Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
12984
A comparison between water exchange and settling
tank as a method for suspended solids management
in intensive biofloc technology systems: effects on
shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) performance, water
quality and water use
Rafael Arantes1, Rodrigo Schveitzer2, Caio Magnotti1, Katt Regina Lapa1 & Luis Vinatea1
1
Department of Aquaculture, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Laborat

Florian

opolis, SC, Brazil
2
Department of Marine Sciences, Federal University of S~
ao Paulo (UNIFESP), Santos, S~
Correspondence: R Arantes, Department of Aquaculture, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Laborat

Marinhos, Florian

opolis, SC CEP 88062-601, Brazil. E-mail: arantesr75@gmail.com
Abstract
Biofloc systems rely on microbial processes in the
water column to recycle animal waste products,
reducing the need for water exchange. These
increases biofloc concentration in the water and
some form of removal is needed. An experiment
was carried out to evaluate two management
practices to control biofloc in Litopenaeus vannamei
culture. Six tanks (48 m3) were divided into two
treatments: water exchange and solid settler.
Shrimp were stocked at 164 shrimp m
2 and with
0.67 g of weight. After 61 days, shrimp under
solid settler treatment demonstrated mean weight
of 12.7  0.5 g with survival of 73.8  1.4%,
and those under water exchange had a final
weight of 10.1  0.2 g and survival rate of
57.8  11.1%. Total suspended solids did not dif-
fer between the treatments: 326.8  24.9 mg L
1
for water exchange and 310.9  25.3 mg L
1 for
solid settlers. Settleable solids and productivity/res-
piration ratio was higher (P < 0.05) in water
exchange treatment, indicating differences in phys-
ical and biological characteristics of bioflocs. Solids
removal method influenced the water use, in
which 1150  249 L of water was necessary to
produce one kilogram of shrimp using water
exchange strategy, and 631  25 L kg
1 with the
use of settlers. Our results indicate that continuous
operation of settlers can reduce variability in solids
characteristics and water quality variables such as
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
doi:10.1111/are.
orio de Camar~
oes Marinhos,
ao Paulo, Brazil
orio de Camar~
oes
ammonia. Both strategies are efficient in control-
ling biofloc concentrations of the water; however,
settlers can reduce water use and improve shrimp
production.
Keywords: biofloc, Litopenaeus vannamei, solids
removal, water use
Introduction
The use of biofloc technology (BFT) allows aqua-
culture managers to produce shrimp in densities
higher than 120 shrimp m
2, with low or almost
no water exchange (WE) during the culture (Boyd
& Clay 2002). This approach can improve biosecu-
rity and water conservation, expanding the possi-
ble sites available for shrimp farming (Browdy &
Moss 2005). The BFT system is based on high
rates of aeration and mixing (Browdy, Bratvold,
Stokes & Mcintosh 2001). The management of a
dense and active microbial community allows con-
trolling ammonia nitrogen concentrations in the
water without need for exchange (Avnimelech,
Kochva & Diab 1994; Avnimelech & Kochba
2009). The microorganisms involved can form
aggregates suspended in the water, known as bio-
flocs (De Schryver, Crab, Defoirdt, Boon & Ver-
straete 2008). In Biofloc tanks, ammonia can be
absorbed by microalgae and heterotrophic bacte-
ria, or it can be transformed by nitrifying bacteria
(Ebeling, Timmons & Bisogni 2006).
1
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
The high feeding rates, usually applied to inten-
sive culture systems, contribute to the increase in
total suspended solids (TSS), the variable used to
quantify bioflocs concentrations (Ebeling et al.
2006). A higher concentration of TSS may be
related to poor water quality and may have nega-
tive effects on the health and performance of culti-
vated organisms (Hargreaves 2006; Van Wyk
2006; Vinatea, G
alvez, Browdy, Stokes, Venero,
Haveman, Lewis, Lawson, Shuler & Leffler 2010).
In L. vannamei BFT culture system, TSS concentra-
tion above 800 mg L
1 was associated with lower
survival rates due to gill obstruction (Schveitzer,
Arantes, Cost
odio, Santo, Vinatea, Seiffert &
Andreatta 2013). It was previously observed that
removing a portion of TSS from culture water is
an important strategy for improving shrimp devel-
opment (Atwood, Bruce, Pierrard, Kelg, Stokes &
Browdy 2004; Van Wyk 2006; Ray, Shuler, Leffler
& Browdy 2009). In shrimp culture with biofloc, it
has been suggested that TSS should be maintained
between 400 and 600 mg L
1 (Ray, Lewis,
Browdy & Leffler 2010; Vinatea et al. 2010;
Schveitzer, Arantes, Baloi, Cost
odio, Arana, Seiffert
& Andreatta 2013; Schveitzer, Arantes, Cost
odio
et al. 2013). To assess similar benefits, it is also
possible to maintain the volume of settleable solids
(SS) between 10 and 15 mL L
1 (Taw 2012).
Different strategies have been used to reduce
bioflocs levels in BFT culture systems: sand filters
(Samocha, Patnaik, Speed, Ali, Burger, Almeida,
Ayub, Harisanto, Horowitz & Brock 2007), bead
filters (Atwood et al. 2004), foam fractionators
(Otoshi, Tang, Dagdagan, Holl, Tallamy, Moss,
Arce & Moss 2006; Mishra, Samocha, Patnaik,
Speed, Gandy & Ali 2008) or settling tanks (Rak-
ocy 2002; Ray, Lewis et al. 2010; Ray, Dillon &
Lotz 2011). In general, the completely mixed
water is collected, passed through a solids-removal
device and flows to the culture tank with lower
solids concentration (Rakocy 2002). This process
reduces mean biofloc residence time in the culture
tanks, removes refractory solids and could reduce
the amount of water used for rearing (Ebeling
et al. 2006; Schveitzer, Arantes, Baloi et al. 2013;
Schveitzer, Arantes, Cost
odio et al. 2013). Addi-
tionally, the use of these devices could help to sta-
bilize the composition of the microorganism
associated with the bioflocs (Hargreaves 2006;
Ray et al. 2009).
Large-scale systems normally rely on some
WE to remove solids and to improve production
2 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
(McIntosh 2000; Boyd & Clay 2002; Avnimelech
2009; Crab, Kochva, Verstraete & Avnimelech
2009). In completely mixed shrimp tanks, turning
off the central aeration equipment allows the set-
tlement of bioflocs at the centre of the tank, and
the sludge can be siphoned out or pumped from
the bottom (Hopkins 1994; Funge-Smith & Briggs
1998; Taw 2012). The use of this method can
control solids concentrations without the costs of
installing removal devices. On the other hand,
higher volumes of influent water can increase the
risk of virulent pathogen infection (Lotz & Lightner
1999) and promote water quality changes in tem-
perature or pH (Atwood et al. 2004; Crab et al.
2009). Moreover, the effluent can adversely affect
water quality of adjacent environments (Jackson,
Preston, Thompson & Burford 2003).
Pilot-scale shrimp facilities were designed by
using settling chambers to remove solids (Ogle,
Flosenzier & Lotz 2006). Settling is an effective
technology that costs less than filtration and flota-
tion (Timmons & Ebeling 2007), and could be
used in large-scale operations. Although settling
and WE have been used in shrimp production, the
efficiency of these two management strategies
needs to be addressed. The purpose of this study
was to compare these two methods for suspended
solids management in intensive BFT systems.
Material and methods
Shrimp source
The study was carried out at the Laborat
orio de
Camar~ oes Marinhos (LCM), in Santa Catarina, Bra-
zil. Ten-day-old post-larvae (PL10) of Litopenaeus
vannamei were obtained from a commercial hatch-
ery (Aquatec LTDA, in Brazil), and cultured at a
nursery in an 8-meter-diameter round tank filled
with 43 m3of filtered sea water.
The nursery tank was inoculated with 5 m3 of
a mix of two diatoms cultures (Thalassiosira weiss-
flogii and Chaetoceros muelleri), at a density of
~3 9 104 cells mL
1 each, to help maintain water
quality until a heterotrophic community was
established. Dried molasses with 42% carbon or
69% of carbohydrate content was added daily.
Additions were divided between feed input to
maintain a carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio above
12:1 and control ammonia-nitrogen build-up
(Avnimelech 1999). The tank was stocked at a
density of 1100 PLs m
2. The shrimp were fed a
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
40% protein commercial diet (Guabi, LTDA) four
times a day according to a feed chart (Van Wyk
1999). The shrimp were cultured for 31 days, and
then gradually acclimated from 34 to 16 g L
1
salinity according to Roy, Davis, Saoud, Boyd, Pine
and Boyd (2010) using tap water filtered at
25 lm. After 3 days at salinity of 16 g L
1, all
the shrimp were harvested and stocked in the
experimental tanks.
Experimental design
The units consisted of six 50 m3 circular fibreglass
tanks (water volume of 48 m3). A central aeration
ring with 50 cm in diameter made of PVC pipe
(32 mm) perforated with 0.75-mm holes was pro-
vided to maintain the solids in suspension and to
increase dissolved oxygen levels. Another circular
PVC pipe placed at the periphery of the tank was
equipped with 15 air-lift pumps (100 mm in diam-
eter) to provide water aeration and movement in a
circular pattern. A 7.4-HP regenerative blower
was used to aerate all six tanks. Finally, all tanks
were individually covered with a transparent PVC
liner and with a 70% shade cloth to reduce light
intensity.
Two treatments were used to evaluate the effects
of the suspended solids reduction strategies. In one
treatment, solids concentration was managed by
settling in the tank and subsequent WE, in the
other treatment settling chambers were used to
reduce solids concentration (SE). Each treatment
was randomly assigned to three replicate tanks. In
a different tank, the same procedure was applied
to prepare water used to exchange or replace the
culture tanks. Before stocking, tanks received
3 m3 of water each from the nursery tank as ino-
colum, and stocked with juvenile pacific white
shrimp with an initial weight of 0.67  0.1 g for
a stocking density of 164 m
2. The experiment
was ended when shrimp in the fast growth treat-
ment reached the average commercial size of 12 g
(Tahim & Araujo 2012).
System management
The volume of SS was monitored daily, using a
15-min settling time (APHA 1998– 2540F,
adapted by Avnimelech 2007). When the volume
reached 15 mL L
1, a periodic removal was initi-
ated by using two different treatments trying to
maintain SS values under this limit.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
In the WE treatment, the central aeration ring
valve was closed for 15 min to allow the solids to
settle at the centre of the tank. Bottom water rich
in solids was then flushed out through the central
drain line linked to a stand pipe. The volume of
water removed from each tank varied within a
range of 1026–5000 L at each draining event.
The time to stop the drainage was calculated by
using the SS volume measured into the drain
water, the drain line water flow, and the amount
of solids needed to be reduced from the tanks. This
was used to trying to reach a TSS value in culture
water between 400 and 600 mg L
1 (Ray, Lewis
et al. 2010; Vinatea et al. 2010; Schveitzer, Aran-
tes, Baloi et al. 2013; Schveitzer, Arantes, Cost

