6. Ethics vs. welfare in fish domestication

• Good animal welfare is characterised by a broad predictive physiological and behavioural

• Good animal welfare is guaranteed when the regulatory range of allostatic mechanisms

• A low allostatic load (not very low or zero) is key for good health and good animal

• Behaviour and physiology should be interpreted in terms of animal perceptions and not

To summarise, the Five Freedoms were primarily derived in relation to the welfare of farm animals, but, with the exception of the fifth freedom, would appear to consider that animals are passive within their environment [128]. Despite its undeniable role in the development of present (and future) welfare standards, this concept would benefit from an update in order to incorporate both ultimate (i.e. adaptive) and proximate (i.e. physiological) mechanisms. Integrating phylogeny and ontogeny in the design and analysis of husbandry practices would

Figure 3. Animal welfare in relation to environmental challenges as shown by the out-dated concept based on homeosta-

capacity to anticipate environmental challenges.

matches the environmental demands.

exclusively in terms of human values.

result in broader and overall better welfare schemes (Figure 3).

sis and the new concept based on allostasis. Adapted from [117].

• Symmorphosis should be respected.

welfare.

124 Animal Domestication

The ethical discussion on welfare of animals is controversial. This occurs because often the perspectives of scientists studying welfare science(s) and philosophers debating about ethics lie on very different standpoints. While science uses mostly operational and measurable concepts, such as the ones described throughout this chapter, ethics is focused on experiencing values and critically reflecting on them. Three main ethical theories are followed:


The following allegory provides a good metaphor for the misunderstanding between philosophers and scientists:

'Two dog owners met one day to walk their dogs together. One owner had grown up in a small family that valued health, safety, and orderly, disciplined behaviour. The dog of this owner received regular veterinary care, two meals a day of low-fat dog food, and was walked on a leash. The other owner had grown up in a large community that valued conviviality, sharing of resources and close contact with the natural world. This dog (the owner's third - the first two had been killed by cars) had burrs in its coat, was fed generously but sporadically, and had never worn a collar in its life. Each owner, judging quality of life from very different viewpoints, felt sorry for the other's dog' [131].

The challenge lies in the different concepts, assumptions and vocabulary that scientists and philosophers use, which function as two distinct cultures with little mutual understanding or communication. Since the early days of the animal welfare debate, the two sides have struggled to communicate with each other, even though both were (and are) working with the common goal of understanding and improving an appropriate relationship between humans and other species of animals [132]. In fact, scientific research on animal welfare began because of ethical concerns over the quality of life of animals, and the public looks to animal welfare research for guidance regarding these concerns. The conception of animal welfare used by scientists must therefore relate to these ethical concerns in order to make sure that the orientation of the research and the interpretation of the findings are to address them successfully [131]. In order to bridge the gap and seek common ground between ethics and welfare science, it is important to recognise three classes of problems that may arise when the adaptations present in an animal do not fully correspond to the challenges posed by its current environment. These problems summarise the ethical concerns about the quality of life of animals [131]:

• If animals present adaptations that no longer serve a significant function in the new environment, then unpleasant subjective experiences may arise, yet these may not be accompanied by significant disruption of biological functioning. For example, species such as sea bream farmed in an open water sea cage may experience a strong, not fullfilled need to seek shelter or forage on the sea bottom;

grounds between ethics and science, can we expect to build species-appropriate and ethi-

This work was funded by Open Philanthropy Project (San Francisco, USA), Swiss Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (Bern, Switzerland), Stiftung Dreiklang (Basel, Switzerland),

, Pablo Arechavala-López1,3, Jenny Volstorf1 and

Domestication and Welfare in Farmed Fish http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77251 127

cally justifiable systems in which to farm aquatic species.

Haldimann-Stiftung (Aarau, Switzerland) and other private donations.

1 Fair-Fish International, FishEthoBase Research Group, Winterthur, Switzerland

[1] Price EO. Animal Domestication and Behavior. Wallingford, UK: Cabi; 2002

Mountains 10,000 years ago. Science. 2000 Mar 24;287(5461):2254-2257

[6] El-Sayed A-FM. Tilapia Culture. Oxfordshire: CABI Publishing; 2006

Marine Science and Engineering. 2015 Oct 15;3(4):1227-1243

future of aquaculture. Fish and Fisheries. 2012;15(2):181-195

[3] Galal S. Biodiversity in goats. Small Ruminant Research. 2005 Oct 1;60(1):75-81

[2] Zeder MA, Hesse B. The initial domestication of goats (Capra hircus) in the Zagros

[4] Duarte CM, Marbá N, Holmer M. Rapid domestication of marine species. Science. 2007;

[5] Balon EK. About the oldest domesticates among fishes. Journal of Fish Biology. 2004 Dec

[7] Teletchea F. Domestication of marine fish species: Update and perspectives. Journal of

[8] Teletchea F, Fontaine P. Levels of domestication in fish: Implications for the sustainable

[9] Clutton-Brock J. The process of domestication. Mammal Review. 1992 Jun 1;22(2):79-85

3 IMEDEA - Mediterranean Institute for Advanced Studies, Mallorca, Spain

Acknowledgements

Author details

References

316(5823):382

1;65:1-27

Billo Heinzpeter Studer<sup>1</sup>

João L. Saraiva1,2\*, Maria F. Castanheira1

\*Address all correspondence to: joao@fair-fish.net

2 CCMAR - Center of Marine Sciences, Faro, Portugal


Animal welfare science has grown more compatible with the approaches used by some ethicists. Some scientists have recognised the interplay of normative and empirical elements in the assessment of animal welfare, and many are attempting to understand ethically relevant subjective experiences of animals. This convergence of the scientific and philosophical approaches may lead to a more integrated field of study and to a greater awareness that neither empirical information nor ethical reflection can, by themselves, answer questions about our proper relationship with animals of other species [132].

## 7. Conclusions

Considering that the domestication process in fishes is still in its early stages, determining whether and how this process affects welfare is not a straightforward task. Our understanding of fish biology is millennia behind that of terrestrial mammals, and the life-history of fish can be highly complex, with many species presenting stages that completely differ in every aspect from the final adult form. Furthermore, the sensory worlds of fish are very different from our own, and only recently have we begun to scratch the surface of the minds of fish, which hinders the establishment of empathy with our underwater relatives. To complicate things even more, fish farming is not focused on a few species, as in the case of land animals, but rather on hundreds of species that the industry invested in rearing for human consumption. Finally, the key concepts guiding welfare in farm animals are currently out-dated and seem to be insufficient to tackle a complex and diverse animal group such as fishes. The present review shows that domestication is not necessarily related to better welfare of fish especially because the traits the industry is selecting throughout the domestication process are generally focused on production (e.g. faster growth, larger mass), without taking into consideration pleiotropic or epistatic effects on other systems and on the organism. This knowledge gap should be bridged with research, either through species-specific approaches such as the COST action Welfare of fish in European aquaculture or broader frameworks such as FishEthoBase. Only by integrating the research and the industry, and by finding common grounds between ethics and science, can we expect to build species-appropriate and ethically justifiable systems in which to farm aquatic species.

