| Literature DB >> 24040586 |
Surjya Narayan Datta1, Vaneet Inder Kaur, Asha Dhawan, Geeta Jassal.
Abstract
Comparative study was conducted to observe the efficacy of different feeding regimes on growth of Channa punctata. Six iso- proteinous diets were prepared by using different agro industrial by-products. Maximum weight gain was recorded with diet having 66.75% rice bran, 11.50% mustard cake, 23.0% groundnut cake, 5% molasses, 1.5% vitamin-mineral mixture and 0.5% salt with specific growth rate of 0.408. The experimental fish recorded the value of exponent 'b' in the range of 2.7675 to 4.3922. The condition factor 'K' of all experimental fish was above 1.0 (1.094- 1.235) indicating robustness or well being of experimented fish.Entities:
Keywords: Channa punctata; Condition factor; Correlation coefficient; Formulated diets; Growth
Year: 2013 PMID: 24040586 PMCID: PMC3771022 DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Springerplus ISSN: 2193-1801
Percent composition of experimental diets
| Ingredients | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice bran | 67.11 | 73.15 | 66.75 | 76.49 | 71.86 | 69.29 |
| Mustard cake | 10.85 | 26.92 | 11.50 | 7.84 | 9.38 | 10.46 |
| Fish meal | 21.70 | - | - | - | - | 6.75 |
| Groundnut cake | - | - | 23.0 | - | 9.38 | 6.75 |
| Soybean meal | - | - | - | 9.38 | 1.88 | 6.75 |
Additives in all diets: Vitamin-mineral mixture = 1.5%, Salt = 0.5%, Molasses = 5%.
Proximate composition (% DM basis) of feed ingredients and experimental diets
| Ingredients | Moisture | Crude protein | Ether extract | Crude fibre | Ash | NFE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rice bran | 14.20 | 26.70 | 1.4 | 8.89 | 7.18 | 41.63 |
| Mustard cake | 13.20 | 57.53 | 1.5 | 7.58 | 7.22 | 12.97 |
| Fish meal | 14.65 | 46.80 | 3.0 | 2.99 | 29.76 | 3.25 |
| Groundnut cake | 13.95 | 44.59 | 2.5 | 7.81 | 4.21 | 26.94 |
| Soybean meal | 13.05 | 66.48 | 1.5 | 5.73 | 5.26 | 8.01 |
| D1 | 16.00 | 34.22 | 2.66 | 7.68 | 16.12 | 23.32 |
| D2 | 17.25 | 33.68 | 1.45 | 10.68 | 7.14 | 30.29 |
| D3 | 17.00 | 34.10 | 1.90 | 9.73 | 5.80 | 30.34 |
| D4 | 15.10 | 33.94 | 1.12 | 9.36 | 5.48 | 35.60 |
| D5 | 15.15 | 33.74 | 1.75 | 9.49 | 6.13 | 33.94 |
| D6 | 14.85 | 34.35 | 1.95 | 9.23 | 10.34 | 28.49 |
Water quality parameters of different treatments
| Tanks | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | D6 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temperature °C | 30.450 ± 2.717 | 30.612 ± 2.717 | 30.269 ± 2.294 | 29.821 ± 2.363 | 29.22 ± 1.683 | 29.672 ± 1.959 |
| pH | 8.070 ± 0.403 | 8.110 ± 0.428 | 8.204 ± 0.386 | 8.171 ± 0.382 | 8.217 ± 0.376 | 8.242 ± 0.369 |
| DO (mg/l) | 2.355 ± 1.316 | 2.202 ± 1.356 | 3.059 ± 1.401 | 2.611 ± 2.050 | 2.989 ± 2.187 | 3.469 ± 2.694 |
| Alkalinity (mg/l) | 411.090 ± 43.994 | 424.363 ± 43.797 | 363.272 ± 72.901 | 425.45 ± 46.79 | 445.09 ± 45.889 | 404.00 ± 36.57 |
| Hardness (mg/l) | 378.667 ± 23.626 | 340.000 ± 11.313 | 373.332 ± 26.599 | 372.00 ± 37.09 | 362.00 ± 28.33 | 349.33 ± 24.07 |
| Ammonia (mg/l) | 0.3591 ± 0.124 | 0.4245 ± 0.116 | 0.320 ± 0.111 | 0.3409 ± 0.114 | 0.3273 ± 0.117 | 0.2909 ± 0.108 |
| Phosphate (mg/l) | 1.750 ± 0.765 | 1.540 ± 0.745 | 1.654 ± 0.782 | 1.622 ± 0.707 | 1.582 ± 0.718 | 1.613 ± 0.773 |
| Nitrite - NO2 (mg/l) | 0.197 ± 0.222 | 0.182 ± 0.222 | 0.116 ± 0.222 | 0.114 ± 0.222 | 0.077 ± 0.222 | 0.165 ± 0.222 |
| Nitrate - NO3 (mg/l) | 0.308 ± 0.322 | 0. 340 ± 0.447 | 0.396 ± 0.428 | 0.395 ± 0. 361 | 0.393 ± 0.389 | 0.349 ± 0.406 |
Values are Mean ± Standard Deviation.
Final length weight relationship of fishes reared in experimental tanks
| Tank | Final average weight (g) | Specific growth rate (%/day) | Logarithmic equation Log W = log a + b log L | Correlation coefficient ‘r’ | Coefficient of determination ‘r2’ | Condition factor ‘K’ | ‘b’ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 21.67 | 0.281 | Log W = log 0.0151 + 2.7675 log L | 0.789 | 0.622 | 1.094 | 2.767 |
| D2 | 24.25 | 0.334 | Log W = log 0.0003 + 4.3922 log L | 0.930 | 0.865 | 1.116 | 4.392 |
| D3 | 27.77 | 0.408 | Log W = log 0.0011 + 3.866 log L | 0.939 | 0.881 | 1.210 | 3.866 |
| D4 | 25.66 | 0.376 | Log W = log 0.0012 + 3.820 log L | 0.944 | 0.892 | 1.171 | 3.820 |
| D5 | 24.66 | 0.346 | Log W = log 0.0042 + 3.3254 log L | 0.876 | 0.768 | 1.334 | 3.325 |
| D6 | 22.16 | 0.302 | Log W = log 0.0118 + 2.888 log L | 0.913 | 0.834 | 1.235 | 2.888 |
Initial length weight relationship of fishes reared in experimental tanks
| Tank | Initial average weight (g) | Initial logarithmic equation Log W = log a + b log L | Initial ‘b’ value |
|---|---|---|---|
| D1 | 12.09 | Log W = log 0.0288 + 2.474log L | 2.474 |
| D2 | 12.13 | Log W = log 0.0117 + 2.862 log L | 2.862 |
| D3 | 11.91 | Log W = log 0.012 + 2.851log L | 2.851 |
| D4 | 11.76 | Log W = log 0.0014 + 3.775 log L | 3.775 |
| D5 | 12.04 | Log W = log 0.0104 + 2.917log L | 2.917 |
| D6 | 11.84 | Log W = log 0.0107+ 2.925log L | 2.925 |
Figure 1Final logarithmic relationship between length and weight with regression equation ofin experimental cysterns.