MARICULTURE TECHNOLOGY

(SMT 4683)
SEMESTER 1, 2019/2020

MINI-PROJECT REPORT
MARINE FINFISH REARING: LATES CALCARIFER
(DATE OF SUBMISSION: 19 DISEMBER 2019)

INSTRUCTORS:
ASST. PROF. DR FITRI YUSOF

NAMES MATRIC NO SECTION

MUHAMMAD ANSARULLAH BIN MOHD SUBARI 1611935
1

DEPARTMENT OF MARINE SCIENCE

KULLIYAH OF SCIENCE

INTRODUCTION
 Aquaculture is an important source of stock enhancement, employment and profits.
Mass production of Seabass juveniles was started by late 1960s in France and Italy (Murillo-
Gurrea et al., 2001), and culture technique for the fish was developed in Thailand in 1970
(Williams and Barlow, 1999). The Asian seabass is a commercially important aquaculture
species in Australia and south-east Asia. Production of the fish has progressively increased in
the past years (Thirunavukkarasu et al., 2001).

The Asian seabass or ‘Barramundi’ or giant sea perch, Lates calcarifer is an important
euryhaline carnivorous fish. It can be cultured in both brackish and freshwater ponds as well
as in cages. The Asian seabass fetches a high market price due to its delicately flavoured
white meat. It has fast growth rate and is suitable for aquaculture. It can be fed with artificial
feed or low-cost fish (Singh, 2000). Feeding practices and nutritional requirements for
juvenile seabass are well-known (Glencross et al., 2013). The fish is produced on large scale
in captivity through induced breeding technique in India (Thampi Samraj, 2015). Larval and
nursery rearing techniques have been standardised for better survival and growth (Kailasam
et al., 2001).

Seabass are raised in ponds and cages in Southeast Asia. The development of artificial
propagation and hatchery techniques contributed to the large-scale development of seabass
culture. The report of Baldia and Vasudevan in 1996 showed that culture of this high-value
species gave a 74% return-on-investment and 1.4 years payback period for hatchery and cage
grow-out. (Aldon, 1997)

Market for fresh or chilled seabass is small. The September 1997 wholesale price of
chilled seabass is RM 11-14 per kg (US$4-5 per kg). Seabass are normally sold in wet
markets and in supermarkets. Home consumption is very limited. Although Malaysia imports
some fish, there are hardly any for seabass as domestic production is enough to cover the
local demand.

Malaysia even exports live seabass to Singapore (bytruck) where the market offers
higher prices. Singapore imports seabass from Malaysia and Indonesia. Infofish reports that
almost 95% of the total seabass supply in Singapore goes to restaurants. The live, ex-farm
prices range SS7.50-12.00 per kg. (Marilyn, 1997)

OBJECTIVES
 The objective of this study is to determine the effect of stocking density to the fish
rearing performance of Asian seabass, Lates calcarifer for about 3 weeks of period. The
specific growth, the survival rate and the food conversion ratio were calculated to analyse the
performance of Asian seabass, Lates calcarifer.

MATERIALS

 Seawater
 Mechanical filter
 Aquarium tank
 Formulated feed (Pellet)
 Weighing balance
 Aeration pump
 Hand net
 Digital thermometer
 Refractometer

METHODOLOGY

A) EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN / MINI PROJECT SETUP

A total of 60 juveniles of Asian seabass were retrieved by INOCEM. Asian seabass

fry with a mean body weight of 2.4 g were stocked in aquarium tank filled with 30 litres of
seawater than been filtered by plankton net at 3 different stocking densities.

Aquarium Tank A were stocked with only a total of 10 juveniles while Aquarium
Tank B were stocked with a total of 20 juveniles and the last aquarium which is Tank C, with
a total of 30 juveniles of Asian seabass.

The fish were fed with commercial dry pellet feed at 3% of fish biomass for the first 2
week and 5 % of fish biomass for the last week of period of fish rearing. The feeding was
done 2 times daily with one time in the morning and the second time at the evening.

