ReviewVeterinary medicine and science2026
Nanotechnology-Based Immunostimulants in Aquaculture: Mechanisms, Advances and Practical Applications.
Review in Veterinary medicine and science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe rapid expansion of aquaculture has intensified disease outbreaks, increasing antibiotic reliance and accelerating antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Given the ecological and economic consequences of traditional treatments, nanotechnology-based eco-efficient alternatives are urgently needed.
objectiveThe primary goal of this manuscript is to critically evaluate the practical applicability, mechanisms of action and safety profiles of nano-immunostimulants in aquaculture. Furthermore, this review aims to provide a comparative roadmap of major nano-delivery systems (polymeric, metallic, lipid and carbon-based), identifying their safety-efficacy trade-offs to facilitate their transition from laboratory research to commercial aquaculture.
methodsA structured literature search was conducted across major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and ScienceDirect) targeting nano-immunostimulants, delivery systems, fish/shellfish immunity and environmental safety. Due to high methodological heterogeneity, data were synthesised qualitatively.
resultsPolymeric nanocarriers (e.g., chitosan, alginate, PLGA) show the highest translational potential, significantly improving immune biomarkers, bioavailability and survival against major pathogens (e.g., Aeromonas and Vibrio spp.) with favourable safety profiles. While metallic, lipid and carbon-based nanomaterials exhibit strong immunomodulatory and antimicrobial potential, their practical adoption is currently constrained by variable toxicity, environmental persistence and bioaccumulation risks.
conclusionsNano-immunostimulants represent a transformative strategy for antibiotic-free, One Health-oriented aquaculture. To achieve commercial viability, future research must shift from basic efficacy trials towards green synthesis, standardised ecotoxicological assessments and field-scale cost‒benefit validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.