Đăng ký Đăng nhập
Trang chủ Comparison of water quality and production performance of barramundi (lates calc...

Tài liệu Comparison of water quality and production performance of barramundi (lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems

.PDF
52
193
102

Mô tả:

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NHA TRANG UNIVERSITY VO THI LUU COMPARISON OF WATER QUALITY AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF BARRAMUNDI (Lates calcarifer) FINGERLINGS IN TWO SYSTEMS: A RECIRCULATION SYSTEM AND A FLOW-THROUGH SYSTEM MASTER THESIS KHANH HOA - 2018 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NHA TRANG UNIVERSITY VO THI LUU COMPARISON OF WATER QUALITY AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF BARRAMUNDI (Lates calcarifer) FINGERLINGS IN TWO SYSTEMS: A RECIRCULATION SYSTEM AND A FLOW-THROUGH SYSTEM MASTER THESIS Major: Marine Ecosystem Management and Climate Change Topic allocation Decision 1011/QD-DHNT dated 16/10/2017 Decision on establishing the Committee: 06th June 2018 Defense date: Suppervisors: LE ANH TUAN Chairman: Faculty of Graduate Studies: KHANH HOA - 2018 UNDERTAKING I undertake that the thesis entitled: “Comparison of water quality and performance of Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: a recirculation systems and a flow-through system” is my own work. The work has not been presented elsewhere for assessment until the time this thesis is submitted. NhaTrang, 02nd May 2018 i ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express the deepest appreciation to the Faculty of Graduate Studies, Nha Trang University (NTU) for the helping and giving best conditions me finish my thesis. My special thanks go to Dr. Le Anh Tuan for the continuous support of my study, for his patience, motivation, enthusiasm, and immense knowledge. My gratitude is always there with all the Lecturers and the coordinators of the Norhed Master’s Programme. I sincerely would like to thank the collaboration of the Australis Aquaculture Vietnam Ltd. Company (Ninh Hoa, Khanh Hoa, Vietnam) where the recirculating system was constructed and all the data collections were carried out. I am grateful with Mr. Daniel Fisk, the Managing Director of AAV and all of the colleagues from nursery farm, RAS team and laboratory for their supports. Last but not the least, to thank my family and my friends for always concern and encourage me during the past time. Thank you! NhaTrang, 02nd May 2018 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS UNDERTAKING ........................................................................................................................ i ACKNOWLEDGMENT ............................................................................................................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ..........................................................................................................iii LIST OF SYMBOLS .................................................................................................................. v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................... vi LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................... viii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 2 Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................... 5 2.1. Recirculation aquaculture system ........................................................................................ 5 2.2. Barramundi, distribution and production ............................................................................ 8 2.3. Nursery phase .................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 3: MATERIALS AND METHOD .............................................................................. 12 3.1. Study site ........................................................................................................................... 12 3.2. Production setup ................................................................................................................ 14 3.3. Water quality...................................................................................................................... 14 3.4. Barramundi production parameters ................................................................................... 17 3.5. Statistical analysis.............................................................................................................. 19 Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................. 20 4.1. Water quality ..................................................................................................................... 20 4.1.1 Water quality in the RAS ................................................................................................ 20 4.1.2. Comparison of water quality between the RAS and the FTS ......................................... 21 4.1.3. Discussion....................................................................................................................... 22 4.2. Barramundi production performance................................................................................. 25 4.2.1. Comparison of barramundi production parameters between the FTS and the RAS ...... 