The tanks were provided with continuous aeration and water was changed once a
week. Water quality parameters such as temperature and salinity were monitored with using
portable instrument. Each tank also was provided with 1 mechanical filtration to filter organic
substances in the water body. The growth and survival under different stocking densities were
monitored for a period of 3 weeks.

B) SPECIFIC GROWTH RATE

The specific growth rate was calculated by using the formula below:

C) SURVIVAL RATE

The survival rate was calculated by using the formula below:

D) FEED CONVERSION RATIO

The feed conversion ratio was determined by using the formula below:

RESULTS

1.0 SPECIFIC GROWTH RATE

a) Week 1

Table 1.1: SGR of Week 1

Tank A (10 individuals) ln 3.515−ln 2.4

SGR Tank A ¿ ×100=5.45 %
7 days
Tank B (20 individuals) ln 3.081−ln 2.4
SGR Tank B ¿ ×100=3.56 %
7 days
Tank C (30 individuals) ln 3.8334−ln 2.4
SGR Tank A ¿ × 100=6.69 %
7 days

b) Week 2

Table 1.2: SGR of Week 2

Tank A (9 individuals left) ln 4.535−ln 3.515

SGR Tank A ¿ ×100=3.6 %
7 days
Tank B (10 individuals left) ln 4.6082−ln 3.081
SGR Tank B ¿ ×100=5.75 %
7 days
Tank C (22 individuals left) ln 4.8824−ln 3.8334
SGR Tank A ¿ ×100=3.45 %
7 days

c) Week 3

Table 1.3: SGR of Week 3

Tank A (2 individuals left) ln 9.0065−ln 4.535

SGR Tank A ¿ × 100=9.80 %
7 days
Tank B (3 individuals left) ln 6.9243−ln 4.6082
SGR Tank B ¿ ×100=5.81%
7 days
Tank C (3 individuals left) ln 5.0300−ln 4.8324
SGR Tank A ¿ × 100=0.57 %
7 days

d) Overall

Table 1.4: SGR of Overall

Tank A (2 individuals left) ln 9.0065−ln2.4

SGR Tank A ¿ × 100=18.89 %
7 days
Tank B (3 individuals left) ln 6.9243−ln 2.4
SGR Tank B ¿ ×100=15.13 %
7 days
Tank C (3 individuals left) ln 5.0300−ln2.4
SGR Tank A ¿ ×100=10.57 %
7 days
2.0 SURVIVAL RATE

a) Week 1

Table 2.1 Survival rate of Week 1

Tank A 9
Survival rate Tank A ¿ ×100=90.00 %
10
Tank B 10
Survival rate Tank B ¿ ×100=50.00 %
20
Tank C 22
Survival rate Tank C¿ ×100=73.33 %
30

b) Week 2

Table 2.2 Survival rate of Week 2

Tank A 3
Survival rate Tank A ¿ ×100=33.33 %
9
Tank B 7
Survival rate Tank B ¿ ×100=70.00 %
10
Tank C 10
Survival rate Tank C¿ ×100=45.45 %
22

c) Week 3

Table 2.3 Survival rate of Week 3

Tank A 2
Survival rate Tank A ¿ ×100=66.66 %
3
Tank B 3
Survival rate Tank B ¿ ×100=42.85 %
7
Tank C 3
Survival rate Tank C¿ ×100=30.00 %
10
d) Overall

Table 2.4 Survival rate of Week 3

Tank A 2
Survival rate Tank A ¿ ×100=20.00 %
10
Tank B 3
Survival rate Tank B ¿ ×100=15.00 %
20
Tank C 3
Survival rate Tank C¿ ×100=10.00 %
30