odio
et al. 2013). The volume of water removed from
each tank (Vdrain) was calculated using the follow-
ing equation:
Vdrain ¼ ðSStq  VolumeÞ
ðSSFinal
 VolumeÞ=SSeffluent ð1Þ
where: Volume = total volume of culture tank (L);
SStq = SS present in culture tank (mL L
1); SSfinal
= SS desired in culture tank (mL L
1); SSeffluent =
SS in the drainage water (mL L
1).
In the treatment with settlers (SE), the TSS con-
centration was maintained by using one 1.2 m
diameter (0.8 m3) cylindro-conical settler per tank.
The settling chambers were adapted from Ray,
Lewis et al. (2010) and Davidson and Summerfelt
(2005) and were continuously operated to main-
tain TSS concentration close to 400–600 mg L
1.
The flow rate of the settlers (FRs) was calculated
according to the daily feeding input as described in
Eqn (2), considering a TSS production between
0.36–0.65 of the total feed applied daily to the
tanks (Ebeling et al. 2006).
FRs ¼ ½ðRfeed  TSSP Þ  ER
1
1
%   TSStank ð2Þ
where: FRs = flow rate of settler (m3 day
1); Rfeed
= feed applied to culture tank (g day
1); TSSp =
TSS produced per gram of feed applied to culture
tank (g g
1); ER% = TSS removal efficiency;
TSStank = concentration of TSS into tank water
(g m
3).
The flow rate of settling tanks was monitored
twice a day using a stop watch and a beaker and
was adjusted daily to prevent sudden changes in TSS
concentrations based on the SS volume from one
day to another. Total suspended solids (TSS) from
3
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
the tank water and from water flowing back into the
culture were sampled twice a week to monitor TSS
ranges and to access the TSS removal efficiency of
the settlers (Davidson & Summerfelt 2005).
Water temperature of the entire system was
controlled using one 5 kW eletrical water heater
operated at night. To prevent a drop in alkalinity
below 120 mg L
1, hydrated lime was applied at
the rate of 12% of daily feed input. For each tank,
a mixture containing 35% rice bran (C:N = 20:1)
and 65% dried molasses (C:N = 76:1) was used in
addition to the feed (C:N = 7:1) to increase the
total carbon to nitrogen ratio to 12:1. The organic
fertilizer was applied to the tanks three times a
day, 1.5 h after feeding to prevent a drop in dis-
solved oxygen (DO). All the materials used as a
fertilizer were analysed (Labcal-UFSC). Whenever
TAN concentrations exceeded 1 mg L
1, an addi-
tional dried molasses input were applied using
20 g of carbohydrates per gram of total ammonia
nitrogen (TAN) needed to be reduced (Avnimelech
1999). This methodology was used in order to
momentarily increase C:N ratio and avoid concen-
trations higher than 1 mg L
1. When needed, the
additional molasses input was divided at least in
six applications, or two consecutive days, in order
to avoid low DO levels. The shrimp were fed three
times per day with 35% crude protein (CP) com-
mercial diet (Guabi LTDA). Three feeding trays
received 15% of the feed applied to each tank, and
were used to check the amount of feed consumed
after 1.5 h to avoid overfeeding (Casillas-Hernan-
dez, Magall~aes-Barajas, Portillo-Clarck & Paez-
Osuna 2006).
Water quality monitoring
Dissolved oxygen and water temperature (YSI
550A, Yellow Springs, HO, USA) were measured
twice a day, the salinity (YSI 30 salinity meter) was
measured daily, and the pH (YSI model100 pHme-
ter) was analysed twice a week. The alkalinity of
water based on CaCO3 (APHA 1998 – 2320 B), the
TSS (APHA, 1998 – 2540D) using 0.6 lm fibre-
glass microfilters (GF-6 Macherey-Nagel, Bethle-
hem, PA, USA) were analysed weekly. Ammonium
(TAN) (Koroleff 1969), nitrite (Bendschneider &
Robison 1952), nitrate (HACH – 8039 cadmium
reduction HACH, Loveland, CO, USA) were analysed
weekly with a LaMotte Smartspectro spectrometer.
The sludge volume index (SVI) is a ratio between
the SS volume and the TSS concentrations. It is
4 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
defined as the volume occupied by each gram of
TSS in the water and was calculated according to
Eqn (3) (Gray 1990).
SVI ¼ SS  ðTSS  1000Þ
1 ð3Þ
where: SVI = Sludge volume index (mL g
1); SS =
setteable solids (mL L
1); TSS = total suspended
solids (mg L
1).
Microbial activity
Microbial activity in the water was monitored
weekly according to the methodologies proposed
by Bratvold and Browdy (1998) and Vinatea et al.
(2010). The term microbial activity used in this
study was proposed by Bratvold and Browdy
(1998) and involves two microbial processes: gross
primary production (P) and water column respira-
tion rate (R). Both were measured using the light–
dark bottles method (Strickland 1960), and the
calculations were performed according to Dodds
and Cole (2007):
P ¼ ðfinal O2 light bottle