25 4.2.2. Discussion....................................................................................................................... 29 4.3. Preliminary assessment of comparative economics .......................................................... 30 4.3.1. Comparison of economic parameters between the RAS and the FTS ............................ 30 iii 4.3.2. Discussion....................................................................................................................... 32 Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ..................................................... 34 5.1. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 34 5.2. Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 34 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 35 APPENDICES iv LIST OF SYMBOLS B : Biomass Bf : The final biomass Bi : The initial biomass F : Feed consumption m1 : The pre weight m2 : The post weight P : Population Pf: : The final population Pi : The stocking population. t : Time W : Weight of fish Wf : The final weight Wi : The initial weight v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AAV : Australis Aquaculture Vietnam AGR : Absolute growth rate CO2 : Carbon dioxide DFI : Daily feed intake DO : Dissolved oxygen FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization FCR : Feed conversion ratio FRP : Fiberglass reinforced plastic FTS : Flow-through system NH3 : ammonia NH4 : ammonium NO2 : nitrite NO3 : nitrate RAS : Recirculation aquaculture system SR : Survival rate SGR : Specific growth rate TSS : Total suspended solids UV : Ultraviolet vi LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Environmental parameters .......................................................................... 15 Table 4.1: Mean values for environmental parameters in RAS (mg.L-) (N = 12) ........ 20 Table 4.2: Compare mean values of environmental parameters between the RAS and the FTS (NS, no significant difference; *, significant difference, P < 0.05) 22 Table 4.3: The stocking data of barramundi fingerlings in the FTS and in the RAS................ 25 Table 4.4: The mean values for barramundi production performance in the FTS and in the RAS ....................................................................................................... 27 Table 4.5: Summary of all parameters monitored from October 2014 to September 2015 with FTS and from October 2015 to September 2016 with RAS at the AAV facility ................................................................................................ 31 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Schematic diagram of a basic RAS ............................................................. 5 Figure 2.2: A RAS compared with a traditional FTS ..................................................... 6 Figure 2.3: Distribution map for Lates calcarifer .......................................................... 8 Figure 2.4: Main producer countries of Lates calcarifer ............................................... 9 Figure 2.5: Global aquaculture production for Lates calcarifer ................................... 10 Figure 3.1: Small tanks in AAV nursery ...................................................................... 12 Figure 3.2: A schematic design of the basic components of AAV nursery ................... 13 Figure 3.3: Oxygen meters in AAV nursery ................................................................. 16 Figure 4.1: The mean values for pH, DO (mg.L-) and CO2 (mg.L-) in the RAS .......... 21 Figure 4.2: Population and fish weight of nursery period in the FTS and in the RAS ...... 26 Figure 4.3: Survival rate in the FTS and in the RAS during nursery phase ................. 27 Figure 4.4: Feeding rate and growth rate in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery period ...... 28 Figure 4.5: Feed conversion ratio in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery phase .......... 29 viii Comparison of water quality and production performance of Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: a recirculation system and a flow-through system. ABSTRACT The comparison of water quality and barramundi (Lates calcarifer) production performance were conducted using the recirculation system and the flow-through system of Australis Aquaculture Vietnam (AAV) as an adaption option in the context of climate change. The goals were; (1) to evaluate and compare the important environmental parameters of the RAS versus the FTS for the commercial nursery farm, (2) to compare the survival, feeding rate, growth rate and FCR of barramundi production between RAS and FTS in the nursery phase, (3) preliminary assessment of economic budget between two systems. All information in this study and production scale were based on the technology design and production parameters existing at the AAV facility. pH and dissolved oxygen concentrations were lower in the RAS (7.2 ± 0.13, 5.8 ± 0.41) compared to in the FTS (8.2 ± 0.13, 6.3 ± 0.58). The mean values of nitrite and nitrate were higher in the RAS (1.3 ± 0.36 mg.L-, 49.6 ± 8.68 mg.L-) compared to in the FTS (0.4 ± 0.16 mg.L-, 25 ± 7.92 mg.L-), but the ranges of these levels in both systems were safe for aquaculture production. Water temperature and ammonia concentrations were not significantly different between the RAS and the FTS. In contrast to the high density of Vibrio bacteria (160 ± 72 CFU.mL-) and total bacteria (432 ± 283 CFU.mL-) in water input of the FTS, no pathologies were detected in RAS water. Performance of barramundi fingerling production included survival rate, feeding rate, growth rate and FCR respectively were higher in the RAS (93.8%, 4.1%, 6.49% and 1.04) compared to in the FTS (79%, 3.5%, 5.84% and 0.99). Combined with the requirements of environmental parameters, the results confirmed that the RAS can produce more fish with high survival and less water consumption. 