4.6 Article

Assessment of Tilapia-Freshwater Prawn Co-Culture Schemes in Tanks and Lake-Based Cages for Increased Farm Production

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 24, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su132413574

关键词

Nile and red tilapia; giant freshwater prawn; lake cages; co-culture

资金

  1. Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center Aquaculture Department (SEAFDEC/AQD) [FS-01-2020B]
  2. [ICFA2021]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The technical viability of co-culturing tilapia and giant freshwater prawn was evaluated, with the best feeding protocols determined for different environmental conditions to support multi-species aquaculture.
The technical viability of tilapia (I-ExCEL strain Nile or red) and giant freshwater prawn (GFP) co-culture in cages-within-tanks was evaluated while appropriate feeding protocols for tilapia-GFP co-culture in cages in a eutrophic lake were determined. Specifically, production parameters in all test species grown for five months in tank co-culture (where only tilapias were fed) were compared, while the best feeding protocol from among the following treatments: (a) T-fed-fed tilapias; (b) GFP(fed)-fed prawns and (c) T-GFP(fed)-both species fed, were defined. I-ExCEL Nile tilapias grew faster in tank co-culture whether reared singly or otherwise. However, red tilapia-GFP tank co-culture gave the best results considering key production traits in all test species (red tilapia -2.52%/day specific growth rate or SGR, 83.3% survival; GFP-1.17%/day SGR, 72.85% survival). Lake-based co-culture was technically feasible at stocking densities of 12.5/m(2) for tilapia and 2.4 to 4/m(2) for prawns even when only tilapias were fed; prawns grew to desired marketable sizes by thriving mainly on detritus and natural food organisms in the lake. However, further refinements can still be made to optimise the co-culture schemes to make them more sustainable and provide artisanal fish farmers options in increasing farm yields through multi-species aquaculture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据