#### Acknowledgements

accompanied by significant disruption of biological functioning. For example, species such as sea bream farmed in an open water sea cage may experience a strong, not full-

• If the environment poses challenges for which the animal has no corresponding adaptation, then functional problems may arise, even if not accompanied by significant effects on emotional-like states. Thus, a fish being fed with feed with incorrect lipid content will

accumulate unhealthy body fat without appearing to notice or mind the problem;

• Where animals have adaptations corresponding to the kinds of environmental challenges they face, problems may still arise if the adaptations prove inadequate. For example, tilapia farmed in too cold water or trout farmed in too warm water will not be able to adequately regulate temperature, leading to functional failure as well as to a negative

Animal welfare science has grown more compatible with the approaches used by some ethicists. Some scientists have recognised the interplay of normative and empirical elements in the assessment of animal welfare, and many are attempting to understand ethically relevant subjective experiences of animals. This convergence of the scientific and philosophical approaches may lead to a more integrated field of study and to a greater awareness that neither empirical information nor ethical reflection can, by themselves, answer questions

Considering that the domestication process in fishes is still in its early stages, determining whether and how this process affects welfare is not a straightforward task. Our understanding of fish biology is millennia behind that of terrestrial mammals, and the life-history of fish can be highly complex, with many species presenting stages that completely differ in every aspect from the final adult form. Furthermore, the sensory worlds of fish are very different from our own, and only recently have we begun to scratch the surface of the minds of fish, which hinders the establishment of empathy with our underwater relatives. To complicate things even more, fish farming is not focused on a few species, as in the case of land animals, but rather on hundreds of species that the industry invested in rearing for human consumption. Finally, the key concepts guiding welfare in farm animals are currently out-dated and seem to be insufficient to tackle a complex and diverse animal group such as fishes. The present review shows that domestication is not necessarily related to better welfare of fish especially because the traits the industry is selecting throughout the domestication process are generally focused on production (e.g. faster growth, larger mass), without taking into consideration pleiotropic or epistatic effects on other systems and on the organism. This knowledge gap should be bridged with research, either through species-specific approaches such as the COST action Welfare of fish in European aquaculture or broader frameworks such as FishEthoBase. Only by integrating the research and the industry, and by finding common

filled need to seek shelter or forage on the sea bottom;

about our proper relationship with animals of other species [132].

mental experience.

126 Animal Domestication

7. Conclusions

This work was funded by Open Philanthropy Project (San Francisco, USA), Swiss Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office (Bern, Switzerland), Stiftung Dreiklang (Basel, Switzerland), Haldimann-Stiftung (Aarau, Switzerland) and other private donations.

#### Author details

João L. Saraiva1,2\*, Maria F. Castanheira1 , Pablo Arechavala-López1,3, Jenny Volstorf1 and Billo Heinzpeter Studer<sup>1</sup>


#### References


[10] Lorenzen K, Beveridge MCM, Mangel M. Cultured fish: Integrative biology and management of domestication and interactions with wild fish. Biological Reviews. 2012 Aug 1;87(3):639-660

[25] Kelly SA, Panhuis TM, Stoehr AM. Phenotypic plasticity: Molecular mechanisms and adaptive significance. Comprehensive Physiology. 2012;2:1417-1439. DOI: 10.1002/cphy.

Domestication and Welfare in Farmed Fish http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77251 129

[26] Gjedrem T. Genetic improvement of cold-water fish species. Aquaculture Research. 2000

[27] Duchev Z, Distl O, Groeneveld E. Early warning system for loss of diversity in European

[28] Eknath A, Dey M, Rye M, Gjerde B, Abella TA, Sevilleja R, et al. Selective breeding of Nile

[29] Haffray P, Tsigenopoulos C, Bonhomme F, Chatain B, Magoulas A, Rye M, et al. European sea bass-Dicentrarchus labrax. In: "Genetics of Domestication, Breeding and Enhancement of Performance of Fish and Shellfish", Viterbo, Italy, 12-17th June, 2006.

[30] Janssen K, Chavanne H, Berentsen P, Komen H. Gilthead Seabream (Sparus aurata) – Current status of selective breeding in Europe. Abstract book of the International Symposium on Genetics in Aquaculture XII, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, June 21st–27th, 2015

[31] Harkness WJK, Dymond JR. The Lake Sturgeon: The History of its Fishery and Problems of Conservation. Fish & Wildlife Branch, Ontario Department of Lands and Forests,

[32] Hutchings JA. Adaptive phenotypic plasticity in brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, life

[33] Johnston IA. Phenotypic plasticity of fish muscle to temperature change. In: Fish Eco-

[34] de MB, Mol J, Vigouroux R, Chaves P de T. Phenotypic plasticity in fish life-history traits in two neotropical reservoirs: Petit-Saut reservoir in French Guiana and Brokopondo

[35] Saraiva J, Gonçalves D, Oliveira R. Ecological modulation of reproductive behaviour in the peacock blenny: A mini-review. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry. 2013;39(1):85-89

[36] Saraiva JL, Gonçalves DM, Oliveira RF. Environmental modulation of androgen levels and secondary sex characters in two populations of the peacock blenny Salaria pavo.

