RESULTS Result of chemical and gaseous parameter changes with probiotic (Protexin Aquatech Program) application : The Protexin Aquatech Program has been introduced in which four different beneficial microbial products containing different concentrations are taken in combinations. Aqua media is used as a specifically designed nutrient for the activation and multiplication of the Bacillus spores. 4.1 Probioitic or beneficial bacterial population reduces the ammonia concentration in shrimp culture: The study undertaken revealed that the Probiotic application at the rate of 15 ml with 40 gm media (T 3 ) reduced ammonia concentration significantly (P<0.01) in water in comparison with the control pond T 4 . This is exhibited in the result of T 3 pond where the ammonia level was 0.0475 mg/liter which is 58
Transcript
RESULTS
Result of chemical and gaseous parameter changes
with probiotic (Protexin Aquatech Program)
application :
The Protexin Aquatech Program has been introduced in
which four different beneficial microbial products
containing different concentrations are taken in
combinations. Aqua media is used as a specifically
designed nutrient for the activation and
multiplication of the Bacillus spores.
4.1 Probioitic or beneficial bacterial population
reduces the ammonia concentration in shrimp
culture:
The study undertaken revealed that the Probiotic
application at the rate of 15 ml with 40 gm media
(T3) reduced ammonia concentration significantly
(P<0.01) in water in comparison with the control
pond T4. This is exhibited in the result of T3 pond
where the ammonia level was 0.0475 mg/liter which is
58
comparatively better than that of traditional
farming system as shown in control pond
T4(0.07mg/l). The protexin treated other pond T1
where Protexin was applied as 30 gm media + 10 ml
Protexin Aqua following the rotation technique
and found that ammonia level was reduced to 0.056
mg/l and treatment pond T2 where Protexin
application was 35 gm Media +13 ml Protexin Aqua
Program the reduced ammonia level was 0.061 mg /
litre.
Table 1 : Influence of Protexin on the ammonia content in pond water
TreatmentGiven in ponds
Ammonia concentration
MeanNH4
Standard Deviation
T1 0.0560bc
0.0587 0.097
T2 0.0612 0.06 0.091
59
abT3 **0.0475
c0.046 0.09
T4 0.0702 a
0.071 0.093
Normal level <0.05 - -Max 0.08 -Coefficient of variation
9.93 %
Significancelevel
1 %
(T1 = 30gm media + 10 ml protexin , T2 = (35 gm media + 13 ml protexin),T3 = T3(40 gm media + 15 ml protexin), T4(without protexin)
Values are mean of 4 replications and data were analyzed after
appropriate transformations. In H2S column, means followed by same
latter(s) are statistically identical by DMRT at 1% (*) and 1% (**)
level of significance.)
4.2 Probioitic or beneficial bacterial population reduces the H2S concentration in shrimp culture:In respect of H2S content in pond water, it is
indicated that T2 treatment obviously presented the
lowest level, followed by T1 & T3. In Table 2 it
demonstrates the H2S content in pond water. It is
clearly evidenced that post pond water Probiotic
application in the T2 showed the most desirable and
significant (P<0.01) result in relation to H2S
content. Although the hydrogen sulphide content in
T3 was slightly high but this is negligible in
60
comparison to other probiotic treated ponds (T1 &
T2); as the ammonia content of T1 & T2 were higher
than T3. It is interesting to note that H2S
content in control pond T4 remain in peak most
concentration.
Table 2 : Influence of Protexin on the H2S content in pond water
TreatmentGiven in ponds
Hydrogen sulfideconcentration
MeanH2S
Standard Deviation
T1 0.015 b 0.029 0.029
T2 *0.012 b 0.021 0.02
T3 0.017 b 0.015 0.02
T4 0.027 a 0.016 0.015
Normal level <0.02 - -
Max 0.04 -
Coefficient of variation
29.44 %
Significance level
1%
61
(T1 = 30gm media + 10 ml protexin , T2 = (35 gm media + 13 ml protexin), T3 = T3(40 gm media + 15 ml protexin), T4(without protexin)
Values are mean of 4 replications and data were analyzed
after appropriate transformations. In H2S column, means followed
by same latter(s) are statistically identical by DMRT at 1% (*)
and 1% (**) level of significance.)
Although the hydrogen sulphide content in T3
was slightly high but this is negligible in
comparison to other probiotic treated ponds (T1 &
T2). It is interesting to note that Ammonia and
H2S content in control pond remain in peak most
concentration.
62
4.3 Probioitic or beneficial bacterial population to maintain the DO in shrimp culture:Table 3: Estimation of Dissolve Oxygen level in all probiotic(Protexin) treated pond.
