified and artificial diets. Proc. World Maricul. Soc., 9:225-234.
Aquatic Network, 2003. Shrimp-farming report strong on attack, weak on focus. Online at www.aquanet.com/news/archive/2003/jul001.htm?0sl=-41&cp1=1. Accessed 27 August 2004.
Arnstein DR; Beard TW, 1975. Induced maturation of prawn Penaeus orientalis (Kishinouyi) in the laboratory by means of eyestalk removal. Aquaculture, 5: 411-412.
Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, 2004. Biosecurity Australia. Online at www.affa.gov.au/index.cfm. Accessed 26 August 2004.
Bailey-Brock JH; Moss SM, 1992. Penaeid taxonomy, biology and zoogeography. In: Fast AW, Lester LJ, eds. Marine shrimp culture: principles and practices. Developments in aquaculture and fisheries science, volume 23. The Netherlands: Elsevier Science, 9-27.
Barnette P; Khururat O; Sananan W; Tangkrad-Olan N; Upatham S; Pantuwatana S; Wongwiwatanawute C, 2006. The prevalence of Taura Syndrome Virus, White Spot syndrome Virus and Yellow Head Virus in wild shrimp species in Thailand. In: ICAIS Conference Proceedings. http://www.icais.org/pdf/2006ppt/Barnette_Praparsiri
Bellon-Humbert CF; van Herp; GE; Strolenbergy CM; Denuce; JM, 1981. Histlogical and physiological aspects of the medulla externa X organ, a neurosecretory cell group in the eyestalk of Palaemon serratus (Crustacea, Decapoda). Natantia. Biol. Bull. (Woods Hole), 160:11-30.
Bliss DE, 1966. Relation between reproduction and growth in decapod crustaceans. Am. Zool., 6:231-233.
Bollenbacher WE; Smith; SL; Gilbert; LI, 1978. The biosynthesis of a and b ecdysone: in vivo, in vitro,and cell free approaches. In: Gallare PJ, Boer, HH, eds. Comparative Endocrinology. Amsterdam, Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press, 491-494.
Bombeo-Tuburan I; Guanzon NG; Schroeder GL, 1993. Production of Penaeus monodon (Fabricius) using four natural food types in an extensive system. Aquaculture, 112(1):57-65.
Bomirski A; Arendarczyk M; Kawinska E; Kleinholz; LH, 1981. Partial characterization of crustacean gonad-inhibiting hormone. Int. J. Invert. Reprod., 3:213-219.
Bonami JR; Bruce LD; Poulos BT; Mari J; Lightner DV, 1995. Partial characterization and cloning of the genome of PvSNPV (=BP-type [Baculovirus penaei] virus) pathogenic for Penaeus vannamei. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 23(1):59-66.
Boyd CE, 1989. Water Quality Management and Aeration in Shrimp Farming. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn.
Boyd CE, 1990. Water Quality in Ponds for Aquaculture. Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn University. Birmingham, USA: Birmingham Publishing Company, 482 pp.
Bradfield JY; Berlin RL; Rankin SM; Keeley; LL, 1989. Cloned cDNA and antibody for an ovarian cortical granule polypeptide of the shrimp P. vannamei. Biol. Bull., 177:344-349.
Bray WA; Lawrence AL, 1992. Reproduction of Penaeus species in captivity. In: Fast A, Lester AJ, eds. Culture of Marine Shrimp: Principles and Practices. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Sci. Publ., 93-170.
Brock JA; Gose R; Lightner DV; Hasson K, 1995. An overview on Taura syndrome, an important disease of farmed Penaeus vannamei. Swimming through troubled water. Proceedings of the special session on shrimp farming, San Diego, California, USA, 1-4 February, 1995., 84-94.
Brown P, 2004. Imports trend down as antidumping unfolds. Global Aquaculture Advocate 7(4):23-24.