[37] Saraiva JL, Gonçalves DM, Simões MG, Oliveira RF. Plasticity in reproductive behaviour in two populations of the peacock blenny. Behaviour. 2011;148(14):1457-1472

[38] Saraiva JL, Pignolo G, Gonçalves D, Oliveira RF. Interpopulational variation of the mating system in the peacock blenny Salaria pavo. Acta Ethologica. 2012;15(1):25-31

[39] Falconer DS. Early selection experiments. Annual Review of Genetics. 1992;26(1):1-16

livestock breeds. Archiv Tierzucht. 2006;49(6):521

c110008

2007

Jan;31(1, 1):25-33

tilapia for Asia. Vol. 27; 1998

Toronto, Canada; 1961

histories. Écoscience. 1996 Jan;3(1, 1):25-32

Hormones and Behavior. 2010;57(2):192-197

physiology. Dordrecht: Springer; 1993. pp. 322-340

reservoir in Suriname. Neotropical Ichthyology. 2009;7(4):683-692


[25] Kelly SA, Panhuis TM, Stoehr AM. Phenotypic plasticity: Molecular mechanisms and adaptive significance. Comprehensive Physiology. 2012;2:1417-1439. DOI: 10.1002/cphy. c110008

[10] Lorenzen K, Beveridge MCM, Mangel M. Cultured fish: Integrative biology and management of domestication and interactions with wild fish. Biological Reviews. 2012 Aug

[11] Thorpe JE. Life history responses of fishes to culture. Journal of Fish Biology. 2004 Dec 1;

[12] Arechavala-Lopez P, Fernandez-Jover D, Black KD, Ladoukakis E, Bayle-Sempere JT, Sanchez-Jerez P, et al. Differentiating the wild or farmed origin of Mediterranean fish: A review of tools for sea bream and sea bass. Reviews in Aquaculture. 2013;5:137-157 [13] Teletchea F. Domestication and genetics: What a comparison between land and aquatic species can bring? In Evolutionary Biology: Biodiversification from Genotype to Pheno-

[14] Gross MR. One species with two biologies: Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in the wild and in aquaculture. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 1998 Jan 1;55(S1):

[15] Jensen P, Andersson L. Genomics meets ethology: A new route to understanding domestication, behavior, and sustainability in animal breeding. Ambio: A Journal of the

[16] Martins CIM, Galhardo L, Noble C, Damsgård B, Spedicato MT, Zupa W, et al. Behavioural indicators of welfare in farmed fish. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry.

[17] Duncan IJ. Science-based assessment of animal welfare: Farm animals. Revue

[18] Duncan I, Dawkins M. The problem of assessing "well-being" and "suffering" in farm animals. In: Indicators Relevant to Farm Animal Welfare. Dordrecht, Netherlands:

[19] Spruijt BM, van den Bos R, Pijlman FT. A concept of welfare based on reward evaluating mechanisms in the brain: Anticipatory behaviour as an indicator for the state of reward

[20] Broom DM. Indicators of poor welfare. The British Veterinary Journal. 1986 Nov 1;142(6):

[21] Broom DM. Animal welfare: Concepts and measurement. Journal of Animal Science.

[23] Krebs JR, Davies NB, Parr J. An Introduction to Behavioural Ecology. Oxford, UK:

[24] Wiens JJ. Polymorphism in systematics and comparative biology. Annual Review of

[22] Dawkins R. The Selfish Gene. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 1976 497 p

scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics). 2005;24(2):483

systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2001;72(2):145-171

type. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2015:389-401

Human Environment. 2005 Jun 1;34(4):320-324

1;87(3):639-660

65:263-285

128 Animal Domestication

131-144

524-526

2012 Feb;38(1):17-41

Springer; 1983. pp. 13-24

1991;69(10):4167-4175

Blackwell Scientific Publications; 2012

Ecology and Systematics. 1999;30(1):327-362


[40] Hill WG. Caballero and A. Artificial selection experiments. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1992;23(1):287-310

[54] Altimiras J, Axelsoon M, Claireaux G, Lefrançois C, Mercier C, Farrell AP. Cardiorespiratory status of triploid brown trout during swimming at two acclimation temperatures.

Domestication and Welfare in Farmed Fish http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77251 131

[55] Hyndman CA, Kieffer JD, Benfey TJ. Physiology and survival of triploid brook trout following exhaustive exercise in warm water. Aquaculture. 2003 May 1;221(1):629-643

[56] Ojolick EJ, Cusack R, Benfey TJ, Kerr SR. Survival and growth of all-female diploid and triploid rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) reared at chronic high temperature. Aqua-

[57] Withler RE, Beacham TD, Solar II, Donaldson EM. Freshwater growth, smolting, and marine survival and growth of diploid and triploid coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch).

[58] Woodward CC, Strange RJ. Physiological stress responses in wild and hatchery-reared rainbow trout. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 1987 Jul 1;116(4):574-579

[59] Wydoski RS, Wedemeyer GA, Nelson NC. Physiological response to hooking stress in hatchery and wild rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri). Transactions of the American Fisher-

[60] Takahara T, Minamoto T, Doi H, Ito T, Kawabata Z. Differences between domesticated Eurasian and Japanese indigenous strains of the common carp (Cyprinus carpio) in cortisol release following acute stress. Ichthyological Research. 2014 Apr 1;61(2):165-168 [61] Barton BA. Stress in fishes: A diversity of responses with particular reference to changes in circulating corticosteroids. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 2002 Jul 1;42(3):517-525

[62] Lachance S, Magnan P. Performance of domestic, hybrid, and wild strains of brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis, after stocking: The impact of intra- and interspecific competition.

[63] Eknath AE, Tayamen MM, Palada-de Vera MS, Danting JC, Reyes RA, Dionisio EE, et al. Genetic improvement of farmed tilapias: The growth performance of eight strains of Oreochromis niloticus tested in different farm environments. Aquaculture. 1993 Apr 1;

[64] Osure GO, Phelps RP. Evaluation of reproductive performance and early growth of four strains of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus, L) with different histories of domestication.

[65] Fraser TWK, Fjelldal PG, Hansen T, Mayer I. Welfare considerations of triploid fish.

[66] Price EO. Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication. Applied Ani-

[68] Huntingford FA. Implications of domestication and rearing conditions for the behaviour

[67] Waples RS. Dispelling some myths about hatcheries. Fisheries. 1999 Feb 1;24(2):12-21

of cultivated fishes. Journal of Fish Biology. 2004 Dec 1;65:122-142

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 1990 Dec 1;47(12):2278-2284

Journal of Fish Biology. 2002 Jan;60(1, 1):102-116

culture. 1995 Apr 1;131(3):177-187

Aquaculture. 1995 Nov 1;136(1):91-107

ies Society. 1976 Sep 1;105(5):601-606

Aquaculture. 2006 Mar 31;253(1):485-494

Reviews in Fisheries Science. 2012 Oct 1;20(4):192-211

mal Behaviour Science. 1999 Dec 1;65(3):245-271

111(1):171-188


[54] Altimiras J, Axelsoon M, Claireaux G, Lefrançois C, Mercier C, Farrell AP. Cardiorespiratory status of triploid brown trout during swimming at two acclimation temperatures. Journal of Fish Biology. 2002 Jan;60(1, 1):102-116

[40] Hill WG. Caballero and A. Artificial selection experiments. Annual Review of Ecology

[41] Rauw W, Kanis E, Noordhuizen-Stassen E, Grommers F. Undesirable side effects of selection for high production efficiency in farm animals: A review. Livestock Production