1 Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION Aquaculture production is playing an important role in food demand for human life. Fish is also an important source of animal protein, providing livelihood opportunities and food security for millions of people. Aquaculture accounts for 50 percent of the world’s food fish and can potentially be increased to 62 percent of fish for human consumption by 2030 (FAO, 2014). As the demand for aquaculture products increases, producers must expand current fish farms based on existing land and water resources by adopting new technology to enable higher rearing densities (Clark, 2003). Flow-through systems (FTS) can be used in intensive farming if there is an abundant and easy to harness supply of clean water (Bijo, 2007). In a traditional flowthrough system, water simply passes through tank culture of fish only once before it is discharged back to environment. The flowing water transports oxygen to the fish and removes wastes out of the system (Bijo, 2007). However, this requires a large volume of water resources and both water quantity necessary for fish production and amount of pollutants out environment are very high. Thus, the FTS do not satisfy requirements of future trends in the environmental protection and especially water resources preservation (Lang et al., 2012). Recirculation aquaculture system (RAS) is one of the new methods used to increase aquaculture production after more than 30 years of research and development (Timmon et al., 2007). In fish farms, a RAS includes the fish tanks, an adapted water treatment system and pumps to maintain water flow. The water treatment system is the center of the RAS that makes the system distinct from traditional FTS (Lekang, OddIvar, 2013). With RAS, the outlet water from the fish tanks goes through the water treatment system, which includes physical, chemical and biological process to filter, clean and improve water quality before turning back through fish culture tanks, thus the amount of added new water can be reduced. In the context of climate change, worldwide aquaculture production is threatened to the sustainability (De Silva & Soto, 2009). The negative effects of climate change on aquaculture natural resources such as land, water, seeds, feeds and 2 energy have directly impact on the productivity and profitability levels of this sector (Oguntuga, Adesina & Akinwole, 2009). However, they are different among regions, aquaculture practice systems, time, size and changeability (De Silva & Soto, 2009). Some studies in Southeast Asian countries included the poverty, marginalization and lack of alternative incomes that make fishery communities unable to cope with the impact of climate change in Cambodia (Baran, Schwartz & Kura, 2009), the disease and virus outbreaks led to decrease the profits of aquaculture activities in Thailand (Flaherty, Vandergeest& Miller, 1999), the performance of aquaculture production under the environmental pressure of climate change in Malaysia (Hamdan et al., 2015). In Vietnam, the storm surges, sea level rise, high waves and strong winds had caused severe damages and losses to aquaculture production (Kelly & Adger, 1999), the frequent flood events had caused loose to a huge number of fish and shrimps production in Red River Delta, Central Region and Mekong Delta (Asian Development Bank [ADB], 2009). Due to the remarkable contribution of aquaculture production towards economic growth, the concerns about environmental externalities and consequences related to sustainability of aquaculture activities have been increasing during recent years (Tisdell & Leung, 1999). Fluctuation of climate events such as changing water temperature and annual precipitation, the shift of raining and dry seasons all changes the physiological, ecological and operational aspects of aquaculture activities (Handisyde et al., 2006). Especially, changes in temperature and precipitation may lead to a rise in the occurrence of some kinds of virus, bacteria and parasites in water sources (Siwar, Alam, Murad and Al-Amin, 2009; Handisyde et al., 2006). It is hard to predict and identify the causes of disease outbreaks and increasing mortality risks in relation to aquaculture production. In order to minimize the impacts from external environmental factors as well as from fish farms to the environment, applying recirculation aquaculture technology could be considered for a greater commercial scale providing for the development of aquaculture production, profitability and environmental sustainability (Timmons et al., 2007). The study “Comparison of water quality and production performance of barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: a recirculation system and a flow-through system” was conducted as a pioneer model of application new 3 technology in barramundi fish farming in Viet Nam, especially in the context of climate change. The study focuses on barramundi fingerlings in the nursery phase. This stage plays a decisive role for the final output because small fish are easy to be infected with disease and get high mortality. The system was analyzed for a nursery with a single-batch, reaching a desired 30 g fish size in 40 – 50 days before harvested. Survival data of fish and water quality parameters were collected and monitored as indicators of the system performance. Specific objectives are to: 1) Evaluate the important environmental parameters of the recirculation system for commercial fish farm in nursery phase, compared with the flow-through system in the same facilities; 2) Compare the efficiency of barramundi production between the RAS and the FTS in the nursery phase; 3) Preliminary assessment of investment costs for two systems: RAS and FTS. 4 Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Recirculation aquaculture system RAS is closed culture systems with less water change or zero-discharge, intensive, usually indoor tank-based systems that achieve high rates of water re-use by mechanical, biological chemical filtration and other treatment steps. Normally, the mechanical stage removes the solid waste, the biological filtration removes the dissolved wastes and converts the ammonia to nitrate, and sterilization subsequently reduces the bacterial and pathogen concentration in the entire system (Figure 2.1). Figure 2.1: Schematic diagram of a basic RAS More recently, the addition of a denitrification stage has shown potential in increasing the volume of water recycled and decreasing waste outputs (Steicke et al., 2009). In fact, most recirculation technologies are being applied in aquaculture today need a replacement of 10 – 20% of water used per day (Timmons and Ebeling, 2012). Dissolved oxygen (DO), carbon dioxide, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate are the critical water quality variables in RAS that may affect fish health as well as result of production (Colt et al., 2006). With recirculation technology, an operator can secure greater control over the environmental parameters and water quality, give less stress and better growth, thus enabling optimal conditions for fish culture (Heinen et al., 1996; Badiola et al., 2012; Carrera et al., 2013). Basically, RAS has a unit for growing fish, a mechanical filter to remove larger particles before bio-filtration, an aerobic biological 5 nitrification area to remove potentially toxic nitrogenous compounds and sometimes an anaerobic denitrification filter (Barbu et al., 2008). RAS can be considered as an opportunity to reduce water consumption and effluent emission by a factor of 100 in comparison to traditional FTS (Blancheton, 2000) and allow concomitant control of rearing water quality. In RAS, the make-up water needs, about 1 m3 per kg of feed, are 100 times lower than in FTS (Mac Millan, 1992; Blancheton et al., 2007). Besides, RAS can reduce potential environmental impacts by increasing feed conversion (Fredricks, K.T., 2015). The lower waterexchange rate in RAS also allows for controlling temperature, which creates the best conditions for year-round production (Gutierrez-Wing and Malone, 2006; Lyssenko and Wheaton, 2006) and reduces energy costs whilst maintaining a particular temperature (Summerfelt et al., 2001; Avnimelech, 2006; Gutierrez-Wing and Malone, 2006). RAS also allows for better bio-security and independence in location of production facilities (Summerfelt et al., 2001; Cancino-Madariaga et al., 2011). Finally, RAS allows for higher output and a higher density of fish per unit of production tanks (Lyssenko and Wheaton, 2006; Good et al.,2009; Gullian-Klanian and Arámburu-Adame, 2013). Figure 2.2: A RAS compared with a traditional FTS (Source: Lekang, Odd-Ivar, 2013) 6 Due to the possibility to maintain a constant water quality, RAS may also contribute to improve growth performance, feed conversion ratio (FCR) and survival rate of aquatic animals. RAS production has increased significantly in volume and species diversity since the late of 80’s (Rosenthal, 1980; Verreth and Eding, 1993; Martins et al., 2005). Today, more than 10 species are produced in RAS facilities (African catfish, tilapia, eel and trout as major freshwater species and salmon, rainbow trout, turbot, sea-bass and sole as major marine species) (Martins et al., 2010). Despite the many advantages of using recirculation technology in fish farming, the operation of RAS requires a mechanically sophisticated and biologically complex system (Duning et al. 1998). To control this system, managers and farmers have good knowledge of the design of the system, specification of the technical components and operation of it. Although RAS technology is considered to have environmentally friendly characteristics and demonstrates an increasing number of applications in European countries, its contribution to production