Cai S; Huang J; Wang C; Song X; Sun X; Yu J; Zhang Y; Yang C, 1995. Epidemiological studies on the explosive epidemic diseases of prawn in 1993-1994. J. Fish China, 19:112-117.
Caillouet CW, 1972. Ovarian maturation induced by eyestalk ablation in pink shrimp, Penaeus duorarum (Burkenroad). Proc. World Maricul. Soc., 3:205-225.
Castille FL; Lawrence AL, 1989. The effect of deleting dietary constituents from pelleted feeds on the growth of shrimp in the presence of natural foods. J. World Aquacul. Soc., 20:22a.
Chang ES; O’Connor JD, 1978. In vitro secretion and hydroxylation of b ecdysone as a function of the crustacean molt cycle. Gen. Comp. Endocrin., 36:151-160.
Chang PohShing; Lo ChuFang; Wang YuChi; Kou GuangHsiung, 1996. Identification of white spot syndrome associated baculovirus (WSBV) target organs in the shrimp Penaeus monodon by in situ hybridization. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 27(2):131-139.
Chow S; Dougherty MM; Dougherty WJ; Sandifer PA, 1991. Spermatophore formation in the white shrimps Penaeus setiferus and P. vannamei. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 11(2):201-216.
Clifford HC, 2000. Personal communication. In: Haws MC, Boyd CE, eds. Methods for improving shrimp farming in Central America: Fertilization. Managua, Nicaragua: UCA Press, 304pp.
Cousin M, 1995. Contribution à l’ètude de l’utilisation des glucides et du rapport proteine/ènergie chez P. vannamei et P. stylirostris. These INA/PG. Paris, 201pp.
Cruz-Suárez LE; Ricque-Marie D; Pinal-Mansilla JD; Wesche-Ebelling P, 1994. Effect of different carbohydrate sources on the growth of Penaeus vannamei: economical impact. Aquaculture, 123(3/4):349-360.
Cuzon G; Guillaume J, 1997. Energy and protein/energy ratio. In: d’Abramo LR, Conklin DE, Akiyama DM, eds. Crustacean nutrition. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA: World Aquaculture Society, 51-70.
Dall W; Hill J; Rothlisberg PC; Staples DJ, 1990. The biology of Penaeidae. In: Blaxter JHS, Southward AJ, eds. Advances in marine biology, Vol. 27. New York, USA: Academic Press, 489pp.
Davis D; Lawrence AL; Gatlin DM, 1993. Response of Penaeus vannamei to dietary calcium, phosphorus, and calcium:phosphorus ratio. J. World Aquacul. Soc., 24:504-515.
Davis DA, 1990. Dietary mineral requirements of Penaeus vannamei. Evaluation of the essentiality for thirteen minerals and the requirements for calcium, phosphorus, copper, iron, zinc, and selenium. PhD dissertation. Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Davis DA; Lawrence AL, 1997. Minerals. In: d’Abramo LR, Conklin DE, Akiyama DM, eds. Crustacean nutrition. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA: World Aquaculture Society, 150-163.
Davis DA; Lawrence AL; Gatilin DM, 1992. Mineral requirements of Penaeus vannamei. A preliminary examination of the dietary essentiality of thirteen minerals. J. World Aquacul. Soc., 23:8-14.
de Saint-Brisson SC, 1985. The mating behavior of P. paulensis. Crustaceana, 50:108-110.
Dechan C; Chen C, 1975. Bait worm culture of Aristicus crit. (Simpson). Sea Grant Report 16.
Deshimaru O; Kuroki K, 1974. Studies on a purified diet for prawn. 3. A feeding experiment with amino acid test diet. Bull. Jap. Soc. of Sci. Fish., 40:421-424.
Dittel AI; Epifanio CE; Cifuentes LA; Kirchman DL, 1997. Carbon and nitrogen sources for shrimp postlarvae fed natural diets from a tropical mangrove system. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 45(5):629-637.
