Aeromonas hydrophila Infections in Aquaculture: Detection and Antimicrobial Resistance

Introduction

Aeromonas hydrophila is a Gram-negative, facultative anaerobic, rod-shaped bacterium belonging to the family Aeromonadaceae. It is a ubiquitous opportunistic pathogen of freshwater and warm-water aquaculture systems worldwide, causing motile aeromonad septicemia (MAS), a disease characterized by hemorrhagic septicemia, exophthalmia, ascites, and high mortality in numerous fish species including tilapia, grass carp, common carp, yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco), and striped catfish. The economic impact of MAS is substantial, with losses attributed to both acute outbreaks and chronic low-grade infections that impair growth and feed conversion. Effective disease management requires robust diagnostic tools for early detection and a comprehensive understanding of the pathogen's virulence repertoire and its evolving antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profile. This review provides an exhaustive examination of A. hydrophila virulence factors, biofilm formation, molecular typing strategies, detection methodologies, AMR mechanisms, and the expanding array of alternative therapeutic and prophylactic interventions being developed to reduce reliance on conventional antibiotics.

Virulence Factors and Biofilm Formation

The pathogenicity of A. hydrophila is multifactorial, relying on a suite of secreted and surface-associated virulence determinants. Among the most critical are the pore-forming toxins aerolysin (aerA) and hemolysins (hlyA, ahh1). Aerolysin is a beta-barrel toxin that oligomerizes on host cell membranes, forming ion-permeable channels that disrupt osmotic homeostasis and induce cytolysis [1, 2]. Polydatin, a natural stilbenoid, has been shown to reduce aerolysin production by downregulating the aerolysin-encoding gene without affecting bacterial growth, highlighting this toxin as a viable antivirulence target [1]. Similarly, apigenin decreases the pathogenicity of A. hydrophila by inhibiting aerolysin activity and interfering with quorum sensing (QS) [2]. Luteolin, another flavonoid, protects crucian carp against A. hydrophila by modulating the inflammation-apoptosis axis [3].

Secreted enzymes including proteases, lipases, and nucleases contribute to tissue degradation and evasion of host immune responses. Extracellular polysaccharides and adhesins facilitate attachment to mucosal surfaces. Biofilm formation, regulated by QS signaling molecules such as N-acyl homoserine lactones (AHLs), is a key virulence trait that enhances environmental persistence, resistance to disinfectants, and tolerance to antibiotics [4, 5, 6]. Turmeric oil has been identified as a QS inhibitor that reduces biofilm formation and virulence factor production in A. hydrophila, leading to decreased fish mortality in challenge models [5]. Ice nucleation active bacteria metabolites, including sarcosine and fatty acids, have demonstrated antibiofilm activity against A. hydrophila by disrupting established biofilms and inhibiting new biofilm formation [4]. Shrimp-shell-derived chitosan nanoparticles (ChNPs) exhibit multiphase antibiofilm activity, inhibiting adhesion, planktonic proliferation, and degrading mature biofilms through electrostatic disruption and penetration of the extracellular polymeric substance matrix [6]. The ChNPs, with a size of approximately 641 nm and a zeta potential of +51 mV, reduced adherent biomass by over 59% at 45 µg/mL against clinical isolates [6].

Table 1 summarizes key virulence factors and their functions.

Molecular Typing and Detection Methods

Accurate identification and typing of A. hydrophila are essential for epidemiological surveillance, outbreak investigation, and resistance monitoring. Traditional culture-based methods using selective media (e.g., Rimler-Shotts agar) followed by biochemical profiling remain widely used but lack discriminatory power for strain-level differentiation. Molecular typing techniques have largely supplanted phenotypic methods.

PCR and Real-Time PCR: Conventional PCR targeting the 16S rRNA gene, the aerolysin gene (aerA), or the hemolysin gene is employed for species confirmation. Multiplex PCR panels allow simultaneous detection of multiple aquatic pathogens. Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) provides quantification of bacterial loads in tissues and water samples.

Isothermal Amplification: Recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) has been developed for visual, rapid detection of A. hydrophila and other aquatic pathogens, offering field-deployable sensitivity without the need for thermal cyclers [7]. RPA assays can be coupled with lateral flow readouts for point-of-care use.

