Grohth of Juvenile Abalones (Haliotis Rufescens), Mussels (~Iytilus Californianus), and Spot Prahns (Pandalus Platyceros), in an Experipiental Polyculture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
GROHTH OF JUVENILE ABALONES (HALIOTIS RUFESCENS), MUSSELS (~IYTILUS CALIFORNIANUS), AND SPOT PRAHNS (PANDALUS PLATYCEROS), IN AN EXPERIPIENTAL POLYCULTURE A thesis submitted to the faculty of San Francisco State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science in Marine Science by John Hilliam Hunt San Francisco, California June, 1987 Copyright by John William Hunt 1987 Growth of Juvenile Abalones (Haliotis rufescens), Mussels (Mytilus californianus), and Spot Prawns (Pandalus platyceras) in an Experimental Polyculture John H. Hunt San Francisco State University 1987 Polyculture techniques were applied to the hatchery production of juvenile abalones Haliotis rufescens, mussels Mytilus californianus, and spot prawns Pandalus platyceras to investigate the effects of coexistence and food quantity on shellfish growth and fouling control. Growth of abalones and spot prawns was significantly greater in monoculture treatments than in polycultures, and growth increased significantly with increasing amount of food supplied. Mussels gre1< relatively slowly in all treatments, and were not significantly affected by any experimental manipulations. Abalones were found to be capable of ingesting and assimilating shrimp meat that was intended as food for prawns in the polyculture system. Overlap in utilization of this food source is suggested as one reason for decreased growth of abalones and prawns in the polyculture. Fouling was greatest in mussel monoculture containers, significantly less in prawn containers, and least in abalone and polyculture containers, which were not significantly different from each other. I certify that the Abstract is a correct representation of the content of this thesis. · (Thesis Advisor) (Date) / / ACKNO\vLEDGEHENTS I would like to thank Drs. H:tchael S. Foster, Gregor H. Cailliet, George A. Knauer, and James IV. Nybakken of the Hoss Landing Harine Laboratories, and Dr. Ralph J. Larson of San Francisco State University for their assistance in designing the experiments and in editing the manuscript. Special thanks to Earl E. Ebert, director of the Harine Culture Laboratory at Granite Canyon, for his continuing support and advise, and for allowing me to do this work at that fine facility. Thanks also to James Houk, Arthur Hazeltine, Gino Segna, and Cathy Thaler of the Harine Culture Lab for their help and many helpful suggestions during the course of the project. I am grateful to Sheila Baldridge, who, as usual, went out of her way to find references to the appropriate literature; and to Joe Aliotti for trapping and delivering healthy ovigerous spot prawns for broodstock. Of course, I owe much more than thanks to Teresa Clayton, who not only helped with the collecting, sampling, and data analysis, but also enthusiastically supported the project for far longer than either of us had bargained for, and then married me anyway. This work was funded in large part by a grant from the David and Lucille Packard Foundation, and their support is gratefully acknowledged. v TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables . • . • ... • . • • . • • . • • • • . • • . • • . • • . • • vii List of Figures . • • . • • . • . • . • . • . viii List of Appendices . • . • . • . • . • . • • . • • . ix Introduction • . • . • . • . • . • . • • . • • • • . • • . • • . 1 Red Ahal one • • • • • . • . • . • . • . • • . • • • . • . • 3 California t1ussel . • . • . • . • • . • • . • . • . • • . • . • • • . 3 Spot Prawn • • . • • • . • . • • • . • • • • . • • • • . • . • . • • • . 5 Materials and Methods . • . • • . • . • • . • . • . • . • • 7 Experimental design . • . • . • . • . • . • . • • 7 Data analysis . .. • • . • • . .. 8 Test containers . • . • . • . • . • . • . • 9 Culture of test organisms . • • . • • . • • . • . • . • . • . 11 Test densities . • . • . 12 Mortality and replacement .............................. 13 Food, feeding, and ration size ..............•......•..• 14 Cleaning schedule • • . • . • • . • . • . • • 14 Accuracy .. and precision of gr01;th measurements . 15 Competition experiment ........•...•..•.••..•.•.•..•.•.. 15 Measurement of container fouling ...•.•••.•............. 16 Results • • • . • • . • • . • . • . • • • . • . • . • . • . 18 Growth of test shellfish ...........••.••....•.••.•....• 18 Comparisons between unfed treatments •.................. 19 Total production from all species ...•••.•.............. 20 Interactive effect . • . • . • • . • • . 20 Mortality . • . • . • • . • . • . • . 21 Competition experiment . • . • • • . 21 Fouling of test containers ........................•.... 22 Discussion 44 References 53 Appendix • • • . • . • • . • . • . • . • . • . • . 