 |
|
|
|
|
ANNUAL PROGRESS
REPORT North Central Regional Aquaculture Center Telephone: (517) 353-1962 FAX: (517) 353-7181 TABLE OF CONTENTS The U.S. aquaculture industry continues to be one of the fastest growing sectors within U.S. agriculture, although at a lesser rate than what occurred during the 1980s. Production in 1994 reached 666 million pounds and generated approximately $751 million for producers. The impact of U.S. aquaculture is substantial accounting for approximately 181,000 jobs and generating an estimated $5.6 billion annually. Yet, anticipated growth in the industry, both in magnitude and in species diversity, continues to fall short of expectations. Much of what is known about aquaculture science is a result of institutional attention given to our traditional capture of wild fisheries with the goal of releasing cultured fishes into public waters for enhancement of declining public stocks. Despite extensive efforts to manage wild populations for a sustained yield, as a nation we consume substantially greater amounts than we produce. Much of the United States' demand for seafood has been met by imports. The U.S. imports over 40% of its fish and shellfish and, after Japan, is the world's second largest importer of seafood. Fisheries imports are the largest contributor to the U.S. trade deficit among agricultural products, and the second largest after petroleum, among all natural resources products. The value of imported fisheries products more than doubled during the 1980s and has continued to increase in the 1990s. In fact, the $12.5 billion value for 1995 was a record. In 1995, the trade deficit was $4.2 billion for all fisheries products, $3.5 billion of which was for edible fish and shellfish. Landings for most commercial capture fisheries species and recreational fisheries of the United States have been relatively stable during the last decade, with many fish stocks being overexploited. In this situation, aquaculture provides an opportunity to reduce the trade deficit and meet the rising U.S. demand for fish products. A strong domestic aquaculture industry is needed to increase U.S. production of fish and shellfish. This can be achieved by a partnership among the Federal Government, State and local public institutions, and the private sector with expertise in aquaculture development. Congress recognized the opportunity for making significant progress in aquaculture development in 1980 by passage of the National Aquaculture Act (P.L. 96-362). Congress amended the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (P.L. 95-113) in Title XIV of the Agriculture and Food Act of 1981 (P.L. 97-98) by granting authority to establish aquaculture research, development, and demonstration centers in the United States in association with colleges and universities, State Departments of Agriculture, Federal facilities, and non-profit private research institutions. Five such centers have been established: one in each of the northeastern, north central, southern, western, and tropical/subtropical Pacific regions of the country. The 1996 Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act (FAIR) (P.L. 104-127) otherwise know as the Farm Bill, has reauthorized the Regional Aquaculture Center program at $7.5 million per annum. As used here, a center refers to an administrative center. Centers do not provide monies for brick-and-mortar development. Centers encourage cooperative and collaborative aquaculture research and extension educational programs that have regional or national application. Center programs complement and strengthen other existing research and extension educational programs provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other public institutions. As a matter of policy, centers implement their programs by using institutional mechanisms and linkages that are in place in the public and private sector. The mission of the Regional Aquaculture Centers (RACs) is to support aquaculture research, development, demonstration, and extension education to enhance viable and profitable U.S. aquaculture production which will benefit consumers, producers, service industries, and the American economy. The North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) was established in February 1988. It serves as a focal point to assess needs, establish priorities, and implement research and extension educational programs in the twelve state agricultural heartland of the United States which includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. NCRAC also provides coordination of interregional and national programs through the National Coordinating Council for Aquaculture (NCC). The council is composed of the RAC directors and USDA aquaculture personnel. Michigan State University (MSU) and Iowa State University (ISU) work together to develop and administer programs of NCRAC through a memorandum of understanding. MSU is the prime contractor for the Center and has administrative responsibilities for its operation. The Director of NCRAC is located at MSU. ISU shares in leadership of the Center through an office of the Associate Director who is responsible for all aspects of the Center's publications, technology transfer and outreach activities. At the present time the staff of NCRAC at MSU includes Ted R. Batterson, Director and Liz Bartels, Executive Secretary. The Center Director has the following responsibilities:
At the present time the staff of NCRAC's Office for Publications and Extension Administration at ISU includes Joseph E. Morris, Associate Director and Katie Dalton, Secretary. The Associate Director has the following responsibilities:
The Board of Directors (BOD) is the primary policy-making body of the NCRAC. The BOD has established an Industry Advisory Council (IAC) and Technical Committee (TC). Membership of the BOD consists of two persons from the IAC (the chair and an at-large member), a representative from the region's State Agricultural Experiment Stations and Cooperative Extension Services, a member from a non-land grant university and representatives from the two universities responsible for the center: Michigan State and Iowa State. The IAC is composed of representatives from each state's aquaculture association and six at-large members appointed by the BOD who represent various sectors of the aquaculture industry and the region as a whole. The TC is composed of a sub-committee for Extension (TC/E) and a subcommittee for Research (TC/R). Directors of the Cooperative Extension Service within the North Central Region appoint representatives to the TC/E. The TC/R has broad regional make-up and is composed of scientists from universities and state agencies with varied aquacultural expertise who are appointed by the BOD. Each sub-committee of the TC has a chairperson who serves as an ex-officio member of the BOD. NCRAC functions in accordance with its Operations Manual which is periodically amended and updated with BOD approval. It is an evolving document that has changed as the Center's history lengthens. It is used for the development of the cooperative regional aquaculture and extension projects that NCRAC funds. Since inception of NCRAC February 1, 1988, the role of the Administrative Center has been to provide all necessary support services to the