# Aquaculture Diagnostic Sampling and Laboratory Submission


## Key Takeaways

- Pre-submission laboratory communication is critical to confirm appropriate sample types (e.g., moribund fish for culture, fixed tissues for histopathology), preservatives, and shipping conditions to ensure diagnostic integrity and cost-effectiveness.
- Water quality parameters (temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, ammonia-nitrogen, salinity) recorded at the time of sampling are essential for interpreting disease expression and diagnostic test performance, as environmental stressors can mimic or exacerbate infectious conditions.
- Sample selection should prioritize at least five to ten moribund fish exhibiting characteristic clinical signs, with target organs such as kidney, spleen, gill, and brain collected for comprehensive analysis, as recommended by organizations like the FAO.
- Rigorous chain of custody documentation, including unique sample IDs, species, water quality data, clinical history, and veterinary contact, is mandatory for traceability and accurate interpretation of laboratory results, as emphasized by USDA NAHMS.
- Diagnostic interpretation requires understanding test limitations; negative results do not definitively rule out disease due to factors like focal lesions or suboptimal sample quality, and positive results must be correlated with clinical and environmental data.
- Biosecurity measures during sampling, such as using dedicated equipment and disinfectants (e.g., 200 ppm chlorine), are vital to prevent cross-contamination and protect personnel from zoonotic risks (e.g., *Mycobacterium* spp.).

---

Effective diagnostic sampling for fish disease testing requires a systematic approach that prioritizes pre-submission laboratory communication, deliberate sample selection based on clinical presentation and water quality context, rigorous chain of custody documentation, and a clear understanding of the limits of diagnostic interpretation. These elements, when executed correctly, form the foundation of reliable disease diagnosis in aquaculture and enable timely management interventions.

## At a Glance

| Aspect | Description |
| :--- | :--- |
| Laboratory Communication | Contact laboratory before sampling to confirm sample types, preservatives, shipping conditions, and cost. |
| Sample Selection | Collect at least five to ten moribund fish, include target organs such as kidney, spleen, gill, and brain. |
| Water Context | Record temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, ammonia-nitrogen, and salinity at time of sampling. |
| Chain of Custody | Use a standardized submission form with unique sample ID, species, water quality data, clinical history, and veterinary contact. |
| Interpretation Limits | No test is perfectly sensitive or specific, negative results do not rule out disease, and positive results require correlation with clinical and environmental data. |

## System Context and Planning Decisions

### Water Quality as a Modifying Factor in Disease Expression

Water parameters are not background data, they directly modify disease expression and diagnostic test performance. Elevated ammonia impairs gill function and immune responses. Temperature dictates pathogen replication rates and incubation periods. Hypoxia increases susceptibility to bacterial and viral infections. The [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/) guidance requires that water quality records accompany diagnostic submissions so that laboratories can differentiate primary pathogen effects from environmental stress. When water quality data are absent, pathologists may misinterpret lesions attributable to environmental causes as infectious, or vice versa. Recording dissolved oxygen, pH, ammonia-nitrogen, nitrite, salinity, and temperature at the time of sampling provides essential context.

### Outbreak Investigation versus Surveillance Sampling

The planning context dictates sample size, target population, and urgency. In an outbreak investigation, speed and sensitivity take priority, samples are taken from clinically affected fish showing characteristic lesions, and shipping is expedited. The [WOAH Aquatic Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) specifies that for notifiable diseases, samples must be collected by an authorized veterinarian and submitted to an accredited laboratory. For surveillance, statistical frameworks are needed to detect a target prevalence with defined confidence. The [USDA APHIS Livestock and Poultry Disease](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease) aquaculture guidance recommends stratified random sampling across ponds or tanks to maximize detection of subclinical carriers. Including both affected and apparently healthy fish within a single submission can provide more comprehensive diagnostic information.