[42] Andersson L. Genetic dissection of phenotypic diversity in farm animals. Nature

[43] Carlborg Ö, Kerje S, Schütz K, Jacobsson L, Jensen P, Andersson L. A global search reveals Epistatic interaction between QTL for early growth in the chicken. Genome

[44] Jensen P. Domestication, selection, behaviour and welfare of animals — Genetic mecha-

[45] Fleming IA, Agustsson T, Finstad B, Johnsson JI, Björnsson BT. Effects of domestication on growth physiology and endocrinology of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Canadian

[46] Mason JW, Brynildson OM, Degurse PE. Comparative survival of wild and domestic strains of brook trout in streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society. 1967 Jul

[47] FishEthoBase Research team. FishEthoBase. Available from: http://fishethobase.net/en/

[48] Allen D, Rosenfeld J, Richards J. Physiological basis of metabolic trade-offs between growth and performance among different strains of rainbow trout. Canadian Journal of

[49] Castanheira MF, Martins CI, Engrola S, Conceição LE. Daily oxygen consumption rhythms of Senegalese sole Solea senegalensis (Kaup, 1858) juveniles. Journal of Experi-

[50] Benfey TJ. The physiology and behavior of triploid fishes. Reviews in Fisheries Science.

[51] Scott MA, Dhillon RS, Schulte PM, Richards JG. Physiology and performance of wild and domestic strains of diploid and triploid rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in response to environmental challenges. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 2014

[52] Cotter D, O'Donovan V, O'Maoiléidigh N, Rogan G, Roche N, Wilkins NP. An evaluation of the use of triploid Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in minimising the impact of escaped

[53] Koenig MK, Kozfkay JR, Meyer KA, Schill DJ. Performance of diploid and triploid rainbow trout stocked in Idaho Alpine Lakes. North American Journal of Fisheries

farmed salmon on wild populations. Aquaculture. 2000 Jun 1;186(1):61-75

nisms for rapid responses. Animal Welfare. 2010 May 1;19(2):7-9

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 2016 Apr 6;73(10):1493-1506

mental Marine Biology and Ecology. 2011;407(1):1-5

Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 2002 Aug 1;59(8):1323-1330

and Systematics. 1992;23(1):287-310

Reviews. Genetics. 2001 Feb 1;2:130

Research. 2003 Mar 1;13(3):413-421

Science. 1998;56(1):15-33

130 Animal Domestication

1;96(3):313-319

1999 Jan 1;7(1):39-67

Sep 18;72(1):125-134

Management. 2011 Mar 24;31(1):124-133

ethology/


[69] Huntingford F, Adams C. Behavioural syndromes in farmed fish: Implications for production and welfare. Behaviour. 2005 Sep 1;142(9–10):1207-1221

[85] Hansen A, Reutter K. Chemosensory systems in fish: Structural, functional and ecologi-

Domestication and Welfare in Farmed Fish http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77251 133

[86] Sorensen PW, Wisenden BD. Fish Pheromones and Related Cues. Ames, Iowa, USA: John

[87] Keller-Costa T, Saraiva JL, Hubbard PC, Barata EN, Canário AVM. A multi-component pheromone in the urine of dominant male tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) reduces

[88] Saraiva JL, Keller-Costa T, Hubbard PC, Rato A, Canário AVM. Chemical diplomacy in male tilapia: Urinary signal increases sex hormone and decreases aggression. Scientific

[89] Valentinčič T. Taste and olfactory stimuli and behavior in fishes. In: The Senses of Fish.

[90] Ladich F. Sound production and acoustic communication. In: The Senses of Fish. Dor-

[91] Ashley PJ, Sneddon LU, McCrohan CR. Nociception in fish: Stimulus–response properties of receptors on the head of trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Brain Research. 2007 Aug 29;

[92] Sneddon LU. Trigeminal somatosensory innervation of the head of a teleost fish with particular reference to nociception. Brain Research. 2003 May 16;972(1):44-52

[93] Baduy F, Soares J, Silva M, Canário AVM, Saraiva JL, Guerreiro PM. Critical thermal maximum and minimum in Australoheros facetus, a neo-tropical invader in the Iberian

[94] Mogdans J, Kröther S, Engelmann J. Neurobiology of the fish lateral line: Adaptations for the detection of hydrodynamic stimuli in running water. In: The Senses of Fish. Dor-

[95] Janssen J. Lateral line sensory ecology. In: The Senses of Fish. Dordrecht: Springer; 2004.

[96] Balcombe J. In praise of fishes: Précis of 'what a fish knows' (Balcombe 2016). Animal

[97] Keller CH. Electroreception: Strategies for separation of signals from noise. In: The

[98] Scheffel A, Kramer B. Intra- and interspecific electrocommunication among sympatric mormyrids in the Upper Zambezi River. In: Ladich F, Collin SP, Moller P, Kapoor BG, editors. Communication in Fishes. Science Publishers, Enfield, NH, USA; 2006; pp. 733-751

[99] Tytell ED, Standen EM, Lauder GV. Escaping flatland: Three-dimensional kinematics and hydrodynamics of median fins in fishes. The Journal of Experimental Biology. 2008

Sentience: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Animal Feeling. 2016 Jul 6;1(8):1

Senses of Fish. Dordrecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 330-361

cal aspects. In: The Senses of Fish. Dordrecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 55-89

aggression in rivals. Journal of Chemical Ecology. 2016 Feb 1;42(2):173-182

Wiley & Sons; 2015. p. 305

Reports. 2017 Aug 9;7(1):7636

Dordrecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 90-108

drecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 210-230

1166(Supplement C):47-54

peninsula. FishMed. 2016;12:1-3

drecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 265-287

pp. 231-264

Jan 15;211(2):187-195


[85] Hansen A, Reutter K. Chemosensory systems in fish: Structural, functional and ecological aspects. In: The Senses of Fish. Dordrecht: Springer; 2004. pp. 55-89

[69] Huntingford F, Adams C. Behavioural syndromes in farmed fish: Implications for pro-

[70] Arechavala-Lopez P, Toledo-Guedes K, Izquierdo-Gomez D, Šegvić-Bubić T, Sanchez-Jerez P. Implications of sea bream and sea bass escapes for sustainable aquaculture management: A review of interactions, risks and consequences. Reviews in Fisheries

[71] Kotrschal A, Rogell B, Bundsen A, Svensson B, Zajitschek S, Brännström I, et al. Artificial selection on relative brain size in the guppy reveals costs and benefits of evolving a larger

[72] Castanheira MF, Conceição Luís EC, Sandie M, Sonia R, Marie-Laure B, Børge D, et al. Coping styles in farmed fish: Consequences for aquaculture. Reviews in Aquaculture.

