By Subhra Bikash Bhattacharyya, Tapas Kumar Ghoshal, Jitendra Kumar Sundaray (Central Institute of Brackishwater Aquaculture, India) Revitalizing the Ganges Coastal Zone Conference 21-23 October 2014, Dhaka, Bangladesh http://waterandfood.org/ganges-conference/

1. Growth
and
produc.on
performance
of
tade
mullet,
Liza
tade
(Forsskal,
1775)
at
different
stocking
density
in
.de
fed
brackishwater
pond
rearing
systems
in
West
Bengal
ICAR-­‐
Central
Ins.tute
of
Brackishwater
Aquaculture,
India
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
1
Subhra
Bikash
BhaJacharyya,Tapas
Kumar
Ghoshal
Jitendra
Kumar
Sundaray*

2. ü Tade
mullet-­‐
One
of
the
most
preferred
food
fish
in
India
&
Bangladesh
ü Grows
up
to
250
g
in
one
year
and
about
1
kg
in
two
years
in
tradi.onal
polyculture
system
ü Informa.on
on
growth
and
produc.on
performance
in
monoculture
is
scanty
ü Scarcity
of
informa.on
on
op.mum
stocking
density
for
L.
tade
monoculture
ü System
and
species
diversifica.on
is
need
of
hour
Background
11/4/14
2
Objec.ve
ü To
op.mize
the
stocking
density
for
monoculture
of
Liza
tade

3. q The
experiment-­‐
Period
of
240
days
q Experimental
farm-­‐
Ramkrishnachawk
village,
Kakdwip,
24
Pgs
(S),
West
Bengal,
India
q Tade
mullets-­‐
Reared
at
1
(D1),
2
(D2),
and
3
(D3)
fish/
m2
stocking
densi.es
with
replica.on
q Ponds
prepara.on-­‐
Following
standard
procedure
for
brackishwater
fish
culture
Materials
and
methods
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
3
Contd….

4. q Stocking-­‐Nursery
reared
tade
fingerlings
(4.20±0.91
g,
10.30±0.36
cm)
q Feed-­‐
Formulated
floa.ng
pellets
@
10-­‐2%
of
biomass
(protein:
29.7%,
fat:
4.9%)
q Feeding-­‐
Twice
daily
at
0800
and
1630
hrs
q Aera.on
(2
×
2
HP)
was
provided
in
each
ponds
as
follows:
Days
of
culture
Aerator
run
.me
Morning
Evening
1
-­‐
60
0500
-­‐
0530
1500
-­‐
1530
61
-­‐120
0500
-­‐
0540
1450
-­‐
1530
121
–
180
0500
-­‐
0550
1440
-­‐
1530
181
-­‐
240
0500
-­‐
0600
1430
-­‐
1530
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
4

5. q Daily
weight
gain
(DWG)
was
determined
as:
𝑫𝑾𝑮= ​​ 𝑾↓𝒇 − ​ 𝑾↓𝒊 /𝒕
q Specific
growth
rate
(SGR)
was
determined
as:
𝑺𝑮𝑹=​​ 𝐥 𝐧​ 𝒘↓𝒇 ⁠−​ 𝒍 𝒏⁠​ 𝒘↓𝒊 /𝒕 ×𝟏𝟎𝟎
q Length-­‐weight
rela.onship
was
calculated
as:
𝑾= 𝒂.​ 𝑻 𝑳↑𝒃
q Condi.on
factor
(K)
was
determined
using
Fulton’s
condi.on
equa.on
as:
𝑲= ​​ 𝒘 /(​​ 𝑻 𝑳) ↑ 𝟑 ×​ 𝟏 𝟎↑ 𝟓
​ 𝑊↓𝑓
and
​ 𝑊↓𝑖
are
the
average
final
and
iniGal
weight
in
Gme
t
​ 𝑊↓𝑓
and
​ 𝑊↓𝑖
are
the
average
final
and
iniGal
weight
in
Gme
t
W
is
fish
weight
(g),
TL
is
total
length
(mm),
a:
proporGonality
constant
,b:
isometric
exponent
​ 𝑤
is
the
average
weight
(g)
and
​ 𝑇 𝐿
is
the
average
total
length
(mm)
Fish
growth
parameters
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
5