is still small compared to sea cages, ponds or FTS (Martins et al., 2010). Besides, the high initial capital investment does in part lead to slow adoption of RAS technology (Schneider et al., 2006). High stocking densities and production are required to be able to cover investment costs. Literatures on RAS are still limited and mostly focuses on technical issues or stocking densities at experimental scales. Some authors have reported about water quality assessment and fish performance in recirculation systems for some species productions, such as Arctic charr Salvelinus alpines L. in Iceland (Molleda, 2007), Rainbow trout Oncorhynchusmykiss and European sea bass Dicentrarchuslabrax in France (Blancheton et al., 2009), Nile Tilapia Oreochromisniloticus in Mexico (Gullian-Klanian and Arámburu-Adame, 2013), Salmonid in Czech Republic (Buric et al., 2014). The evaluation of water quality and performance of Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) in RAS has not been studied to a significant level yet, particularly at the commercial fish farming. A combination of environmental parameters such as DO (Wajsbrot et al., 1991; Foss et al., 2003), salinity (Alabaster et al., 1979; Sampaio et al., 2002), CO2 (Randall and Wright, 1989), nitrite (Lemarié et al., 2004) and ammonia may cause fish health problems. Classical production parameters, such as growth and survival rates (Jørgensen et al., 1993; Canario et al., 1998; Papoutsoglou et al., 1998; Irwin et al., 1999; Sørum and Damsgård, 2004) can be used to assess fish 7 performance. Research conducted at a Barramundi farming documenting potential benefits of applying RAS can help producers get more relevant information to select the appropriate system with production scale and specific culture species. 2.2. Barramundi, distribution and production Barramundi is the accepted common name used in Australia, but the fish is also known under others names in different countries, but often more generally as Asian sea-bass or Lates calcarifer (Bloch, 1790) in the literatures. Barramundi is a euryhaline member of the family Centropomidae (Katayama, 1956; Grey, D. L. 1987, Tucker et al., 2002), can be grown in salinities ranging from fresh to sea water (0 – 36 ‰). Available information shows that juvenile barramundi tends to grow faster in lower salinities. The optimum temperature for growth of this species is between 280C and 320C. According to Meynecke et al., 2013, higher temperatures can enhance primary production and increase growth rates as well as fish activity. The species is widely distributed in the Indo-West Pacific region from the Arabian Gulf to China, Taiwan, Papua New Guinea and northern Australia (Figure 2.3). Figure 2.3: Distribution map for Lates calcarifer (Source: www.aquamaps.org, 2013) 8 Aquaculture of this species commenced in the early 1970s in Thailand and rapidly expanded to China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Vietnam and Australia. More recently countries such as the United States of America, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Israel have also developed barramundi farming (Glenn Schipp et al., 2007). The popularity and demand for barramundi made it a potential candidate for aquaculture. It also has some characteristics like tender, mild tasting, boneless fillets and rich omega-3 fatty acids that endear it to the consumers. Figure 2.4: Main producer countries of Lates calcarifer (Source: FAO, 2006) According to FAO Fishery statistics, annual barramundi production has been quite stable since 1998, around 20 – 27 thousand tons, then, continuously increased in subsequent years, particularly from 2008 onwards. The highest yield was achieved over 77 thousand tons in 2012. Thailand is the largest producer with about 8 thousand tons per year from 2001. Indonesia, Malaysia and Taiwan are also the substantial producers. There has been a significant increase of international production of barramundi in the last few years, mainly from Vietnam, Thailand and China. Because of the differences in the consumption demand of barramundi in these countries, various levels of production and culture technologies also exist (Ayson et al., 2013). 9 Barramundi is also successfully cultured in commercial farms in all Australian mainland states and the Northern Territory (Harrison et al., 2013). Producers have used land based ponds and raceways, open ocean sea cages, and recirculation aquaculture systems in their farms. Recently years, the innovation and technological advances have fuelled the growth of the Australian farmed barramundi industry, as according to Harrison et al., 2013 wrote “industry production statistics in Australia do not account for the commercial value of seed stock supply, but advancements in this area certainly underpin the growth that this industry has enjoyed recently and is likely to further fuel growth in the future”. Highly intensive shore-based grow out aquaculture systems combined with a year-round supply of hatchery produced fish is currently practiced in a number of Australian states (Meynecke et al., 2013). Figure 2.5: Global aquaculture production for Lates calcarifer (Source: FAO, 2014) 10
- Xem thêm -

Tài liệu liên quan

Tài liệu vừa đăng

Tài liệu xem nhiều nhất