[73] Gjedrem T, editor. Selection and Breeding Programs in Aquaculture. Dordrecht, Nether-

[74] Martins Catarina IM, Schrama Johan W, Verreth Johan AJ. Inherent variation in growth efficiency of African catfish Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) juveniles. Aquaculture

[75] Smiseth PT, Wright J, Kölliker M. Parent–offspring conflict and co-adaptation: Behavioural ecology meets quantitative genetics. Proceedings of the Royal Society of

[76] Dingemanse NJ, Kazem AJN, Réale D, Wright J. Behavioural reaction norms: Animal personality meets individual plasticity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2010 Feb 1;25(2):81-89

[77] FAO. FAO Yearbook. Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics. 2015. Rome: FAO; 2017. p. 107 [78] Balcombe J. What a Fish Knows: The Inner Lives of our Underwater Cousins. Straus and

[80] Fay RR, Simmons AM. The sense of hearing in fishes and amphibians. In: Comparative

[81] Sneddon LU. Comparative physiology of nociception and pain. Physiology (Bethesda,

[82] Berthoz A. Neurobiology of 'Umwelt': How Living Beings Perceive the World. Springer

[83] Evans BIA. Fish's eye view of habitat change. In: The Senses of Fish. Dordrecht: Springer;

[84] Northcutt RG, Wullimann MF. The visual system in teleost fishes: Morphological patterns and trends. In: Sensory Biology of Aquatic Animals [Internet]. New York, NY:

Hearing: Fish and Amphibians. New York, NY: Springer; 1999. pp. 269-318

London - Series B: Biological Sciences. 2008 Aug 22;275(1645):1823-1830

[79] Jordan DS. The history of ichthyology. Science. 1902;16(398):241-258

duction and welfare. Behaviour. 2005 Sep 1;142(9–10):1207-1221

Science & Aquaculture. 2018 Apr 3;26(2):214-234

brain. Current Biology. 2013;23(2):168-171

2017 Mar 27;9(1):23-41

132 Animal Domestication

lands: Springer Netherlands; 2005

Research. 2005 Jun 21;36(9):868-875

Giroux: Farrar; 2016. p. 305

Md.). 2018 Jan;33(1, 1):63-73

Springer; 1988. pp. 515-552

2004. pp. 1-30

Science & Business Media; 2008. p. 161


[100] Power DM, Einarsdóttir IE, Pittman K, Sweeney GE, Hildahl J, Campinho MA, et al. The molecular and endocrine basis of flatfish metamorphosis. Reviews in Fisheries Science. 2008;16(sup1):95-111

[117] Toates FM. Motivational Systems. CUP Archive; 1986. p. 204

Physiology & Behavior. 2007 Oct 22;92(3):422-428

Journal of Medicine. 1998 Jan 15;338(3):171-179

Reviews. 2011 Apr 1;35(5):1291-1301

1991 Nov 15;88(22):10357-10361

Philosophy. 2005;14(1):7

2016

Veterinary Journal. 2012 Apr;192(1, 1):13-19

reflects ethical concerns. Ethics: Animal ethics. 1997

Animal Behaviour Science. 1999 Dec 1;65(3):171-189

(6):262-269

Italian Journal of Animal Science. 2009 Jan 1;8(Supp1):21-30

Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2005 Feb;29(1):3-38

bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2012. p. 386

[118] Carenzi C, Verga M. Animal welfare: Review of the scientific concept and definition.

Domestication and Welfare in Farmed Fish http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77251 135

[119] Korte SM, Olivier B, Koolhaas JM. A new animal welfare concept based on allostasis.

[120] Webster AJ. What use is science to animal welfare? Die Naturwissenschaften. 1998 Jun;85

[121] McEwen BS. Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. The New England

[122] Korte SM, Koolhaas JM, Wingfield JC, McEwen BS. The Darwinian concept of stress: Benefits of allostasis and costs of allostatic load and the trade-offs in health and disease.

[123] Koolhaas JM, Bartolomucci A, Buwalda B, de Boer SF, Flügge G, Korte SM, et al. Stress revisited: A critical evaluation of the stress concept. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral

[124] Schulkin J. Allostasis, Homeostasis, and the Costs of Physiological Adaptation. Cam-

[125] Weibel ER, Taylor CR, Hoppeler H. The concept of symmorphosis: A testable hypothesis of structure-function relationship. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[126] Korte SM, Sgoifo A, Ruesink W, Kwakernaak C, van Voorst S, Scheele CW, et al. High carbon dioxide tension (PCO2) and the incidence of cardiac arrhythmias in rapidly

[128] Ohl F, van der Staay FJ. Animal welfare: At the interface between science and society.

[129] Burgess D. Utilitarianism, game theory and the social contract. Macalester Journal of

[130] Alexander L, Moore M. Deontological ethics. In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, Stanford, USA;

[131] Fraser D, Weary D, Pajor E, Milligan B. A scientific conception of animal welfare that

[132] Fraser D. Animal ethics and animal welfare science: Bridging the two cultures. Applied

growing broiler chickens. The Veterinary Record. 1999 Jul 10;145(2):40-43

[127] World Health Organization. WHO | Constitution of WHO: Principles. WHO


[117] Toates FM. Motivational Systems. CUP Archive; 1986. p. 204

[100] Power DM, Einarsdóttir IE, Pittman K, Sweeney GE, Hildahl J, Campinho MA, et al. The molecular and endocrine basis of flatfish metamorphosis. Reviews in Fisheries Science.

[101] Pardo SA, Cooper AB, Dulvy NK. Avoiding fishy growth curves. Methods in Ecology

[102] Randall DJ, Tsui TKN. Ammonia toxicity in fish. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 2002 Sep 1;

[103] Ip YK, Chew SF. Ammonia production, excretion, toxicity, and Defense in fish: A review.

[104] Gross M. What fish genomes can tell us about life on land. Current Biology. 2013 May 20;

[105] Vandepoele K, De Vos W, Taylor JS, Meyer A, Van de Peer Y. Major events in the genome evolution of vertebrates: Paranome age and size differ considerably between ray-finned fishes and land vertebrates. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the

[106] FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016. Contributing to food security

[107] FAO. Domestic Animal Diversity Information System (DAD-IS). Available from: http://

[108] Ashley PJ. Fish welfare: Current issues in aquaculture. Applied Animal Behaviour Sci-

[109] Hastein T. Animal welfare issues relating to aquaculture. In: Proceedings of the Global

[110] Huntingford FA, Kadri S. Taking account of fish welfare: Lessons from aquaculture.