### Species, Age, and Production System Considerations

Fish species differ in tissue tropisms for major pathogens. In salmonids, kidney and spleen are primary targets for viral and bacterial isolation. In catfish, brain and trunk kidney are critical for bacterial and viral agents, while gill and skin are important for parasitic infections. The [Merck Veterinary Manual](https://www.merckvetmanual.com/) provides species-specific sampling protocols. Age affects pathogen distribution, larval fish are often submitted whole for histopathology and molecular testing. Research on freshwater fish disease

### Water Quality and Environmental Context

Diagnostic accuracy begins with a complete water-quality profile at the time of sampling. Temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, total ammonia nitrogen, nitrite, and salinity directly influence both pathogen viability and host physiology. For instance, elevated ammonia or low dissolved oxygen can produce gill lesions that mimic infectious branchitis, leading to false clinical impressions. The [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/) guidance emphasizes that water samples should be collected from the same depth and location as affected fish, preferably within 30 minutes of fish sampling. Repeat measurements over 24 to 48 hours help distinguish transient spikes from chronic deterioration. Without this context, laboratory findings may be misinterpreted as primary disease when the underlying driver is environmental stress.

### Nutrition, Feeding, and Gut Health

Feed composition and feeding regimen affect immune competence and disease resistance. Diets deficient in essential fatty acids, vitamins C and E, or selenium compromise mucosal barriers and phagocyte function, predisposing fish to opportunistic pathogens. The [USDA APHIS Livestock and Poultry Disease](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease) resources note that nutritional myopathies and hepatic steatosis can present as lethargy or high mortality, yet laboratory cultures may remain negative. In systems using biofloc technology, the [Biofloc Technology in Fish Aquaculture review](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5f1e27c410fdb17e5858b3fe29bc78cc97699619) highlights improved hematological parameters and immune responses, but also warns that sudden shifts in carbon-to-nitrogen ratios can trigger bacterial blooms that mimic clinical disease. Producers should document feed batch numbers, daily intake, and any recent ingredient changes in the submission paperwork so that diagnosticians can rule out nutritional etiology.

### Production-Stage Sampling Decisions

Sampling strategy must align with the life stage and production system. Fry and fingerlings require whole-fish submissions because organ masses are too small for targeted necropsy, pools of 5 to 10 fry are standard. Grow-out fish allow organ-specific sampling of gill, liver, kidney, spleen, and brain. The [WOAH Aquatic Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) advises that broodstock should be sampled only for vertically transmitted pathogens such as [infectious pancreatic necrosis virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/infectious-pancreatic-necrosis-virus) or [viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/viral-hemorrhagic-septicemia-virus), and that repeated non-lethal sampling (mucus, blood, fin clips) is preferable to preserve genetic stock. In all stages, moribund fish showing clinical signs yield higher diagnostic sensitivity than dead fish, because autolysis degrades cellular morphology and inactivates certain viruses.

### Records and Epidemiological Context

Complete production records reduce diagnostic guesswork. Cumulative mortality curves, feeding behavior logs, and water treatment dates allow the laboratory to prioritize testing. For example, if mortality peaked 48 hours after a water change, chemical toxicity becomes a more probable cause. The [USDA National Animal Health Monitoring System](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/nahms) recommends that producers maintain a standardized health event log that includes date, number of affected tanks or ponds, clinical signs, and any therapeutic interventions. When submitting samples, a one-page epidemiological summary should accompany the chain-of-custody form. Without this context, laboratories may default to broad [bacterial culture](/blog/guides/bacterial-culture) instead of targeted PCR for parasites or viruses.

