Pathogenic Vibrio species are an increasing concern in global seafood safety, with major implications for public health. This review focuses on the key foodborne pathogens V. cholerae, V. parahaemolyticus, and V. vulnificus, analysing their virulence traits, routes of transmission, and the growing impact of climate change on their prevalence.
We provide a critical overview of current detection techniques, control measures, and regulatory standards, supported by recent RASFF alerts (2020–2025). In addition, the article examines innovative interventions such as bacteriophage therapy, assesses the limitations of depuration, and outlines future directions for risk management in the seafood chain.
Introduction
The genus Vibrio comprises naturally occurring aquatic bacteria that have emerged as major foodborne pathogens, particularly associated with seafood consumption. These halophilic bacteria cause diseases ranging from mild gastroenteritis to life-threatening septicaemia, with seafood serving as the primary vehicle of transmission. The global burden of foodborne vibriosis has increased substantially due to international seafood trade and rising consumption of raw seafood (Newton et al., 2012).
Three species dominate foodborne vibriosis:
- V. cholerae, causing epidemic cholera;
- V. parahaemolyticus, the leading cause of seafood-associated gastroenteritis; and
- V. vulnificus, causing severe septicaemia with high mortality following oyster consumption. Understanding their transmission through the food chain and virulence expression is crucial for effective food safety management (Baker-Austin et al., 2017).
The increasing prevalence of Vibrio in seafood, coupled with consumer preferences for raw or undercooked products, presents significant challenges for the food industry and public health authorities. This review synthesises current knowledge on Vibrio as food pathogens, focusing on contamination sources, detection methods, and control strategies throughout the seafood supply chain.
Vibrio species in the food chain
Sources of contamination
Vibrio contamination of seafood occurs primarily through environmental exposure in marine waters where these bacteria naturally thrive:
- filter-feeding molluscs, particularly oysters, concentrate vibrios from surrounding water, with levels 100-1000 times higher than ambient water;
- crustaceans and finfish harbour vibrios on surfaces and in gastrointestinal tracts.
Temperature and salinity critically influence Vibrio abundance in seafood. Optimal growth occurs at water temperatures above 20°C, creating distinct seasonal patterns with peak contamination during summer months. V. parahaemolyticus prefers moderate salinity (15-25 ppt), whilst V. vulnificus thrives in lower salinity (5-20 ppt) (Letchumanan et al., 2014).
Post-harvest proliferation represents a major food safety concern. Vibrios can multiply rapidly in seafood at ambient temperatures, with populations doubling every 30-60 minutes under optimal conditions. Time-temperature abuse during harvest and transport significantly increases contamination levels and infection risk (DePaola et al., 2003).
Seafood products at risk
Pathogenic Vibrio spp. can contaminate a wide range of seafood products, with raw molluscan shellfish accounting for over 80% of Vibrio parahaemolyticus infections (Jones & Oliver, 2009). Among these, raw oysters represent the highest-risk vehicle for vibriosis, particularly V. vulnificus infections in susceptible populations. During summer months, studies indicate that 1–10% of retail oysters harbour pathogenic vibrios, with concentrations reaching 10⁴–10⁶ CFU/g.
Crustaceans such as shrimp, crab, and lobster also frequently harbour V. parahaemolyticus and V. cholerae. Contamination may occur during harvesting, processing, or through cross-contamination in retail environments. Notably, imported frozen shrimp has been implicated in multiple outbreaks (Iwamoto et al., 2010).
While finfish pose a lower risk, they are not exempt. Sushi and sashimi prepared from contaminated fish have caused V. parahaemolyticus outbreaks worldwide. In addition, ready-to-eat seafood products such as ceviche and seafood salads are emerging risk vehicles, particularly when acidification is inadequate to suppress bacterial growth.
Survival and growth in foods
Vibrio species demonstrate remarkable survival capabilities in seafood products under various conditions. In refrigerated seafood (0-4°C), populations remain stable or decline slowly, with V. parahaemolyticus showing greater cold tolerance than V. vulnificus. However, temperature abuse leads to rapid proliferation, with growth resuming above 8-10°C.