DNA Sequencing and Phylogenetics: 16S rRNA gene sequencing is the gold standard for species identification. Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) using housekeeping genes (e.g., gyrB, rpoD, recA) provides high-resolution clonal lineage assignment. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) enables comprehensive characterization of virulence gene content, AMR determinants, and plasmid profiles.

MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) offers rapid, cost-effective identification of Aeromonas species based on protein profile fingerprints. This technique is increasingly used in diagnostic laboratories for routine identification. For further detail on the technique, refer to the companion article on MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry for Veterinary Microbial Identification.

Serological Methods: Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using polyclonal or monoclonal antibodies targeting surface antigens (e.g., lipopolysaccharide, outer membrane proteins) can detect A. hydrophila in fish tissues or water. The principles of such assays are parallel to those described for Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for Feline Leukemia Virus.

Table 2 compares the performance characteristics of these detection methods.

Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns

The intensive use of antibiotics in aquaculture has driven the emergence and dissemination of resistance in A. hydrophila populations. Resistance has been reported to critically important antimicrobial classes including tetracyclines (tet determinants), beta-lactams (blaTEM, blaSHV, blaCTX-M, and inducible AmpC beta-lactamases), quinolones (mutations in gyrA and parC, plasmid-mediated qnr), sulfonamides (sul1, sul2), and trimethoprim (dfrA). Integrons and transposons frequently capture and spread resistance gene cassettes. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains are common, with some isolates exhibiting resistance to five or more antibiotic classes [8, 9].

The presence of MDR A. hydrophila in aquaculture environments poses a dual threat: treatment failure in fish and potential reservoir for resistance genes that can transfer to human pathogens via mobile genetic elements. The concept of "One Health" surveillance is therefore critical. Detailed AMR genomic epidemiology approaches are discussed in the article on Antimicrobial Resistance in Livestock-Associated Staphylococcus aureus: Genomic Epidemiology and One Health Implications. Similarly, the emergence of resistance in avian pathogens follows analogous mechanisms, as reviewed in Antimicrobial Resistance in Avian Pathogenic E. coli: Mechanisms and Alternative Therapies.

Given the escalating burden of AMR, alternative therapeutic strategies are urgently needed.

Alternative Treatments and Vaccine Strategies

Vaccination

Vaccination represents the most sustainable long-term approach for preventing A. hydrophila infections. Several vaccine platforms have been explored.

Inactivated (Killed) Vaccines: Formalin-killed whole-cell bacterins have been administered via injection, immersion, or oral routes. A feed-based killed bivalent vaccine against Streptococcus iniae and A. hydrophila in hybrid red tilapia induced significant humoral and cellular immune responses, with relative percent survival (RPS) of 76.67% in the bivalent formulated group [10, 11, 12]. Gene expression analysis revealed upregulation of CD4, MHC-I, MHC-II, IgT, C-type lysozyme, IL-1β, TNF-α, and TGF-β in mucosal and systemic tissues [12]. Another bivalent oral vaccine incorporating fucoidan as an adjuvant induced a survival rate of 63-73% in Nile tilapia and modulated gut microbiome composition [13]. A bivalent oral vaccine against A. veronii and A. hydrophila in carps, formulated with fish oil as an adjuvant, achieved 83-85% survival [14].

Live Attenuated Vaccines: Attenuated strains with targeted gene deletions (e.g., aroA, aerA) offer strong immunogenicity but raise safety concerns regarding reversion to virulence in the aquatic environment.

Subunit and Recombinant Vaccines: Recombinant proteins (e.g., outer membrane protein OmpA, flagellin) and DNA vaccines encoding protective antigens are under development. The use of Pichia pastoris to express recombinant grass carp CXCL20a chemokine, co-administered with immunostimulatory polysaccharides, enhanced resistance to A. hydrophila in grass carp [15].

Nanovaccines: Nanoparticle-based delivery systems encapsulate antigens in biodegradable polymers, protecting them from degradation in the gut and enabling sustained release. Nanovaccines can be administered orally, eliminating the stress associated with injection. While promising, potential nanoparticle toxicity must be thoroughly evaluated [16]. Dissolving microneedle patches for transcutaneous immunization represent another innovative delivery method, eliciting immune responses comparable to injection in fish [17].