### Welfare During Sampling and Handling

Animal welfare is both an ethical obligation and a diagnostic concern. Stress from netting, crowding, or air exposure elevates cortisol, which suppresses immune function and can trigger latent infections. The [Merck Veterinary Manual](https://www.merckvetmanual.com/) outlines that anaesthetic overdose (e.g., tricaine methanesulfonate, eugenol) should be used for euthanasia before necropsy to minimize tissue damage from struggling. For live transport of samples, fish should be kept in aerated, temperature-stable water and delivered to the laboratory within 4 hours. Prolonged transportation in sealed bags leads to ammonia accumulation and hypoxia, altering blood gas values and histopathology. If live delivery is impossible, chilled (not frozen) carcasses on ice packs remain acceptable for bacteriology and histology, but viral isolation requires fresh or appropriately preserved tissue.

### Worker Safety and Biosecurity

Sampling personnel face zoonotic risks from Mycobacterium spp., Streptococcus iniae, and Edwardsiella tarda. Gloves, eye protection, and waterproof aprons are mandatory when handling fish with skin lesions or ascites. The [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/) guidelines specify that necropsy should be performed on a disinfected surface with dedicated instruments, and that all waste must be incinerated or chemically disinfected. Cross-contamination between ponds or tanks is prevented by using separate nets and boots for each water source, and by cleaning equipment with 200 ppm chlorine solution followed by thorough rinsing. Laboratories should be notified if a reportable pathogen (e.g., [viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/viral-hemorrhagic-septicemia-virus), [infectious salmon anemia virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/infectious-salmon-anemia-virus)) is suspected, so that appropriate [biosafety level](/knowledge/diagnostics/emerging-tech/biosafety-levels-1-4-a-comparative-framework-for-diagnostic-laboratory-design) containment procedures can be activated.

### Food Safety Implications

Antibiotic residues in aquaculture products remain a regulatory concern. When sampling for disease diagnosis, tissue from treated fish must be clearly labeled with drug used, dose, and withdrawal time. The [WOAH Aquatic Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) provides international standards for maximum residue limits in aquaculture. If a laboratory isolates a bacterial pathogen, [antimicrobial susceptibility testing](/knowledge/diagnostics/microbiology/antimicrobial-susceptibility-testing-interpreting-mics-and-zone-diameters) should be performed to guide therapy, but treatment should not begin until samples are collected, because antibiotics suppress bacterial growth in culture. Misuse of antibiotics selects for resistant strains and can contaminate processing facilities.

### Common Failure Patterns in Submission

Diagnostic failures often stem from avoidable errors. Frozen samples are acceptable for PCR but not for [bacterial culture](/blog/guides/bacterial-culture) or histology, because ice crystals lyse cells and kill bacteria. Improper fixative volume (less than 10 times tissue volume) leads to autolysis and artifacts. Leaking containers cross-contaminate the submission package, rendering all samples suspect. The [USDA APHIS Livestock and Poultry Disease](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease) resources note that delayed shipment beyond 48 hours markedly reduces recovery of fastidious bacteria such as [Renibacterium salmoninarum](/knowledge/bacteria/fish-bacteria/renibacterium-salmoninarum). Producers should telephone the diagnostic laboratory before shipping to confirm sample requirements and current testing schedules.

### Practical Monitoring Strategies

Regular monitoring reduces the need for emergency diagnostics. Sentinel fish placed in a net pen within the production system can be removed and examined weekly, providing baseline health data. The [Enhancing Fish Disease Classification in Bangladeshi Aquaculture paper](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4a47092def1e08d1eb12956fd6704642011b31f7) (2024) demonstrates that image-based classification using deep learning models can rapidly identify external lesions, but such tools require validation by trained personnel and cannot replace laboratory confirmation for internal pathology. In practice, the [Classification of Freshwater Fish Diseases in Bangladesh paper](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b35b0ca4724d9320f2c73fd9258e637f3f4ae46a) (2024) shows that ensemble models achieve high accuracy, however, the authors explicitly note that interpretability methods like Grad-CAM should be used to confirm that the model is focusing on the lesion instead of background tank features. These technologies supplement, but do not replace, professional veterinary oversight.