Low pH conditions in marinated or acidified seafood provide limited protection. While vibrios are sensitive to organic acids, survival depends on initial contamination levels and exposure time. V. cholerae can survive at pH 4.5 for hours, potentially persisting in ceviche.
Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) shows variable effects on Vibrio survival. While reduced oxygen levels may inhibit growth, vibrios can utilize alternative electron acceptors. Biofilm formation on seafood surfaces provides protection from environmental stresses.
Virulence expression in food matrices
Temperature-dependent regulation
Virulence gene expression in vibrios responds to temperature shifts encountered during seafood handling. The ToxR regulon in V. cholerae and V. parahaemolyticus senses temperature changes, with optimal expression of many virulence factors at 37°C. However, some adhesins show enhanced expression at environmental temperatures (15-25°C).
The thermostable direct haemolysin (TDH) of V. parahaemolyticus maintains activity after heating at 100°C for 10 minutes, contributing to foodborne illness even in partially cooked seafood. Type III secretion systems show temperature-dependent assembly.
Nutrient availability effects
Nutrient composition of seafood influences Vibrio virulence potential:
- amino acid availability in protein-rich seafood enhances toxin production and secretion system assembly;
- iron from haemoglobin in fish tissue promotes growth of V. vulnificus.
Stress response and virulence
Environmental stresses during food processing can paradoxically enhance virulence expression:
- cold shock proteins induced during refrigeration cross-protect against acid stress;
- osmotic stress from salt in preserved seafood activates general stress response systems that overlap with virulence regulation.
Detection methods in food matrices
Cultural methods
Traditional culture methods remain the regulatory standard for Vibrio detection in seafood, as outlined by ISO and FDA guidelines. These include:
- enrichment in alkaline peptone water (APW) at pH 8.5–8.6 with 1–3% NaCl, which selectively promotes Vibrio spp. growth;
- Most Probable Number (MPN) techniques for semi-quantitative enumeration, particularly in samples with low-level contamination;
- Thiosulfate-Citrate-Bile Salts-Sucrose (TCBS) agar for presumptive identification based on typical colony morphology and sucrose fermentation.
These procedures are described in:
- ISO/TS 21872-1:2017 (Microbiology of the food chain — Horizontal method for the determination of Vibrio spp. — Part 1: Detection of potentially enteropathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus, Vibrio cholerae and Vibrio vulnificus), and
- U.S. FDA Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM), Chapter 9 – Vibrio (latest revision).
Chromogenic media, such as CHROMagar™ Vibrio, offer improved selectivity and differentiation. Colony colours typically allow for species-level distinction: V. parahaemolyticus (mauve), V. vulnificus (turquoise), and V. cholerae (blue-green). However, phenotypic variability among strains can result in atypical colony colours, leading to potential misidentification. Therefore, confirmatory molecular or biochemical tests remain essential for accurate species identification.
Molecular detection
PCR-based methods offer rapid, sensitive, and specific detection of pathogenic Vibrio spp. in seafood, as described in ISO and FDA guidelines.
- Real-time PCR (qPCR) targeting species-specific genes — such as toxR (V. parahaemolyticus), vvhA (V. vulnificus), and ctxA (V. cholerae) — allows for detection within 2–4 hours.
- Multiplex PCR enables the simultaneous detection of multiple species and key virulence factors (e.g., tdh, trh), improving throughput and diagnostic efficiency.
Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) represents a robust, field-adaptable alternative, functioning without the need for thermal cycling equipment (Chen et al., 2011). LAMP assays have demonstrated sensitivity and specificity comparable to PCR, with rapid visual detection via colour change or turbidity. These features make LAMP suitable for on-site testing, particularly in low-resource or time-critical settings.
Immunological methods
Antibody-based detection techniques offer a valuable option for the rapid screening of Vibrio spp. in seafood products.
- enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) are used to detect species-specific antigens in seafood extracts. These tests are suitable for batch analysis in laboratory settings and have demonstrated moderate sensitivity and specificity, depending on the antigen target and sample matrix (Chaivisuthangkura et al., 2013);
- lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) enable on-site testing and provide qualitative results within 15–30 minutes. These devices are user-friendly and applicable for preliminary screening in aquaculture facilities, seafood processing plants, and import controls.
Despite their speed and simplicity, immunoassays may yield false positives or negatives due to cross-reactivity or low antigen levels. Therefore, positive screening results should be confirmed by culture or molecular methods before regulatory decisions are made.
Post-harvest interventions
Physical treatments
Rapid cooling represents the most critical post-harvest intervention for controlling Vibrio in seafood. Immediate icing to <10°C within 2 hours of harvest prevents logarithmic growth. Hydrocooling with refrigerated seawater provides faster temperature reduction (Andrews et al., 2000).
High hydrostatic pressure (HHP) processing effectively eliminates pathogenic vibrios while preserving raw characteristics. Treatment at 300 MPa for 3 minutes achieves >5 log reduction of V. parahaemolyticus and V. vulnificusin oysters.
Gamma irradiation (1–3 kGy) reduces pathogenic Vibrio spp. in seafood without affecting quality and is regulated by Codex Alimentarius. The FDA permits irradiation of certain seafood (up to 5.5 kGy) with mandatory labelling, while the EU currently prohibits seafood irradiation. Regulations on doses and labelling vary worldwide.
Chemical interventions
Depuration in clean seawater reduces particulate bacteria but has limited effectiveness against Vibrio spp., especially V. vulnificus, which may persist intracellularly and resist removal (Campbell et al., 2022; Froelich & Noble, 2014). Use of UV-treated water significantly improves bacterial removal, with UV plus chlorine depuration systems achieving 2.4-2.5 log reductions of V. vulnificus in oysters within 48 hours (Ramos et al., 2012).
Organic acid dips (1–2% citric, acetic, or lactic acid) effectively reduce Vibrio contamination by 1–2 log units through acidification mechanisms that disrupt cellular homeostasis. These treatments are permitted in the United States under FDA regulations concerning food-contact surfaces. In the European Union, however, their use must undergo specific compliance assessments and may require the extension of authorisations for the use of certain food additives, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008.
Other approved treatments include chlorine, ozone, and peracetic acid, all recognized for food contact use in both the US and EU under strict conditions. Chlorine remains widely used but is limited by disinfection by-product concerns, while ozone and peracetic acid offer effective alternatives with growing regulatory acceptance.
Biological control
Bacteriophage therapy represents a promising biological approach for Vibrio control in oysters. Phage applications targeting V. parahaemolyticus achieve significant bacterial reductions in artificially contaminated oysters, with single phage treatments reducing bacterial counts from 8.9×10⁶ CFU/ml to 1.4×10 CFU/ml after 72 hours of bath immersion, and surface applications achieving 99% inactivation within 72 hours (Jun et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2018).
Phage cocktails targeting multiple Vibrio species demonstrate enhanced efficacy and broader host range, with multi-phage formulations reducing larval oyster mortalities by up to 91% in controlled trials against V. coralliilyticus and V. tubiashii (Richards et al., 2021).
Natural populations of vibriophages are abundant in oyster tissues (>10⁴ phages/g) throughout the year, even when target Vibrio species are below detection limits, suggesting potential for sustainable biological control strategies (DePaola et al., 1998; Richards et al., 2019).
Regulatory framework for food safety
International standards
The Codex Alimentarius provides guidance on Vibrio control in seafood but lacks specific microbiological criteria. Risk assessment documents for V. parahaemolyticus and V. vulnificus in raw oysters inform national standards.
The absence of international consensus on acceptable levels reflects different risk perceptions globally.
ISO standards specify detection methods but not limits for vibrios in seafood. ISO 21872-1:2017 provides horizontal methods for detecting potentially enteropathogenic V. parahaemolyticus, V. cholerae, and V. vulnificus. Performance criteria ensure method comparability across laboratories.