Dunham PJ, 1978. Sex pheromone in crustacea. Biol. Rev., 53:555-583.
Duronslet M; Yudin AI; Wheller RS; Clark WH Jr, 1975. Light and fine structural studies of natural and artificially induced egg growth of penaeid shrimp. Proc. World Maricul. Soc., 6:105-122.
Eldred B; Hutton RF, 1960. On the grading and identification of domestic commercial shrimps (Family Penaeidae) with a tentative world list of commercial Penaeids. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences, 23(2):89-118.
Emmerson WD, 1980. Induced maturation of prawn Penaeus indicus. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 2:121-131.
Enaca, 2004. www.enaca.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=54.
Eurofish, 2004. FISHINFO network: Market report on shrimp, May 2004. Online at www.eurofish.dk. Accessed 27 August 2004.
Faure Y; Bellon-Humbert C; Charniaux-Cotton H, 1981. Folliculogenese et vitellogenese secondaries chez la Crevette Palaemon serratus (Pennant): controle par les pedoncules oculaires et l’organe X de la medulla externa (MEX). CR Acad. Sc. Paris., 293(3):461-466.
Fingerman M, 1970. Perspectives in crustacean endocrinology. Scientia, 105:1-23.
Fishfarming, 2003. Online at www.fishfarming.com/shrimp_marketing.html. Accessed 26 August 2004.
Fox JM; Treece GD, 2000. Shrimp nutrition and feed management. In: Haws MC, Boyd CE, eds. Methods for improvement of shrimp farming in Central America. Managua, Nicaragua: UCA Press, 65-90.
Fox RS, 2004. Invertebrate anatomy online Farfantepenaeus aztecus. In: Invertebrate zoology laboratory exercises. Online at www.lander.edu/rsfox.310penaeusLab.html. Accessed 30 September 2004.
Garcia SM; Newton C, 1994. Current situation, trends and prospects in world capture fisheries. FAO, 18-19.
Garza JR; Hasson KW; Poulos BT; Redman RM; White BL; Lightner DV, 1997. Demonstration of infectious Taura syndrome virus in the feces of seagulls collected during an epizootic in Texas. Journal of Aquatic Animal Health, 9(2):156-159.
Gong Hui; Lawrence AL; Jiang DongHuo; Castille FL; Gatlin DMIII, 2000. Lipid nutrition of juvenile Litopenaeus vannamei I. Dietary cholesterol and de-oiled soy lecithin requirements and their interaction. Aquaculture, 190(3/4):305-324.
GSMFC (Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission), 2004. Litopenaeus vannamei fact sheet. Online at www.nis.gsmfc.org/nis_factsheet.php?toc_id=141. Accessed 25 August 2004.
Hameed AK; Dwivedi SN, 1977. Acceleration of prawn growth by cauterization of eye stalks and using Actes indicus as supplementary feed. J. India Fish. Assoc. Bombay, 3-4 (1-2):136-138.
Hardy RW, 2002. Marine byproducts for aquaculture use. In: Bechtel PJ, ed. Proceedings of the conference on advances in seafood byproducts. Alaska Sea Grant Publication AK-SG-03-01, 141-152.
Hawaii Department of Agriculture, 2004. Kauai’s CEATECH shrimp farm under state quarantine. News Release NR04-04.
Highnam KC, 1978. Comparative aspects of endocrine control of reproduction in invertebrates. In: Gaillard PJ, Boer HH, eds. Comparative Endocrinology. Proceedings of the 8th Intl. Symp. on Comparative Endocrinology held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 19-23, 1978. Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3-12.
Inouye K; Miwa S; Oseko N; Nakano H; Kimura T; Momoyama K; Hiraoka M, 1994. Mass mortalities of cultured kuruma shrimp Penaeus japonicus in Japan in 1993: electron microscopic evidence of the causative virus. Gyobyo Kenkyu = Fish Pathology, 29(2):149-158.