### Escalation to Veterinary Professionals

When mortality exceeds 2 percent per day over three consecutive days, or when clinical signs involve neurological, systemic, or hemorrhagic patterns, immediate consultation with an aquatic veterinarian is warranted. The veterinarian can coordinate with a reference laboratory to perform rule-out panels for reportable pathogens. The [WOAH Aquatic Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) requires that any suspicion of a listed disease be reported to the national veterinary authority. Producers should maintain a current list of accredited aquatic diagnostic laboratories and understand that interpretation of negative results depends on sample quality, number of fish tested, and the stage of infection. A single negative culture does not rule out a chronic, low-level carrier state.

Practical monitoring thus integrates water quality, nutrition, production records, welfare protocols, and careful communication with the diagnostic laboratory. Each step reduces uncertainty and increases the likelihood of a correct diagnosis, which is essential for effective disease management in aquaculture.

## Health Observation and Biosecurity

Sustained health observation of cultured fish is the foundation of effective diagnostic sampling. Daily monitoring of feeding behavior, swimming patterns, opercular rate, and the presence of external lesions should be recorded systematically. Any deviation from baseline behavior,such as lethargy, loss of equilibrium, or gill flaring,warrants immediate attention and possible sampling. The [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/) guidance emphasizes that observation windows of at least 48 hours before sample collection help differentiate acute from chronic disease processes. However, observation alone cannot confirm etiology, it directs sampling decisions.

Biosecurity measures during sampling prevent cross-contamination between production units and protect the diagnostician. Single-use gloves, disinfected nets, and separate containers for each tank or cage are mandatory. The [WOAH Aquatic Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) (applicable by extension to aquaculture through national animal health frameworks) stipulates that equipment must be decontaminated between sites to avoid pathogen spread. Surface disinfectants effective against common aquatic viruses and bacteria include chlorine compounds at 200 ppm for 10 minutes or iodophors at 100 ppm for 5 minutes. These measures reduce the likelihood of submitting samples that reflect iatrogenic contamination instead of natural disease.

Water quality context must accompany health observations. Parameters such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH, ammonia, nitrite, and alkalinity should be measured at the time of sampling and recorded on the submission form. The [USDA APHIS Livestock and Poultry Disease](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease) aquaculture guidance notes that water quality stress often precipitates infectious disease outbreaks, therefore laboratories require these data to differentiate primary infections from secondary opportunism. Without water context, a bacterial isolate may be misinterpreted as pathogenic when it is merely environmental.

## Diagnostic Escalation and Veterinary Involvement

When initial observation and on-site testing (e.g., wet mounts, gill clips, skin scrapes) reveal abnormalities beyond the scope of farm-level identification, escalation to a veterinary diagnostic laboratory is necessary. The Merck Veterinary Manual (available through [Merck Veterinary Manual](https://www.merckvetmanual.com/)) states that clinical signs such as bilateral exophthalmos, petechial hemorrhages, or ascites indicate systemic disease requiring laboratory confirmation. Veterinary involvement at the sampling stage ensures that specimen selection targets organs with highest pathogen load (e.g., spleen, kidney, liver, brain) based on suspected disease.

Chain of custody documentation must accompany all samples sent to external laboratories. This includes a unique sample identifier, species, age, weight, water temperature, date and time of collection, preservative used (if any), and a brief history of clinical signs and mortality trends. The [USDA National Animal Health Monitoring System](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/nahms) requires that such documentation be retained for at least 12 months for traceability. In aquaculture, where production cycles are rapid, this traceability supports epidemiological investigations and regulatory reporting.

