Effect of Fertilization on Growth, Survival, Food Conversion Ratio, and Production of Pacific White Shrimp<i>Penaeus vannamei</i>in Earthen Ponds in Sonora, Mexico

Martínez‐Córdova, Luis Rafael; Pastén-Miranda, Norberto; Barraza-Guardado, Ramón Héctor

doi:10.1577/1548-8640(1998)060<0101:eofogs>2.0.co;2

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2009). Some strategies used to promote biotic communities in aquaculture ponds include: organic and inorganic fertilization to promote phytoplankton (Martínez‐Córdova et al. 1998; Molina‐Poveda et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A common trend is that they are abundant at the beginning of the farming trial but decline abruptly over the time, being almost inexistent to the end of the culture (Nunes & Parsons 1998;Martı´nez-Co´rdova et al 2009). Some strategies used to promote biotic communities in aquaculture ponds include: organic and inorganic fertilization to promote phytoplankton (Martı´nez-Co´rdova et al 1998;Molina-Poveda et al 2006); enclosures into the ponds to promote zoobenthos (Nunes & Parsons 2000); the use of fermented organic substrates floating in the ponds to promote zooplankton (Martı´nez-Co´rdova et al 2002), and the use bioflocs and/or biofilms to promote microbial biomass (Ballester et al 2007(Ballester et al , 2010.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of promoted natural feed on the production, nutritional, and immunological parameters of Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone, 1931) semi-intensively farmed

Porchas‐Cornejo¹,

Martínez‐Córdova²,

Ramos-Trujillo³

et al. 2010

Aquaculture Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of promoted biota on the production parameters, water quality, nutritional and immunological condition of Litopenaeus vannamei was assessed in semi‐intensive ponds. Earthen ponds were used as experimental units: three with formulated + natural promoted feed + shrimp (T1), three with formulated feed + shrimp (T2), and three with promoted natural feed without shrimp (Control). The dissolved oxygen (DO) levels were optimal for all treatments (≥6 mg L−1) as well as the pH (8.4–8.6). Total ammonia nitrogen was greater in T2 (0.10 mg L−1) than T1 (0.07 mg L−1) and the Control (0.06 mg L−1). Phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthos were more abundant in T1 and the Control. The promotion of natural feed had a positive effect on all the production parameters of shrimp with an increase of 19.0%, 3.5% and 23.9% in weight gain, survival, and final biomass, respectively; also it was observed a decrease of 13.9% in feed conversion ratio. No differences in haemolymph parameters were observed for nutritional indicators (glucose, cholesterol, proteins, and triglycerides) nor for immunological response (phenoloxidase and prophenoloxidase). The results indicate that the promotion of biotic communities enhances the production parameters of farmed shrimp, without affecting the nutritional and immunological status. Also the water quality was improved by the presence of biota.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of promoted natural feed on the production, nutritional, and immunological parameters of Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone, 1931) semi-intensively farmed

Porchas‐Cornejo¹,

Martínez‐Córdova²,

Ramos-Trujillo³

et al. 2010

Aquaculture Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Though differences in FCR between treatments with fertilization and without fertilization were not significant (Table 3), less FCR in treatments with fertilization will reduce cost of production to a certain level. Martinez-Córdova et al (1998) studied impact of fertilization on the production of Penaeus vannamei and revealed that growth of shrimp was higher in fertilized ponds, despite a lower feeding rate which suggests that fertilization enhances natural food and contributes to shrimp nutrition. Moorthy and Altaf (2002) revealed that in modified extensive system, natural food contributed considerably to the growth of P. monodon and proper assessment of this food in the pond may help to reduce the use of supplementary feed.…”

Section: Fig 2 (Gpp Gross Primary Productivity (Npp) and Net Primarmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Karlson (2010) reported that by feeding on organic matter from settled phytoplankton blooms benthic invertebrates produce food for higher trophic levels and remineralize nutrients that can fuel primary production. Contribution of primary productivity to the growth of different shrimp species has been studied by Reymond and Lagardere (1990), Jory (1995b), Martinez-Córdova et al (1998), Moorthy and Altaf (2002), MartinezCórdova et al (2003), Gamboa-Delgado (2013) and Bojórquez-Mascareňo ans Soto-Jimėnez (2013). Yutaka and Chen (1994) focused on the utilization of the natural productivity of fish ponds to reduce production costs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Production potential of Tiger Shrimp, Penaeus monodon by fertilization and reducing feed supply