IUCN, 2004. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Invasive Species Specialist Group invasive species list. www.issg.org.
Jimenez R, 1992. Sindrome de Taura (resumen). Acuacultura del Ecuador. Revista especializada de la Camara Nacional de Acuacultura, Guayaquil, 1:1-16.
Johnson SK, 1996. Summary of key virus diseases of shrimp aquaculture. Prepared for the Texas Senate Natural Resources Interim Subcommittee, Texas A&M University, 19 April 1996.
Jory DE, 2003. Stock domestication and genetic improvement in shrimp culture. Aquaculture Magazine, 29(2):66-72.
Kamemoto; FI; Kato KN; Tucker LE, 1966. Neurosecretion and salt and water balance in the Annelida and Crustacea. Am. Zoologist, 6:213-219.
Kitani H, 1986. Larval development of the White Shrimp Penaeus vannamei Boone reared in the laboratory and the statistical observation of its naupliar stages. Bull. Jap. Soc. of Sci. Fish., 52(7):1131-1139.
Kitani H, 1993. Morphology of postlarvae of the whiteleg Shrimp Penaeus vannamei. Nippon Suisan Gakkaishi, 59(2):223-227.
Kitani H, 1994. Identification of wild postlarvae of the penaeid shrimps, genus Penaeus, in the Pacific coast of Central America. Fisheries Science, 60(3):243-247.
Kleinholz LH, 1978. Crustacean neurosecretory hormones and their specificity. In: Gallard PJ, Boer HH, eds. Comparative Endocrinology. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press, 397-400.
Kulakovskii EE; Baturin YA, 1979. The sinus gland of the shrimp Eualus gaimardi and its state related to environmental salinity variations. Tsitologiya, 21:1200-1203.
Laubier-Bonichon A; Laubier L, 1976. Reproduction control with the shrimp P.japonicus FAO Tech. Conf. Aqua. Kyoto, Japan FIR: AQ/Conf./76/E.38, 6pp.
Laufer H; Borst D; Baker FC; Carrasco C; Sinkus M; Reuter CC; Tsai LW; Schooley DA, 1987. Identification of a juvenile hormone-like compound in a crustacean. Science, 235:202-205.
Laufer H; Landau M; Borst D; Homola E, 1986. The synthesis and regulation of methyl farnesoate, a new juvenile hormone for crustacean reproduction. Adv. Invert. Reprod., 4:135-143.
Lightner DV, 1995. Taura syndrome: an economically important viral disease impacting the shrimp farming industries of the Americas including the United States. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the United States Animal Health Association, 99:36-52.
Lightner DV, 1996. A handbook of shrimp pathology and diagnostic procedure for diseases of cultured penaeid shrimp. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, LA.
Lightner DV, 1996. The penaeid shrimp viruses IHHNV and TSV: epizootiology, production impacts and role of international trade in their distribution in the Americas. ‘Revues Scientifique et Technique Office Interantional des Epizooties’ 15(2): 579-601.
Lightner DV; Redman RM, 1998. Shrimp diseases and current diagnostic methods. Aquaculture, 164(1/4):201-220.
Lightner DV; Redman RM; Hasson KW; Pantoja CR, 1995. Taura syndrome in Penaeus vannamei (Crustacea: Decapoda): gross signs, histopathology and ultrastructure. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 21(1):53-59.
Lu Y; Tapay LM; Brock JA; Loh PC, 1994. Infection of the yellow head baculo-virus (YHV) in two species of penaeid shrimp, Penaeus stylirostris (Stimpson) and Penaeus vannamei (Boone). Journal of Fish Diseases, 17(6):649-656.
Lytle JS; Lytle TF, 1989. Fatty acid composition and variations in individual bloodworms. Gulf Coast Research Laboratory, Ocean Springs, Mississippi, USA.
Magarelli PC, 1981. Nutritional and behavioral components of reproduction in the blue shrimp, Penaeus stylirostris, reared under controlled environment conditions. PhD thesis. Tucson, Arizona, USA: University of Arizona.