[112] Brambell FWR. Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire into the Welfare of Ani-

[113] McCulloch SP. A critique of FAWC's five freedoms as a framework for the analysis of animal welfare. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 2013 Oct 1;26(5):959-975

[114] European Union. Treaty of Lisbon amending the treaty on European Union and the treaty establishing the European Community. Official Journal of the European Union.

[115] Dawkins M. Animal Suffering: The Science of Animal Welfare. Dordrecht, Netherlands:

[116] Dawkins MS. Through our Eyes Only?: The Search for Animal Consciousness. Oxford,

mals Kept under Intensive Livestock Husbandry Systems. London; 1965

Conference on Animal Welfare: An OIE Initiative; 2004. pp. 219-231

2008;16(sup1):95-111

45(1):17-23

134 Animal Domestication

23(10):R419-R421

and nutrition for all; 2016

2007

Springer Netherlands; 1980

www.fao.org/dad-is/data/en/

ence. 2007 May 1;104(3):199-235

and Evolution. 2013 Apr 1;4(4):353-360

Frontiers in Physiology. 2010 Oct 4;1:1-20

United States of America. 2004 Feb 10;101(6):1638-1643

Journal of Fish Biology. 2009 Dec 1;75(10):2862-2867

New York: Oxford University Press; 1998. p. 202

[111] COST AC 867. Welfare of Fish in European aquaculture; 2011


**Chapter 7**

**Provisional chapter**

**Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (***Perca fluviatilis***)**

The farming of percids (Eurasian perch *Perca fluviatilis*, pikeperch *Sander lucioperca*) has progressively become a diversification path of European inland aquaculture in the past 25 years. This required the domestication of wild or pseudowild (coming from polyculture ponds) populations. Considering the history of Eurasian perch, this domestication can be subdivided into four main successive parts: (1) a short initial prospective period (bibliographical analysis, market analysis, etc.), (2) a first experimental period to acquire basic data that notably resulted in the choice of the rearing system and commercial feeds, (3) a second experimental period allowing to get an in-depth knowledge on each of the main phase of the life cycle of this species (control of the life cycle in rearing conditions), and (4) a third experimental period, still ongoing, of optimization of rearing practices. This chapter allows understanding the domestication framework of this species and better understanding the role of different actors in the decision-making. In the future, the farming of this species is likely to rely on a larger diversity of rearing systems; a key issue is to study the interactions between species-rearing system. How different domestication trajectories or paths (intratrajectories variability) will affect global performances of

**Keywords:** Eurasian perch, domestication, aquaculture, chronology, major steps,

Fish farming is an animal production sector that followed, in the past years, various dynamic paths according to the region considered. For instance, between 1995 and 2015, this sector displayed a strong increase at global scale with a production rising from 14.9 to 51.3 Mt. (+242%), whereas only a slight increase was observed within the European Union countries: from 490,000 to 660,000 tons (+34%). At national level, fish production has decreased from 65,500

**Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (Perca fluviatilis)**

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

© 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.85132

Pascal Fontaine and Fabrice Teletchea

Pascal Fontaine and Fabrice Teletchea

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85132

**Abstract**

rearing system

**1. Introduction**

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Eurasian perch remains an open question.

#### **Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (***Perca fluviatilis***) Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (Perca fluviatilis)**

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.85132

Pascal Fontaine and Fabrice Teletchea Pascal Fontaine and Fabrice Teletchea

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85132

#### **Abstract**

The farming of percids (Eurasian perch *Perca fluviatilis*, pikeperch *Sander lucioperca*) has progressively become a diversification path of European inland aquaculture in the past 25 years. This required the domestication of wild or pseudowild (coming from polyculture ponds) populations. Considering the history of Eurasian perch, this domestication can be subdivided into four main successive parts: (1) a short initial prospective period (bibliographical analysis, market analysis, etc.), (2) a first experimental period to acquire basic data that notably resulted in the choice of the rearing system and commercial feeds, (3) a second experimental period allowing to get an in-depth knowledge on each of the main phase of the life cycle of this species (control of the life cycle in rearing conditions), and (4) a third experimental period, still ongoing, of optimization of rearing practices. This chapter allows understanding the domestication framework of this species and better understanding the role of different actors in the decision-making. In the future, the farming of this species is likely to rely on a larger diversity of rearing systems; a key issue is to study the interactions between species-rearing system. How different domestication trajectories or paths (intratrajectories variability) will affect global performances of Eurasian perch remains an open question.

**Keywords:** Eurasian perch, domestication, aquaculture, chronology, major steps, rearing system

#### **1. Introduction**

Fish farming is an animal production sector that followed, in the past years, various dynamic paths according to the region considered. For instance, between 1995 and 2015, this sector displayed a strong increase at global scale with a production rising from 14.9 to 51.3 Mt. (+242%), whereas only a slight increase was observed within the European Union countries: from 490,000 to 660,000 tons (+34%). At national level, fish production has decreased from 65,500

© 2016 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2019 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

tons in 1995 to 44,500 tons in 2005 (−32%) in France, despite its expansion in other countries like Norway. This fact illustrates that the development of this sector depends strongly on territorial contexts. Despite projections indicating the strong increase of aquaculture at global scale up to 2050, much higher than any other animal production sectors, except for poultry production [1, 2], some territories are facing several obstacles. These obstacles include, among others, (i) competition with other economic sectors (fisheries, tourism, agriculture, production of potable water, etc.), for access to land and water resources, (ii) an economical context of free exchange that often results in strong competition with imported products coming from countries with much lower production costs, (iii) policies (environmental and social protection, food safety, etc.) most often perceived as very binding, and (iv) a degraded image of rearing systems and farming products for which sustainability is frequently questioned by societies in developed countries, particularly concerning quality of products, respect of animal welfare, and environmental impacts. All these issues could hamper the development of aquaculture in some developed countries, such as France. In this context, it is hard to conceive that fish farming could increase significantly in those regions. Nevertheless, these territories are heterogeneous and often display a strong historical, cultural (e.g., culinary traditions), and landscape (mountainous or coastal regions, ponds, wetlands, etc.) diversity that results in numerous microterritories with their specific consumption of fish or more exactly very typical products or dishes. This is particularly true for Europe and France. For instance, one might cite the consumption of smoked eel in the Netherlands [3], frying of cyprinids (roach, rudd) in the Valley of Moselle (Luxemburg), tench in the region of Extremadura in Spain, fried carps in the Sundgau in Alsace in France, meager in the southeast French Mediterranean Sea, or Eurasian perch in the countries around the Alps. These small markets rely on a close link between local populations, the history of the territory, and the presence of a specific landscape (e.g., country of ponds) or particular ecosystems (lakes) and the animal species inhabiting these regions. This tight link between consumers and species is obviously the case for the market of Eurasian perch in the Alps region, where consumers often require the presence of the fish skin to clearly observe the alternation of dark and light bands, typical of this species [4]. These are key advantages for this territory that could allow the development of a diversified and resilient aquaculture based on the diversification of the production and the domestication of new fish species, corresponding to a development model that we can call "mosaic aquaculture." This is in this global context associated with this vision that the domestication of Eurasian perch started in the early 1990s, 25 years ago. The understanding of the initial motivations and the process of domestication realized over this period require first considering the specificities of inland European aquaculture and associated territories.

