5 Mitigating the Impacts of Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning During Harmful. . .
49
activities (Montojo et al. 2006, 2010, 2012; Narceda et al. 2011, unpublished) to
help understand the PSP phenomenon and support the crafting of national programs
and policies related to PSP management and monitoring.
This paper presents various management and research interventions aimed to
mitigate impacts of PSP in the Philippines.
Centralized Versus Decentralized Monitoring Systems
After the first incidence of a toxic HAB in 1983, the BFAR established a centralized
monitoring program for the early detection of toxic blooms, particularly those of
Pyrodinium (Gonzales et al. 1989; Bajarias et al. 2006). The monitoring strategy
is to identify the PSP causative algal species in the water samples and to analyze
shellfish for PSP toxins. Toxic organisms are identified through morphological
characteristics under the light microscope and shellfish toxicity is determined
by mouse bioassay (MBA), using Method 959.08 of the Association of Official
Analytical Chemists (1999). This method employs the injection of shellfish extract
into the mouse and correlating the mouse death time with toxicity. Green mussels
(Perna viridis) and, in some areas, thorny oysters (Spondylus squamosus), are
used as indicator shellfish for PSP monitoring. The centralized monitoring system
requires that the sample be brought to Manila for analysis and publication of results.
However, the archipelagic nature of the country poses logistical problems, e.g.
delays in the transport and analysis of samples, and consequently, information
dissemination. In addition, some affected areas are not easily accessible. As a
result, adverse effects, such as harvesting and selling of contaminated products, and
sometimes death, have occurred before appropriate management interventions could
be imposed.
In order to arrive at a more effective monitoring system, decentralization was
implemented in 2002, in collaboration with the Japanese government. Twelve
regional and local testing centers, strategically located in Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao, were established and have since made the fast tracking of results for
public warnings possible (Bajarias et al. 2002). The decentralized monitoring
system also uses the MBA for PSP toxin determination. As such, regional and local
laboratories are required to maintain a mouse colony composed of a single strain, to
ensure consistency.
Procedures to maintain test mice that are adapted to tropical climate conditions
were provided to local laboratories (Montojo et al. 2002). However, it was sometimes difficult to maintain a mouse colony, especially for laboratories operated
by Local Government Units (LGUs); as a result, only a few are operational. At
present, alternative methods for screening shellfish samples for PSP toxins are
being evaluated by BFAR, in collaboration with the North Pacific Marine Science
Organization (PICES). The applicability of the ELISA PSP Kit (Abraxis) and PSP
Rapid Test Kit (Jellett) are being tested (Relox et al. 2011, unpublished). ELISA
is currently being evaluated at the BFAR Central Laboratory as a semi-quantitative
49
activities (Montojo et al. 2006, 2010, 2012; Narceda et al. 2011, unpublished) to
help understand the PSP phenomenon and support the crafting of national programs
and policies related to PSP management and monitoring.
This paper presents various management and research interventions aimed to
mitigate impacts of PSP in the Philippines.
Centralized Versus Decentralized Monitoring Systems
After the first incidence of a toxic HAB in 1983, the BFAR established a centralized
monitoring program for the early detection of toxic blooms, particularly those of
Pyrodinium (Gonzales et al. 1989; Bajarias et al. 2006). The monitoring strategy
is to identify the PSP causative algal species in the water samples and to analyze
shellfish for PSP toxins. Toxic organisms are identified through morphological
characteristics under the light microscope and shellfish toxicity is determined
by mouse bioassay (MBA), using Method 959.08 of the Association of Official
Analytical Chemists (1999). This method employs the injection of shellfish extract
into the mouse and correlating the mouse death time with toxicity. Green mussels
(Perna viridis) and, in some areas, thorny oysters (Spondylus squamosus), are
used as indicator shellfish for PSP monitoring. The centralized monitoring system
requires that the sample be brought to Manila for analysis and publication of results.
However, the archipelagic nature of the country poses logistical problems, e.g.
delays in the transport and analysis of samples, and consequently, information
dissemination. In addition, some affected areas are not easily accessible. As a
result, adverse effects, such as harvesting and selling of contaminated products, and
sometimes death, have occurred before appropriate management interventions could
be imposed.
In order to arrive at a more effective monitoring system, decentralization was
implemented in 2002, in collaboration with the Japanese government. Twelve
regional and local testing centers, strategically located in Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao, were established and have since made the fast tracking of results for
public warnings possible (Bajarias et al. 2002). The decentralized monitoring
system also uses the MBA for PSP toxin determination. As such, regional and local
laboratories are required to maintain a mouse colony composed of a single strain, to
ensure consistency.
Procedures to maintain test mice that are adapted to tropical climate conditions
were provided to local laboratories (Montojo et al. 2002). However, it was sometimes difficult to maintain a mouse colony, especially for laboratories operated
by Local Government Units (LGUs); as a result, only a few are operational. At
present, alternative methods for screening shellfish samples for PSP toxins are
being evaluated by BFAR, in collaboration with the North Pacific Marine Science
Organization (PICES). The applicability of the ELISA PSP Kit (Abraxis) and PSP
Rapid Test Kit (Jellett) are being tested (Relox et al. 2011, unpublished). ELISA
is currently being evaluated at the BFAR Central Laboratory as a semi-quantitative