6. q Feed
conversion
ra.o
(FCR)
was
determined
as:
FCR
=
total
feed
intake/
total
biomass
produc.on
q Survival
(Sr
%)
was
determined
as:
Sr
(%)
=
(number
of
fish
harvested/
number
of
fish
stocked)
×100
q Coefficient
of
varia.on
(CVhw)
at
harvest
weight
was
determined
as:
CVhw
=
mean
standard
devia.on
of
final
weight/
mean
final
weight
of
fish
q Fish
produc.vity
(kg/
ha)
was
determined
as:
Pr
(kg/
ha)
=
Stocking
no
(/ha)×
ABW
(kg)
×
Sr
(%)
Fish
produc.on
parameters
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
6

7. q Physico-­‐chemical
parameters
–
(APHA,
1998)
o Water
temperature
(⁰C)
o Salinity
(ppt)
o pH
o Dissolved
oxygen
(DO,
mg
L-­‐l)
o Nitrite-­‐nitrogen
(NO2-­‐N,
µg
L-­‐l)
o Nitrate-­‐nitrogen
(NO3-­‐N,
µg
L-­‐l)
o Ammonia-­‐nitrogen
(NH3-­‐N,
µg
L-­‐l)
o Phosphate-­‐phosphorus
(PO4-­‐P,
µg
L-­‐l)
q Plankton
samples
collected
monthly
by
filtering
50
L
of
water
through
bol.ng
silk
plankton
net
(mesh
size
64
μm).
q Quan.ta.ve
&
qualita.ve
analysis
-­‐
Direct
census
method
(Jhingran
et
al.,
1969)
Water
quality
parameters
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
7

8. Highest
growth
was
observed
in
D1
(225±10
g)
followed
by
D2
(212±8
g)
and
D3
(167±10
g)
0
50
100
150
200
250
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Average
Body
Weight
(g)
Months
Growth
of
tade
mullet
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
D1
D2
D3
0
50
100
150
200
250
D1
D2
D3
Average
body
weight
(g)
Stocking
density
Average
body
weight
of
tade
mullet
at
harvest
in1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
Results
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
8

9. 0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
D1
D2
D3
Daily
weight
gain
(g/
day)
Daily
weight
gain
(DWG,
g/
day)
of
tade
mullet
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
D1
D2
D3
Specific
growth
rate
(%/
day)
Specific
growth
rate
(SGR,
%/
day)
of
tade
mullet
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
Daily
weight
gain
and
specific
growth
rate
decreased
with
increasing
stocking
density
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
9

10. TL
=
0.0075W3.08
R²
=
0.98
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
5
15
25
35
Body
weight
(g)
Total
length
(cm)
D1
TL
=
0.0056W3.01
R²
=
0.96
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
5
15
25
35
Body
weight
(g)
Total
length
(cm)
D2
TL
=
0.0085W2.92
R²
=
0.97
0
50
100
150
200
250
5
15
25
35
Body
weight
(g)
Total
length
(cm)
D3
Tade
mullet
in
D2
showed
isometric
growth
(b=3.01),
whereas
fishes
in
D1
and
D3
showed
posi.ve
allometric
(b
=
3.08)
and
nega.ve
allometric
(b=2.92)
growth
respec.vely
Note:
when
the
b
parameter
is
equal
to
3
growth
is
isometric
and
when
it
is
less
than
or
greater
than
3
it
is
allometric
(Enin,
1994).
Woo[on
(1992)
was
more
specific
and
stated
growth
to
be
posiGve
allometric
when
organism
weight
increases
more
than
length
(b<3),
and
negaGve
allometric
when
length
increases
more
than
weight
(b>3).