3.0 FEED CONVERSION RATIO

a) Week 1

Table 3.1 Feed conversion ratio of Week 1

Tank A 5.04
FCR Tank A ¿ =4.51
1.1152
Tank B 6.552
FCR Tank B ¿ =5.871
0.681
Tank C 14.112
FCR Tank C¿ =9.8
1.4334

b) Week 2

Table 3.2 Feed conversion ratio of Week 2

Tank A 6.58
FCR Tank A ¿ =5.56
1.0183
Tank B 6.44
FCR Tank B ¿ =4.21
1.5272
Tank C 12.74
FCR Tank C¿ =12.14
1.049

c) Week 3

Table 3.3 Feed conversion ratio of Week 3

Tank A 6.3468
FCR Tank A ¿ =1.41
4.473
Tank B 11.2896
FCR Tank B ¿ =4.87
2.3161
Tank C 17.0884
FCR Tank C¿ =115.77
0.1476

d) Overall

Table 3.4 Feed conversion ratio of Overall

Tank A 17.9668
FCR Tank A ¿ =2.71
6.6065
Tank B 24.2816
FCR Tank B ¿ =5.33
4.5243
Tank C 43.8604
FCR Tank C¿ =16.67
2.63
 Comparison of Fish Rearing Perfomance of Asian Seabass
20
20 18.89

18 16.67

15.13 15
16

14

12 10.57
10
10

5.33
6

4 2.71

0
SGR Survival rate FCR

Tank A Tank B Tank C

Figure 1: Comparison of Fish Rearing Performance of Asian Seabass

DISCUSSION

a) Specific growth rate

Based on the result of Specific Growth Rate, the performance of SGR when been
compared week by week showing no consistency of result. On week 1, the SGR of Tank C
which has more stocking density surprisingly has the highest SGR value but the value still
not so much significant of distinction. On week 2, the SGR value of tank B showed some
improvement in growth rate and also the highest value of SGR with 5.75% while the other
tank encountered with decrease growth rate which is much lower from SGR value for each of
tank in the Week 1. In comparison, in the week 3, the SGR value in tank with low density has
higher value of SGR. This also can be reflected to Overall of SGR value as Tank A with low
density has the higher value than the other tank which has higher more stocking density that
been applied. All of these results indicated that high stocking density reduce the growth of
Asian seabass. According to Quiros (1999), the study stated that at high levels, increased
stocking density can reduce yield. Increased stocking density can increase competition among
fish for space and access to feed and thus reduce growth. Furthermore, increased stocking
density can compromise water quality in fish tanks which also can compromise growth. The
optimum stocking density is the level where the maximum yields is reached.

b) Survival Rate

Based on the result of Survival Rate, the value of Survival rate of Week 1 showed that
the survival rate of the tank A has the highest of survival rate follow by Tank B and Tank C.
However, on the Week 2, Tank B has the highest value of survival rate. Moving on to the
survival rate on Week 3 showed that tank A has the highest value and same situation can be
applied to the overall of survival rate which also indicate that tank A has the highest survival
rate too. Nevertheless, the value of overall survival rate of all stocking density does not
exceed 20 % of survival. This shows that the survival rate in general is very low and
considered as very poor result. There are several factors that can cause the value of survival
rate resulting very poor from the experiment. The first factor is cannibalism. Seabass fry
reared under controlled conditions face competition among individuals for feed and space
resulting in uneven growth causing cannibalism (Sukumaran et al., 2011). Hecht and Pienaar
(1993) stated that cannibalism is also a phenomenon believed to be caused due to genetics
and behaviour of the fish. Cannibalism due to size variation caused by genotypic differences
dictates individual growth rate. Several environmental factors like food availability,
population density, refuges, water clarity, light intensity, feeding frequency and the frequency
at which alternative prey is presented are found to influence the behavioural pattern of larvae
and juveniles which ultimately lead to cannibalism (Li and Mathias, 1982). Another factor of
that cause high mortality in all tanks is the fish might be suspected by disease that causing
high number of mortalities especially in Tank C with high stocking density. High stocking
density also cause the water quality to degrade fast. Based on the observation of our naked
eye, the turbidity of water in tank C is the worst. The reason is due to high stocking density
also produce high waste of organic substances and the mechanical filter itself seems not
enough to filter all the effluent. Ammonia level also increase which is toxic to the fish and
also will lead the fish into stress condition. When the fish stress, it can easily be infected by
pathogenic bacteria as stress induced the low level of immunity in the fish. With the
intensification of farming systems, Asian seabass can be affected by infectious diseases such
as vibriosis. (Pridgeon and Klesius, 2012). Vibriosis are a group of common, Gram-negative
and rod-shaped bacteria that are natural inhabitant of marine environments (Baker-Austin et
al 2018). In Malaysia, Vibrio harveyi and V. alginolyticus are the main Vibrios that caused
outbreak of vibriosis, leading to severe mortalities (Dong et al., 2017) or endemic vibriosis
(Lafferty et al., 2015), especially in stressed fish (Venkatachalam et al., 2018). Stress occurs
especially at high stocking density (Sadhu et al., 2015) and with drastic changes in
temperature, pH, ammonia, nitrate and dissolved oxygen levels (Venkatachalam et al., 2018).