Probiotics and Immunostimulants

Probiotic bacteria, such as Paenibacillus ehimensis NPUST1, produce hydrolytic enzymes (protease, amylase, cellulase, xylanase, lipase) and enhance growth and innate immunity in zebrafish, reducing cumulative mortality after A. hydrophila challenge [18]. Administration upregulated hepatic glucose metabolism genes, growth hormone receptor, IGF-I, and innate immune genes (IL-1β, TLR-4, complement C3b, lysozyme) [18]. Short-term fasting (2 days) in common carp improved disease resistance by modulating gut microbiota, reducing oxidative stress (lower MDA), and stabilizing glucose and hemoglobin levels, suggesting a non-pharmacological management strategy [19]. White button mushroom (Agaricus bisporus) water extract, containing polysaccharides, proteins, and polyphenols, activated non-specific immunity and protected goldfish against A. hydrophila and Vibrio fluvialis [20].

Phytochemicals and Natural Products

A wide range of plant-derived compounds exhibit anti-Aeromonas activity through direct killing, QS interference, or antivirulence mechanisms. Turmeric oil targets QS and reduces fish mortality [5]. Plectranthus amboinicus essential oil, rich in carvacrol, showed strong antibacterial activity when incorporated into fish feed, exceeding that of chloramphenicol [21]. Behenic acid, a phytochemical identified through in silico screening, demonstrated multi-target inhibition of KatG, ADSS, and PdxJ, with MIC of 50 µg/mL against A. hydrophila and dose-dependent survival in zebrafish [22]. Sodium butyrate supplementation in Labeo rohita improved growth, gut health, hepatic enzymes, and resistance to A. hydrophila [23].

Antimicrobial Peptides (AMPs) and IgY

Avian IgY antibodies raised against formaldehyde-killed A. hydrophila exhibited synergistic effects with ciprofloxacin and chloramphenicol (FIC indices 0.24 and 0.37), potentially reducing antibiotic usage [9]. Marine actinomycete extracts (Microbacterium marinum, Kocuria rhizophila) yielded purified compounds with inhibition zones of 10-21 mm and 80-90% survival in Macrobrachium rosenbergii [24].

The integration of these alternative strategies into comprehensive health management programs is essential. The diagnostic workflow below illustrates the decision pathway for detecting A. hydrophila and determining appropriate interventions.

flowchart TD
    A[Fish exhibiting clinical signs of MAS], > B[Sample collection: kidney, spleen, ascites fluid]
    B, > C{Culture on selective agar?}
    C, >|Positive| D[Gram stain, oxidase, catalase]
    D, > E[Biochemical identification or MALDI-TOF]
    E, > F[Molecular confirmation: PCR / 16S rRNA sequencing]
    F, > G[Antimicrobial susceptibility testing]
    G, > H{Resistance detected?}
    H, >|Yes| I[Screen for alternative treatments: phytochemicals, probiotics, phage]
    H, >|No| J[Select appropriate antibiotic]
    I, > K[Implement targeted therapy + vaccination]
    J, > L[Monitor treatment response]
    L, > M[Evaluate RPS and environmental samples]
    M, > A

Conclusion

Aeromonas hydrophila remains a formidable challenge in warm-water aquaculture due to its diverse virulence armamentarium, robust biofilm formation, and rapidly evolving antimicrobial resistance. Diagnostic capabilities have advanced significantly, with molecular techniques such as RPA and MALDI-TOF MS enabling rapid, accurate detection. The rise of MDR strains has catalyzed intensive research into alternatives to antibiotics, including vaccines, probiotics, phytochemicals, AMPs, and immunostimulants. Bivalent and multivalent vaccine formulations, particularly those delivered orally with effective adjuvants, show great promise for field application. Nanovaccines and microneedle patches offer innovative delivery routes that improve compliance. Combining multiple intervention strategies within an integrated health management framework, guided by accurate diagnostics and resistance surveillance, will be critical to sustaining aquaculture productivity and reducing the selective pressure that drives resistance evolution.