BOD, IAC, TC, and project work groups for the North Central Region as well as representing the region on the NCC. As the scope of the NCRAC programs expand, this has entailed a greater work load and continued need for effective communication among all components of the Center and the aquaculture community. The Center functions in the following manner. After BOD approval of Administrative Center costs, the Center submits a grant to USDA/CSREES/Grants Management Branch for approval. To date the Center has received ten grants from USDA for FY88 (Grant #88-38500-3885), FY89 (Grant #89-38500-4319), FY90 (Grant #90-38500-5008), FY91 (Grant #91-38500-5900), FY92 (Grant #92-38500-6916), FY93 (Grant #93-38500-8392), FY94 (Grant #94-38500-0048), FY95 (Grant #95-38500-1410), FY96 (Grant #96-38500-2631), and FY97 (#97-38500-3957) with monies totaling $7,172,031. Currently, four grants are active (FY94-97); the first six grants (FY88-93) have terminated. The Center annually coordinates a program planning meeting which sets priorities for the next funding cycle and calls for regional workshops to develop project outlines to address priority problem areas. Work Groups, which are formed at the workshops, submit project outlines to the Center. The projects are peer reviewed by experts from both within and outside the region. The BOD, using reviewers' responses, decides which projects are to be approved and funding levels. The Center conveys BOD decisions to all Project Work Groups. Those that are approved for funding are asked to submit revised project outlines incorporating BOD and reviewers' comments. The Center then submits the revised project outlines as a Plan of Work (POW) to USDA for approval. Once a POW is approved by USDA, the Center then prepares subcontracts for each participating institution. The Center receives all invoices for subcontractual agreements and prepares payment vouchers for reimbursement. Thus, the Center staff serve as fiscal agent for both receiving and disbursing of funds in accordance with all terms and provisions of the grants. Through August 31, 1997, the Center has funded or is funding 42 projects through 238 subcontracts from the first nine grants received. Funding for these Center supported projects is summarized in Table 1 below (pages 7-8). During this reporting period, the Publications Office at ISU produced and distributed a number of publications including fact sheets, technical bulletins, videos, and the Center's newsletter. A complete list of all publications from this office is included in the Appendix under Extension. Other areas of support by the Administrative Office during this reporting period included: monitoring research and extension activities and developing progress reports; developing liaisons with appropriate institutions, agencies and clientele groups; preparing, in coordination with the other RACs, both written and oral testimony for the U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies hearing in Washington, D.C.; participating in the NCC; numerous oral and written presentations to both professional and lay audiences; working with other fisheries and aquaculture programs throughout the North Central Region; and in conjunction with the Aquaculture Network Information Center (AquaNIC) maintaining a NCRAC web site (ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/ncrac). A joint Program Planning meeting of the BOD, IAC, and TC is held every year in the early winter. The IAC, with input from the TC, generates a list of priority areas for consideration by the BOD. Using their recommendation as guidelines, the BOD then selects priority areas for which project outlines will be developed. The BOD also specifies a maximum funding level for each priority area. Problem statements and objectives are then developed for each priority area by IAC and TC members at the Program Planning meeting. For projects with more than one objective, the IAC ranks the objectives by priority. The problem statement and objective(s) are then included in a workshop announcement that is broadly distributed throughout the North Central Region. The workshops are one-day events to establish a work group that will develop a project outline over the summer months. Work group members will be those who have demonstrated that they have the expertise and facilities for undertaking the proposed work in regard to a particular objective or objectives. The proposed work cannot deviate from the objective or objectives included in the workshop announcement. The work group elects a chair and secretary. The chair is responsible for submitting the project outline to the NCRAC Director; the secretary is responsible for preparing minutes from the workshop that are distributed to all attendees. All project outlines are peer reviewed. The reviewers' comments are used by the BOD in making the final selection of projects and level of funding at the following year's annual Program Planning meeting. All work group members are apprised of the BOD decisions. Revisions of projects approved by the BOD are submitted by the work group chair to the NCRAC Director. The revised project outlines are then included in a POW that is submitted to USDA. Upon approval by USDA, the Center issues subcontracts to the funded work group members. TIME FRAME
By following this procedure, it takes approximately 18 months from the time of identifying a priority area until inception of a project to address the issue in question. WORKSHOPS The purpose of the workshops is to bring together those who are best qualified to work on project objectives by virtue of a demonstrated record of expertise and access to facilities required in the project. These people form a work group for the purpose of writing a project outline to address the problem in question. The following criteria typically apply to those projects that are funded by NCRAC.
The NCRAC program pays no overhead to participating institutions nor tuition remission, has no brick-and-mortar money, and relies on in-place salaried personnel, equipment, and facilities to carry out the projects. Due to the collaborative and cooperative nature of these regional projects, no one individual or institution receives a significant portion of the total project funds. As indicated in Table 1, NCRAC has funded a number of projects for many of the project areas it has selected for research and extension activities. For example, there have been five separately funded projects in regard to Extension and six for Walleye. Project outlines have been written for each separate project within an area, or the project area itself if only one project. These project outlines have been submitted in Plans of Work (POWs) or amendments to POWs for the grants as indicated in Table 1. Many times, the projects within a particular area are merely continuations of previously funded activities; while at other times they are addressing new objectives. Presented below are Progress or Termination Reports mostly for projects that were underway or completed during the period September 1, 1996 to August 31, 1997. All publications, manuscripts, papers presented, or other outputs for all funded NCRAC project areas are listed in the Appendix. Table 1. North Central Regional Aquaculture Center funded projects.