63 vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Analysis of variance: Abalone growth ........... 24 2. Analysis of variance: Mussel growth ............ 25 3. Analysis of variance: Prawn growth ............. 26 4. Analysis of variance: Total production ......... 27 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Experimental design •.......................••... 28 2. Test container . • . • • . • . • . • • . • . 29 3. Shellfish wet weight vs. dry weight .....•..••..• 30 4. Phytoplankton growth curve ...................... 33 5. Abalone gr01;th . • . • . • . • . • 34 6. Hussel growth . • . • • . 36 7. Prmm gr01<th • . • . • • • . • . • . 38 8. Tot;al production . • • . • • . • . • . • . • 40 9. Growth of abalones fed meat •.••.•.....•......••• 41 10. Fouling of test containers ...•.•..•.....•.•••.•• 43 viii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page l. Preparation of diets for test shellfish ...•.•••. 63 Benthic diatoms . • . • . • • . • • • . 63 Cultured phytoplankton .......••..••......... 65 Neat for prawns • . • . • . • . • . • 66 Nutrition provided by unfiltered seawater •.• 66 iX INTRODUCTION Polyculture techniques have been used to increase production of fish in freshwater ponds for centuries (Yashouv, 1966; Bardach, et al., 1972; Cruz and Laudencia, 1980; Dimitrov, 1984). More recently, polyculture has been proposed as a means of increasing production in a number of other aquaculture systems, using such organisms as: penaeid shrimp with milkfish (Eldani and Primavera, 1981); penaeid shrimp with pompano (Tatum and Trimble, 1979); penaeid shrimp with tilapia, milkfish or rabbitfish (Gundermann and Popper, 1977); oysters with penaeid shrimp (Maguire~ al., 1981); oysters in fish ponds (Hughes- Games, 1977); oysters, flounder, and lobster (Mitchell, 1975); and pandalid shrimp with salmon (Rensel and Prentice, 1979). Polyculture systems have also been explored as a means of converting treated waste water into usable animal biomass through controlled marine food chains (Ryther, 1972, 1975; Tenore and Dunstan, 1973; Tenore et al. 1973, 1974; Tenore, 1976; Mann and Ryther, 1977). The primary potential advantage of polyculture is increased production, the increase in cultured biomass in a given space and time. Greater production is achieved through the greater utilization of available food and space within the culture system by species having varied feeding and habitat requirements. The classic example, developed over centuries in China, involves the stocking of up to six different carp species in the same pond. Grass carp feed at the surface on macrovegetation, silver carp feed on midwater phytoplankton, bighead feed on zooplankton, mud carp and common carp feed on benthic animals and detritus, and black carp feed on molluscs (Bardach et al., 1972). This diversity of feeding patterns all01;s 1 greater utilization of available resources, and can have the added advantage of turning organisms that might otherwise overgrow and foul the system into food for harvestable species (Avault, 1965; Rensel and Prentice, 1979). Detritus produced by increased incorporation of the available food energy is retained in the system where it can be utilized directly or indirectly by the appropriate cultured species to increase the harvested biomass (Tenore, 1974). A further potential advantage, for which there is evidence in terrestrial agriculture, is an increased resistance to disease in polycultured organisms, resulting from the host-specific nature of most pests and pathogens (Ehrlich et al., 1977; Levandowsky, 1977). At the present time little is known about this phenomenon in aquatic systems. A polyculture approach can have obvious disadvantages if the species chosen are not compatible. Inhibitory interactions such as competition or predation will clearly have a negative effect on production. Furthermore, many modern intensive cultivation systems are designed to address the needs and habits of a single target species. To include additional species can complicate the process, requiring greater inputs of labor and materials which may not be justified by any increase in production. Whether the advantages of a polyculture approach outweigh the disadvantages will depend on the choice of species and culture systems. For most situations it is difficult to predict whether one species or many will provide the greatest production from the resources available. The purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of a polyculture system incorporating three marine invertebrates presently being used or considered for commercial mariculture on the west coast 2 of North America. These are the red abalone Haliotis rufescens, the mussel Mytilus californianus, and the spot prawn Pandalus platyceras. They are an appealing combination for polyculture because of their different food and habitat requirements, and similar tolerances to physical and chemical conditions.· RED ABALONE Juvenile