Evaluation Methods for TrophicResource Factors ‚Äî Nutrients,Primary Production, andAssociated Assemblages

Miller, Margaret; Falace, Annalisa

doi:10.1201/9781420036633.ch4

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparatively higher total carp yield in substrate ponds than control ponds can be attributed to the provision of additional food in terms of periphyton (Miller and Falace, 2000) and bacterial biofilm (Ramesh, 1999). All treatments with periphyton enhancement gave comparatively higher fish yield than the control.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential substrates for periphyton enhancement in Carp-SIS polyculture

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A field trial was carried out to test performance of four locally available substrates (split bamboo, whole bamboo, banana midrib and plastic bottle) for periphyton enhancement in farmer's ponds at Seri and Nandapur in Nawalparasi district for 7 months. Six carp species were stocked at 15000 fish/hectare and SIS at unrecorded densities. Carp was fed with rice bran and mustard oil cake at 1.5% BW while grass carp was fed with grass and banana leaves at 50% BW. There was no significant effect of substrates on growth and production of carp. Combined NFY was 19% higher in plastic bottle ponds than control ponds, while NFY of SIS was 50% higher in banana midrib ponds than control and other substrate ponds. FCR was significantly better (P<0.05) in split bamboo ponds than control ponds. Banana midrib decayed fast and was replaced 3-4 times during experimental period while plastic bottles performed better in terms of production and profit.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential substrates for periphyton enhancement in Carp-SIS polyculture

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two substrate treatments gave better fish yield than the control, probably due to the provision of additional foods in terms of periphyton (Miller & Falace 2000) and bacterial biofilm (Ramesh et al 1999). Total weight gains of rohu and catla increased significantly in the substrate treatments over the control similar to the findings of Azim, Rahman, Wahab, Asaeda, Little and Verdegem (2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of rice straw and bamboo stick substrates in periphyton-based carp polyculture systems

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experiment was conducted to compare rice straw mat and kanchi (bamboo sticks) as substrates in periphyton-based polyculture systems. The experiment had three treatments: (a) no substrate (control), (b) rice straw as a substrate (3 Â 2.7 kg pond À1 ) and (c) kanchi as a substrate (390 kanchi pond À1 ). Fingerlings (n 5 40) of rohu, Labeo rohita (24.5 AE 0.5 g); mrigal, Cirrhinus mrigala (25.1 AE 0.6 g); catla, Catla catla (25.8 AE 0.5 g); common carp, Cyprinus carpio (27.6 AE 0.6 g), and silver carp, Hypophthalmichthys molitrix (30.4 AE 0.9 g) were stocked at a 3:2:2:2:1 ratio and cultured for 90 days. There were no di¡erences in the number of plankton, periphyton and macro-zoobenthos among the treatments. The total plate count of bacteria was higher in the rice straw treatment (41320 millioncfu m À 2 ) than that in the kanchi treatment (11780 million cfu m À 2 ). Growth and the ¢nal mean weight of rohu, catla and common carp were higher in the substrate treatments than those in the control. Rice straw and kanchi treatment, respectively, resulted in 38% and 47% higher combined total weight gain over control. Gross margin analysis showed that rice straw treatment resulted in more pro¢t than the control and kanchi treatment. Therefore, rice straw has the potential to be used to increase production in the low-input rural aquaculture.

show abstract

“…In ponds, periphyton requires some sort of substrate on which to colonize. Natural food availability for fish is higher in substrate‐based ponds as periphyton serves as an additional food web besides phytoplankton (Miller & Falace 2000; Azim 2001). Therefore, fish productivity per unit pond surface area is also increased.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of periphyton substrate and fish stocking density on water quality, phytoplankton, periphyton and fish growth

Äzim

Verdegem

Singh

et al. 2003

Aquaculture Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objectives of this study were to determine how periphyton and phytoplankton biomass vary with grazing pressure by tilapia Oreochromis niloticus, to evaluate the growth performance of fish when substrate is introduced and to calculate the efficiency of nitrogen utilization in substrate and non‐substrate systems. Ten circular 1000‐L plastic tanks were filled with 15 cm of loamy soil bottom and water. Five different treatments were applied: eight tilapias with substrate (treatment 8T/S), eight tilapias without substrate (treatment 8T), four tilapias with substrate (treatment 4T/S), four tilapias without substrate (treatment 4T) and no tilapia with substrate (treatment 0T/S). Each week, 2 g of NaNO3 and 3.5 g of single superphosphate (SSP) were applied to each tank. Sixteen glass slides (1 m×4 cm×4 mm) were installed vertically in the tank bottom, one portion extending above the water surface and equally spaced within the water column in all substrate tanks. Periphyton and phytoplankton quantity and quality, water quality, fish growth and proximate fish composition were measured. Because of grazing, phytoplankton and periphyton biomass decreased after the introduction of fish to the tanks. The periphyton biomass was higher in non‐fish tanks (treatment 0T/S) throughout the experiment than that in tanks with fish (treatments 8T/S and 4T/S). The periphyton biomass was similar in the 4T/S and 8T/S treatments, suggesting that the grazing pressure on periphyton biomass reached threshold levels. Fish ate 25–36% of the total standing biomass every day. Tilapia growth was significantly higher in treatments with substrate. Nitrogen retention was double in substrate ponds compared with in control ponds. There were no significant effects of periphyton substrate or fish density on body composition of fish.

show abstract

Evaluation Methods for TrophicResource Factors ‚Äî Nutrients,Primary Production, andAssociated Assemblages

Cited by 14 publications

References 0 publications

Potential substrates for periphyton enhancement in Carp-SIS polyculture

Potential substrates for periphyton enhancement in Carp-SIS polyculture

Comparison of rice straw and bamboo stick substrates in periphyton-based carp polyculture systems

The effects of periphyton substrate and fish stocking density on water quality, phytoplankton, periphyton and fish growth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About