References

[1] Dong J, Yan T, Yang Q, et al. Inhibitory Effect of Polydatin Against Aeromonas hydrophila Infections by Reducing Aerolysin Production. Front Vet Sci. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6a4237c7cba9eb6fe67e44344d4639ab9bde4d43

[2] Li S, Ma X, Zhou S, et al. Apigenin decreases the pathogenicity of Aeromonas hydrophila infection by inhibiting aerolysin activity and interfering with quorum sensing. J Appl Microbiol. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42233888/

[3] Xu J, Liu T, Chen J, et al. Luteolin protects crucian carp against Aeromonas hydrophila by modulating inflammation-apoptosis axis. Dev Comp Immunol. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42242402/

[4] Kurniawan J, Waturangi D, Julyantoro PGS, et al. Ice nucleation active bacteria metabolites as antibiofilm agent to control Aeromonas hydrophila and Streptococcus agalactiae infections in Aquaculture. BMC Res Notes. 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/99bc2d1df8991ca48ddd7d83b77c393ecc609bc1

[5] Dong J, Tong J, Li S, et al. Turmeric Oil Interferes with Quorum Sensing as an Alternative Approach to Control Aeromonas hydrophila Infection in Aquaculture. Biology. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/43de06cae4e9fe63d6f2a31e7dd6ac38098ef84

[6] Rozi R, Tyasningsih W, Rahmahani J, et al. Multiphase antibiofilm potential of shrimp-shell-derived chitosan nanoparticles against Aeromonas hydrophila isolated from tropical aquaculture environments. Vet World. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6d2e3d76b973c228a959da1e73449ed48ae815d5

[7] Luo H, Wu Z, Fan W, et al. Establishment of methods for visual and rapid detection of piscine lactococcosis based on isothermal recombinase polymerase amplification. BMC Vet Res. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42210273/

[8] Li S, Dong J, Zhou S, et al. Antibiotic Alternative Strategies Against Aeromonas hydrophila Infections: New Trends and Advances. Rev Aquac. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/378b5068efa5305b6b8ce43aad6c53fb08d94c49

[9] James T, Rahiman KM M, Sebastian D, et al. The combinational effect of avian IgY antibodies and broad-spectrum antibiotics (ciprofloxacin and chloramphenicol) in vitro reduces the incidence of Aeromonas hydrophila. J Appl Aquac. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ad273af744c39e65f91165970922049d70a73d7f

[10] Monir MS, Yusoff S, Zulperi Z, et al. Haemato-immunological responses and effectiveness of feed-based bivalent vaccine against Streptococcus iniae and Aeromonas hydrophila infections in hybrid red tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus × O. niloticus). BMC Vet Res. 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7023b03b98a492fcb176e6f0758a0092937d0962

[11] Monir MS, Yusoff S, Zulperi Z, et al. Haemato-immunological responses and effectiveness of feed-based bivalent vaccine against Streptococcus iniae and Aeromonas hydrophila infections in hybrid red tilapia (Oreochromis spp.). 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9099f284082105c10436bb76d388d52d0d6128e1

[12] Monir MS, Yusoff MSM, Zamri-Saad M, et al. Effect of an Oral Bivalent Vaccine on Immune Response and Immune Gene Profiling in Vaccinated Red Tilapia (Oreochromis spp.) during Infections with Streptococcus iniae and Aeromonas hydrophila. Biology. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f394359a2d4795f2b1621fd74f3302e235f05101

[13] Guha R, Lakshmi S, Krebs T, et al. Efficacy of a novel oral bivalent vaccine with fucoidan as adjuvant against Aeromonas hydrophila and Edwardsiella tarda infections in Nile tilapia aquaculture. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/40e550931047b83beb3b606699296530d65ee66b

[14] Mubeen N, Abbas F, Hafeez-ur-Rehman M, et al. Immunopotential Induced in Culturable Carps Fed on Edible Bivalent Vaccine Against Aeromonas veronii and Aeromonas hydrophila. Aquac Res. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8af14003cbe510c25210914ffb7c2dcddddaace7

[15] Li W, Lv M, Chen G, et al. Co-administration of recombinant Pichia pastoris-CXCL20a and immunostimulatory polysaccharides enhances resistance to Aeromonas hydrophila in grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella). Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42229674/

[16] Harshitha M, Nayak A, Disha S, et al. Nanovaccines to Combat Aeromonas hydrophila Infections in Warm-Water Aquaculture: Opportunities and Challenges. Vaccines. 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/39c49bcd5247de2c273cc9c5c6b07afa66fa1d82