Regional regulations
The United States implements comprehensive Vibrio controls through the National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP). Time-temperature matrices based on harvest water temperature guide harvest practices. Post-harvest processing validation requires ≥3.52 log reduction for V. vulnificus and V. parahaemolyticus.
European Union regulations lack specific Vibrio criteria, relying on HACCP-based preventive controls. Recent EFSA opinions recommend risk-based approaches considering climate projections (EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards, 2024). Member states implement varying standards, with some applying unofficial limits of 100 CFU/g.
Asian countries with high seafood consumption implement diverse regulatory approaches. Japan maintains zero tolerance for tdh-positive V. parahaemolyticus in seafood. China sets limits of 100 MPN/g for V. parahaemolyticus in ready-to-eat foods.
Surveillance data: European RASFF experience (2020-2025)
The European Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF) provides insight into contemporary vibrio contamination patterns affecting EU markets, though these notifications represent only one regional perspective on a global food safety challenge. RASFF Vibrio contamination notifications from 2020 to 2025 reveal concerning patterns within European seafood imports (RASFF window, 2025).
Of the 106 total Vibrio notifications recorded during this five-year period, 67 cases (representing 63% of all Vibrio alerts) involved seafood products, specifically frozen shrimps and langostinas (Norway lobster/scampi), originating from Ecuador. This substantial concentration of notifications from a single country underscores Ecuador’s disproportionate contribution to vibrio-related food safety alerts within the European food safety network, despite Ecuador’s reputation as a leading global shrimp exporter with advanced aquaculture practices.
The overwhelming dominance of Ecuadorian frozen crustaceans in RASFF Vibrio alerts highlights the need for enhanced bilateral cooperation between EU authorities and Ecuadorian regulators to address the root causes of contamination and strengthen preventive measures throughout the seafood supply chain from harvest to export.
Climate change impacts on food safety
Expanding risk zones
Global warming dramatically affects Vibrio ecology and seafood safety worldwide. Sea surface temperature increases of 1-2°C expand suitable habitats poleward, with formerly cold waters now supporting year-round Vibrio populations (Baker-Austin et al., 2017).
Regional impacts vary significantly. The Baltic Sea experiences unprecedented V. vulnificus growth. Alaskan waters now harbour epidemic strains of V. parahaemolyticus previously restricted to tropical regions.
Extreme weather events
Climate-driven extreme weather directly impacts seafood safety through acute Vibrio proliferation. Marine heatwaves trigger explosive growth in harvest waters. Storm surge and flooding expand brackish zones where vibrios thrive.
Adaptation strategies
The seafood industry must adapt to climate-driven Vibrio risks through enhanced surveillance and adaptive management frameworks. Remote sensing-based approaches using satellite sea surface temperature (SST) enable predictive risk mapping, with monitoring platforms already operational for Vibrio environmental suitability assessment (Baker-Austin et al., 2024; ECDC, 2024).
Real-time environmental surveillance using satellite SST data at 1-km spatial resolution has demonstrated significant predictive power for Vibrio parahaemolyticus abundance and human illness risk, with SST thresholds of approximately 14°C identified as critical risk indicators (Meredith et al., 2017). The NOAA CoastWatch program has implemented global-scale Vibrio habitat suitability models using temperature and salinity as primary inputs, providing synoptic environmental monitoring for pathogenic Vibrio infections in coastal areas (NOAA, 2022).
Integrated technology approaches incorporating biosensing, IoT devices, remote sensing, and machine learning offer comprehensive decision-support systems for real-time ecological monitoring and customized management solutions (Rahman et al., 2024).
Antimicrobial resistance in foodborne vibrios
Resistance patterns
Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in foodborne vibrios presents dual threats of treatment failure and resistance gene dissemination. Seafood isolates often show higher resistance rates than clinical strains.