c) Feed conversion ratio

Based on the result of overall feed conversion ratio, the value of FCR of Tank A
which is the lowest density has the best value of FCR compared to other tank with more
stocking density. The FCR of Tank A is 2.71 while the other two is 5.33 for tank B and 16.67
for tank C. This result also explains how the value of overall survival rate is very low. The
reason is the amount of pellet that been given does not been fully utilized by the fish for
growth. The excess feed not been cleared also contributed to this value.

d) Challenges and problems

In this mini project, there are several problems and challenges that been facing
throughout the experiment. The first challenge is limited seawater resources to do exchange
of water daily. Next, the mechanical filter not fully capable to filter the seawater in efficient
condition. There is no biological filter is available to reducing the value of ammonia toxicity.
Despite all that, we barely manage to rear the fish until the end of period.

e) Recommendations

For the first recommendation, the feeding technique need to be improved. Feeding
frequency need to be re-evaluate by calculating the weight of uneaten food. The resources of
seawater need to limitless so the water exchange activity can be done more frequently. Next,
addition of biological filter also needs to be added so can filter out excess organic and
nitrogen waste especially ammonia that toxic to the fish.

f) Summary /Overall

In summary, by refer to Figure 1, the overall performance of low stocking density is

still having the best performance compared to other tank with higher stocking density. The
stocking density of fishponds describes the number of fish that are stocked initially per unit
area. It is one of the most important factors in determining the production of a fish farm (El-
Sayed, 2006). At low levels, increased the stocking density will increase yield. However,
stocking density influences survival, growth, behaviour, health, water quality, feeding and
production. Therefore, at high levels, increased stocking density can reduce yield.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, low stocking density produce more yield and resulting best
performance in SGR, survival rate and FCR.

REFERENCES

Aldon, E. T. (1997). The culture of seabass. SEAFDEC Asian Aquaculture, 19(4), 14-17.

Baker-Austin, C., Oliver, J.D., Alam, M., Ali, A., Waldor, M.K., Qadri, F., Martinez-Urtaza,
J., 2018. Vibrio spp. infections. Nat. Rev. Dis. Prim. 4 (8).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-018-0005-8.

Brett Glencross, Nick Wade, Katherine Morton, (2013) Nutrition and feeding practices

R. Jessy (Ed.), Biology and Culture of Asian Seabass Lates Calcarifer, CRC
Press (2013), pp. 178-22

D.P. Murillo-Gurrea, R.M. Coloso, I.G. Borlongan, A.E. Serrano, Lysine and arginine

requirements of juvenile Asian seabass (Lates calcarifer) J. Appl. Ichthyol., 17 (2001),
pp. 49-53

Dong, H.T., Taengphu, S., Sangsuriya, P., Charoensapsri, W., Phiwsaiya, K., Sornwatana,T.,
Khunrae, P., Rattanarojpong, T., Senapin, S., 2017. Recovery of Vibrio harveyi from
scale drop and muscle necrosis disease in farmed barramundi, Lates calcarifer
inVietnam. Aquaculture. 473, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.02. 005.