PROJECT TERMINATION OR PROGRESS REPORTS Progress Report for the Period NCRAC FUNDING LEVEL: $348,448 (May 1, 1989 to August 31, 1997) PARTICIPANTS:
PROJECT OBJECTIVES (1) Strengthen linkages between North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) research and extension work groups. (2) Enhance the North Central Region (NCR) extension network for aquaculture information transfer. (3) Provide in-service training for Cooperative Extension Service, Sea Grant Advisory Service, and other landowner assistance personnel. (4) Develop and implement aquaculture educational programs for the NCR. (5) Develop aquaculture materials for the NCR including extension fact sheets, bulletins, manuals/guides, and instructional video tapes. (6) Survey quarterly wholesale fish buyers in selected United States and Canadian cities with emphasis on the NCR. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS The NCRAC Extension Work Group will promote and advance commercial aquaculture in a responsible fashion through an organized education/training outreach program. The primary benefits will be:
PROGRESS AND PRINCIPAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS OBJECTIVE 1 Due to the efforts of aquaculture extension personnel in the NCR, NCRAC's Board of Directors formally adopted guidelines for extension's involvement in all NCRAC-funded projects. These guidelines integrate research and extension activities so that extension service personnel can better serve their clientele groups. In addition, aquaculture Extension Work Group members have:
OBJECTIVE 2 The demand for aquaculture extension education programs cannot be met by the few specialists in the NCR (4.0 FTE). Networking of specialists and Cooperative Extension Service (CES) designated contacts has maximized efficiency of education programs and minimized duplication. The NCRAC Extension Project is designed to assess and meet the information needs of the various clientele groups through cooperative and coordinated regional educational programming. In fact, individual state extension contacts often respond to 10-15 calls per month from outside their respective state as well as interacting with colleagues with mutual concerns related to developing aquaculture activities. Many of these requests have been met by providing fact sheets, technical bulletins, bibliographies, and detailed responses to specialized questions. Prior to mid-1994 little coordination of international aquaculture information sharing existed. Materials from national and international agencies producing aquaculture information could only be obtained by contacting the respective sources of this information. Also, individual CES personnel relied heavily on information produced by individual states or through regional cooperative projects. As Internet access extended beyond educational institutions and governmental agencies, a clear need developed to utilize the Internet to reach a much broader audience. In the age of an "information overload" the need for a centralized gateway to the ever increasing number of aquaculture resources in electronic format was apparent. The development of the Aquaculture Information Network Center (AquaNIC) has been instrumental in reaching the public with valuable and timely information. AquaNIC receives direction from a national steering committee from public and private sector aquaculture. AquaNIC began on a Gopher Server in July 1994 and moved to a World Wide Web server in January 1996. AquaNIC (ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/) houses more than 1,650 extension publications, governmental documents, image files, comprehensive e-mail lists, newsletters, calendars, job announcements, and résumés. In addition, AquaNIC has 190 pointers to other aquaculture and fisheries related web sites. It is the gateway to the world's electronic resources in aquaculture including the Regional Aquaculture Centers. It also serves as the home of NCRAC's web site (ag.ansc.purdue.edu/aquanic/ncrac). Swann has coordinated the distribution of NCRAC Annual Progress Reports through AquaNIC. Currently, AquaNIC houses nine NCRAC extension Fact Sheets and nine NCRAC Technical Reports and 1991-1996 Annual Progress Reports. In addition, the May 1, 1991-August 31, 1996 Compendium Report has also been posted on AquaNIC. Other services provided on the NCRAC web site include a directory of administrative staff and various NCRAC committee members, extension contacts and the NCRAC newsletter. Other activities related to the AquaNIC and NCRAC web sites include the development of a World Wide Web 30 slide set for use in extension and Sea Grant Educator training. AquaNIC has been recognized by various groups including:
AquaNIC has now been expanded to include a beginner's section accessible from AquaNIC's Home Page. There are two areas currently available for the beginners. First, there are individual species pages for baitfish, channel catfish, crawfish, ornamental fish, striped bass, tilapia, trout/salmon, shellfish, and shrimp. On each of these pages electronic versions of key publications, lists of videos, photographs, frequently asked questions, and lists to extension/Sea Grant outreach contacts are provided. Similarly, automated discussion groups have been set up for each of the species. Each discussion group allows the user to post and reply to questions. Aquaculture handbooks have been developed and distributed to each NCRAC designated aquaculture extension specialist and selected CES and Sea Grant field staff member. As with any organization, there have been changes in NCRAC extension personnel since the inception of the project. Landkamer was the primary aquaculture extension contact for Minnesota. However, he left the university and Kapuscinski became the primary contact person; Gunderson has since assumed that responsibility. Two other individuals, who had served since the outset of the project as their state's aquaculture extension contact, were replaced in 1994. In Kansas, Neils replaced Henderson and in Illinois, Kohler replaced Selock. There continues to be changes in NCRAC extension personnel since the inception of the project. Lee replaced Neils in Kansas in 1996. Hochheimer, who replaced Ebeling in Ohio, has now left Ohio State University. OBJECTIVE 3 In-service training for CES and Sea Grant personnel and other landowner assistance personnel have been held in most of the states in the region. Training has been in the areas of basic aquaculture and safe seafood handling including HACCP (Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point). Many of these individuals have, in turn, trained industry representatives in HACCP. OBJECTIVE 4 A number of workshops, conferences, videos, field-site visits, hands-on training sessions, and other educational programs have been developed and implemented. There have been workshops on general aquaculture, fish diseases, commercial recirculation systems, aquaculture business planning, crayfish culture, pond management, hybrid striped bass, walleye, and yellow perch culture, rainbow trout production, in-service training for high school vocational-agricultural teachers and polyploid induction in sunfish held in the region. Three North Central Regional Aquaculture Conferences have
been held. The first in Kalamazoo, Michigan was held in March 1991. The second was held in
February 1995 in Minneapolis, Minnesota and the third conference was held in Indianapolis,
Indiana in February 1997. These regional meetings were attended by hundreds of individuals
including persons from Canada. The next conference is scheduled for February 1999 in
Columbia, Missouri. In support of extension activities being funded through research projects, i.e., hybrid striped bass and sunfish research projects, extension specialists have completed fact sheets/book chapters/videos. These extension materials arising from the combined efforts of both extension specialists and researchers will help to address many questions concerning aquaculture in the NCR. In addition to the previously mentioned areas, several NCRAC extension contacts have been instrumental in fostering the continued growth of the aquaculture industry in the region. For example, Pierce has recently created the Cooperative Extension Aquaculture and Marketing Educational Program to facilitate the development and implementation of aquaculture educational programs in Missouri. Many of the NCRAC extension contacts have worked with industry and governmental representatives to produce state aquaculture plans and improved governmental regulations. OBJECTIVE 5 Numerous fact sheets, technical bulletins, and videos have been written or produced by various participants of the Extension Work Group. These are listed in the Appendix. OBJECTIVE 6 The quarterly survey of wholesale fish buyers was partially successful. One of the original investigators left their position and another took a leave of absence. As a result there were a limited number of reports from wholesale buyers in the region. However, an agreement was made with the Maryland Department of Agriculture to distribute their bi-weekly buyer's report to AquaNIC's web page. Purdue University receive faxed copies of the reports, which were re-entered, and converted for the web. Twenty-eight reports were distributed on AquaNIC. WORK PLANNED Efforts will continue in regard to strengthening linkages between research and extension work groups as well as enhancing the network for aquaculture information transfer. Participants will also continue to provide in-service training for CES, Sea Grant, and other landowner assistance personnel. Educational programs and materials will be developed and implemented. This includes development of a sunfish culture guide, yellow perch culture guide and videos, hybrid striped bass culture guide, a publication on fee-fishing (sunfish), tilapia culture information packet, and a publication on yellow perch culture in flowing water systems. Additional workshops developed and hosted by state extension contacts will be advertised in surrounding states to take advantage of the NCRAC extension network and the individual expertise of Extension Work Group participants. Several additional NCRAC fact sheets, technical bulletins,