Veterinary pathologists interpret laboratory results within the context of submitted information. They may request additional samples if the initial submission is incomplete,for example, if only live moribund fish were sent but no fixed tissue for histopathology. Diagnostic escalation also includes the possibility of notifiable disease reporting. WOAH-listed aquatic pathogens, such as [koi herpesvirus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/koi-herpesvirus), [infectious salmon anemia virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/infectious-salmon-anemia-virus), and Aphanomyces invadans ([epizootic ulcerative syndrome](/knowledge/bacteria/aquatic-bacteria/epizootic-ulcerative-syndrome-fish-pathogen-identification-management)), require immediate notification to national veterinary authorities. Farmers and veterinarians should confirm reporting obligations with their local animal health office before submission.

## Uncertainty in Diagnostic Interpretation

No single diagnostic test provides absolute certainty. False negatives occur when sample handling degrades pathogen nucleic acids or when lesions are focal instead of diffuse. Conversely, false positives can result from cross-contamination during necropsy or from detection of non-pathogenic strains using molecular assays. The [PubMed record 42445609](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42445609/) (a review on aquaculture diagnostic methods) highlights that histopathology remains the gold standard for confirming tissue damage, even when [polymerase chain reaction](/knowledge/molecular-biology/polymerase-chain-reaction) results are negative. Therefore, a negative molecular test does not rule out disease, it indicates that the target was not detected under current conditions.

Interpretation limits are particularly relevant when using artificial intelligence-based classification methods. Studies such as "Enhancing Fish Disease Classification in Bangladeshi Aquaculture through Transfer Learning and LIME Interpretability Techniques" (2024) demonstrate that deep learning models can achieve high accuracy on curated image datasets, but their performance degrades under field conditions of variable lighting, water turbidity, and lesion obscuration. These models should be considered screening tools instead of definitive diagnostic instruments. Veterinary confirmation remains essential before instituting therapeutic interventions.

Uncertainty is also introduced by coinfections. A fish with bacterial septicemia may concurrently carry a subclinical viral infection that is missed if culture alone is performed. The [PubMed record 42444358](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42444358/) (a study on mixed infections in aquaculture) recommends that diagnostic submissions include both bacterial culture and viral molecular detection when mortality exceeds 2% per day.

## Sustainability Considerations

Responsible diagnostic sampling supports sustainability by minimizing unnecessary fish sacrifice and optimizing therapeutic use. The [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/) guidelines advocate for sampling only a representative number of moribund fish (typically 5,10 individuals per affected unit) instead of large batches. Live sampling techniques,such as fin clips, gill biopsies, and blood collection,can provide diagnostic material without lethality, though they may have lower sensitivity for certain pathogens.

Waste disposal from diagnostic activities, including carcasses and contaminated consumables, must follow local environmental regulations. Incineration or alkaline digestion is recommended for tissues from confirmed notifiable diseases to prevent pathogen release into water systems. The [PubMed record 42444175](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42444175/) (a review on biosecurity in aquaculture) emphasizes that diagnostic waste management is an often-overlooked component of farm-level sustainability.

Data sharing between farms and diagnostic laboratories contributes to regional disease surveillance and reduces the need for repeated testing. Anonymized aggregate data can help identify emerging disease trends and guide vaccination strategies. Sustainability also extends to judicious antimicrobial use, [culture and sensitivity testing](/knowledge/veterinary-medicine/at-home-diagnostics/culture-and-sensitivity-testing-managing-multi-drug-resistant-pet-infections) should precede antibiotic therapy to reduce selection for resistance, as outlined in the [WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) (principles applicable to aquatic animals).

## Frequently Asked Questions

**1. How many fish should I send to the laboratory for disease testing?**
Submit 5,10 moribund fish showing typical clinical signs. Avoid dead fish unless preserved on ice within two hours of death. The FAO guidelines recommend this number to ensure statistical representativeness without excessive sacrifice.

**2. What is the best way to transport live fish samples to the lab?**
Place fish in oxygenated, sealed plastic bags with minimal water (approximately one-third water, two-thirds oxygen) within an insulated container. Maintain temperature at 4,10 °C using ice packs, but prevent direct contact between ice and fish. Transport within 24 hours.