Resistance mechanisms
Horizontal gene transfer in aquatic environments facilitates AMR spread among vibrios. Integrons, plasmids, and conjugative elements carry resistance determinants between environmental and pathogenic strains.
Food safety implications
AMR in foodborne vibrios impacts food safety beyond clinical treatment. Resistant strains may show altered fitness affecting survival in foods. Surveillance of seafood isolates provides early warning of emerging resistance patterns.
Prevention strategies throughout the food chain
Primary production
Preventing Vibrio contamination begins at harvest sites through water quality monitoring and site selection based on fecal coliform thresholds (<14 MPN/100mL for approved areas) and environmental parameters including temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen (Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2022; Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 2024).
Remote sensing technology enables real-time tracking of environmental parameters favoring Vibriogrowth, with satellite-derived sea surface temperature and ocean color data providing predictive capabilities for V. parahaemolyticus abundance and serving as early warning systems for shellfish safety management (Baker-Austin et al., 2024; Phillips et al., 2017; Urrego-Blanco et al., 2020).
Processing and distribution
HACCP implementation specifically addressing Vibrio hazards requires validated critical control points throughout processing, with time-temperature controls as fundamental preventive measures (Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 2023; Love et al., 2020).
Rapid cooling as a critical control point demands continuous monitoring to ensure shellfish reach internal temperatures below 10°C within specified timeframes post-harvest, with requirements for immediate ice slurry placement achieving <10°C within 3-5 hours depending on risk classification (Fearnley et al., 2024).
Cold chain integrity represents the single most important factor in Vibrio control, with studies demonstrating 75% of properly managed shipments achieving net V. parahaemolyticus die-off during distribution, though 18% still experience temperature excursions above 10°C (Love et al., 2020).
Consumer education
Risk communication targeting vulnerable populations including immunocompromised individuals, those with liver disease, and elderly patients remains essential, with studies showing that targeted education can modify consumption behaviors in high-risk groups such as renal dialysis patients (Klontz et al., 2000; EFSA, 2024).
Clear labeling of raw seafood risks through mandatory consumer advisory statements such as ‘Consuming raw or undercooked meats, poultry, seafood, shellfish or eggs may increase your risk of foodborne illness, especially if you have certain medical conditions’ and specific warnings for vulnerable populations significantly reduce consumer exposure risks (King County, 2024; Dechet et al., 2008).
Conclusions
Vibrio species represent major and expanding threats to seafood safety globally. Their natural occurrence in marine environments, rapid multiplication in seafood, and severe health impacts demand comprehensive control strategies throughout the food chain.
Effective management requires integration of environmental monitoring, rapid detection, validated interventions, and regulatory oversight. The complexity of global seafood trade demands international cooperation on standards and surveillance.
Dario Dongo
Cover art copyright © 2025 Dario Dongo (AI-assisted creation)
References
- Andrews, L. S., Park, D. L., & Chen, Y. P. (2000). Low-temperature pasteurization to reduce the risk of vibrio infections from raw shell-stock oysters. Food Additives & Contaminants, 17(9), 787-791. https://doi.org/10.1080/026520300415336
- Baker-Austin, C., Trinanes, J., Gonzalez-Escalona, N., & Martinez-Urtaza, J. (2017). Non-cholera vibrios: The microbial barometer of climate change. Trends in Microbiology, 25(1), 76-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tim.2016.09.008
- Baker-Austin, C., Trinanes, J., Gonzalez-Escalona, N., & Martinez-Urtaza, J. (2024). Stemming the rising tide of Vibriodisease. The Lancet Planetary Health, 8(7), e547-e556. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00124-4
- Campbell, V. M., Chouljenko, A., & Hall, S. G. (2022). Depuration of live oysters to reduce Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Vibrio vulnificus: A review of ecology and processing parameters. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 21(4), 3480-3506. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12969