restocking market in link with angling activities: fish are sold alive to river managers (associations of anglers) or private ponds. These markets are both more lucrative and less demanding in terms of personnel and investment. A very small percentage of this aquaculture production

Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (*Perca fluviatilis*) http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85132 139

The initial choice of Eurasian perch resulted from several points that were taken into account locally, like at the Lorraine territory scale in France. First, at national level, there was at that time the mutual motivation by several stakeholders (producers, policymakers, and developing agencies) to promote and diversify freshwater aquaculture with different incentives, even though the human consumption market was targeted (**Table 1**). In Lorraine, this dynamism first resulted in one part in the structuring of the inter-profession with the establishment of the Inland Aquaculture Lorraine Sector (Filière Lorraine d'Aquaculture Continentale) in 1987 and on the other part the inception of a new specific university diploma in inland aquaculture, the "Ingénieur-Technologue" DI-T [6–8]. Besides, carnivorous fishes, such as Eurasian perch, pikeperch *Sander lucioperca*, or pike *Esox Lucius*, are and remain both the most appreciated species by anglers and consumers who know them, particularly in Western Europe (except salmonids). Third, a survey realized at the European scale revealed that in some territories (Eastern France, Switzerland, and Northern Italia), this species was widely consumed in various forms (whole fish, fillets, etc.) and at different sizes (**Table 2**) [9], and they exist a niche market relatively large such as in Switzerland where it was estimated at about 4000 tons of fillets per year with a supply essentially ensured by fisheries from large lakes in Central and Northern Europe and Russia [10–11]. Fourth, the production of Eurasian perch in polyculture ponds remains challenging to control, which is less the case for other carnivorous species. So much that in certain French regions (Centre), this species was considered as undesirable by fish farmers because of

dwarfing problems often linked to the overabundance of young individuals [11].

Summing up, the domestication of Eurasian perch appeared as a good compromise for several reasons: (1) a diversification of aquaculture production targeting the human consumption market by valuing a native species known by consumers and benefiting from a good image

**Species Territories Initial will Current production in France**

Aquitaine To preserve another sturgeon

Wels *Silurus glanis* Centre, Languedoc Human consumption Negligible

South-West Angling, human consumption Negligible

species (*A. sturio*)

**Table 1.** Trials of diversification and domestication of new fish species in inland aquaculture in metropolitan France

Lorraine, Rhône-Alpes Human consumption 100 tons, three perch farms

17 farms, third global producer of caviar

is destined to the markets for human consumption.

**2. Why choosing Eurasian perch?**

Black bass *Micropterus* 

Siberian sturgeon *Acipenser baeri*

Eurasian perch *Perca* 

during the last decades of the twentieth century.

*salmoides*

*fluviatilis*

In Europe (European Union), inland aquaculture only represents 25.3% of the total production [5]. Two main distinct economic sectors exist, salmoniculture (farming of salmonids, chiefly monoculture of rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*) in running waters and pond culture, corresponding to polyculture in ponds with the dominant species being common carp (*Cyprinus carpio)*. Thus, logically, the two most consumed fish species in Europe are rainbow trout (second) and common carp (fifth), mainly in Central and Eastern Europe for the latter. The domestication of Eurasian perch started in France with the will to diversify inland aquaculture while respecting the other economic sectors already developed, particularly pond aquaculture. Interestingly, it is important to specify that in France, pond aquaculture is mainly for the restocking market in link with angling activities: fish are sold alive to river managers (associations of anglers) or private ponds. These markets are both more lucrative and less demanding in terms of personnel and investment. A very small percentage of this aquaculture production is destined to the markets for human consumption.

## **2. Why choosing Eurasian perch?**

tons in 1995 to 44,500 tons in 2005 (−32%) in France, despite its expansion in other countries like Norway. This fact illustrates that the development of this sector depends strongly on territorial contexts. Despite projections indicating the strong increase of aquaculture at global scale up to 2050, much higher than any other animal production sectors, except for poultry production [1, 2], some territories are facing several obstacles. These obstacles include, among others, (i) competition with other economic sectors (fisheries, tourism, agriculture, production of potable water, etc.), for access to land and water resources, (ii) an economical context of free exchange that often results in strong competition with imported products coming from countries with much lower production costs, (iii) policies (environmental and social protection, food safety, etc.) most often perceived as very binding, and (iv) a degraded image of rearing systems and farming products for which sustainability is frequently questioned by societies in developed countries, particularly concerning quality of products, respect of animal welfare, and environmental impacts. All these issues could hamper the development of aquaculture in some developed countries, such as France. In this context, it is hard to conceive that fish farming could increase significantly in those regions. Nevertheless, these territories are heterogeneous and often display a strong historical, cultural (e.g., culinary traditions), and landscape (mountainous or coastal regions, ponds, wetlands, etc.) diversity that results in numerous microterritories with their specific consumption of fish or more exactly very typical products or dishes. This is particularly true for Europe and France. For instance, one might cite the consumption of smoked eel in the Netherlands [3], frying of cyprinids (roach, rudd) in the Valley of Moselle (Luxemburg), tench in the region of Extremadura in Spain, fried carps in the Sundgau in Alsace in France, meager in the southeast French Mediterranean Sea, or Eurasian perch in the countries around the Alps. These small markets rely on a close link between local populations, the history of the territory, and the presence of a specific landscape (e.g., country of ponds) or particular ecosystems (lakes) and the animal species inhabiting these regions. This tight link between consumers and species is obviously the case for the market of Eurasian perch in the Alps region, where consumers often require the presence of the fish skin to clearly observe the alternation of dark and light bands, typical of this species [4]. These are key advantages for this territory that could allow the development of a diversified and resilient aquaculture based on the diversification of the production and the domestication of new fish species, corresponding to a development model that we can call "mosaic aquaculture." This is in this global context associated with this vision that the domestication of Eurasian perch started in the early 1990s, 25 years ago. The understanding of the initial motivations and the process of domestication realized over this period require first considering the specificities of inland European aquaculture and associated territories.