and videos will be developed by various work group members. IMPACTS In-service training for CES and Sea Grant personnel has enabled those professionals to respond to initial, routine aquaculture questions from the general public. Development of aquaculture education programs for the NCR has provided "hands-on" opportunities for prospective and experienced producers. Approximately 5,000 individuals have attended workshops or conferences organized and delivered by the NCRAC Extension Work Group. Clientele attending regional workshops learned of aquaculture development strategies in other areas of the country and acquired information which was of direct use to their own enterprises. Education programs also created situations where problems encountered by producers were expressed to extension personnel who later relayed them to researchers at NCRAC work group meetings for possible solutions through the research effort. Fact sheets, technical bulletins, and videos have served to inform a variety of clients about numerous aquaculture practices for the NCR. For instance, "Making Plans for Commercial Aquaculture in the North Central Region," is often used to provide clients with initial information about aquaculture, while species specific publications on walleye, trout, and catfish have been used in numerous regional meetings and have been requested by clients from throughout the United States. Publications on organizational structure for aquaculture businesses, transportation of fish in bags, and others are beneficial to both new and established aquaculturists. In a 1994 survey, NCRAC extension contacts estimated that NCRAC publications were used to address approximately 15,000 client questions annually. NCRAC extension outreach activities have helped to foster a better understanding and awareness for the future development of aquaculture in the region. AquaNIC is rapidly becoming the entry point for people searching for aquaculture information on the web. AquaNIC's home page now averages more than 3,000 visits per month by people from more than 50 countries. The Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant Program has also created web pages for the Indiana Aquaculture Association, the Illinois Aquaculture Industry Association, NCRAC, and the World Aquaculture Society. PUBLICATIONS, MANUSCRIPTS, WORKSHOPS, OR CONFERENCES See the Appendix for a cumulative output for all NCRAC-funded Extension activities. SUPPORT
Project Termination Report for the Period NCRAC FUNDING LEVEL: $40,000 (September 1, 1993 to May 31, 1997) ARTICIPANTS:
REASON FOR TERMINATION The objective for this project was completed and funding was finally expended. PROJECT OBJECTIVE Develop cost of production budgets and expected revenues for the raising of food-sized walleye, yellow perch, and hybrid striped bass on farms in the North Central Region (NCR). PRINCIPAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS HYBRID STRIPED BASS Kohler compiled a mailing list of 56 producers of phase III hybrid striped bass (HSB) both within and outside the NCR. A mail survey was sent to these 56 producers to obtain data on production costs. The response rate was low due to a hesitation on the part of producers to reveal this information. Two large fish farms in Arkansas (Malone's and Keo) and one in Missouri (Osage Catfisheries) were visited to discuss HSB production and gather production information. In all three cases, other species in addition to HSB were produced, therefore, species-specific production figures were not available. Kohler compiled an annotated bibliography on HSB production and production costs. This bibliography is available from Kohler for anyone needing the information. Kohler also summarized HSB cost of production estimates from six published reports on HSB production. Those estimated costs were presented at the North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) Hybrid Striped Bass Workshop in November 1995. WALLEYE Work has advanced on identifying and analyzing the cost of production for advanced walleye fingerlings and food-sized walleye in intensive culture systems. O'Rourke and Illinois State University graduate students completed an extensive walleye production/culture literature review with the primary focus of finding research findings that might be useful in ascertaining the cost of production for walleye fingerlings and food-sized fish under intensive and extensive culture regimes. Very little economic research was found and even less was found that was documented well enough to be useful. The literature reviews were reported in two Master's theses. The first thesis was finished in December 1994. It is an economic feasibility analysis of a tank-based intensive walleye fingerling production system. The second thesis, an economic feasibility analysis of a tank based intensive food-sized walleye system, was finished in August 1995. Research experts and hatchery personnel familiar with walleye culture were surveyed using a modified Delphi approach for both the fingerling and food-sized studies. It was surprising that some "experts" were as reluctant to share research information as were some entrepreneurs/producers. This stage of the research was completed in 1995. The two theses produced for this project contain the best economic feasibility data for any known/proposed production systems for commercial production of walleye fingerlings and food sized fish. Commercial production is considered to be potentially profitable but highly risky and uncertain due to lack of actual commercial production data for systems (especially for food-sized grow out), the difficulties in domestication of the fish and the potential market (price) impacts of commercial production. YELLOW PERCH Knowing the number of commercial producers of yellow perch to be very small, Riepe conducted a literature review in early 1993 to determine whether any data on the production requirements for yellow perch were available. Unfortunately, most research on yellow perch has been limited to attempts to spawn them out of season and successfully culture and harvest eggs, fry, and eventually fingerlings habituated to commercial diets. Riepe then rejected the historical method for developing enterprise budgets and used the economic engineering approach. Riepe considered alternatives for obtaining the needed information, and came up with two methods. The first method used to collect production-related information upon which the budgets must be based was a record keeping procedure. Riepe developed a record keeping sheet for the non-funded collaborators involved in the yellow perch project who were testing the commercial scale feasibility of food-size yellow perch production systems. The record keeping sheets asked for the itemization of all costs and inputs into the production process used by the collaborators. The resulting information was of limited value. The second method was a Delphi approach to obtaining the expert opinions of NCRAC researchers on the production relationships needed to underpin the yellow perch production cost budgets. Expert opinions were solicited from the researchers and extension persons involved in the NCRAC Yellow Perch Work Group during 1994. The opinion data were entered into a spreadsheet to average the responses and then re-submitted to the researchers. Also budget assumptions were clarified so that all researchers were thinking of production relationships relating to a similar set of assumptions. Expert opinions were solicited for several types of related production values (death loss, feed conversion, fingerling size, harvest size, etc.) for a producer with average skill under average conditions and then for minimum and maximum values representing above and below average skills and conditions. It was not financially feasible to model all life stages in all production systems at all sizes of production. Researchers and the membership of the Indiana Aquaculture Association were queried to solicit their views on priorities for budgets modeled. The decision was made that the budgets to be modeled would be the life stage of advanced fingerling grow out; the production systems of cage, constructed fish pond, and recirculating tank; and two sizes, 2,268 kg (5,000 lb) and 22,680 kg (50,000 lb). Sensitivity analysis was conducted to test the impact of alternative budget parameters (production values and individual cost items) on the overall break-even price. A Master's graduate student was assigned to conduct research in costs of producing perch in recirculating tank systems and a thesis was completed in 1995. Costs of growing out yellow perch in recirculating tank systems were analyzed for two sizes of operations; 1,588 kg (3,500 lb) and 2,268 kg (5,000 lb). A technical bulletin and a fact sheet (NCRAC Extension Fact Sheet #111 and NCRAC Extension Technical Bulletin #111) detailed the costs of producing yellow perch in cages and ponds. These may contain the best economic feasibility study and data for any known/proposed production systems for commercial production of yellow perch in the NCR. IMPACTS Extension Liaison Garling hosted a Yellow Perch Workshop in June 1995. The results of Riepe's work on yellow perch production costs were presented at that workshop. Attendees indicated that they were considering the types of systems modeled by Riepe. O'Rourke presented the preliminary results of the work on walleye fingerling tank based system cost of production at the Minnesota Aquaculture Conference in February 1995. Kohler presented the results of the review of HSB production costs at the NCRAC Hybrid Striped Bass Workshop in November 1995. The information developed and presented is anticipated to be directly useful to the attendees (producers and potential producers) as they consider their own operations and intentions in light of the cost data and analytical tools presented. This project has already benefited the aquaculture industry
in the NCR through those workshop presentations. As a result of this project, economists
have been able to develop and deliver presentations on economic issues in aquaculture
production to current and potential aquacultural producers. These presentations and
publications may reduce the impacts of uninformed investment decisions by current and
potential aquaculture entrepreneurs. RECOMMENDED FOLLOW-UP ACTIVITIES This project showed that good economics work could
contribute to the knowledge base of species studies. Unfortunately the objective and the
budget restricted the scope to fish that are not the most common produced commercially in
the NCR. A new Economics and Marketing Work Group should be started and adequately funded
for at least four years to continue the work of ascertaining the potential profitability
of various commercially adopted species and production systems for the NCR. PUBLICATIONS MANUSCRIPTS, OR PAPERS PRESENTED See the Appendix for a cumulative output for all NCRAC-funded Economics and Marketing activities.