Treatment
DO concentration mg/l
Mean Standard Deviation
DO
T1 7.50a
7.125 1.258
63
T2 7.00a
6.99 1.24
T3 **8.50b
8.48 1.21
T4 5.50a
5.56 1.24
Normal Level
- 7.0-9.0 -
Max - 9.5 -Min - 5.00 -Coefficient of variation
15.19%
Significance level
1 %
(T1 = 30gm media + 10 ml protexin , T2 = (35 gm media + 13 mlprotexin), T3 = T3(40 gm media + 15 ml protexin), T4(withoutprotexin)
Values are mean of 4 replications and data were analyzed after
appropriate transformations. In H2S column, means followed by same
latter(s) are statistically identical by DMRT at 1% (*) and 1%
(**) level of significance.)
The data as obtained are presented in Table 3 which evidenced that the DO concentration after Probioticapplication in T3 pond was found significantly higher (P<0.01) which indicate that the BOD had reduced appreciably. The result has stimulated to promote recognition of increased level of Oxygen concentration generated in pond water. The other ponds held the required marginal oxygen
64
concentration which was 7 mg/l.(T1 : 7.50 mg/l and T2 : 7.00 mg/litre).
4.4 Probioitic or beneficial bacterial population reduces and PH in shrimp culture:Table 4: Estimation of Dissolve Oxygen level in all probiotic(Protexin) treated pond.
Treatment PH Mean Standard DeviationPH
T1 8.625 ab 8.525 0.751T2 8.95 a 8.95 0.73T3 *7.625 b 7.66 0.035T4 8.90 a 8.87 0.744Normal Level 7.5-8.5 - -Max 9.00 - -Min 7.5 - -Coefficient of variation
3.02 %
Significancelevel
1%
T1 = 30gm media + 10 ml protexin , T2 = (35 gm media + 13 mlprotexin), T3 = T3(40 gm media + 15 ml protexin), T4(withoutprotexin)
Values are mean of 4 replications and data were analyzed after appropriate transformations. In H2S column, means followed by samelatter(s) are statistically identical by DMRT at 1% (*) and 1% (**) level of significance.
For growth of Paenus monodon the ideal PH is from 7.5 to 8.5 , which indicated that T3 pond served to possess most suitable (P<0.05) water quality environment for shrimp culture. Although Protexin treated pond T1,T2 and control pond with out Protexin T4 were statistically identical with littledifference in T1 ; the dose recommendation of
65
Protexin Aquatech Program in T3 showed the desired effect.
4.5 Effect of Probiotic to maintain Salinity Table 4: Estimation of salinity level in all probiotic(Protexin) treated pond.
in T1, T2 and T3 respectively. It is noteworthy that
the body weight gain was found considerably
(P<0.01) maximum in shrimps of T3 pond, while the
shrimp of control pond were found to weigh 8 gm less
than shrimps of T3 pond. This means that shrimps
grown in probiotic(Protein Aquatech) treated ponds
exhibited appreciable higher weight gain.
68
69
70
Influence of probiotic in comparative (Correlation) result of weight gain potentialfor reduced ammonia content in pond water :
Ammonia was found to reduce up to favorable level
in all protexin treated ponds T1,T2 and T3 except the
control pond only. The coefficient of variance in
ammonia content was found up to 9.93% while analogously
a significant (p<0.01) ammonia reduction was revealed in
experiment.
71
Fig: Interrelation between ammonia reduction and
weight gain
In relation to ammonia reduction intensity weight
gain was found up to 35 gm at trial pond T3. Since it
was a direct result that shrimp growth promotion in T3
pond was better at the ammonia concentration ranging
from 0.04 to 0.05. Effect on shrimp yield loss was found
in trial pond T4 where 25 gram weight gain was occurred
in shrimp due to ammonia concentration ranging from 0.06
to 0.08 ascertained. However, effect of high ammonia
concentration on shrimp yield loss is evident in trial
pond T4 from the graph below, which shows a significant
72
negative correlation (r = -.767) of rate of weight
reduction with actual shrimp yield. Moreover, Probiotic
application reduced the the ammonia, which consequently
increase shrimp yield. But since the increased yield in
the treated plot was due to the combined effect of the
reduction of other toxic gas like H2S , the effect of
this particular reduction of ammonia on shrimp yield
enhancement could not be singled out. Though in terms
of correlation between ammonia and weight gain , **
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The other correlation result between H2S and weight
gain is quoted below.