[17] Yun S, Lee SJ, Giri S, et al. Vaccination of fish against Aeromonas hydrophila infections using the novel approach of transcutaneous immunization with dissolving microneedle patches in aquaculture. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0de924526415781a30f349d12c4413945b9a4010

[18] Lin PH, Chen SW, Wen Z, et al. Administration of the Potential Probiotic Paenibacillus ehimensis NPUST1 Enhances Expression of Indicator Genes Associated with Nutrient Metabolism, Growth and Innate Immunity against Aeromonas hydrophila and Streptococcus iniae Infections in Zebrafish (Danio rerio). Fishes. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/070e274a1090ab3085050372fb621f2cba6b9265

[19] Qosimah D, Widyaputri T, Ataullah MA, et al. Short-term fasting enhances the resistance of common carp (Cyprinus carpio) to Aeromonas hydrophila: Impacts on gut microbiota, glucose, and oxidative stress. Vet World. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d41c2dca4ff5f2f0d016ea81f3c0b1e1d53473f6

[20] Sun S, Chen J, Cui P, et al. Evaluation of Immunoprotective Activities of White Button Mushroom (Agaricus bisporus) Water Extract Against Major Pathogenic Bacteria (Aeromonas hydrophila or Vibrio fluvialis) in Goldfish (Carassius auratus). Animals. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/83a554bb0701111bbc5adcd3ae5fa3d8c064f83b

[21] Silva J, Vilar F, Lima G, et al. Plectranthus amboinicus Essential Oil Incorporated into Fish Feed Shows Strong Antimicrobial Activity against Aeromonas hydrophila, an Opportunistic Bacterium of Aquaculture. J Braz Chem Soc. 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a607ca37653511407c7915419a5aad20de13e7e0

[22] Ravi L, Kumar KA, Kumari GRS, et al. Behenic Acid as a multi-target inhibiting antibacterial phytochemical against Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Aeromonas hydrophila for effective management of aquaculture infections: an in-silico, in-vitro & in-vivo experimentation. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e936967bbd11ce7bd536cfccde32453b21fda54f

[23] Younas A, Fatima M, Shah SZH, et al. Sodium butyrate supplementation improves growth performance, gut health, hepatic enzyme activities, and disease resistance against Aeromonas hydrophila in Labeo rohita. Vet Res Commun. 2026. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42240874/

[24] Mondal H, Thomas J. Treatment of Aeromonas hydrophila and Vibrio parahaemolyticus infections in Macrobrachium rosenbergii using bioactive compounds from marine Actinomycetes - an alternative to synthetic antibiotics. Microb Pathog. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e3f7bf20751b315e27cd0d32a7805e320e71c506

[25] Wang L, Prodhan ZH, SafiulAzam FM, et al. Study of Aeromonas Hydrophila Infections in Pelteobagrus Fulvidraco: In the Morphological and Hematological Symptoms. 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ff033df820523dc50385547317bf5f0bf352b3c6

[26] Wang L, Prodhan ZH, Ao L, et al. Morphological and Hematological Symptoms of Aeromonas Hydrophila Infections in Pelteobagrus Fulvidraco. Am J Surg Clin Case Rep. 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fe734f1c5b5294dbe3ab527bb7d734729fcad915

[27] Nair RR, John KR, Das B, et al. Modulation of immune and pathological responses in Nile tilapia by single and co-infections with Lactococcus garvieae and Aeromonas hydrophila. Aquac Int. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b03f48ba5652a11602c1c084961b0a90990bb409

[28] Miryala KR, Swain B. Advances and Challenges in Aeromonas hydrophila Vaccine Development: Immunological Insights and Future Perspectives. Vaccines. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2c17dadacaa4d0f90c2d031584b753d99de365d8

[29] Li P, Zeng C, Liu Y, et al. Grass carp HB-EGFa enhances resistance to Aeromonas hydrophila infection by fortifying gut mucosal barrier function. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e1e445f7af5f5e184d4df3db3a0d6c3a59b91111

[30] Boregowda KK, Sankara NM, Kallappa GS, et al. Co-infection of infectious spleen and kidney necrosis virus, Aeromonas hydrophila, and Aeromonas dhakensis in native endemic Canara pearlspot Etroplus canarensis of Western Ghats, India. Aquac Int. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ad970d5fb4a017079e1a0de198ff5db7d7c99d5