Every nation that raises salmon raises broodstock. There are even some regions that raise broodstock, but do not growout fish. Whatever the scenario, ova producers rely on more than just the biology of the fish to put bread on the table; they use every available technology to help them produce. These technologies are sometimes old, sometimes new. And they vary from species to species, region to region and country to country.

For consideration here, the top four salmon-producing areas are taken to be Norway, the UK, South America and North America. There are also special considerations for Ireland and the South Pacific.

Norway was first off the mark for large-scale salmon production. Out of the Agricultural College came AkvaForsk and then the concept and realization of AkvaGen. AkvaGen is Norway’s premier broodstock producer. The Norwegians enjoy close links between producers, researchers and government. This close association permits the transfer of needs to technology development to regulation back to the producers. Broodstock technologies are no different in this regard. Further, those researchers who were once graduate students have a place in industry when they graduate while still maintaining their research contacts. Thus, the training and experience are transferred directly to the producers and the cycle compounds on itself.

In terms of available technologies, Norwegian producers have access to land-based broodstock facilities where temperature, salinity and photoperiod can all be tightly controlled. As well, they have the Cadillac of breeding programmes from which to draw. If distinct, predictable spawning time is a heritable trait; it will soon be utilized in breeding programmes.

Norwegians have a high efficiency of broodstock success. That is, eyed egg production is at maximum from a given number of brood fish. This is largely due to hatchery efficiency. Numbers of selected brood or designated stocks that are raised solely for egg production are not in the public domain. That is, there are no available reports of how many fish are selected for brood compared to those that are actually contributing eggs and milt. These include culls, gimps and fish that remain silver. This is an obvious cost, but is not released for public consumption.

Like Norway, Chile has selective breeding programmes. These are mainly corporate operations, but of very high quality. Chileans have a very open mind to adopting new technologies. This is exemplified by the list of operational tools at their disposal. For example, producers use photoperiod to induce maturation in more than one species; have capabilities for land-based tanks that are salinity controlled; have registered Ovaplant and Ovaprim to advance and control maturation times; produce all-female Coho and Atlantics and have land-locked stocks. Not a bad arsenal of broodstock tools. Still, at times Chileans can not supply all the eggs they require; egg importations are still a source of seed.

The UK, primarily Scotland is a little more secretive about their broodstock technologies. This may be due to the competitive nature in the EU market. Still, photoperiod control of maturation is an active area of research and production as is land-locked stocks and all-female Atlantics. The close ties to Sterling University and the free-flow of information among the Scottish Salmon Growers Association keep the ideas coming. Early eggs are usually obtained from early season maturing stocks or from those in very Northern latitudes.

In Canada, aquaculture has the blessing of some federal departments, the damnation of others. The access to technologies is good, and the development of new methods is rapid. Implementation is another thing. Drug regulatory procedures are restrictive with eight years being the minimum timeframe for new drugs. Despite this, Canadian producers have access to and use photoperiod and temperature to mature stocks; use land-locked stocks, SW spawning and have several cooperative industry-sponsored breeding programmes. Because the salmon-farming industry is separated by 5,000 km of non-tenurable space (read land), the efforts and developments are likewise separated. Consequently, overall figures for broodstock numbers are split in Canada just like the production stats.

In the USA, three producers have quietly gone about their business for decades and have profoundly impacted salmon and trout farming worldwide. Both these facilities are freshwater farms that supply salmon ova of high quality. These farms are Troutlodge, Aquaseed and Cascade. Quality is the keystone of these operations and they are both recognized as the broodstock experts.

On the eastern seaboard of the USA, the history of broodstock sciences extends back as far or farther (depends on your nationality) than stock enhancement work in New Brunswick. Producers there use SW spawning, salinity manipulation, photoperiod and have HcG registered for use. Some great strain comparison work has been done over the years in Maine and surrounding areas.

Of honourable mention to the list of salmon producers are Ireland and the South Pacific. The hatchery/brood facility located at Fanad Head in Co. Donegal, Ireland has been a model of broodstock technology. The company has been progressive and receptive to many new and innovative techniques over the years. They use tanks that are photoperiod/salinity/temperature controlled: sort of recipe tanks. Production of ova is of such high quality that the Fanad facility (now part of Marine Harvest Ireland) has supplied the national and international industry for years. Close ties with Trinity College Dublin and other institutions ensure a free-flow of information.

In Oz and particularly Taz, much work on stress and temperature recovery of broodstock has been conducted over the last few years. Although small by comparison, the industry has an advantage to accept and adapt technology for growth in a new area. Ties with researchers in the universities and veterinary enable producers down under to capitalize on new ideas.

The commonality of developing new technologies and putting them into place has three crucial areas of input. First, the biology and biological limits of the organism must be understood and respected from both the clinical and practical standpoints. Second, the need must be portrayed from producers to developers. Thirdly, avenues for technology transfers must be clear and expedient. Without these, your competitors will have an advantage.