Progress Report for the Period NCRAC FUNDING LEVEL: $350,000 (September 1, 1993 to August 31, 1997) PARTICIPANTS:
PROJECT OBJECTIVES (1) Continue to improve larval rearing techniques by developing and evaluating different starter diets in relation to size at transfer to formulated feeds under selected environmental conditions. (2) Continue to improve pond fingerling production through examination of in-pond feeding techniques using physical/chemical attractants and improved harvesting strategies for different sizes of fingerlings from various types and sizes of ponds. (3) Continue development of extension materials and workshops emphasizing practical techniques coinciding with production events to meet the needs of established and potential yellow perch culturists through on-site presentations at two or more locations in different parts of the region. ANTICIPATED BENEFITS This project addresses priority needs identified by the North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC) Industry Advisory Council (IAC) for advancing yellow perch aquaculture in the North Central Region (NCR). The IAC has indicated that one major constraint that presently limits perch aquaculture is the lack of reliable methods of producing perch fingerlings habituated to formulated feeds. In addition, there is a continuing need to provide producer training on key aspects of perch aquaculture, and to transfer advances in perch culture technology to the public sector. The information generated by these projects will greatly
assist perch producers in their efforts to reliably raise the large number of perch
fingerlings needed by the industry. Improvements in pond fingerling techniques will
immediately increase the availability of fingerlings to the industry because almost all
fingerlings currently available are produced in ponds. Research on the effect of spawner
size on larval size and on starter diet formulation for yellow perch will improve
intensive fry rearing techniques and decrease the dependence on live feeds. Laying the
foundation for use of one of the more potent and proven legal flavor additives for fish
requires quantifying two critical nutritional requirements for yellow perch; the total
sulfur amino acid and choline requirements. These values alone are beneficial in terms of
developing a diet for yellow perch and provide the foundation for evaluation of betaine as
a flavor additive in diets. Extension activities will continue to promote and advance
yellow perch culture through expanded outreach, education, and training programs.
Additional extension materials (bulletins, fact sheets, audiovisual materials) developed
by the NCRAC Yellow Perch and Extension Work Groups and a series of hands-on workshops and
field demonstrations will transfer current technology to established and potential fish
farmers, and increase public awareness of the potential of yellow perch aquaculture as a
viable agricultural enterprise in the NCR. In addition, this project will develop improved
technologies for certain key facets of yellow perch aquaculture. Finally, the results of
experiments incorporated into this proposal will immediately help fish farmers improve the
production efficiency of yellow perch. PROGRESS AND PRINCIPAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS As an integral component of this project, private producers have cooperated by providing facilities, fish, feed, day-to-day husbandry, and routine data collection. At its inception, this project included the participation of eight different private fish farms in various parts of the NCR. Participating university researchers provided project oversight on experimental design, advice or direct assistance with the technical set-up of any specialized experimental systems, supervision and assistance on critical end-point data collection, and analyses of results. In the first year of the project (September 1, 1993 to August 31, 1994), significant progress was made at certain sites at testing selected research-based production technologies. Accordingly, from an extension perspective, the project is successfully building and/or expanding working relationships between NCRAC researchers and certain regional fish farmers, testing various research-based technologies under practical production conditions, transferring knowledge from academia to the private sector, and identifying private producers who are both capable and willing to sustain a collaborative technology evaluation and demonstration effort. Several of the original private-sector collaborators have either met or have worked hard to meet their project commitments. OBJECTIVE 1 Researchers at Michigan State University (MSU) directed their efforts in 1996 towards studying the effects of female spawner size on eggs and fry. The research indicated that selection for larval fish cannot be made based on maternal size until the paternal influence on the trait was identified for the cross. In 1997, MSU researchers studied the maternal and paternal contribution on larval yellow perch mouth gape and total length (TL). The study was designed to test the significance of the paternal contribution observed in the 1996 study. Based on the sire and dam components of the spawning stock used, estimates of heritability for fry TL and mouth gape were calculated. A true estimation of heritability was not calculated because the design of this study includes a fixed assignment of parental stock. However, the estimation of dominance or non-additive genetic variance can be calculated. The additive genetic variance for TL can be estimated using a cross-classification design. Two small-sized and two large-sized male yellow perch were mated to each of four females, two small-sized and two large-sized. This mating produced eight families sired by small males and eight sired by large males. Data collected during 1996 and 1997 were used to develop an equation to predict mouth width (y) based on changes in TL (x): y = -0.058461 + 0.062357x (r2 = 0.4227; P = 0.0001). Measurements of gape height, gape width, and TL were taken using a dissecting microscope in conjunction with the Optimas imaging system, BioScanTM. Studies at Purdue University (Purdue) were designed to quantify the dietary requirements for sulfur amino acids (methionine plus cyst(e)ine) and the dietary choline requirements, providing the framework for the legal use of betaine as a flavor additive in diets for yellow perch. To date, the dietary requirements for lysine, arginine, total sulfur amino acids, and the sparing effect of cyst(e)ine for methionine have been quantified in juvenile fish fed experimental diets. The dietary choline requirement study is underway. Studies at Purdue were delayed during quantification of the dietary lysine requirement. It appears there is a biochemical antagonism between dietary lysine and arginine. That is, when dietary concentrations of one of these two essential amino acids is relatively high, it hinders absorption of the other. This is a common phenomenon in terrestrial animal nutrition, but is rare in fish. In fact, most people argue the antagonism simply does not exist in fish. The critical