Massaut L, 1999. Mangrove management and shrimp aquaculture. Research and Development Series No. 44. Alabama, USA: Auburn University, 45 pp.
McDonald NL; Stark JR; Keith M, 1989. Digestion and nutrition in the prawn Penaeus monodon. J. World Aquacul. Soc., 20:53A.
Middleditch BS; Missler SR; Hines HB; McVey JP; Brown A; Ward DG; Lawrence AL, 1980. Metabolic profiles of penaeid shrimp: dietary lipids and ovarian maturation. Journal of Chromatography, 195(3):359-368.
Momoyana K; Hiraoka M; Nakano H; Koube H; Inouye K; Oseko N, 1994. Mass mortalities of cultured kuruma shrimp, Penaeus japonicus, in Japan in 1993: histopathological study. Gyobyo Kenkyu = Fish Pathology, 29(2):141-148.
Moss SM, 1998. Proceedings US Marine Shrimp Farming Biosecurity Workshop. USMSFP Publications.
Moss SM; Arce SM; Argua BJ; Otoshi CA; Calderon FRO; Tacon AGC, 2001. Greening of the blue revolution: efforts toward environmentally responsible shrimp culture. In: Browdy CL, Jory DE, eds. The new wave, Proceedings of the Special Session on Sustainable Shrimp Culture, Aquaculture 2001. The World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.
Naessens E; Lavens P; Gomez L; Browdy CL; McGovern-Hopkins K; Spencer AW; Kawahigashi D; Sorgeloos P, 1997. Maturation performance of Penaeus vannamei co-fed Artemia biomass preparations. Aquaculture, 155(1/4):87-101.
Nakano H; Koube H; Umezawa S; Momoyama K; Hiraoka M; Inouye K; Oseko N, 1994. Mass mortalities of cultures kuruma shrimp, Penaeus japonicus, in Japan in 1993: epizootiological survey and infection trials. Gyobyo Kenkyu = Fish Pathology, 29(2):135-139.
National Marine Fisheries Service, 2004. Tokyo wholesale shrimp prices. Internet http://swr.ucsd.edu/fmd/sunee/twshrimp/tokyo.htm. Accessed 30 September 2004.
NFI, 2004. National Fisheries Institute. Online at www.nfi.org. Accessed 26 August 2004.
Otoshi CA; Montgomery AD; Look AM; Moss SM, 2001. Effects of diet and water source on the nursery production of Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 32(2):243-249.
Otsu T, 1963. Bihormonal control of sexual cycle in the freshwater crab, Potamon dehaani. Embryologi, 8:1-20.
Panouse JB, 1943. Influence de l’ablation du pedoncule oculaire sur la croissance de l’ovaire chez la crevette Leander serratus. CR Acad. Sci., Paris, T 217:553-555.
Perez Farfante I, 1975. Spermatophores and thelyca of the American white shrimps, genus Penaeus, subgenus Litopenaeus. Fishery Bulletin, United States, 73(3):463-486.
Perez Farfante I; Kensley B, 1997. Penaeoid and sergestoid shrimps and prawns of the world. Keys and diagnoses for the families and genera. Memories du Museum National D’Historie Naturelle, Paris, France.
Preston NP; Clifford HC, 2002. Genetic improvement of farmed shrimp: summary and implications of a global survey. Global Aquaculture Advocate, 5(1):48-50.
Primavera JH, 1978. Induced maturation and spawning in five-month-old Penaeus monodon (Fabricius) by eyestalk ablation. Aquaculture, 13:355-359.
Primavera JH, 1979. Notes on the courtship and mating behavior in Penaeus monodon (Fabricius) (Decapoda,Natantia). Crustaceana, 37(3):287-292.