final O2 dark bottleÞ  time
1 ð4Þ
where: P = gross primary production (mg
O2 L
1 h
1)
R ¼ ðinitial O2 of dark bottle

final O2 dark bottleÞ  time
1 ð5Þ
where: R = water column respiration rate (mg
O2 L
1 h
1)
The analyses were performed by incubating
the transparent (primary production) and dark
(respiration) DBO bottles (300 mL) immersed at a
depth of 10 cm in the tank water. All bottles
were incubated in duplicate for 90 min. The con-
sumption (respiration) and production (photosyn-
thesis) of oxygen in the water column were
estimated by measuring the variation in DO in
the bottles with a water sample from the tanks.
To keep the flocs in suspension inside the bottles
during the incubation, the bottles were manually
agitated every 20 min for about 3 s (Schveitzer,
Arantes, Baloi et al. 2013; Schveitzer, Arantes,
Cost
odio et al. 2013). The initial and final oxy-
gen concentration was measured with a YSI
5100 oximeter using a specific probe with self-
agitation.
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
Water use
The total amount of water used per tank was cal-
culated by the sum of the sludge volume produced
during the culture period and the total water dis-
charged from the tanks after harvest. Solids
retained in the settling chambers were drained
from the base of the cone four times during the
rearing period. The sludge volume was determined
using a graduated 40-L bucket. The effluent vol-
ume from the WE treatment was recorded directly
from the volume reduction of the tanks after water
removal, just before water was refilled in the
tanks. Aliquots of the sludge and the effluent were
taken to determine TSS concentration in the WE
and SE treatments respectively. The total amount
of solids discharged was calculated using the vol-
ume of sludge or volume of final effluent water dis-
charged and their respective TSS concentration.
Water addition to all units was needed to replace
evaporative losses and sludge removal.
Shrimp monitoring
Weight gain was monitored weekly by weighing
three groups of at least 80 shrimp per tank using
a digital scale. The final weight (g), survival (%),
growth rate (g per week) and final biomass
(kg m
3) were recorded at the end of the experi-
ment and used to assess the culture performance.
The feed conversion ratio (FCR) was estimated as
the total dry weight of the feed supplied/shrimp
wet weight gain.
Statistical analisys
Culture performance data and effluent volume
were analysed using one-way ANOVA. Mean weight
(g), feed intake (kg per week) and water quality
data were compared using one-way ANOVA with
repeated measures. Treatments were considered
the main factor and the culture weeks, the addi-
tional factor (Gomez & Gomez 1984). Significant
differences were analysed using Tukey’s test at a
5% significance level. Normality and homoscedas-
ticity were tested using Shapiro–Wilk (Zar 1999)
and Bartlett (Gomez & Gomez 1984) tests
respectively. Percentage data were analysed using
data transformed into arc-sine (y0.5); variables
without homogeneous variances were transformed
to log (x + 1). Statistical analyses were conducted
using the STATISTICA Version 8 (StatSoft South
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
America, Brazil) and the results were presented as
means  SD.
Results
Control of suspended solids concentration
The concentration of TSS increased in both treat-
ments until the fourth week of the experiment,
reaching 465.0  95.0 mg L
1 in the WE treat-
ment and 429.3  6.4 mg L
1 in the SE treat-
ment (Fig. 1). After the initiation of solids
removal in the fourth week, TSS concentrations
remained between 400 and 500 mg L
1 and
were not significantly different until the end of
the study (Table 1). Flow rates applied to settlers
ranged from 115.4 to 185.6 L h
1, and the
solids removal efficiency ranged between 57%
and 65%.
Until the sixth week, the SS were similar in
both WE (10.0  2.0 mL L
1) and SE
(9.3  3.2 mL L
1) treatments. In the seventh
week, SS was higher in the WE treatment, and
until the end of the experiment, it remained higher
than in SE (Fig. 1). In WE, the SVI values were
superior (23.0  2.82 mL g
1) than in the SE
treatment (16.7  2.19 mL g
1) during the last
3 weeks of the rearing period (Fig. 1).
Water quality
Water temperature (28.4  0.9°C), dissolved oxy-
gen (5.3  0.5 mg L
1), pH (7.7  0.0) and
salinity (16.2  0.3 g L
1) were similar in both
treatments. Minimum dissolved oxygen of 3.7 and
3.9 mg L
1 and maximum of 7.4 and 7.1 mg L
1
were recorded for treatments WE and SE respec-
tively. The average C:N ratio for both treatments,
calculated from the amount of feed, molasses and
rice bran, was 12.1  0.1.
Total ammonia nitrogen and nitrate concen-
trations were also similar in both treatments
(Table 1). In SE, TAN concentration was vari-
able in the fourth week (1.2  0.8 mg L
1) and
remained close to minimum detection limits of
the method in the following weeks. In WE, the
variation in TAN initiated at week 5
(1.3  1.7 mg L
1) and reached a maximum
value of 4.3 mg L
1 at week 7 (Fig. 2). In both
treatments, nitrate concentrations increased
after the fifth week. By the harvest time, mean
nitrate concentration was not significantly
5
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
different between the treatments (P > 0.05),
48.5  2.1 mg L
1 for WE and 32.3  14.
4 mg L
1 for the settlers treatment (Fig. 2).
Nitrite was significantly higher in the SE treat-
ment (Table 1), and in both treatments, nitrite
concentrations increased significantly after week
4 (Fig. 2).
Microbial activity
Respiration rates of the microbial community
suspended in the water of WE (0.8  0.0
mg L
1 h
1) did not significantly differ from the
SE (0.9  0.0 mg L
1 h
1) (Table 1; Fig. 3). The
ratio of gross primary production to respiration
(P/R) were not measured in the first week, but
6 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
Figure 1 Total suspended solids
(TSS) (a), settleable solids (SS) (b)
and sludge volume index (SVI) (c)
during nine culture weeks of
Litopenaeus vannamei with two
methods of solids control: water
exchange (WE) and use of solids
settler (SE). Asterisks indicate sta-
tistically significant differences
between treatments (P < 0.05).
decreased from the second to the fifth weeks of the
culture and reached values below 1 (Fig. 3). After
periods of solids removal in both treatments, P/R
ratio increased again to values >1 indicating pre-
dominance of photoautotrophic microorganisms.
Water exchangeshowed a higher P/R ratio when
compared to SE (P < 0.05; Fig. 3).
Shrimp production
All shrimp production parameters differed signifi-
cantly in the treatments (Table 2), except for sur-
vival (P = 0.06). Shrimp from the SE treatment
showed significantly lower FCR and the final
biomass of shrimp was 60% higher compared to
the WE; demonstrating a higher weekly weight
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13 Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.

Table 1 Water quality variables and microbial activity parameters in tanks of Litopenaeus vannamei cultured with two
methods of solids removal: WE and use of SE

Treatment† ANOVA‡

Variables WE SE (T) (W) (T 3 W)

1
TSS (mg L ) 326.8  24.9 (102.0–575.0) 310.0  17.5 (95.5–499.0) NS * NS
SS (mL L
1) 9.38  0.7 (0.0–21.0) 6.14  1.0 (0.0–14.0) * * *
TA-N (mg L
1) 0.48  0.2 (0.0–4.6) 0.36  0.0 (0.0–2.5) NS NS NS
Nitrite-N (mg L
1) 0.31  0.1b (0.0–0.9) 0.46  0.0a (0.0–1.0) * * NS
Nitrate-N (mg L
1) 15.3  2.1 (0.0–50.8) 12.8  3,5 (0.0–46.3) NS * NS
Respiration (R) (mg L
1 h
1) 0.8  0.0 (0.5–1.2) 0.8  0.04 (0.3–1.4) NS NS NS
Production/Respiration 1.6  0.2a (0.3–4.5) 1.0  0.1b (-0.3–2.0) * * NS

†Values are mean  SD (range); a,b(P < 0.05).

‡ANOVA with repeated measures, T (treatment), W (Week), T 9 W (Interaction T 9 W); *(P < 0.05).
NS, not significant; TSS, total suspended solids; SS, settleable solids; TA-N, total ammonia nitrogen; WE, water exchange; SE, solids
settling.

Figure 2 Total ammonia nitrogen

TAN (a), nitrite NO2-N (b), nitrate
NO3-N (c) duringnine culture
weeksof Litopenaeus vannamei with
two methods of solids control:
water exchange (WE) and use of
solid settler (SE). Asterisks indicate
statistically significant differences
between treatments (P < 0.05).

© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13 7

Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al. Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13

Figure 3 Water column respira-

tion rates (R) (a), Production to
respiration ratio (P/R) (b) during
nine culture weeks of Litopenaeus
vannamei with water exchange
(WE) and use of settler (SE). Aster-
isks indicate statistically significant
differences between treatments
(P < 0.05).