dietary levels of lysine and arginine will be explored this winter in juvenile fish. The dietary requirements for lysine and arginine were 1.5% and 1.4% of the dry diet, respectively. The dietary total sulfur amino acid requirement for juvenile yellow perch is 1.0% of the diet and cyst(e)ine, a nonessential amino acid, can spare approximately 50% of the dietary requirement for the essential amino acid methionine. In 1996, Ohio State University (OSU) researchers spawned yellow perch out-of season during September-October by shifting the photothermal condition (light hours and temperature) by six months. The natural spawning of yellow perch occurs in April-May at 12-14C (53.6-57.2F) and a 12 h photoperiod. The brood stock was maintained at higher temperature and longer photoperiod during September-February (18C [64.4F] and 13 h). The photothermal conditions were decreased gradually until June. The chill period (10C [50.0F] and 11 h light) was 60 days in duration (June-July) and was followed by gradually increased water temperature and longer day light (12C [53.6F] and 19 h). Following this period, 47% of the females were recorded as gravid and 24 were stripped or spawned naturally. The males spermiated during the entire shifted spawning period from August till September. The average relative weight of ovulated eggs as percentage of the female weight was 26.6 ± 10.7%. Embryo survival through the eyed-stage was 56 ± 24%. Larval skeleton abnormalities (45 ± 15%) and a low frequency of swim bladder inflation (44 ± 34%) were observed. Hatching occurred seven days after spawning incubation at 14C (57.2F). Just before hatching, the eggs were transferred to 20-L (5.3-gal) aquariums with continuous water flow at 20C (68.0F). Three days after hatching, fresh-water rotifers Brachionus calyciflorus and microalgae Dictyosphaerium chlorelloides were added three times a day to aquariums at an average concentration of 10 rotifers/mL (296/oz). Eighty percent of the larvae were found to have 1-4 rotifers in the gut at first feeding. Artemia nauplii were added six days after hatching. The combination of rotifers, algae, and Artemia was supplied until 14 days after hatching after which, only Artemia nauplii were offered to the larvae. Two different dry diets were tested for weaning 25 day old larvae, salmonid starter diet and experimental squid based diet. However, only 35 day old juveniles were found to accept dry diets and were not weaned completely from Artemia until an age of 45 days. Nine diets were tested as weaning diets, including two commercial (Zeigler trout starter and Biokyowa), one semi-commercial (F.T. Barrows, Fish Technology Center, Bozeman, Minnesota), and six experimental diets. Live food (Artemia nauplii) was used as a control. In addition, the semi-commercial and one experimental diet ("walleye") were supplemented with 20% (initial fish biomass) Artemia. The commercial trout starter was coated with 5 or 10% (diet weight) krill hydrolysate as a feed attractant. One hundred fish (average wet weight 75.5 ± 5 mg; 0.0027 ± 0.0002 oz) were placed in each of 44 20-L (5.3-gal) aquariums. Fish were fed ad libitum, eight feedings per day. After 31 days, fish were sacrificed, counted, and sampled for length, wet weight, dry weight, and digestive tract enzyme activities. Percent survival to 31 days ranged from 35 ± 6.2 % (French diet - based on freeze-dried liver and yeast extract, carboxymethylcellulose was used as a binder) to over 70% on a walleye diet (based on krill meal and herring meal as protein sources, included 2% krill hydrolysate, gelatin was used as a binder) or Barrows with 20% Artemia nauplii (manufactured by marumerization technique). OBJECTIVE 2 Two years of trials have been completed by University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-Madison) researchers at Coolwater Farms, LLC, to determine key parameters for producing yellow perch fingerlings habituated to formulated feed and reared in ponds for an entire growing season, and to compare the performance of two types of pond lighting and feeding systems. Ponds have recently been harvested and production data are being analyzed. Preliminary examination of the data indicates that rearing fingerlings in ponds for the entire first growing season can result in yields greater than 247,097 fish/ha (100,000 fish/acre), although variability in both pond productivity and fish size result in a wide range of production levels. Over the two years of data collection pond fingerling production ranged from 49,419 to 276,748 fish/ha (20,000 to 112,000 fish/acre), and averaged about 148,258 fish/ha (60,000 fish/acre). Autumn-harvested fingerlings ranged in size from 7.0-17.8 cm (2.8-7.0 in) TL (3-80 g; 0.1-2.8 oz total weight). In 1996, University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) investigators compared the utility of different lighting systems, combined with a specially designed trap-net, to harvest photopositive young-of-the-year (YOY) yellow perch on a large scale from ponds. UNL was unable to provide a summary of their 1997 progress. OBJECTIVE 3 During 1996, three yellow perch workshops were conducted. The University of Wisconsin Sea Grant Institute sponsored two workshops entitled: "Intensive Aquaculture of Yellow Perch in Conjunction with Recirculating Aquaculture Systems," which included NCRAC Extension and Yellow Perch Work Group members. Alpine Farms (Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin) personnel participated as aquaculture industry cooperators to provide their practical experience with, and knowledge of, yellow perch rearing in their recirculating aquaculture system technology. UNL conducted a workshop in Nebraska. In 1997, UW-Madison researchers sponsored an organizational meeting of producers of yellow perch that are using pond systems. The objectives of this meeting were to discuss common problems faced by these aquaculturists and determine specific topics to be addressed by an upcoming workshop(s). The group was unanimous in their identification of fingerling size uniformity and pond production variability as being the most critical problem areas. The group was also highly in favor of examining the potential of developing a cooperative association to purchase commodities (e.g., fish food) and market products (e.g., fingerlings and processed fillets). WORK PLANNED OBJECTIVE 1 MSU researchers will complete evaluations of parental age and size influences on larval size. The results will be used to select spawners from size classes that produce favorable hatchability and mouth size traits in their fry. The fry will be used for nutritional studies comparing live and formulated dry diets. The dietary choline requirement and ability of betaine to spare the choline requirement will be completed winter 1997/1998 at Purdue. Researchers will complete collection and analysis of the data and prepare manuscripts for publication. OBJECTIVE 2 UW-Madison researchers will complete collation and analysis of the data and a manuscript describing fingerling production studies will be prepared for publication. OBJECTIVE 3 One or more workshops demonstrating key facets of fingerling production and grow out will be scheduled by UW-Madison for the spring-summer of 1998. IMPACTS Quantifying critical nutritional requirements for targeted species reduces feed costs and allows variation in use of feed ingredients. The research completed at Purdue, MSU, and OSU are defining a yellow perch diet for use in the NCR. If verified, the lysine/arginine antagonism will be the