Saha

Ali

2015

Bangladesh J. Zool.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Experiment was conducted to assess the potential of increasing production of shrimp, Penaeus monodon by enhancing primary production through fertilization and reduc feeding regime. Four treatments viz., T1, feeding @ 2% of shrimp biomass from 31~80 days of culture and then 1%; T2, feeding @ 3% of shrimp biomass from 31~80 days of culture and then 2%; T3, feeding @ 2% of shrimp biomass from 31~80 days of culture and then 1% + fertilization; T4, feeding @ 3% of shrimp biomass from 31~80 days of culture and then 2% + fertilization each with three replications were tested. Urea @1.25 ppm and TSP @ 1.50 ppm were applied as fertilizer monthly. After 120 days of culture, mean final weight of shrimp was 11.86±0.35g, 12.08±0.51g, 13.30±0.99g and 14.50±1.14g with the production of 458.36±14.86 kg/ha, 484.93±7.26kg/ha, 536.75±4.81 kg/ha and 592.19±35.05 kg/ha in T1, T2, T3 and T4, respectively. Reduction of feed reduce both growth and production of shrimp. Increase in primary productivity due to fertilization increase production of shrimp to a significant level (F=32.94; p<0.001). But overall production of shrimp was lower in comparison to other similar studies when higher feeding applied.

show abstract

“…Some studies have shown that such contribution may be > 75% of the requirements of the farmed organisms (Anderson, Parker & Lawrence 1987). Copepods, larvae of polychaetes, juvenile and adult polychaetes, larvae of insects and mollusks, ostracods, rotifers and other crustaceans have been considered the most important sources of food for shrimp (Rubright, Harrel & Parker 1981;Schroeder 1983;Mertens, Munuswamy, Walsche & Dumont 1990;Chiu & Chien 1992;Allan, Moriarty & Maguire 1995;Martinez-Cordova et al 1998a;Pen Ä a-Messina 1999). Despite these important findings, no significant advantage of natural food in commercial farms has yet been documented.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promotion and contribution of biota in low water exchange ponds farming blue shrimp Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson)

Córdova

Campaña-Torres²,

Porchas‐Cornejo³

2002

Aquaculture Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experimental study was conducted during 20 weeks in Bahia Kino, Sonora, Mexico, in order to evaluate the feasibility of promoting biota in low‐water exchange ponds farming blue shrimp, Litopenaeus stylirostris. The effect of that promotion on the production parameters of cultured shrimp as well as on the water quality parameters was evaluated. Treatments consisted of: (i) ponds fed formulated food (FF), and (ii) ponds fed formulated plus promoted natural food (NFF). Phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthos were effectively promoted during some weeks of the culture period. Growth and feed conversion ratio (15.16 g and 1.79 respectively) were significantly better in treatment NFF than in treatment FF (13.89 g and 2.02 respectively). Differences in some of the water quality parameters were observed among treatments. Phosphates (0.15 mg/L versus 0.53 mg/L), and total ammonia‐N (0.09 mg/L versus 0.12 mg/L) presented greater concentrations in treatment FF than in the NFF.

show abstract

Effect of Fertilization on Growth, Survival, Food Conversion Ratio, and Production of Pacific White ShrimpPenaeus vannameiin Earthen Ponds in Sonora, Mexico

Cited by 12 publications

References 11 publications

Effect of promoted natural feed on the production, nutritional, and immunological parameters of Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone, 1931) semi-intensively farmed

Effect of promoted natural feed on the production, nutritional, and immunological parameters of Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone, 1931) semi-intensively farmed

Production potential of Tiger Shrimp, Penaeus monodon by fertilization and reducing feed supply

Promotion and contribution of biota in low water exchange ponds farming blue shrimp Litopenaeus stylirostris (Stimpson)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About