11. 0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
D1
D2
D3
Condi.on
factor
(K)
Condi.on
factor
(K)
of
tade
mullet
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
D1
D2
D3
Survival
(%)
Survival
(%)
of
tade
mullet
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
Condi.on
factor
(K)
and
survival
(%)
reduced
with
increasing
stocking
density
11/4/14
11

12. 1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
D1
D2
D3
Feed
conversion
ra.o
(FCR)
Feed
conversion
ra.o
(FCR)
of
tade
mullet
reared
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
D1
D2
D3
Produc.on
(ton/
ha)
Produc.on
(ton/
ha)
of
tade
mullet
reared
in
1,
2
and
3
fish/
m2
stocking
density
Feed
conversion
ra.o
(FCR)
and
produc.on
(ton/
ha)
increased
with
increasing
stocking
density
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
12

13. Water
quality
parameters
of
Tade
mullet
(Liza
tade)
rearing
ponds
at
1
(D1),
2
(D2)
and
3
(D3)
fish/
m2
stocking
density
Water
parameters D1 D2 D3
Water
temperature
(ºC) 29.9±1.7 29.9±1.7 29.7±1.9
pH 8.0±0.2a 7.9±0.2a 7.7±0.3b
DO
(mg
L-­‐1) 6.0±0.4a 5.9±0.5a 5.6±0.5b
Salinity
(ppt) 16.8±5.3 16.7±5.3 16.8±5.1
NO2-­‐N
(µg
L-­‐l) 36.7±3.8c 41.6±5.6b 54.7±6.6a
NO3-­‐N
(µg
L-­‐l) 194.1±15.4c 211.4±11.1b 279.7±8.9a
NH4-­‐N
(µg
L-­‐l) 175.1±14.6b 179.1±17.9b 254.8±36.2a
PO4-­‐P
(µg
L-­‐l) 182.6±16.4a 169.1±8.9b 127.6±12.7c
Phytoplankton
(nos
L-­‐1
×103) 17.2±1.2a 15.1±0.9b 12.5±0.7c
Zooplankton
(nos
L-­‐1
×103) 3.7±0.2a 3.1±0.2b 2.8±0.1c
Means
bearing
different
superscripts
indicate
sta.s.cally
significant
differences
in
a
row
(p<0.05);
Values
are
expressed
as
mean
±
SE
of
three
replicate
ponds.
NO3-­‐N,
NO2-­‐N
and
NH4-­‐N
increased
and
DO,
pH,
PO4-­‐P
and
plankton
popula.on
decreased
with
increasing
stocking
density
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
13

14. 14
Economic
analysis
revealed
higher
B:
C
ra.o
in
treatment
D2
Currency
men.oned
is
Indian
Rupee
(100
INR=1.67
US$).
Item QuanGty/
ha Rate
(Rs) D1 D2 D3
Opera.onal
cost
(OC)
T a d e
m u l l e t
fingerlings
10000,
20000
and
30000
D1,
D2
and
D3
5
fingerling-­‐1 50000 100000 150000
Manure 250
kg 20
kg-­‐1 5000 5000 5000
Lime 3000
kg 6
kg-­‐1 18000 18000 18000
Feed 2982,
6303
and
7825
kg
in
D1,
D2
and
D3
35
kg-­‐1 104385 220605 273875
Labour 140,
160
and180
man-­‐
days
in
D1,
D2
and
D3
250
man-­‐day-­‐1 35000 40000 45000
Sub
total
212385 383605 491875
Interest
on
OC
(8
months)
Annual-­‐12
%
16991 30695 39350
Total
OC
229376 414300 531225
Economic
return
Tade
mullet
sale 1977,
3708
and
4309
kg
from
D1,
D2
and
D3
210,
200
and
180
from
D1,
D2
and
D3
415170 741600 775620
Gross
return
185794 327300 244395
Benefit
cost
(B:C)
ra.o
1.81 1.97 1.46
Comparison
of
economic
parameters
among
treatments

15. Conclusion
11/4/14
CPWF
WORKSHOP-­‐DHAKA
15
• The
results
demonstrate
the
feasibility
of
system
diversifica.on
with
tade
mullet
farming
• Decrease
in
growth
parameters
at
higher
densi.es
is
probably
due
to
crowding
• Economic
analysis
revealed
highest
benefit
cost
ra.o
of
1.97:
1
with
2
fish/
m2
stocking
density
• Stocking
density
of
3
fish/
m2
resulted
a
produc.on
up
to
4
tons/
ha
in
8
months

16. THANK
YOU
ALL
11/4/14
GROW
FISH-­‐
GROW
WITH
FISH
16