However, the weight gain due to reduction of
ammonia content in water observed in the present study
is in conformity with the findings of Q. Gacutan et
al(1997), who also reported the same as probiotic
control sludge which reducew ammonia that helps in
better shrimp weight gain.
73
Influence of probiotic in comparative
(Correlation) result of weight gain potential
for reduced H2S content in pond water :
The incidence of H2S content of water was observed
throughout the entire crop cycle of shrimp culture.
However, the rate of H2S content was varied at different
level points with negative correlation (r = -.767) of
shrimp weight gain . As shown in graph below when
H2S exists between 0.01 to 0.03 mg/l the
highest shrimp yield was revealed in trial
pond T3 which was significant at the 0.01
level (2-tailed).
74
Fig: Interrelation between H2S reduction and weight
gain
Starting from 0.03 mg/l concentration of water
H2S shrimp weight , which increased gradually attaining
the peak at the H2S concentration 0.02 mg/l . Probiotic
also influenced the other treatments like T1 & T2
significantly. On the other hand in control pond T4
where weight gain was low (25 g) showed that H2S content
of that pond was always ranging from 0.03 to 0.08 which
is reduce the shrimp weight gain and health.
75
Q. Gacutan et al(1997) also reported that
abnormal H2S content in shrimp culture indicate the
most serious yield loss in shrimp culture system
which is the consequence of sludge accumulation
Influence of probiotic in comparative (Correlation) result of weight gain potentialfor increased oxygen content in pond water :
Although primarily probiotic bacteria lactobacillus
utilize DO from pond water for their own metabolism,
afterwards it was observed that starting from the
stocking to crop maturity stage DO oxygen increase as
probiotic was applied in pond water. The DO
concentration among all treatment ponds also varied at
different time within the wide range, the highest being
at the T3 pond. As shown in Table graph below showed
that DO reached at 8.00 mg/l and then weight gain in T3
was highest.
76
Fig: Interrelation between DO enhancement and weight gain
The Dissolve Oxygen resulted in the significant
increase of protexin treated pond water as
evident of reduction of BOD. Thus correlation of DO
and weight gain shows a significant positive
correlation (r = -.682) of DO with total shrimp
yield. Moreover, probiotic application increased the
DO, which consequently increase shrimp yield.
Li zhoujia et al (1997) also reported that Dissolve
Oxygen reduction by the pond’s biological demand may
checked by probiotic application, as because these
probiotic reduce the sludge and other debris of pond
77
ecology which keep the DO of pond intact during
culture. As a result weight gain of shrimp
improved gradually.
Result of organoleptic traits of dressed shrimp:
Organileptic evaluation consist in finding out
the attributes of food, in this special case of
shrimp flesh of dressed shrimp that can be
perceived by sense organs. The attributes, which
were evaluated are color, flavor, juiciness,
tenderness, texture and overall acceptability.
The six organoleptic quality traits were judged
78
by panel of experts and scores were given. For
each trait, highest score was 10 marks(highly
acceptable0 and lowest score was 1 mark(titally
unacceptable or spoiled). Total panel score
marks was 60. The results of test panel scores at
10 days, 20 days and 30 days were shown in tables
No X, Y and Z and in figures a to g. It is
clearly evident from tables X, Y and Z that T3 (40
gm Media +(15 ml Protexin Aqua) secured the
highest score in color, flavour, juiciness,
tenderness, texture and overall acceptability. T3
shrimp flesh secured 86.00% marks at 10 days,
76.66 % at 20 days and 71.00 marks at 30 days of
storage. These scores were the highest of all
other scores. On the other hand T4(with out
protexin) shrimp flesh secured 68.66 % marks at
10 days, 61.33 % marks at 20 days and 53.00 marks
at 30 days of frozen storage. These scores were
the lowest of all other scores obtained by given
different treatments.
79
The color attributes of the treatment pond
where 40 gm Media and 15 ml Protexin Aqua were
used (T3) obtained the highest values in
comparison to all other treatments and was found
significantly the best(P<0.01). No significant
difference was estimated among treatments other
than T3 . However, significant difference(P<0.01)
was observed when compared with no use of
Protexin Aquatech Program T4.The flavor
attributes of T3 significantly better (P<0.05)
than treatment of no use of Protexin Aquatech
Program(T4), treatment of 35 gm Media +13 ml
Protexin Aquatech Program(T2) and the treatment of
30 gm media + 10 ml Protexin Aquatech
Program(T1). In relation of color and flavour
there is no significant difference (P<0.05) among
T1,T2, T3 and T4. It is therefore evident from
the data that flavour score does not correspond
with color index.