Primavera JH, 1985. A review of maturation and reproduction in closed thelycum penaeids. In: Taki Y, Primavera JH, Llobrera JA, eds. Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Culture of Penaeid Prawns/Shrimps. SEAFDEC Aquaculture Department, Philippines, 47-64.
Primavera; JH; Young T; de los Reyes C, 1980. Survival, maturation, fecundity and hatching rate of unablated and ablated P. indicus. Contrib. No. 59, SEAFDEC Aqua. Dept.
Quackenbush LS; Herrnkind WF, 1983. Partial characterization of eyestalk hormones controlling molt and gonadal development in the spiny lobster Panulirus argus.. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 3(1):34-44.
Quackenbush LS; Keeley LL, 1987. Vitellogenesis in the shrimp, P. vannamei. American Zoologist, 26:810A.
Rosenberry B, 1995. Ecuadorian white shrimp prices--January to November 1994. Shrimp News International, 20(1):24.
Rosenberry B, 1998. Shrimp news international.
Rosenberry B, 2003. World Shrimp Farming, No. 16. Shrimp News International. San Diego, California, USA.
Rosenberry B, 2004. Shrimp Farming News.
Rye M, 2002. Applied genetic improvement programs for shrimp species – the selection approach. In: Book of Abstracts, WAS Annual Meeting, Beijing, People’s Republic of China. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, p.664.
Santiago AC Jr, 1977. Successful spawning of cultured Penaeus monodon (Fabricius) after eyestalk ablation. Aquaculture, 11(3):185-196.
SEAFDEC, 2005. Regional Technical Consultation on the aquaculture of Penaeus vannamei and Other Exoitc Shrimps in southeast Asia. Manila, Philippines, 1-2 March, 2005. SEAFDEC Aquaculture Department, 93 pp.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2004. Solutions for sustainable mariculture Penaeus [Litopenaeus] vannamei-avoiding the adverse affects of mariculture on biological diversity-B. Case study shrimp farming, 51-52.
Senanan W; Tangkrock-Olan N; Panutrakul S; Barnette P; Wongwiwatanawute C; Niphonkit N; Anderson DJ, 2007. The presence of the Pacific whiteleg shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei, Boone, 1931) in the wild in Thailand. Journal of Shellfish Research, 26(4):1187-1192. http://www.bioone.org/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.2983%2F0730-8000%282007%2926%5B1187%3ATPOTPW%5D2.0.CO%3B2
Senapin S; Phewsaiya K; Briggs M; Flegel TW, 2007. Outbreaks of infectious myonecrosis virus (IMNV) in Indonesia confirmed by genome sequencing and use of an alternative RT-PCR detection method. Aquaculture, 266(1/4):32-38. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00448486
Silverthorn SU, 1975. Hormonal involvement in thermal acclimation in the fiddler crab Uca pugilator (Bosc) - I. Effect of eyestalk extracts on whole animal respiration. Comp. Biochem. Physiol., 50A:281-283.
Smith LL; Lee PG; Lawrence AL; Strawn K, 1985. Growth and digestibility by three sizes of Penaeus vannamei Boone: effects of dietary protein level and protein source. Aquaculture, 46(2):85-96; 36 ref.
Takahashi Y; Itami T; Kondo M; Maeda M; Fuji R; Tomonaga S; Supamattaya K; Boonyaratpalin S, 1994. Electron microscopic evidence of bacilliform virus infection in Kuruma shrimp (Penaeus japonicus). Gyobyo Kenkyu = Fish Pathology, 29(2):121-125.
Treece GD, 2001. Shrimp maturation and spawning. UJNR Technical Report No.28:121-134. Online at www.lib.noaa.gov/japan/aquaculture/proceedings/report28/Treece.pdf. Accessed 29 July 2004.
Treece GD; Fox JM, 1993. Design, operation and training manual for an intensive culture shrimp hatchery. Texas A&M University Sea Grant College Program publication TAMU-SG-93-505, 183pp.
Treece GD; Yates ME, 1990. Laboratory manual for the culture of penaeid shrimp larvae. Texas A&M University Sea Grant College Program, Bryan, TX, Pub. 88-202(R).
Urner Barry, 2004. Online at www.urnerbarry.com/charts/central_south_shrimp_index_page.htm. 30 September 2004.
Van Herp F; Bellon-Humbert C; Luub JTM; van Wormhoudt A, 1977. A histophysiological study of the eyestalk of Palaemon serratus (Pennant) with special reference to the impact of light and darkness. Arch. Biol. (Bruxelles), 88:257-278.
Velasco M; Lawrence AL; Castille FL; Obaldo LG, 2000. Dietary protein requirement for Litopenaeus vannamei. In: Cruz-Suarez LE, Ricque-Marie D, Tapia-Salazar M, Olvera-Novoa MA, Civera-Cerecedo R, eds. Avances en Nutricion Acuicola V. Memorias del V Simposium Internacional de Nutricion Acuicola. Merida, Yucatan, Mexico.
Wang CH; Lo CF; Leu JH; Chou CM; Yeh PY; Chou HY; Tung MC; Chang CF; Su MS; Kou GH, 1995. Purification and genomic analysis of baculovirus associated with white spot syndrome (WSBV) of Penaeus monodon. Diseases of Aquatic Organisms, 23:239-242.
Wear RG; Santiago A Jr, 1976. Crustaceana, 31(2):218-220.
OrganizationsTop of page
World: OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health), 12, rue de Prony, 75017 Paris, France, http://www.oie.int/
Malaysia: INFOFISH, FAO, 1st Floor, Wisma PKNS, Jalan Raja Laut,, PO Box 10899, 50728, Kuala Lumpur, http://www.infofish.org/
Thailand: Asia-Pacific Fisheries Commission (APFIC) FAO, Maliwan Mansion, 39 Phra Abit rd.,, Bangkok 10200, http://www.apfic.org
Thailand: NACA (Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific), PO Box 1040, Kasetsart Post Office, Ladyao, Jatujak, Bangkok 10903, Bangkok, Thailand, http://www.enaca.org/
Thailand: SEAFDEC (Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center), PO Box 1406 Kasetsart Post Office Bangkok 10903, Bangkok, Thailand, http://www.seafdec.org/
Italy: Aquatic Animal Pathogen and Quarantine Information System (AAPQIS), Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Service, Fishery Resource Division, Fisheries Department, FAO, Rome, http://www.aapqis.org/main
Italy: FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations), Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00100 Rome, http://www.fao.org/
Italy: Globefish, FAO, Via delle Terme di Caracalla,, 00100, Rome, http://www.globefish.org
Switzerland: World Trade Organzation, Centre William Rappard, Rue de Lausanne 154,, CH-1211 geneva 21, http://www.wto.org
Switzerland: Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF), WWF Switzerland, Hohlstrasse, 110 8010 Zuerich
USA: Global Aquaculture Alliance - GAA, 5661 Telegraph Road, Suite 2A St Louis, Missouri 63129, http://www.gaalliance.org
USA: Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission - GSMFC, PO Box 726 Ocean Springs,, MS 39566-0726, http://nisgsmfc,org
USA: US Environmental Protection Agency - EPA, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC, http://www.epa.gov
USA: World Aquaculture Society (WAS), WAS Home Office, 143 J. M. Parker Coliseum, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70806, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, http://www.was.org/
ContributorsTop of page
02/10/2007 Updated by:
Matthew Briggs, Consultant, Thailand
Physical and Life Sciences, Texas A&M Corpus Christi, CS 251 6300 Ocean Drive, Corpus Christi, TX 78412, USA
Distribution MapsTop of page
Unsupported Web Browser:
One or more of the features that are needed to show you the maps functionality are not available in the web browser that you are using.
Please consider upgrading your browser to the latest version or installing a new browser.
More information about modern web browsers can be found at http://browsehappy.com/