first record of this situation occurring in fish. Feed manufacturers can then limit both
essential amino acids to the requirements. Total sulfur amino acid concentrations are
typically the first limiting amino acid in diets that contain high levels of plant protein
feedstuffs. Thus, the values quantified at Purdue are vital pieces of information for
dietary formulation and provide the basis of equally important work on flavor additives. The impacts of spawner size on larval survival and out-of-season spawning may significantly increase the annual production of yellow perch fingerlings. The procedure of shifting the spawning season has to be accompanied with indoor larvae rearing. The larvae rearing protocol developed in this project is based on a combination of microalgae and rotifer as the larvae first feed. Artemia nauplii is offered from six days after initiation of feeding. Weaning period started at 35 days and the fingerlings were completely weaned from Artemia to dry diet at the age of 45 days. Co-feeding of dry diets and Artemia as well as coating starter diet with krill hydrolysate significantly increased growth of yellow perch juveniles. Studies on pond fingerling production by UW-Madison researchers have shown that research-based production strategies can be used on a commercial scale to produce large numbers of perch fingerlings. At the current market value of yellow perch fingerlings ($0.02-$0.04/cm; $0.05-$0.10/inch), the strategy of rearing fingerlings in production ponds for an entire growing season results in gross production revenues of $14,826/ha ($6,000/acre), with a range of $7,413-$23,474/ha ($3,000-$9,500/acre). The field trials conducted by UNL investigators have
demonstrated both the utility and the limitations of using light to harvest YOY yellow
perch. Present indications are that light is being used by increasing numbers of fish
farmers to harvest young yellow perch (as well as other species) in several states
including Ohio, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Requests for information on yellow perch aquaculture continue to increase annually. Workshops done on yellow perch aquaculture in the NCR have enabled extension specialists and researchers to provide information on this species to established fish farmers, potential fish farmers, and the general public. The workshops have also provided a mechanism for yellow perch culturists to identify problem areas. For example, producers have identified the excessive variability in fingerling size and pond productivity as the critical problems currently faced by yellow perch fingerling producers. This provides valuable insight into future directions that are needed for yellow perch aquaculture research. Addressing these areas of concern expressed by current yellow perch producers will bridge the gap between research and solutions to real-world problems. PUBLICATIONS, MANUSCRIPTS, OR PAPERS PRESENTED See the Appendix for a cumulative output for all NCRAC-funded Yellow Perch activities.
aSea Grant/USDC/NOAA Progress Report for the Period NCRAC FUNDING LEVEL: $160,000 (September 1, 1995 to August 31, 1997) PARTICIPANTS:
PROJECT OBJECTIVES (1) Examine fry (phase I) to fingerling (phase II) production of three strains of white bass and three strains of hybrid striped bass (sunshine bass) in ponds with and without lights and vibrating feeders. (2) Conduct field testing of fingerling (phase II) to advanced fingerling (phase III) production of three strains of hybrid striped bass (sunshine bass) in various culture systems. (3) Extension component: (a) Coordinate selection of various culture systems and implement field testing (fingerling to advanced fingerling to food size). (b) Write an initial culture manual using the information generated by all the hybrid striped bass research sponsored by the North Central Regional Aquaculture Center (NCRAC). (c) Produce associated fact sheets, bulletins, and videos for hybrid striped bass research in the North Central Region (NCR). ANTICIPATED BENEFITS The overall goal of this collaborative project is to
enhance hybrid striped bass aquaculture in the NCR. The logical next step is to conduct
field trials of several strains of white bass and hybrid striped bass in various culture
systems. Existing producers need to improve the economics of hybrid striped bass
production by increasing stocking densities and improving feeds. The break-even production
cost of hybrids grown in cages is $2.29 to $3.45/kg ($1.04 to $1.57/lb). Those values were
based on a stocking density of 100/m3 (2.8/ft3) and feed costs of
$0.55/kg ($0.25/lb). As production of hybrids increases on a regional and national scale,
market price will likely decrease. Thus, this research will help maintain current profit
margins as production increases. The knowledge gained from this study should be of
immediate use by the aquaculture industry. The extension component of the study will
assure that research information gets to the industry in a user-friendly form. PROGRESS AND PRINCIPAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS OBJECTIVES 1 AND 2 Southern Illinois University-Carbondale (SIUC) Brood Stock Acquisition: In 1995/1996 adult white bass were acquired by SIUC researchers from three regions representing the extremes of white bass native range: Arkansas, South Dakota, and Lake Erie. Arkansas white bass were collected by trap netting in the Arkansas River. The South Dakota stock of white bass was collected by South Dakota State University (SDSU) by angling in Lake Kampeska, South Dakota. Lake Erie white bass were collected by commercial fishermen in Sandusky Bay of Lake Erie. Brood fish were held at SIUC in recirculating systems in winter conditions (8C [46.4F] and 10 h daylight) until all three stocks of fish were collected. Spawning of Brood Stock and Incubation of Larvae: Once all three stocks of fish were acquired, temperature and number of daylight hours were gradually increased until 16C (60.8F) and 14 h, respectively, were reached. During this warm-up phase brood fish were fed minnows on a daily basis. When spawning temperature and number of daylight hours were obtained, female white bass were injected with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) at a rate of 150 IU/kg (68.0 IU/lb) to induce ovulation. Males were injected at a rate of 100 IU/kg (45.4 IU/kg) to enhance semen production. Sunshine bass were made using extended striped bass semen obtained from Keo Fish Farm, Arkansas. At least ten females of each stock ovulated, at which point the eggs were manually stripped and divided into two allotments. One allotment of the eggs was fertilized with white bass neat semen to produce pure white bass, while the other allotment of eggs was fertilized with extended