ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Vet. Sci.
Sec. Veterinary Infectious Diseases
Back to Basics: Locally produced vaccines offer a practical alternative to antibiotics for prevention of Streptococcosis in farmed tilapia (Oreochromis spp.)
Provisionally accepted- 1Asian Institute of Technology, Khlong Luang District, Thailand
- 2Asian Institute of Technology, Khlong Nueng, Thailand
- 3Nam Sai Farms Co., Ltd, Prachinburi, Thailand
- 4National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Khlong Nueng, Thailand
- 5Fish Health Platform, Center of Excellence for Shrimp Molecular Biology and Biotechnology (Centex Shrimp), Faculty of Science, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
While novel and advanced vaccine technologies offer significant potential for aquaculture, their adoption is often limited by high costs, particularly in low-value species like tilapia, underscoring the value of simpler approaches. Streptococcus agalactiae is a major pathogen in tilapia farming, causing significant economic losses. While vaccination offers protection, commercial vaccines often show inconsistent efficacy due to serotype variation, regional strain shifts, and limited availability in Southeast Asia. The objective of this study was to establish and evaluate a simple, locally adaptable, and back-to-basic vaccination strategy using two bivalent formulations, heat-killed vaccine (HKV) and formalin-killed vaccine (FKV), against Streptococcus agalactiae serotypes Ia and III. Tilapia received a primary intraperitoneal injection followed by a booster dose after four weeks. In the lab, vaccinated fish exhibited sustained IgM antibody responses against both serotypes for 84 days, with peak levels on days 35–42 after the booster. Challenge trials with lethal doses demonstrated high relative percent survival (RPS), reaching 97.4–100% for serotype Ia and 86.8–97.4% for serotype III, showing comparable protection between HKV and FKV. Given its simple preparation, scalability, safety, and rapid production without the use of toxic chemicals while retaining bacterial extracellular products, the HKV vaccine was further evaluated on a commercial farm. The HKV elicited a significant serum IgM antibody response in vaccinated tilapia, which remained elevated for up to 126 days and conferred protection during a natural disease outbreak. At the end of our six-month trial, survival rate in the vaccinated treatment was on average 94.5%, significantly higher than the control group at 66.8%. Moreover, the vaccine application significantly lowered feed conversion ratio, increased total biomass, and enhanced revenue by approximately 45%, resulting in higher profit. These findings demonstrate that the basic bivalent HKV is an effective, practical, and locally feasible alternative to commercial vaccines for controlling streptococcosis in tilapia, offering a promising strategy for widespread adoption in resource-limited aquaculture settings.
Keywords: alternatives to antibiotics, Autogenous, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Tilapia, Vaccine
Received: 06 Nov 2025; Accepted: 06 Feb 2026.
Copyright: © 2026 Vinh, Dong, Turner, Senapin and Turner. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Nguyen Tien Vinh
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