Table 2 Shrimp production in tanks with Litopenaeus observed in the SE treatment (Table 3). Consider-
vannamei cultured with two solids removal methodolo- ing the total water used, only 2.5% was used
gies: WE and use of SE. Initial stocking density 164 during culture to replace from sludge removal in
shrimp m
2, 61 days of culture with an initial weight of the SE treatment, compared with the 14% of that
0.64 g water removed by tank draining in the WE.
Higher solids concentrations (13 times greater)
Treatment*,†
were found in the effluent generated from the SE
Parameter WE SE treatment (33.4  6.2 g L
1), which differ
(P < 0.05) from those in the WE treatment
Final average weight (g) 10.1  0.2a 12.7  0.4b
(2.5  1.4 g L
1). The amount of feed applied to
Average weekly growth (g) 1.1  0.0a 1.4  0.1b
Survival (%) 57.8  11.0 73.8  1.4 the tanks along culture was 99.0  6.7 kg for SE
FCR 1.9  0.3a 1.3  0,0b and 81.7  4.5 kg for WE. The total amount of
Final Biomass (kg m
3) 1.0  0.2a 1.6  0.0b solids removed on final effluent and as sludge
during culture are described in Table 3. Solids
*Values are mean  SD.
†Different letters indicate significant difference by Tukey’s test on sludge removed from WE treatment
(P < 0.05). (38.0  0.8 kg) were higher than that removed
WE, water exchange; SE, solids settling. from SE (19.4  9.4 kg).

gain (Table 2). Significant differences were found

in the mean weight of shrimp from week 6, and at
the end of the experiment, the average shrimp
weight was 2.6 grams higher in SE (P < 0.05).
Water use
The WE treatment consumed a higher amount of
water during culture (P < 0.05) than that
Discussion
Control of suspended solids concentration
The TSS concentration was relatively stable
throughout the final 6 weeks of the culture per-
iod, indicating the effectiveness of the solids
control methods tested. In both treatments, the
amount of solids removed from final effluents were

8 © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13

Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13 Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
Table 3 Use of water per culture tank, water use effi-
ciency per kilogram of shrimp produced and solids
removed for treatments with WE and with the use of SE
Treatment*,†
Parameter WE SE
Total water used 53 920.0  1143.1a 48 565.0  347.2b
(L per tank)
Water used during 7643.3  3691.7a 1185.0  13.6b
culture (L per tank)
Water use 1150.8  249.1a 631.9  25.1b
efficiency (L kg
1)
Solids on final 19.3  0.1a 15.7  0.1a
effluent (kg)
Solids on sludge 38.4  0.8a 19.4  9.4b
removed (kg)
*Values are mean  SD.
†Different letters indicate significant difference by Tukey‘s test
(P < 0.05).
WE, water exchange; SE, solids settling.
similar, even with a higher quantity of TSS
removed from sludge during culture in the WE
treatment. In this treatment, a higher P/R ratio
(higher predominance of photoautotrophic
microorganisms) can be associated with a higher
TSS production (Ebeling et al. 2006). Solids
production within biofloc culture may be variable,
primarily due to its association with the predomi-
nant pathway for ammonia control by the micro-
bial community (Ebeling et al. 2006). Considering
the difficulty in controlling the roles of these meta-
bolic pathways in the culture, it is necessary to
monitor constantly the amount of solids in the
water to control their concentration properly
(Avnimelech 2009).
One way to facilitate solids control is to estimate
their production due to the feeding input (Chen,
Coffin & Malone 1997; Ebeling et al. 2006). Values
for flow rate and TSS removal efficiency of the
settling tanks suggest that in SE treatment, the
adjustment of the flow rate could be regulated by
the input of feed into the tanks on the day before
and it allowed an approximate control of the solids.
In the WE treatment, the solids control was also
associated with the feed input, however, care has
to be performed to prevent either insufficient or
excessive removal of water and solids. Abrupt
changes possibly lead to variations in biofloc physi-
cal characteristics (Martins, Heijnen & Van Loos-
drecht 2003). In WE, the increase in the SS volume
without any change in TSS profile changed the
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
monitoring of biofloc concentration through the SS
measurement in this treatment, leading to difficul-
ties to TSS control. The problems in tracking TSS
concentration by biofloc volume measurements
(SS) has been reported by Ray et al. (2011). In SE
treatment, the continuous operation of settling
tank kept the values of SS stable, however, the use
of this variable to indicate the concentration of TSS
needs caution (Schveitzer, Arantes, Baloi et al.
2013; Schveitzer, Arantes, Cost
odio et al. 2013).
Microbial activity
The calculation of SVI can be useful as a tool for
indicating changes in physical features of the bio-
flocs. The changes in SVI values are normally
linked to shifts in the characteristics of the biofloc
microbial community (Graddy, Daigger & Lim
1999). Higher SVI values, above 60 mL g
1, are
usually found in bioflocs with high abundance of
filamentous forms of bacteria and cyanobacteria,
since the amount of free space within the flocs
increases (Graddy et al. 1999; De Schryver et al.
2008). In the WE treatment, the higher SVI sug-
gests that changes in the microbial community
may be associated with the solids removal process.
This is also supported by the differences in microbial
P/R ratio, observed after the start of WEs, indicating
greater photoautrotrophic activity (Burford,
Thompson, McIntosh, Bauman & Pearson 2003).
In the first 5 weeks of culture, the decrease in
the P/R ratio was inversely associated with TSS,
as respiration rates did not significantly change
during this period. Lower primary production rates
were reported to be related to an increase in solids
concentration (Vinatea et al. 2010). According to
these authors, an increase in photoautotrophic
activity was observed after the start of the solids
removal process, as also found by this study. The
causes of the increased P/R ratio in the WE treat-
ment are unclear, the removal of microbial bio-
mass combined with clear water additions may
have increased light availability, favouring the
dominance of photoautotrophic microorganisms
(Weirich, Browdy, Bratvold, Mcabee & Stokes
2002; Vinatea et al. 2010).
For the SE treatment, unchanged conditions of
the solids characteristics are indicated by the con-
stant SVI values. This pattern may be related to
the continuous operation of the settling chambers.
Settling tanks allowed the removal of particulate
material slowly and without sudden changes.
9
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
According to Ray et al. (2009) and Ray, Seaborn,
Leffler, Wilde, Lawson and Browdy (2010), con-
stant solids removal is the most effective tool for
encouraging the stability of the microbial commu-
nity and for improving productivity of the target
species.
Water quality
Temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, salinity and
alkalinity were within appropriate values for the
intensive cultivation of L. vannamei (Van Wyk &
Scarpa 1999; Roy et al. 2010).
Changes in ammonia concentration between the
fourth and the fifth week and the increasing values
of nitrite and nitrate in the following weeks may
indicate the start of nitrifying bacteria activity
(Cohen, Samocha, Fox, Gandy & Lawrence 2005;
Mishra et al. 2008). In the SE treatment, ammonia
values approached the minimum limits of detection
(0.007 mg L
1) during week 5, suggesting the
presence of sufficient nitrifying biomass to control
ammonia production. In the WE, the removal of
solids in the fourth week may have led to a delay
in the oxidation of ammonia to nitrite, as indicated
by the increased TAN variability, and to the lower
nitrite values found in this treatment (Cromar &
Fallowfield 1997; Ebeling et al. 2006). The same
variability of ammonia and nitrite due to solids
removal has been reported by Ray et al. (2011).
Shrimp performance
The shrimp growth and the FCR found in this
study were similar to those found in other studies
(Ray et al. 2011; Schveitzer, Arantes, Baloi et al.
2013). Growth rates between 1.3 and 1.7 g per
week were reported for bioflocs shrimp culture at
similar salinities (Ray et al. 2011). Survival was
above the 49.7% found by Ray et al. (2011) in
similar culture conditions. Although shrimp sur-
vival in WE (57.8  11.6%) was not significantly
different from SE (73.8  1.4%), the greater vari-
ability found in the experimental WE units sug-
gests that water renewal may be associated with
shrimp survival due to the water quality variations
in this treatment.
The differences in mean shrimp weight occurred
after the fifth week, and may have been associated
with the greater ammonia variability. The concen-
trations were not statistically different; however,
the variations in TAN in the WE treatment
10
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
between the fifth week (maximum value of
3.2 mg L
1) and the seventh week (maximum
value of 4.6 mg L
1) displayed values above the
safe concentration of 2.4 mg L
1 for L. vannamei
juveniles reared at salinity of 15 g L
1 (Lin &
Chen 2001), exposing the animals to adverse con-
ditions that can affect their growth (Hargreaves
1998; Avnimelech 2009). In addition, changes in
SVI and P/R ratio suggest changes in physical and
biological characteristics of bioflocs (Graddy et al.
1999; Burford et al. 2003; De Schryver et al.
2008) and could be associated with the reduced
shrimp growth and lower final biomass in this
treatment (Ray et al. 2009; Furtado, Poersch &
Wasielesky 2011).
Shrimp production in the SE treatment resulted
in higher final weight and higher biomass. We
suggest that these values are associated with the
stability of ammonia levels and to the quality of
solids, provided by the use of settling chambers. As
described in previous studies, the continuous
removal of a portion of bioflocs may have con-
tributed to the development of a healthier and
more stable microbial community, providing bene-
fits to the cultured animals (Turker, Eversole &
Brune 2003; Atwood et al. 2004; Ray, Lewis et al.
2010; Ray, Seaborn et al. 2010).
Water use
The effectiveness of water conservation in shrimp
culture can be measured by the amount of water
used to produce 1 kg of shrimp (Browdy & Moss
2005). The value of 1150 L kg
1 for WE treat-
ment was lower than those reported from inten-
sive biofloc cultivation in ponds where they were
2000–2260 L kg
1 (McIntosh 1999; Boyd & Clay
2002). These systems use a similar principle of
sludge removal as the WE treatment. However,
these values are reported for ponds deeper than
the average 0.9-m depth used in the present study
(McIntosh 2000). The total water use in WE
(53 920 L per tank) was 10% higher than in SE
(48 565 L per tank) and, the value of 632 L kg
1
of shrimp indicates a 45% increase in water con-
servation when related to WE, due to higher final
biomass and lower water use during culture
shown by SE treatment.
The system operation in SE treatment was sim-
pler and demonstrated some advantages with
the use of this technology in larger ponds. Total
suspended solids (TSS) production was lower
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13 Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
probably due to the lower P/R ratio and lower
FCR observed in this treatment. Also, sludge in the
SE units was 13 times more concentrated than
that removed from the WE mainly due to com-
pressibility inside the settler (Sharrer, Rishel, Tay-
lor, Vinci & Summerfelt 2010). This concentration
(33  6.1 g L
1) is similar to those reported by
Ray et al. (2011) of between 22 and 27 g L
1
when using settlers.
Using both management strategies are efficient
in controlling biofloc concentrations of the culture
water, however, settlers can reduce water use
improving sludge solids concentration. The contin-
uous operation of settlers improve solids quality
and water quality variables such as ammonia
increasing shrimp production.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank to Coordenacß~ ao
de Aperfeicßoamento de Pessoal de N
ıvel Superior
(CAPES) for the doctoral fellowship and financial
support (Ci^encias do Mar – CAPES – no. 09/
2009). The authors would also like to thank to
the Laborat
orio de Camar~
oes Marinhos(LCM-USFC)
and Francisco Pchara for their support in conduct-
ing the experiment.
References
APHA (1998) Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater (19th edn), pp. 1220. American
Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA.
Atwood H.L., Bruce J.W., Pierrard L.M., Kelg R.A., Stokes
A.D. & Browdy C.L. (2004) Intensive zero-exchange
shrimp production systems - Incorporation of filtration
technologies to improve survival and growth. In: Pro-
ceedings of the 5th International Conference in Recirculat-
ing Aquaculture (ed. by T.T. Rakestraw, L.S. Douglas &
G.J. Flick), pp. 152–162. Virginia Tech University,
Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Avnimelech Y. (1999) Carbon/nitrogen ratio as a control
element in aquaculture systems. Aquaculture 176,
227–235.
Avnimelech Y. (2007) Feeding with microbial flocs by
tilapia in minimal discharge bio-flocs technology
ponds. Aquaculture 264, 140–147.
Avnimelech Y. (2009) Biofloc Technology - A Practical
Guide Book, pp. 182. The World Aquaculture Society,
Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Avnimelech Y. & Kochba M. (2009) Evaluation of nitro-
gen uptake and excretion by tilapia in bio floc tanks,
using N-15 tracing. Aquaculture 287, 163–168.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Avnimelech Y., Kochva M. & Diab S. (1994) Develop-
ment of controlled intensive aquaculture systems with
a limited water exchange and adjusted carbon to nitro-
gen ratio. Israeli Journal of Aquaculture-Bamidgeh 46,
119–131.
Bendschneider K. & Robison R.J. (1952) A new spec-
trophotometric method for the determination of nitrite
in sea water. Journal of Marine Research 11, 87–96.
Boyd C.E. & Clay J.W. (2002) Evaluation of Belize Aquacul-
ture, Ltd: A Superintensive Shrimp Aquaculture System,
pp. 17. Report prepared under the World Bank, NACA,
WWF and FAO Consortium Program on Shrimp Farm-
ing and the Environment.
Bratvold D. & Browdy C.L. (1998) Simple electrometric
methods for estimating microbial activity in aquacul-
ture ponds. Aquacultural Engineering 19, 29–39.
Browdy C.L. & Moss S.M. (2005) Shrimp culture in
urban, super-intensive closed systems. In: Urban Aqua-
culture (ed. by B. Costa-Pierce), pp. 173–185. CABI,
Wallingford, UK.
Browdy C.L., Bratvold D., Stokes A.D. & Mcintosh R.P.
(2001) Perspectives on the application of closed shrimp
culture systems. In: The New Wave, Proceedings of the
Special Session on Sustainable Shrimp Culture (ed. by C.L.
Browdy & D.E. Jory), pp. 20–34. The World Aquacul-
ture Society, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
Burford M.A., Thompson P.J., McIntosh R.P., Bauman
R.H. & Pearson D.C. (2003) Nutrient and microbial
dynamics in high-intensity, zero-exchange shrimp
ponds in Belize. Aquaculture 219, 393–411.
Casillas-Hernandez R., Magall~ aes-Barajas F., Portillo-
Clarck G. & Paez-Osuna F. (2006) Nutrient mass bal-
ances in semi-intensive shrimp ponds from Sonora,
Mexico using two feeding strategies: trays and
mechanical dispersal. Aquaculture 258, 289–298.
Chen S., Coffin D.E. & Malone R.F. (1997) Sludge produc-
tion and management for recirculating aquacultural
systems. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 28,
303–315.
Cohen J.M., Samocha T.M., Fox J.M., Gandy R.L. & Lawr-
ence A.L. (2005) Characterization of water quality fac-
tors during intensive raceway production of juvenile
Litopenaeus vannamei using limited discharge and biose-
cure management tools. Aquacultural Engineering 32,
425–442.
Crab R., Kochva M., Verstraete W. & Avnimelech Y.
(2009) Bio-flocs technology application in over-winter-
ing of tilapia. Aquacultural Engineering 40, 105–112.
Cromar N.J. & Fallowfield H.J. (1997) Effect of nutrient
loading and retention time on performance of high
rate algal ponds. Journal of Applied Phycology 9, 301–
309.
Davidson J. & Summerfelt S.T. (2005) Solids removal
from a coldwater recirculating system-comparison of a
swirl separator and a radial-flow settler. Aquacultural
Engineering 33, 47–61.
11
Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
De Schryver P., Crab R., Defoirdt T., Boon N. & Ver-
straete W. (2008) The basics of bio-flocs technology:
the added value for aquaculture. Aquaculture 277,
125–137.
Dodds W.K. & Cole J.J. (2007) Expanding the concept of
trophic state in aquatic ecosystems: it’s not just the
autotrophs. Aquatic Sciences 69, 427–439.
Ebeling J.M., Timmons M.B. & Bisogni J.J. (2006) Engi-
neering analysis of the stoichiometry of photoau-
totrophic, autotrophic, and heterotrophic removal of
ammonia-nitrogen in aquaculture systems. Aquaculture
257, 346–358.
Funge-Smith S.J. & Briggs M.R.P. (1998) Nutrient bud-
gets in intensive shrimp ponds: implications for sus-
tainability. Aquaculture 164, 117–133.
Furtado P.S., Poersch L.H. & Wasielesky W. (2011)
Effect of calcium hydroxide, carbonate and sodium
bicarbonate on water quality and zootechnical perfor-
mance of shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei reared in bio-
flocs technology (BFT) systems. Aquaculture 321,
130–135.
Gomez K.A. & Gomez A.A. (1984) Statistical Procedures
for Agricultural Research (2nd edn), pp. 680. John
Wiley, New York, USA.
Graddy C.P.L., Daigger G.T. & Lim H.C. (1999) Biological
Wastewater Treatment (2nd edn), pp. 1076. Marcel
Dekker, New York, USA.
Gray N.F. (1990) Activated Sludge: Theory and Practice, pp.
272. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Hargreaves J.A. (1998) Nitrogen biogeochemistry of
aquaculture ponds. Aquaculture 166, 181–212.
Hargreaves J.A. (2006) Photosynthetic suspended-growth
systems in aquaculture. Aquacultural Engineering 34,
344–363.
Hopkins J.S. (1994) An apparatus for continuous
removal of sludge and foam fractions in intensive
shrimp culture ponds. Progressive Fish-Culturist 56,
135–139.
Jackson C., Preston N., Thompson P.J. & Burford M.
(2003) Nitrogen budget and effluent nitrogen compo-
nents at an intensive shrimp farm. Aquaculture 218,
397–411.
Koroleff F. (1969) Direct determination of ammonia in
natural waters as indophenol blue. International Council
for the Exploration of the Sea 9, 19–22.
Lin Y.C. & Chen J.C. (2001) Acute toxicity of ammonia
on Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone) juveniles at different
salinity levels. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology
and Ecology 259, 109–119.
Lotz J.M. & Lightner D.V. (1999) Shrimp biosecurity:
pathogens and pathogen exclusion. In: Controlled and
Biosecure Production Systems. Evolution and Integration
of Shrimp and Chicken Models (ed. by R.A. Bullis & G.D.
Pruder), pp. 67–74. Proceedings of a Special Session,
27-30 April 1999, Sydney, Australia. World Aquacul-
ture Society, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
12
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13
Martins A.N.M.P., Heijnen J.J. & Van Loosdrecht M.C.M.
(2003) Effect of feeding pattern and storage on the
sludge settleability under aerobic conditions. Water
Research 37, 2555–2570.
McIntosh R.P. (1999) Changing paradigms in shrimp
farming: I. General description. The Advocate August/
October, 42–46.
McIntosh R.P. (2000) Changing paradigms in shrimp
farming: III. Pond desing and operation considerations.
The Advocate February, 42–45.
Mishra J.K., Samocha T.M., Patnaik S., Speed M., Gandy
R.L. & Ali A.M. (2008) Performance of an intensive
nursery system for the pacific white shrimp, Litope-
naeus vannamei, under limited discharge condition.
Aquacultural Engineering 38, 2–15.
Ogle J., Flosenzier A.V. & Lotz J.M. (2006) USM_GCRL
Large scale growout marine shrimp production facility.
In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on
Recirculation Aquaculture (ed. by T.T. Rakestraw, L.S.
Douglas, L. Marsh, L. Granata, A. Correa & G.J. Flick),
pp. 6–13. Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, VA,
USA.
Otoshi C.A., Tang L.R., Dagdagan D.V., Holl C.M., Tal-
lamy C.J., Moss D.R., Arce S.M. & Moss S.M. (2006)
Super-Intensive growout of the pacific white shrimp
Litopenaeus vannamei: recent advances at the Oceanic
Institute. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Confer-
ence on Recirculating Aquaculture (ed. by T.T. Rakes-
traw, L.S. Douglas, L. Marsh, L. Granata, A. Correa &
G.J. Flick), pp. 1–5. Virginia Tech University, Blacks-
burg, VA, USA.
Rakocy J.E. (2002) An integrated fish and field crop sys-
tem for arid areas. In: Ecological Aquaculture: The Evolu-
tion of the Blue Revolution (ed. by B.A. Costa-Pierce),
pp. 263–285. Blackwell Science, Oxford, UK.
Ray A.J., Shuler A.J., Leffler J. & Browdy C.L. (2009)
Microbial ecology and management of bioflocs systems.
In: The Rising Tide, Proceedings of the Special Session on
Sustainable Shrimp Farming (ed. by C.L. Browdy & D.E.
Jory), pp. 255–266. World Aquaculture Society, Baton
Rouge, LA, USA.
Ray A.J., Lewis B.L., Browdy C.L. & Leffler J.W. (2010)
Suspended solids removal to improve shrimp Litope-
naeus vannamei production and an evaluation of a
plant-based feed in minimal-exchange, superintensive
culture systems. Aquaculture 299, 89–98.
Ray A.J., Seaborn G., Leffler J.W., Wilde S.B., Lawson A.
& Browdy C.L. (2010) Characterization of microbial
communities in minimal-exchange, intensive aquacul-
ture systems and the effects of suspended solids man-
agement. Aquaculture 310, 130–138.
Ray A.J., Dillon K.S. & Lotz J.M. (2011) Water quality
dynamics and shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei production
in intensive, mesohaline culture systems with two
levels of biofloc management. Aquacultural Engineering
45, 127–136.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Aquaculture Research, 2016, 1–13 Two methods for solids management in BFT system R Arantes et al.
Roy L.A., Davis D.A., Saoud I.P., Boyd C.A., Pine H.J. &
Boyd C.E. (2010) Shrimp culture in inland low salinity
waters. Reviews in Aquaculture 2, 191–208.
Samocha T.M., Patnaik S., Speed M., Ali A.M., Burger
J.M., Almeida R.V., Ayub Z., Harisanto M., Horowitz
A. & Brock D.L. (2007) Use of molasses as carbon
source in limited discharge nursery and grow-out sys-
tems for Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquacultural Engineering
36, 184–191.
Schveitzer R., Arantes R., Baloi M.F., Cost
odio P.F.S.,
Arana L.V., Seiffert W.Q. & Andreatta E.R. (2013) Use
of artificial substrates in the culture of Litopenaeus van-
namei (Biofloc System) at different stocking densities:
effects on microbial activity, water quality and produc-
tion rates. Aquacultural Engineering 54, 93–103.
Schveitzer R., Arantes R., Cost
odio P.C., Santo C.M.,
Vinatea L., Seiffert W.Q. & Andreatta E.R. (2013) Effect
of different biofloc levels on microbial activity, water
quality and performance of Litopenaeus vannamei in a
tank system operated with no water exchange. Aqua-
cultural Engineering 56, 59–70.
Sharrer M., Rishel K., Taylor A., Vinci B.J. & Summerfelt
S.T. (2010) The cost and effectiveness of solids thick-
ening technologies for treating backwash and recover-
ing nutrients from intensive aquaculture systems.
Bioresource Technology 101, 6630–6641.
Strickland J. (1960) Measuring the production of marine
phytoplankton. Bulleting of Fisheries Research Board of
Canada 122, 172.
Tahim E.F. & Araujo I.F. Jr (2012) Learning process
innovation in the system of the shrimp farming indus-
try in the Northeastern Brazil. EstudosSociedade e Agri-
cultura 20, 30–65.
Taw N. (2012) Recent developments in biofloc technol-
ogy. Biosecure systems improve economics, sustainabil-
ity. Global Aquaculture Advocate September/October,
28–29.
Timmons M.B. & Ebeling J.M. (2007) Recirculating Aqua-
culture, pp. 975. NRAC Publication No. 01-007.
Ithaca, NY, USA.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Aquaculture Research, 1–13
Turker H., Eversole A.G. & Brune D.E. (2003) Filtration
of green algae and cyanobacteria by nile tilapia, Ore-
ochromisniloticus, in the partitioned aquaculture sys-
tem. Aquaculture 215, 93–101.
Van Wyk P. (1999) Nutrition and feeding of Litopenaeus
vannamei in intensive culture systems. In: Farming
Marine Shrimp in Recirculating Freshwater Systems (ed.
by P. Van Wyk, M. Davis-Hodgkins, R. Laramore, K.L.
Main & J. Scarpa), pp. 125–140. Florida Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services, Tallahassee, FL,
USA.
Van Wyk P. (2006) Production of Litopenaeus vannamei
in recirculating aquaculture systems: management and
design considerations. In: Proceedings of the 6th Interna-
tional Conference in Recirculating Aquaculture (ed. by
T.T. Rakestraw, L.S. Douglas, L. Marsh, L. Granata, A.
Correa & G.J. Flick), pp. 38–47. Virginia Tech Univer-
sity, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Van Wyk P. & Scarpa J. (1999) Water quality and man-
agement. In: Farming Marine Shrimp in Recirculating
Freshwater Systems (ed. by P. Van Wyk, M. Davis-
Hodgkins, R. Laramore, K.L. Main & J. Scarpa), pp.
128–138. Florida Department of Agriculture and Con-
sumer Services, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Vinatea L., G
alvez A.O., Browdy C.L., Stokes A., Venero
J., Haveman J., Lewis B.L., Lawson A., Shuler A. & Lef-
fler J.W. (2010) Photosynthesis, water respiration and
growth performance of Litopenaeus vannamei in a
super-intensive raceway culture with zero water
exchange: interaction of water quality variables. Aqua-
cultural Engineering 42, 17–24.
Weirich C.R., Browdy C.L., Bratvold D., Mcabee B.J. &
Stokes A.D. (2002) Preliminary characterization of a
prototype minimal Exchange super-intensive shrimp
production system. In: Proceedings of the 4th Interna-
tional Conference Recirculating Aquaculture (ed. by T.T.
Rakestraw, L.S. Douglas & G.J. Flick), pp. 255–270.
Virginia Tech University, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Zar J. (1999) Biostatistical Analysis, pp. 663. Prentice
Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.
13