striped bass semen to produce sunshine bass. Both allotments of eggs were treated with tannic acid to reduce the adhesiveness of the eggs. Eggs were then incubated in MacDonald jars until hatch. Hatch was complete at about 48 h postfertilization. Enumeration and Stocking of Larvae: At four days of age, the larvae were enumerated and subsequently stocked into ponds. Ponds used in this study are approximately 0.04 ha (0.10 acres). Stocking of larvae began at dusk and continued after dark. Larvae were stocked at a rate of 500,000/ha (202,350/acre). Each stock of fish was stocked in quadruplicate. Pond Filling and Fertilization: Ponds were filled 5-10 days prior to stocking; incoming water was filtered using a 500-m mesh nylon sock. Ponds were fertilized using both cottonseed meal and 8-32-16 inorganic fertilizer. A single application of cottonseed meal was administered at 350 kg/ha (312.3 lb/acre) four to five days prior to stocking. The inorganic fertilizer was applied at 25 kg/ha (22.3 lb/acre) twice weekly for five weeks. An additional application of cottonseed meal was administered once weekly at 25 kg/ha (22.3 lb/acre) starting in week four. The third and final phase of strain evaluation of hybrid striped bass is currently being conducted. The hybrids being evaluated for aquaculture performance were produced from spawning three strains of white bass (Arkansas, Lake Erie, and South Dakota) with striped bass in May of 1996. Ponds were stocked between October 25-30, 1996 with three different strains of hybrid striped bass obtained from phase II harvest; fish averaged 0.1 kg (0.22 lb) at time of stocking (stocking rate = 5,000 fish/ha; 2,024/acre). SIUC researchers are attempting to obtain a market size fish of 0.7 kg (1.5 lb) by the following fall. Fifteen ponds averaging 0.04 ha (0.10 acre) were randomly assigned a treatment (N = 5 per treatment). Fish in the ponds were fed until ice cover; feeding was resumed in the spring as the weather permitted. In the sampling (seining) done in April 1997 it was observed that there was no complete fish loss in any pond due to overwinter mortality. On the second week of April, twice a day feedings were initiated. Feeding at the surface increased around the middle of May as the water temperatures reached 16-18C (60.8-64.4F). Temperature and dissolved oxyen (DO) were monitored every morning beginning the third week of June. Around the middle of July as morning temperatures reached 30C (86F), emergency aeration with a PTO-driven paddlewheel was frequently used. Two separate replicates were lost on July 31, 1997 due to a combination of high water temperatures and complete overcast conditions for a 4-day period. To avoid excessive fish loss due to low DO problems, a limit on feeding commercial diets was placed at 56 kg/ha (50.0 lb/acre). Fish in most ponds generally fed well through the summer, especially when weather was steady for longer periods. On October 5, 1997, five fish were sampled from each pond by hook and line and visually inspected for size and condition. All fish were in extremely good condition; most fish were beyond minimum marketable size. Feeding of Phase I Fingerlings: Training the fish to accept commercial diets began 21 days poststocking. Fish were offered fry meal twice a day at 5-10 kg/ha/day (4.5-8.9 lb/acre/day). Once fish were observed accepting prepared feed, pellet size was increased as necessary and fish were fed to satiation. Harvesting Phase I Fingerlings: At 36-41 days of age phase I fingerlings were harvested by seining. Survival rate varied from pond to pond, but was generally poor. Fish survival in ponds ranged from 0-21%. Fish survival rates were markedly higher for hybrid striped bass ponds compared to white bass ponds, averaging 13% and 3%, respectively. Average weight of an individual fish in any particular pond was inversely related to its survival rate; that is, if a pond had a high survival rate, then the average weight of an individual within that pond tended to be low. This trend is reflected in the relatively low average weights of hybrid striped bass (1.5 g; 0.05 oz) and the relatively high average weights of white bass (2.2 g; 0.08 oz). Phase II Production: The harvested phase I fingerlings were restocked for phase II production. Due to a lack of fish, all three white bass stocks were eliminated from this segment of the experiment. Both Arkansas and South Dakota hybrid striped bass stocks were restocked in triplicate, while Lake Erie hybrid striped bass were only restocked in duplicate. The stocking rate used for phase II production was 25,000 fish/ha (10,118/acre). Fish were feed twice daily to satiation. Harvesting Phase II Fingerlings: At the end of the growing season, phase II fingerlings were harvested by seining. Survival rates ranged from a low of 49% to a high of 86%. Survival rates for both Arkansas and Lake Erie hybrid striped bass were about 72%, while the survival rate for South Dakota hybrid striped bass was only 57%. The average weight of individual fish also varied from stock to stock. The highest average weight was 90.2 g (3.2 oz) for Lake Erie hybrid striped bass, while South Dakota and Arkansas hybrid striped bass had average weights of 69.0 g (2.4 oz) and 58.4 g (2.1 oz), respectively. SDSU Two groups of hybrid striped bass fingerlings (Arkansas and South Dakota hybrids) were transported from SIUC to SDSU to conduct strain comparison and density experiments (study began August 16, 1996). The culture system for both experiments consists of 110-L (29.1-gal) glass aquaria connected as a closed freshwater recirculating system with a delivery rate of approximately 1 L/min (0.3 gal/min). Ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH, hardness, alkalinity, and carbon dioxide were measured every two days. Water temperature was maintained at 22C (71.6F) and DO was maintained near saturation by continuous aeration. A light/dark cycle of 12-h light/12-h dark was maintained using incandescent lighting controlled by an automatic electric timer. Initial mean weights were 3.6 g (0.13 oz) and 2.9 g (0.10 oz) for Arkansas and South Dakota hybrids, respectively. The diet (38% protein, 8% crude fat) used in both experiments was obtained from Southern States Cooperative, Inc. (Richmond, Virginia). All fish were conditioned for a 2-week period by feeding a #4 crumble ad libitum twice daily. Randomly selected fish from each strain group were then stocked in individual aquaria to provide four replicates. The feed was supplied to fish initially at a rate of 10% of body weight per day equally divided into four feeding periods. All feeding was done with belt feeders. The feeding rate was progressively reduced to 3% of body weight during the experiment to minimize overfeeding while maintaining a level approaching satiation. Also, pellet sizes fed were periodically increased with graded changes in body size. Group and individual measurements were made at weekly intervals; feed allotments were adjusted weekly. The same general protocol was applied to the density experiment. Four replicates each of five (45/m3; 1.3/ft3) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||