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency. (2023). Validation of preventive controls for Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Government of Canada. https://inspection.canada.ca/en/preventive-controls/fish/vibrio-parahaemolyticus-0
- Chaivisuthangkura, P., Pengsuk, C., Longyant, S., & Sithigorngul, P. (2013). Evaluation of a monoclonal antibody‑based immunochromatographic strip test for direct detection of Vibrio cholerae O1 contamination in seafood samples. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 95(2), 304–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mimet.2013.09.013
- Chen, S., Wang, F., Beaulieu, J. C., Stein, R. E., & Ge, B. (2011). Rapid detection of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in raw oysters using a loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay. Food Microbiology, 28(5), 1154–1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fm.2011.03.012
- Connecticut Department of Agriculture. (2024). Vibrio. Bureau of Aquaculture. https://portal.ct.gov/doag/aquaculture1/aquaculture/vibrio
- Dechet, A. M., Yu, P. A., Koram, N., & Painter, J. (2008). Nonfoodborne Vibrio infections: An important cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States, 1997-2006. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 46(7), 970-976. https://doi.org/10.1086/529148
- DePaola, A., Motes, M. L., Zywno, S. R., & McPhearson, R. M. (1998). Phages infecting Vibrio vulnificus are abundant and diverse in oysters (Crassostrea virginica) collected from the Gulf of Mexico. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 64(1), 346-351. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.64.1.346-351.1998
- DePaola, A., Nordstrom, J. L., Bowers, J. C., Wells, J. G., & Cook, D. W. (2003). Seasonal abundance of total and pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus in Alabama oysters. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 69(3), 1521-1526. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.3.1521-1526.2003
- EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards. (2024). Public health aspects of Vibrio spp. related to the consumption of seafood in the EU. EFSA Journal, 22(7), e8896. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8896
- Environment and Climate Change Canada. (2022). Shellfish harvest area water quality. Government of Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/shellfish-harvest-area-water-quality.html
- European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. (2024). ECDC Vibrio Map Viewer. https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/disease-programmes/emerging-and-vector-borne-diseases/vibrio-infections
- Froelich, B. A., & Noble, R. T. (2014). Factors affecting the uptake and retention of Vibrio vulnificus in oysters. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 80(24), 7454-7459. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02042-14
- Fearnley, E., Leong, L. E. X., Centofanti, A., Dowsett, P., Combs, B. G., Draper, A. D. K., Hocking, H., Howden, B., Horan, K., Wilmot, M., Levy, A., Cooley, L. A., Kennedy, K. J., Wang, Q., Arnott, A., Graham, R. M. A., Sinchenko, V., Jennison, A. V., Kane, S., & Wright, R. (2024). Vibrio parahaemolyticus foodborne illness associated with oysters, Australia, 2021–2022. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 30(11), 2271-2278. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid3011.240172
- Georgia Department of Natural Resources. (2024). Shellfish & water quality monitoring. Coastal Resources Division. https://gadnrle.org/shellfish
- Iwamoto, M., Ayers, T., Mahon, B. E., & Swerdlow, D. L. (2010). Epidemiology of seafood-associated infections in the United States. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 23(2), 399-411. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00059-09
- Jones, M. K., & Oliver, J. D. (2009). Vibrio vulnificus: Disease and pathogenesis. Infection and Immunity, 77(5), 1723-1733. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01046-08
- Jun, J. W., Kim, H. J., Yun, S. K., Chai, J. Y., & Park, S. C. (2014). Eating oysters without risk of vibriosis: Application of a bacteriophage against Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oysters. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 188, 31-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2014.07.007
- King County. (2024). Labeling raw and uncooked foods. Public Health Seattle & King County. https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dph/health-safety/food-safety/educational-resources/raw-uncooked-foods
- Klontz, K. C., Lieb, S., Schreiber, M., Janowski, H. T., Baldy, L. M., & Gunn, R. A. (2000). Raw shellfish consumption among renal disease patients: A risk factor for severe Vibrio vulnificus infection. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(1), 20-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00051-8