**3. Should I preserve tissues in formalin or freeze them?**
Formalin (10% neutral buffered) is required for histopathology and preserves cell architecture. Freezing at ,20 °C or ,80 °C is suitable for molecular testing but destroys tissue for microscopy. Both types should be submitted when possible. The Merck Veterinary Manual provides detailed guidance.

**4. Can I test water samples instead of fish tissues?**
Water samples are useful for detecting certain pathogens (e.g., Aeromonas, Flavobacterium) but have lower sensitivity than tissue samples. A negative water result does not rule out infection in fish. Water testing complements, not replaces, direct tissue sampling.

**5. What information must accompany samples to the lab?**
Include: species, age, weight, water temperature, pH, ammonia, nitrite, date and time of collection, preservative type, clinical signs, mortality rate, and recent treatments. Incomplete submission forms delay diagnosis and increase interpretation uncertainty.

**6. How quickly should I expect results after submission?**
Bacterial culture typically requires 48,72 hours. Viral isolation may take 1,3 weeks. Histopathology results require 3,5 days. [Polymerase chain reaction](/knowledge/molecular-biology/polymerase-chain-reaction) results can be available within 24,48 hours. The USDA NAHMS recommends contacting the lab for estimated turnaround times.

**7. What does a negative test result mean?**
A negative result indicates that the pathogen was not detected in the submitted sample. It does not guarantee absence of disease due to sample quality, timing, or pathogen distribution. Clinical interpretation by a veterinarian is essential before concluding that the population is disease-free.

**8. Are diagnostic samples reportable to government agencies?**
Certain pathogens (e.g., koi herpesvirus, [infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus](/knowledge/viruses/aquatic-viruses/infectious-hematopoietic-necrosis-virus)) are notifiable under WOAH guidelines. The laboratory or submitting veterinarian is responsible for reporting positive results to the national animal health authority. Check local regulations before submission.

## Educational Veterinary Notice

This article provides general guidance for diagnostic sampling in aquaculture. Diagnostic decisions should always be made in consultation with a veterinarian experienced in aquatic animal health. Results from laboratory testing are one component of a comprehensive health assessment that includes production records, water quality monitoring, and farm biosecurity audits. Misinterpretation of diagnostic data may lead to inappropriate treatments, economic loss, or delays in controlling notifiable diseases. For specific diagnostic protocols, refer to the [WOAH Manual of Diagnostic Tests for Aquatic Animals](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/) and national veterinary service recommendations.

## Related Farming Guides

- [Aquaculture Water Quality Monitoring](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/aquaculture-water-quality-monitoring)
- [Fish Health Observation And Mortality Investigation](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/fish-health-observation-and-mortality-investigation)
- [Biosecurity For Fish Farms](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/biosecurity-for-fish-farms)
- [Feeding Farmed Fish Efficiently](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/feeding-farmed-fish-efficiently)
- [Recirculating Aquaculture System Basics](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/recirculating-aquaculture-system-basics)

## Related Clinical & Scientific Guides

* [Pond Sediment Management and Dredging Options](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/pond-sediment-management-dredging-options)
* [Indoor Aquaculture Facilities: Lighting and Insulation](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/indoor-aquaculture-facilities-lighting-insulation)
* [Greenhouse Aquaculture: Extending Growing Seasons](/knowledge/animal-farming/aquaculture/greenhouse-aquaculture-extending-growing-seasons)


## References and Further Reading

- [FAO Animal Production and Health](https://www.fao.org/animal-production/en/)
- [WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code](https://www.woah.org/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/)
- [USDA APHIS Livestock and Poultry Disease](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease)
- [Merck Veterinary Manual](https://www.merckvetmanual.com/)
- [USDA National Animal Health Monitoring System](https://www.aphis.usda.gov/livestock-poultry-disease/nahms)

> This article is educational and is not a substitute for veterinary diagnosis, treatment, public-health guidance, or regulatory reporting.