138 Animal Domestication

In Europe (European Union), inland aquaculture only represents 25.3% of the total production [5]. Two main distinct economic sectors exist, salmoniculture (farming of salmonids, chiefly monoculture of rainbow trout (*Oncorhynchus mykiss*) in running waters and pond culture, corresponding to polyculture in ponds with the dominant species being common carp (*Cyprinus carpio)*. Thus, logically, the two most consumed fish species in Europe are rainbow trout (second) and common carp (fifth), mainly in Central and Eastern Europe for the latter. The domestication of Eurasian perch started in France with the will to diversify inland aquaculture while respecting the other economic sectors already developed, particularly pond aquaculture. Interestingly, it is important to specify that in France, pond aquaculture is mainly for the The initial choice of Eurasian perch resulted from several points that were taken into account locally, like at the Lorraine territory scale in France. First, at national level, there was at that time the mutual motivation by several stakeholders (producers, policymakers, and developing agencies) to promote and diversify freshwater aquaculture with different incentives, even though the human consumption market was targeted (**Table 1**). In Lorraine, this dynamism first resulted in one part in the structuring of the inter-profession with the establishment of the Inland Aquaculture Lorraine Sector (Filière Lorraine d'Aquaculture Continentale) in 1987 and on the other part the inception of a new specific university diploma in inland aquaculture, the "Ingénieur-Technologue" DI-T [6–8]. Besides, carnivorous fishes, such as Eurasian perch, pikeperch *Sander lucioperca*, or pike *Esox Lucius*, are and remain both the most appreciated species by anglers and consumers who know them, particularly in Western Europe (except salmonids). Third, a survey realized at the European scale revealed that in some territories (Eastern France, Switzerland, and Northern Italia), this species was widely consumed in various forms (whole fish, fillets, etc.) and at different sizes (**Table 2**) [9], and they exist a niche market relatively large such as in Switzerland where it was estimated at about 4000 tons of fillets per year with a supply essentially ensured by fisheries from large lakes in Central and Northern Europe and Russia [10–11]. Fourth, the production of Eurasian perch in polyculture ponds remains challenging to control, which is less the case for other carnivorous species. So much that in certain French regions (Centre), this species was considered as undesirable by fish farmers because of dwarfing problems often linked to the overabundance of young individuals [11].

Summing up, the domestication of Eurasian perch appeared as a good compromise for several reasons: (1) a diversification of aquaculture production targeting the human consumption market by valuing a native species known by consumers and benefiting from a good image


**Table 1.** Trials of diversification and domestication of new fish species in inland aquaculture in metropolitan France during the last decades of the twentieth century.


**3. Acquiring knowledge on the biology of** *P. fluviatilis* **and** 

A the end of the 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, an in-depth analysis of the available literature on the biology of Eurasian perch and a North American close species, the yellow perch *P. flavescens*, was performed to better evaluate potentialities of this species. We first analyzed general articles as well as book chapters [12–22]. Then, we considered more specific studies focusing on the characteristics of populations inhabiting particular aquatic areas [13–27]. In the meantime, because some farming trials were already performed on yellow perch in the United States (large lake areas), a similar approach was realized aiming at establishing a synthesis of knowledge acquired on the zootechny of this sister species [28–38]. At this period, yellow perch was considered as the reference to promote the farming of Eurasian perch. This choice was reinforced by the fact that questioning about the rearing systems (ponds or recirculated systems) was similar. Based on these bibliographical analyses, preliminary thoughts resulted in the emergence of farming possibilities in Europe [39], and perciculture (i.e., farming of perch) was proposed as a possible way to diversity inland aquaculture in Europe [40].

Domestication of the Eurasian Perch (*Perca fluviatilis*) http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.85132 141

**3.1. Study of the life cycle of perch in natural conditions, first zootechnical trials,** 

During the 1990s, researches were undertaken to first better know the life cycle of the species in local aquatic ecosystems, mainly in the Mirgenbach reservoir and Lindre ponds (Moselle, France), and second to determine the potential of this species at different stages (larval rearing, on-growing). The choice of the Mirgenbach was linked to the fact that this reservoir presents heated waters due to the nuclear power plant of Cattenom and could potentially present thermic conditions more favorable for the growth of perch, in the perspective of a future economic development. These field studies allowed describing the feeding regime, growth (relation size-weight), composition of the main tissues (muscles, gonads, liver, viscera), as well as the reproductive cycle [27, 41–44]. These data constituted the frame of reference and brought the basis for future experimentations, such as the control of the reproductive cycle. In parallel to these descriptive studies, first trials of acclimatization were realized using perch sampled at different development stages in natural conditions (e.g., egg ribbons mainly from the Leman Lake, INRA Thonon-les-Bains, Haute-Savoie, France), polyculture ponds (young perch of 4–20 g for Lorraine fish farm ponds), or rivers (eggs ribbons from Meuse). The acclimatization of young perch, either juveniles or sexually mature individuals, with diverse features from one year to another, was closely linked to the will to value stocks of fish often very abundant during fall and spring pond fisheries and displaying a low market value. Based on the works performed on the yellow perch [32, 34, 36], several weaning protocols were tested using feeds or diverse raw materials (beef liver, frozen plankton, dried or hydrated formulated feeds) [45]. Because of (i) very high mortality rate (40–60% in 2 months) linked to food refusal, development of pathologies caused by *Aeromonas hydrophila* and cannibalism, (ii) high variability of qualities of the different batches of fishes received (juveniles or mature fishes, sizes, more or less lean fish, etc.), and (iii) difficulty of weaning protocols, this way of developing perciculture was rapidly stopped. Nevertheless, it was

*P. flavescens*

**and choice of the rearing system**

**Table 2.** Interest for Eurasian perch according to European countries, survey realized in 1993 [9].

and an established market niche and (2) the development of a new activity that did not harm other traditional activities of the sector (no competition). Initially, this project of diversification aimed at developing a complementary activity for pond fish farmers. Besides, linking to the survey realized [9], a possible competition with capture fisheries coming from Eastern and Central Europe as well as Scandinavia was highlighted; yet, surveyed persons stated that the capture levels were highly variable from one year to another, product quality (filleting yield) also strongly varied (effect of reproductive cycle), and supply period of market was stopped during the spawning season in spring. Consequently, all these facts confirmed the possibilities to develop an aquaculture of Eurasian perch targeting a regular production of fresh fillets with a constant and high quality.
