Loading…
Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana
A feeding experiment was conducted in 40-L tanks each stocked with four fry of olive barb (2.05 ± 0.22 g). Dead notonectids (T1), live notonectids (T2), co-feeding of live notonectids and prepared diet (T3), prepared diet (T4), and plankton concentrate (T5) were fed ad libitum as the five treatments...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of applied aquaculture 2011-07, Vol.23 (3), p.231-237 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c230t-f4c8641be4d535a8af0642881ce85755bb4122754f55ce8ac7ea6e7878588ba03 |
container_end_page | 237 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 231 |
container_title | Journal of applied aquaculture |
container_volume | 23 |
creator | Das, Pratap Chandra Jena, Joykrushna Singh, Tarun Kumar Kar, Samarjit Mitra, Gopa |
description | A feeding experiment was conducted in 40-L tanks each stocked with four fry of olive barb (2.05 ± 0.22 g). Dead notonectids (T1), live notonectids (T2), co-feeding of live notonectids and prepared diet (T3), prepared diet (T4), and plankton concentrate (T5) were fed ad libitum as the five treatments, each maintained with four replications. Proximate composition revealed higher protein and crude lipid contents in both notonectids and plankton concentrate compared to the prepared diet. The insect consumption rate was significantly higher with provision of dead insects (T1), followed by co-feeding of live insect and prepared diet (T3), and the live form (T2) (P < 0.05). Fry showed significantly higher final body weight and net weight gain, as well as specific growth rate, in co-fed group compared to those provided with live or dead insects. Growth performances decreased significantly when fed with prepared diet or plankton concentrate alone. While olive barb fry exhibited a preference for notonectids over the other diets, co-feeding appeared to offer a better nutritional profile for achieving higher growth. The study also indicated possibility of using olive barb as a good candidate for in situ biological control of notonectids during fingerling rearing of barbs and carps. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/10454438.2011.600631 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_898531426</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>902370846</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c230t-f4c8641be4d535a8af0642881ce85755bb4122754f55ce8ac7ea6e7878588ba03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM9LwzAUgIMoOKf_gYfixYudL03SvJ1Eh1NhOEE9hzRNoaNrZtIq--9NqV48eHq_vvd4fIScU5hRQLimwAXnDGcZUDrLAXJGD8iECi7SOBeHMY9IOjDH5CSEDQBFKXFC5LPrXGtNV5ch0SFZ1Z82WTpXJpXzyboZyjvti6vkpW-7ug_Jq_a61afkqNJNsGc_cUrel_dvi8d0tX54WtyuUpMx6NKKG8w5LSwvBRMadQU5zxCpsSikEEXBaZZJwSshYksbaXVuJUoUiIUGNiWX492ddx-9DZ3a1sHYptGtdX1Qc8iYBOR5JC_-kBvX-zY-p3COglGeDRAfIeNdCN5WaufrrfZ7RUENLtWvSzW4VKPLuHYzrtVt1LLVX843per0vnG-ijpMHRT798I3yFh3og</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>898531426</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana</title><source>Taylor and Francis Science and Technology Collection</source><creator>Das, Pratap Chandra ; Jena, Joykrushna ; Singh, Tarun Kumar ; Kar, Samarjit ; Mitra, Gopa</creator><creatorcontrib>Das, Pratap Chandra ; Jena, Joykrushna ; Singh, Tarun Kumar ; Kar, Samarjit ; Mitra, Gopa</creatorcontrib><description>A feeding experiment was conducted in 40-L tanks each stocked with four fry of olive barb (2.05 ± 0.22 g). Dead notonectids (T1), live notonectids (T2), co-feeding of live notonectids and prepared diet (T3), prepared diet (T4), and plankton concentrate (T5) were fed ad libitum as the five treatments, each maintained with four replications. Proximate composition revealed higher protein and crude lipid contents in both notonectids and plankton concentrate compared to the prepared diet. The insect consumption rate was significantly higher with provision of dead insects (T1), followed by co-feeding of live insect and prepared diet (T3), and the live form (T2) (P < 0.05). Fry showed significantly higher final body weight and net weight gain, as well as specific growth rate, in co-fed group compared to those provided with live or dead insects. Growth performances decreased significantly when fed with prepared diet or plankton concentrate alone. While olive barb fry exhibited a preference for notonectids over the other diets, co-feeding appeared to offer a better nutritional profile for achieving higher growth. The study also indicated possibility of using olive barb as a good candidate for in situ biological control of notonectids during fingerling rearing of barbs and carps.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1045-4438</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1545-0805</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/10454438.2011.600631</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis Group</publisher><subject>Diet ; fingerling ; Fish ; Foraging behavior ; Freshwater ; insect control ; Insects ; notonectids ; Predation ; Puntius sarana</subject><ispartof>Journal of applied aquaculture, 2011-07, Vol.23 (3), p.231-237</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 2011</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Ltd. 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c230t-f4c8641be4d535a8af0642881ce85755bb4122754f55ce8ac7ea6e7878588ba03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Das, Pratap Chandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jena, Joykrushna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Tarun Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kar, Samarjit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Gopa</creatorcontrib><title>Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana</title><title>Journal of applied aquaculture</title><description>A feeding experiment was conducted in 40-L tanks each stocked with four fry of olive barb (2.05 ± 0.22 g). Dead notonectids (T1), live notonectids (T2), co-feeding of live notonectids and prepared diet (T3), prepared diet (T4), and plankton concentrate (T5) were fed ad libitum as the five treatments, each maintained with four replications. Proximate composition revealed higher protein and crude lipid contents in both notonectids and plankton concentrate compared to the prepared diet. The insect consumption rate was significantly higher with provision of dead insects (T1), followed by co-feeding of live insect and prepared diet (T3), and the live form (T2) (P < 0.05). Fry showed significantly higher final body weight and net weight gain, as well as specific growth rate, in co-fed group compared to those provided with live or dead insects. Growth performances decreased significantly when fed with prepared diet or plankton concentrate alone. While olive barb fry exhibited a preference for notonectids over the other diets, co-feeding appeared to offer a better nutritional profile for achieving higher growth. The study also indicated possibility of using olive barb as a good candidate for in situ biological control of notonectids during fingerling rearing of barbs and carps.