El-Sayed, A.F.M. (2006). Tilapia culture. Cambridge: CABI Publishing

Hecht, T. and Pienaar, T. 1983. A review of cannibalism and its implications in fish
larviculture. J. World Aquacult. Soc., 24 (2): 246-261.
Lafferty, K.D., Harvell, C.D., Conrad, J.M., Friedman, C.S., Kent, M.L., Kuris, A.M.,
Powell,E.N., Rondeau, D., Saksida, S.M., 2015. Infectious diseases affect marine
fisheries and aquaculture economics. Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 7, 471–496.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-marine-010814-015646.

Li, S. and Mathias, J. A. 1982. Causes of high mortality among cultured larval walleyes.
Transactions of the American Fisheries Society, 111 (6): 710-721.

M. Kailasam, Kishore Chandra, P. Muralidhar, M. Thirunavukkarasu, A.R. Mathew Abraham
(2001) Survival and growth of seabass Lates calcarifer (Bloch) fry reared at different
stocking densities N.G. Menon, P.P. Pillai (Eds.), Perspectives in Mariculture, pp. 311-
320

Marilyn, B. (1997). The seabass market, 19(4), 25–26.

Pridgeon, J.W., Klesius, P.H., 2012. Major bacterial diseases in aquaculture and their vaccine
development. CAB Rev. Perspect. Agric. Vet. Sci. Nutr. Nat. Resour.
7.https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR20127048.

Quiros, R. (1999). The relationship between fish yield and stocking density in reservoir from
Tropical and Temperates Regions. (J. Tundisi, & M. Straskaba, Eds.) Brasil, Brasil:
International Institute of Ecology, Brazilian Academy of Sciences.

R.K. Singh Growth, (2001) Survival and production of Lates calcarifer in a seasonal rain-fed
coastal pond of the Konkan region Aquaculture, 8 (2000), pp. 55-60

Sadhu, N., Krupesha Sharma, S.R., Dube, P.N., Joseph, S., Philipose, K.K., 2015. First
results of culture of Asian seabass (Lates calcarifer, Bloch) in open sea floating net
cages in India: effect of stocking density on survival and growth. Indian J. Geo- Marine
Sci. 44, 1540–1544.

Sukumaran, K., Thirunavukkarasu, A. R., Kailasam, M.,Sundaray, K. J., Subburaj, R. and

Thiagarajan, G. 2011.Effect of stocking density on size heterogeneity and
siblingcannibalism in Asian seabass Lates calcarifer (Bloch, 1790) larvae. Indian J.
Fish., 58(3): 145-147.

Thampi Samraj, (2015) Improved Hatchery and Nursery Technology of Asian Seabass, Lates
Calcarifer (Bloch, 1790). Ph.D., Thesis 134 pp Annamalai University (2015
Thirunavukkarasu and Abraham, (2004) A.R.M. Thirunavukkarasu, Mathew Abraham
Handbook of seed production and culture of Asian seabass, Lates calcarifer (Bloch), CIB

Venkatachalam, S., Kandasamy, K., Krishnamoorthy, I., Narayanasamy, R., 2018.

Survivaland growth of fish (Lates calcarifer) under integrated mangrove-aquaculture and
open-aquaculture systems. Aquac. Rep. 9, 18–24.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqrep.2017.11.004.

Williams and Barlow, (1999) K. Williams, C.G. Barlow Dietary Requirements and Optimal
Feeding Practices for Barramundi (Lates Calcarifer) Project 92/63, Final report to
Fisheries R & D Corporation, Canberra, Australia (1999) (95 pp).

APPENDICES
Figure 1: Experimental Design of Mini project Fish Rearing (Lates calcarifer)
 Figure 2: Seawater salinity check using refractometer

Figure 3: Water turbidity and condition after been reared for weeks
Figure 4 : Fish died might due to disease