80
The tenderness attribute of shrimp flesh from T3
(40 gm Media +15 ml Protexin Aquatech Program)
shoed significantly the best(P<0.01) of all other
treatments. Similar to tenderness attributes the
sensory scores obtained validates in favor of
juiciness, texture and overall acceptability. It
is thus concluded that the overall acceptability
of dressed shrimp flesh in respect to
organoleptic quality is very interrelated to the
sensory attributes perceived by panelists.
Table X: Sensory scores(color and flavour) of
microoven cooked shrimp evaluated by panel of
experts(scoring based on headonic scale:
Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6,
Marginally accepted 3-4, Usually not
81
acceptable 2, Totally unacceptable or
Spoiled 0-1):
Treatment
s
Media +
Protexin
Aquatech
Program
Color Flavor
Storage(S) Mean Storage(S) Mean
10
day
s
20
day
s
30
days
10
days
20
days
30
days
T1
30 g +
10 ml
7.4 7.0 6.0 6.80b 7.4 7.0 6.0 6.74
b
T2
35 g +13
ml
7.4 7.2 6.2 6.93b 7.4 7.0 6.0 6.73
b
T3 = 40 g
M +15 ml
PAP
8.4 7.8 6.8 7.66a 8.4 7.6 6.8 7.60
a
T4
No protexin
7.0 6.8 5.8 6.53b
c
7.0 6.8 5.8 6.47
bc
Mean 7.5 7.2 6.20 6.98 7.55 7.10b 6.15c 6.47
82
5a 0b c a
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginally accepted 3-4, Usuallynot acceptable 2, Spoiled 0-1Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable,21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
Table Y: Sensory scores(juiciness and tenderness)
of micro oven cooked shrimp evaluated by panel of
experts(scoring based on hedonic scale:
Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6,
Marginally accepted 3-4, Usually not
acceptable 2, Totally unacceptable or
Spoiled 0-1):
Treatment
s
Media +
Protexin
Aquatech
Juiciness Tenderness
Storage(S) Mean Storage(S) Mean
10
days
20
days
30
days
10
days
20
days
30
days
83
Program
T1
30 g +
10 ml
7.4 7.2 6.0 7.00b
c
7.6 7.2 5.6 6.80
bc
T2
35 g +13
ml
7.8 7.4 6.4 7.20b 7.8 7.4 6.4 7.20
b
T3 = 40 g
M +15 ml
PAP
8.8 8.2 7.4 8.13a 8.8 8.0 7.2 8.00
a
T4
No protexin
7.2 7.0 5.8 6.66b
c
7.4 7.0 5.6 6.67
bc
Mean 7.80a 7.45a 6.40b 7.24 7.90
a
7.40a 6.20b 7.16
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginally accepted 3-4, Usuallynot acceptable 2, Spoiled 0-1Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable,21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
84
Table Z: Sensory scores(texture and overall
acceptability) of micro oven cooked shrimp
evaluated by panel of experts(scoring based on
hedonic scale: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8,
Good 5-6, Marginally accepted 3-4, Usually
not acceptable 2, Totally unacceptable or
Spoiled 0-1):
Treatment
s
Media +
Protexin
Aquatech
Program
Texture Overall acceptability
Storage(S) Mean Storage(S) Mean
10
days
20
days
30
days
10
days
20
days
30
days
T1
30 g +
10 ml
7.4 7.2 5.8 6.73b
c
7.4 7.2 5.6 6.73
bc
T2
35 g +13
ml
7.8 7.4 6.4 7.20b 7.8 7.4 6.4 7.20
b
85
T3 = 40 g
M +15 ml
PAP
8.6 8.0 7.2 7.93a 8.6 8.0 7.2 7.93
a
T4
No protexin
7.0 7.0 5.6 6.53b
c
7.0 7.0 5.8 6.60
bc
Mean 7.70a 7.40a 6.25b 7.09 7.70
a
7.40a 6.25b 7.11
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginally accepted 3-4, Usuallynot acceptable 2, Spoiled 0-1Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable,21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of harvested raw shrimp of Trial pond T1 which
was conducted by questionnaire among the three
86
groups such as Group A = high school/
college/university goers, Group B = service
holders and Group C = retired persons it was
revealed that
In trial pond T1 (Where probiotic is applied @
Protexin 10 ml + 30 gm media) was acceptable in
terms of grading standard enumerated in
methodology.