</description><subject>Diet</subject><subject>fingerling</subject><subject>Fish</subject><subject>Foraging behavior</subject><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>insect control</subject><subject>Insects</subject><subject>notonectids</subject><subject>Predation</subject><subject>Puntius sarana</subject><issn>1045-4438</issn><issn>1545-0805</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM9LwzAUgIMoOKf_gYfixYudL03SvJ1Eh1NhOEE9hzRNoaNrZtIq--9NqV48eHq_vvd4fIScU5hRQLimwAXnDGcZUDrLAXJGD8iECi7SOBeHMY9IOjDH5CSEDQBFKXFC5LPrXGtNV5ch0SFZ1Z82WTpXJpXzyboZyjvti6vkpW-7ug_Jq_a61afkqNJNsGc_cUrel_dvi8d0tX54WtyuUpMx6NKKG8w5LSwvBRMadQU5zxCpsSikEEXBaZZJwSshYksbaXVuJUoUiIUGNiWX492ddx-9DZ3a1sHYptGtdX1Qc8iYBOR5JC_-kBvX-zY-p3COglGeDRAfIeNdCN5WaufrrfZ7RUENLtWvSzW4VKPLuHYzrtVt1LLVX843per0vnG-ijpMHRT798I3yFh3og</recordid><startdate>20110701</startdate><enddate>20110701</enddate><creator>Das, Pratap Chandra</creator><creator>Jena, Joykrushna</creator><creator>Singh, Tarun Kumar</creator><creator>Kar, Samarjit</creator><creator>Mitra, Gopa</creator><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TN</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>H98</scope><scope>H99</scope><scope>L.F</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110701</creationdate><title>Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana</title><author>Das, Pratap Chandra ; Jena, Joykrushna ; Singh, Tarun Kumar ; Kar, Samarjit ; Mitra, Gopa</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c230t-f4c8641be4d535a8af0642881ce85755bb4122754f55ce8ac7ea6e7878588ba03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Diet</topic><topic>fingerling</topic><topic>Fish</topic><topic>Foraging behavior</topic><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>insect control</topic><topic>Insects</topic><topic>notonectids</topic><topic>Predation</topic><topic>Puntius sarana</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Das, Pratap Chandra</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jena, Joykrushna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Singh, Tarun Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kar, Samarjit</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Gopa</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Oceanic Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Aquaculture Abstracts</collection><collection>ASFA: Marine Biotechnology Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Marine Biotechnology Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of applied aquaculture</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Das, Pratap Chandra</au><au>Jena, Joykrushna</au><au>Singh, Tarun Kumar</au><au>Kar, Samarjit</au><au>Mitra, Gopa</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana</atitle><jtitle>Journal of applied aquaculture</jtitle><date>2011-07-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>23</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>237</epage><pages>231-237</pages><issn>1045-4438</issn><eissn>1545-0805</eissn><abstract>A feeding experiment was conducted in 40-L tanks each stocked with four fry of olive barb (2.05 ± 0.22 g). Dead notonectids (T1), live notonectids (T2), co-feeding of live notonectids and prepared diet (T3), prepared diet (T4), and plankton concentrate (T5) were fed ad libitum as the five treatments, each maintained with four replications. Proximate composition revealed higher protein and crude lipid contents in both notonectids and plankton concentrate compared to the prepared diet. The insect consumption rate was significantly higher with provision of dead insects (T1), followed by co-feeding of live insect and prepared diet (T3), and the live form (T2) (P < 0.05). Fry showed significantly higher final body weight and net weight gain, as well as specific growth rate, in co-fed group compared to those provided with live or dead insects. Growth performances decreased significantly when fed with prepared diet or plankton concentrate alone. While olive barb fry exhibited a preference for notonectids over the other diets, co-feeding appeared to offer a better nutritional profile for achieving higher growth. The study also indicated possibility of using olive barb as a good candidate for in situ biological control of notonectids during fingerling rearing of barbs and carps.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia</cop><pub>Taylor & Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/10454438.2011.600631</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1045-4438 |
ispartof | Journal of applied aquaculture, 2011-07, Vol.23 (3), p.231-237 |
issn | 1045-4438 1545-0805 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_898531426 |
source | Taylor and Francis Science and Technology Collection |
subjects | Diet fingerling Fish Foraging behavior Freshwater insect control Insects notonectids Predation Puntius sarana |
title | Notonectids as Live Food for Olive Barb, Puntius Sarana |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T22%3A14%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Notonectids%20as%20Live%20Food%20for%20Olive%20Barb,%20Puntius%20Sarana&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20applied%20aquaculture&rft.au=Das,%20Pratap%20Chandra&rft.date=2011-07-01&rft.volume=23&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=237&rft.pages=231-237&rft.issn=1045-4438&rft.eissn=1545-0805&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/10454438.2011.600631&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E902370846%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c230t-f4c8641be4d535a8af0642881ce85755bb4122754f55ce8ac7ea6e7878588ba03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=898531426&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |