ASSESSMENT OF SIZE ASSESSMENT OF SIZE DISTRIBUTION, GROWTH AND DISTRIBUTION, GROWTH AND SURVIVAL OF NILE TILAPIA, SURVIVAL OF NILE TILAPIA,

Oreochromis niloticusOreochromis niloticus L. FRY L. FRY COLLECTED FROM DIFFERENT COLLECTED FROM DIFFERENT

HATCHING SYSTEMSHATCHING SYSTEMS

InvestigatorsInvestigators

Bolivar, R. B.Bolivar, R. B.11, H. L. Bolivar, H. L. Bolivar22, R.M. V. Sayco, R.M. V. Sayco11, , E.B. T. JimenezE.B. T. Jimenez11, R.L. B. Argueza, R.L. B. Argueza11, L. B. Dadag, L. B. Dadag22, ,

A. G. TaduanA. G. Taduan22 and R. Borski and R. Borski33

AFFILIATIONSAFFILIATIONS

1 1 Freshwater Aquaculture Center-College of Freshwater Aquaculture Center-College of Fisheries, Central Luzon State University Fisheries, Central Luzon State University (CLSU), Science City of Mu(CLSU), Science City of Muñoz, Nueva ñoz, Nueva Ecija, PhilippinesEcija, Philippines

2 2 GIFT Foundation International, GIFT Foundation International, Incorporated (GFII), CLSU Compound, Incorporated (GFII), CLSU Compound, Science City of MuScience City of Muñoz, Nueva Ecija, ñoz, Nueva Ecija, PhilippinesPhilippines

3 3 Department of Zoology, North Carolina Department of Zoology, North Carolina State University (NCSU), Raleigh, NC State University (NCSU), Raleigh, NC 27695-761727695-7617

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

Tilapia is the main cultured finfishes in freshwater Tilapia is the main cultured finfishes in freshwater pond production and the third among the major pond production and the third among the major cultured species for aquaculture in the Philippinescultured species for aquaculture in the Philippines

The main production systems for tilapia The main production systems for tilapia aquaculture are ponds, cages and fishpensaquaculture are ponds, cages and fishpens

PondsCagesFishpens

Tilapia Production in the Philippines (2005) by Major Types of Culture System

90,335 MT59,204 MT

13,438 MT

INTRODUCTIONINTRODUCTION

The development of genetically improved The development of genetically improved tilapia strains such as GIFT, FaST, GMT, tilapia strains such as GIFT, FaST, GMT, BFAR-GET ExCEL, GENOMAR, etc. BFAR-GET ExCEL, GENOMAR, etc. paved the way in the increase of tilapia paved the way in the increase of tilapia production in the Philippinesproduction in the Philippines

Seed production is an essential component Seed production is an essential component of successful production of any organism of successful production of any organism

The study was conducted from October to The study was conducted from October to December, 2007 at the GFII facilityDecember, 2007 at the GFII facility

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

China Egypt Indonesia Philippines Thailand Mexico Brasil Taiw an Colombia Ecuador

Countries

Met

ric to

ns/y

ear

Top Ten Tilapia Producing CountriesTop Ten Tilapia Producing Countries(2006)(2006)

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMSTATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Shortage of tilapia fry has remained an Shortage of tilapia fry has remained an important constraint to further the important constraint to further the development of aquaculture in many development of aquaculture in many parts of the worldparts of the world

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDYOBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

To assess the size distribution, growth To assess the size distribution, growth and survival of fry collected from artificial and survival of fry collected from artificial incubation units, hapas and ponds after 23 incubation units, hapas and ponds after 23 days of sex reversal treatmentdays of sex reversal treatment

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY

Experimental UnitsExperimental Units

Breeding Breeding

• Fourteen (14) 2.5 x 10 x 1 m fine mesh hapasFourteen (14) 2.5 x 10 x 1 m fine mesh hapas• Four (4) 100 mFour (4) 100 m2 2 earthen ponds earthen ponds

Sex-Reversal TreatmentSex-Reversal Treatment

• Twelve (12) 2 x 4 x 1 m fine mesh hapas Twelve (12) 2 x 4 x 1 m fine mesh hapas

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY

TreatmentsTreatments

I – Incubation-hatched fryI – Incubation-hatched fry

II – Hapa-hatched fryII – Hapa-hatched fry

III – Pond-hatched fry III – Pond-hatched fry

IV – Combination of hatched fry from TI, IV – Combination of hatched fry from TI, II and IIIII and III

There were 3 replicates per treatmentThere were 3 replicates per treatment

Hatching SystemsHatching Systems

HapasHapas

PondsPonds

Artificial Incubation UnitsArtificial Incubation Units

METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY

• Tilapia fry were stocked in hapas at the rate of 850 Tilapia fry were stocked in hapas at the rate of 850 mm22

• Feeding with androgen-treated fry mash was done Feeding with androgen-treated fry mash was done six (6) times a day for 23 dayssix (6) times a day for 23 days

• Fish sampling was done once a weekFish sampling was done once a week• Data analysis was done using analysis of variance Data analysis was done using analysis of variance

(ANOVA) in Randomized Complete Block Design (ANOVA) in Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications followed by Least (RCBD) with three replications followed by Least Significant Difference for comparison of meansSignificant Difference for comparison of means

Collection of fry in breeding hapasCollection of fry in breeding hapas

Collection of fry from mouthbrooding Collection of fry from mouthbrooding femalesfemales

Collection of fry in ponds using a dip netCollection of fry in ponds using a dip net

Fry collectionFry collection

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONRESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Note: Analysis of variance showed no significant difference Note: Analysis of variance showed no significant difference among treatment means (P>0.05) among treatment means (P>0.05)

TreatmentTreatmentInitial Initial LengthLength(mm)(mm)

Final Final LengthLength(mm)(mm)

Initial Initial Weight Weight

(g)(g)

Final Final WeightWeight

(g)(g)

II 8.458.45 17.4117.41 0.0140.014 0.0710.071

IIII 8.408.40 17.3017.30 0.0120.012 0.0810.081

IIIIII 8.308.30 17.4017.40 0.0140.014 0.0680.068

IVIV 8.458.45 17.5717.57 0.0130.013 0.0720.072

Initial and final mean length and weight of fry reared in Initial and final mean length and weight of fry reared in hapashapas

Gain in length, weight and specific growth Gain in length, weight and specific growth rate of tilapia fry in hapasrate of tilapia fry in hapas

Note: Analysis of variance indicated no significant differences Note: Analysis of variance indicated no significant differences among among treatment means for length, weight and specific treatment means for length, weight and specific growth rate (P>0.05) growth rate (P>0.05)

TreatmentTreatmentGain in Gain in Length Length

(mm) (mm) ++ S.D. S.D.

Gain in Weight Gain in Weight (g) (g) ++ S.D. S.D.

Specific Growth Specific Growth Rate (%) Rate (%) ++ S.D. S.D.

II 6.82 6.82 ++ 1.47 1.47 0.06 0.06 ++ 0.02 0.02 6.97 6.97 ++ 1.41 1.41

IIII 8.37 8.37 ++ 1.80 1.80 0.08 0.08 ++ 0.03 0.03 8.70 8.70 ++ 1.34 1.34

IIIIII 6.33 6.33 ++ 1.52 1.52 0.05 0.05 ++ 0.02 0.02 6.32 6.32 ++ 1.14 1.14

IVIV 6.38 6.38 ++ 1.12 1.12 0.05 0.05 ++ 0.01 0.01 6.92 6.92 ++ 0.98 0.98

00.01

0.020.030.040.05

0.060.070.08

0.090.1

1 8 16 23

Days of Culture

Mea

n W

eig

ht

(g)

TI

TII

TIII

TIV

Growth pattern of fry in hapasGrowth pattern of fry in hapas

Percent survival of fry in hapasPercent survival of fry in hapas

Note: Treatment means with the same letter/s are not Note: Treatment means with the same letter/s are not significantly different (P>0.05)significantly different (P>0.05)

aa

bbabab

bb

Size distribution of tilapia fry in hapasSize distribution of tilapia fry in hapas

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Treatment I Treatment II Treatment III Treatment IV

Pe

rce

nta

ge

(%

)

SIZE #24

SIZE #22

SIZE #20

SIZE #17

SUMMARYSUMMARY• The experiment was conducted to evaluate The experiment was conducted to evaluate

size distribution, growth and survival of size distribution, growth and survival of tilapia fry collected from different tilapia fry collected from different hatching systemshatching systems

• Collected fry were sex-reversed in 2 x 4 x Collected fry were sex-reversed in 2 x 4 x 1 m hapas and were stocked at a stocking 1 m hapas and were stocked at a stocking density of 850 per mdensity of 850 per m22

• Data on length, weight, size distribution Data on length, weight, size distribution and survival were gathered along with the and survival were gathered along with the water quality parameterswater quality parameters

SUMMARYSUMMARY

• Treatment I had the least size variability Treatment I had the least size variability of fry produced after the sex- reversal of fry produced after the sex- reversal treatmenttreatment

• Treatment I also had the highest percent Treatment I also had the highest percent survival among treatmentssurvival among treatments

• There were no significant difference on There were no significant difference on the gain in length, gain in weight and the gain in length, gain in weight and specific growth rate among treatmentsspecific growth rate among treatments

CONCLUSIONSCONCLUSIONS

• Tilapia fry from artificial incubation Tilapia fry from artificial incubation units had a significant advantage in units had a significant advantage in terms of survival and uniformity in size terms of survival and uniformity in size as compared to the fry from the other as compared to the fry from the other hatching systemshatching systems

• Further study is recommended to Further study is recommended to assess other hatching systems like cages assess other hatching systems like cages and tanks in the production of tilapia and tanks in the production of tilapia fry fry

• It is also recommended to conduct the It is also recommended to conduct the study at different season to see the study at different season to see the possible effect of weather condition on possible effect of weather condition on the hatching systems used in the the hatching systems used in the production of tilapia fryproduction of tilapia fry

RECOMMENDATIONSRECOMMENDATIONS

Funding for this research was provided by theFunding for this research was provided by the

Aquaculture and FisheriesAquaculture and FisheriesCollaborative Research Support Collaborative Research Support

ProgramProgram

The AquaFish CRSP is funded in part by United States Agency for International The AquaFish CRSP is funded in part by United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Grant No. LAG-G-00-96-90015-00 and by participating Development (USAID) Grant No. LAG-G-00-96-90015-00 and by participating

institutions.institutions.

Thank Thank You!You!