- Letchumanan, V., Chan, K. G., & Lee, L. H. (2014). Vibrio parahaemolyticus: A review on the pathogenesis, prevalence, and advance molecular identification techniques. Frontiers in Microbiology, 5, 705. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00705
- Lewis, D. L., Garrison, A. W., Wommack, K. E., Whittemore, A., Steudler, P., & Melillo, J. (2016). Influence of environmental changes on degradation of chiral pollutants in soils. Nature, 401, 898-901. https://doi.org/10.1038/44801
- Love, D. C., Kuehl, L. M., Lane, R. M., Fry, J. P., Harding, J., Davis, B. J. K., Clancy, K., & Hudson, B. (2020). Performance of cold chains and modeled growth of Vibrio parahaemolyticus for farmed oysters distributed in the United States and internationally. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 313, 108378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2019.108378
- Meredith, I., Buenaventura, E., Thomas, M. K., Galanis, E., & Fleury, M. (2017). Remote sensing measurements of sea surface temperature as an indicator of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oyster meat and human illnesses. Environmental Health, 16, 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-017-0301-x
- Newton, A., Kendall, M., Vugia, D. J., Henao, O. L., & Mahon, B. E. (2012). Increasing rates of vibriosis in the United States, 1996-2010: Review of surveillance data from 2 systems. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 54(Suppl 5), S391-S395. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis243
- NOAA CoastWatch. (2022). Predicting Vibrio risk using satellite data. NOAA CoastWatch Caribbean and Gulf of America regional node. Retrieved from https://coastwatch.noaa.gov/cwn/news/2022-07-22/predicting-vibrio-risk-using-satellite-data.html
- Phillips, K. M., Satchell, F. B., Kremer, J. N., & Martinez-Urtaza, J. (2017). Remote sensing measurements of sea surface temperature as an indicator of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oyster meat and human illnesses. Environmental Health, 16, 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-017-0301-x
- Rahman, M. M., Islam, R., Hasan, M., & Ahmed, S. (2024). Advances in Vibrio-related infection management: An integrated technology approach for aquaculture and human health. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 44(8), 1610-1637. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2024.2336526
- Ramos, R. J., Miotto, M., Squella, F. J., Cirolini, A., Ferreira, J. F., & Vieira, C. R. (2012). Depuration of oysters (Crassostrea gigas) contaminated with Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Vibrio vulnificus with UV light and chlorinated seawater. Journal of Food Protection, 75(8), 1501-1506. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-467
- RASFF window – Search results for ‘Vibrio’. Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), European Commission. Retrieved July 31, 2025, from https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/rasff-window/screen/search
- Richards, G. P., Chintapenta, L. K., Watson, M. A., Abbott, A. G., Ozbay, G., Uknalis, J., Oyelade, A. A., & Parveen, S. (2019). Bacteriophages against pathogenic vibrios in Delaware Bay oysters (Crassostrea virginica) during a period of high levels of pathogenic Vibrio parahaemolyticus. Food and Environmental Virology, 11(2), 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12560-019-09365-5
- Richards, G. P., Watson, M. A., Madison, D., Soffer, N., Needleman, D. S., Soroka, D. S., Uknalis, J., Baranzoni, G. M., Church, K. M., Polson, S. W., Elston, R., Langdon, C., & Sulakvelidze, A. (2021). Bacteriophages against Vibrio coralliilyticus and Vibrio tubiashii: Isolation, characterization, and remediation of larval oyster mortalities. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 87(10), e00008-21. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00008-21
- Urrego-Blanco, J. R., Urban, N. M., Curchitser, E. N., Zavatarelli, M., & Martinez-Urtaza, J. (2020). Evaluation of remotely sensed prediction and forecast models for Vibrio parahaemolyticus in the Chesapeake Bay. Remote Sensing of Environment, 250, 112016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2020.112016
- Zhang, H., Yang, Z., Zhou, Y., Bao, H., Wang, R., Li, T., Pang, M., Sun, L., & Zhou, X. (2018). Application of a phage in decontaminating Vibrio parahaemolyticus in oysters. International Journal of Food Microbiology, 275, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2018.03.027
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT - Food Times) and Égalité.