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
cooked shrimp of Trial pond T1 :
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
6 7 7 6.66
Color 7 8 7.5 7.50
Odor 8 8 7 7.66
Texture 7 6 6 6.33
Overall
quality
9 8 7 8.00
87
Total marks obtained 36.15
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of Trial pond T1 which was
conducted by questionnaire among the three groups
such as Group A = high school/ college/university
goers, Group B = service holders and Group C =
retired persons it was revealed that In trial
pond T1 (Where probiotic is applied @ Protexin 10
ml + 30 gm media) was good quality in terms of
taste and savor grading standard enumerated in
methodology.
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
harvested raw shrimp of Trial pond T2 :
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc 9 8 6 7.66
88
e
Color 8 8 7 7.66
Odor 9 9 9 9
Firmness 8 9 8 8.33
Juiciness 9 8 7.5 8.16
Total marks obtained 33.15
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 =Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of Trial pond T2 which was
conducted by questionnaire among the three groups
such as Group A = high school/ college/university
goers, Group B = service holders and Group C =
retired persons it was revealed that In trial
pond T2 (Where probiotic is applied @ Protexin 13
ml + 35 gm media) was good quality in terms of
raw shrimp grading standard after harvest that
was enumerated in methodology.
89
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
cooked shrimp of Trial pond T2 :
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
8.15 9.12 7.00 8.09
Color 7.0 6.5 9.00 7.50
Odor 9 9 8.5 8.83
Texture 8 9 8 8.33
Overall
quality
8.5 8.2 7.9 8.20
Total marks obtained 40.95
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of Trial pond T2 which was
conducted by questionnaire among the three groups
such as Group A = high school/ college/university
goers, Group B = service holders and Group C =
90
retired persons it was revealed that In trial
pond T2 (Where probiotic is applied @ Protexin 13
ml + 35 gm media) was best quality in terms of
taste and savor grading standard enumerated in
methodology.
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
harvested raw shrimp of Trial pond T3:
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
9 9.9 9.5 9.46
Color 9 10 9.8 9.60
Odor 9.45 9.12 9.00 9.19
Texture 10 9 9.7 9.56
Overall
quality
9.5 9.6 9.9 9.66
Total marks obtained 47.47
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 =Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
91
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of Trial pond T3 which was
conducted by questionnaire among the three groups
such as Group A = high school/ college/university
goers, Group B = service holders and Group C =
retired persons it was revealed that In trial
pond T3 (Where probiotic is applied @ Protexin 15
ml + 40 gm media) was best quality in terms of
raw shrimp grading standard after harvest that
was enumerated in methodology.
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
cooked shrimp of Trial pond T3 :
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
10 9.7 9.8 9.83
Color 9.5 9.3 9.7 9.5
92
Odor 8.9 9.5 9.00 9.13
Texture 10 9.8 10 9.93
Overall
quality
10 9.6 10 9.86
Total marks obtained 48.25
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of Trial pond T3 which was
conducted by a questionnaire among the three
groups such as Group A = high school/
college/university goers, Group B = service
holders and Group C = retired persons it was
revealed that In trial pond T3 (Where probiotic is
applied @ Protexin 15 ml + 40gm media) was best
quality in terms of taste and savor grading
standard enumerated in methodology.
93
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
harvested raw shrimp of Trial pond T4:
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
5.5 5 5.4 5.30
Color 6.4 5.9 5.3 5.86
Odor 5 5.2 5 5.06
Texture 5.8 6.9 5.8 6.16
Overall
quality
5.8 5.9 5.78 5.82
Total marks obtained 28.20
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 =Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
The result of Organoleptic Quality examination
of cooked shrimp of control pond T4 which was
conducted by questionnaire among the three groups
such as Group A = high school/ college/university
goers, Group B = service holders and Group C =
94
retired persons it was revealed that In control
pond T4 (Where probiotic was not applied) was
acceptable in terms of raw shrimp grading
standard after harvest that was enumerated in
methodology.
Table: Organioleptic Quality examination of
cooked shrimp of Trial pond T4:
Organiole
ptic
Quality
Mean Marks given by three groups
Group A Group B Group C Group
mean
Appearanc
e
9 8.7 7.9 8.53
Color 7.35 6.45 7.5 7.10
Odor 7.89 8.35 5.9 7.38
Texture 7 6.41 5.76 6.39
Overall
quality
8.37 7.93 7 7.76
Total marks obtained 37.16
Marks parameter: Excellent 9-10, Very Good 7-8, Good 5-6, Marginallyaccepted 3-4, Usually not acceptable 1-2, Spoiled 0
95
Total Marks parameter: 0-20 = Unacceptable, 21-30 = Acceptable, 31-40 = Good quality, 41-50 = Best quality
