Comparison of water quality and production performance of barramundi (lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NHA TRANG UNIVERSITY VO THI LUU COMPARISON OF WATER QUALITY AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF BARRAMUNDI (Lates calcarifer) FINGERLINGS IN TWO SYSTEMS: A RECIRCULATION SYSTEM AND A FLOW-THROUGH SYSTEM MASTER THESIS KHANH HOA - 2018 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NHA TRANG UNIVERSITY VO THI LUU COMPARISON OF WATER QUALITY AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF BARRAMUNDI (Lates calcarifer) FINGERLINGS IN TWO SYSTEMS: A RECIRCULATION SYSTEM AND A FLOW-THROUGH SYSTEM MASTER THESIS Major: Marine Ecosystem Management and Climate Change Topic allocation Decision 1011/QD-DHNT dated 16/10/2017 Decision on establishing the Committee: 06th June 2018 Defense date: Suppervisors: LE ANH TUAN Chairman: Faculty of Graduate Studies: KHANH HOA - 2018 UNDERTAKING I undertake that the thesis entitled: “Comparison of water quality and performance of Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: a recirculation systems and a flow-through system” is my own work The work has not been presented elsewhere for assessment until the time this thesis is submitted NhaTrang, 02nd May 2018 i ACKNOWLEDGMENT I would like to express the deepest appreciation to the Faculty of Graduate Studies, Nha Trang University (NTU) for the helping and giving best conditions me finish my thesis My special thanks go to Dr Le Anh Tuan for the continuous support of my study, for his patience, motivation, enthusiasm, and immense knowledge My gratitude is always there with all the Lecturers and the coordinators of the Norhed Master’s Programme I sincerely would like to thank the collaboration of the Australis Aquaculture Vietnam Ltd Company (Ninh Hoa, Khanh Hoa, Vietnam) where the recirculating system was constructed and all the data collections were carried out I am grateful with Mr Daniel Fisk, the Managing Director of AAV and all of the colleagues from nursery farm, RAS team and laboratory for their supports Last but not the least, to thank my family and my friends for always concern and encourage me during the past time Thank you! NhaTrang, 02nd May 2018 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS UNDERTAKING i ACKNOWLEDGMENT ii TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF SYMBOLS v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF FIGURES viii ABSTRACT Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Recirculation aquaculture system 2.2 Barramundi, distribution and production 2.3 Nursery phase 11 Chapter 3: MATERIALS AND METHOD 12 3.1 Study site 12 3.2 Production setup 14 3.3 Water quality 14 3.4 Barramundi production parameters 17 3.5 Statistical analysis 19 Chapter 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 20 4.1 Water quality 20 4.1.1 Water quality in the RAS 20 4.1.2 Comparison of water quality between the RAS and the FTS 21 4.1.3 Discussion 22 4.2 Barramundi production performance 25 4.2.1 Comparison of barramundi production parameters between the FTS and the RAS 25 4.2.2 Discussion 29 4.3 Preliminary assessment of comparative economics 30 4.3.1 Comparison of economic parameters between the RAS and the FTS 30 iii 4.3.2 Discussion 32 Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 34 5.1 Conclusion 34 5.2 Recommendation 34 REFERENCES 35 APPENDICES iv LIST OF SYMBOLS B : Biomass Bf : The final biomass Bi : The initial biomass F : Feed consumption m1 : The pre weight m2 : The post weight P : Population Pf: : The final population Pi : The stocking population t : Time W : Weight of fish Wf : The final weight Wi : The initial weight v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AAV : Australis Aquaculture Vietnam AGR : Absolute growth rate CO2 : Carbon dioxide DFI : Daily feed intake DO : Dissolved oxygen FAO : Food and Agriculture Organization FCR : Feed conversion ratio FRP : Fiberglass reinforced plastic FTS : Flow-through system NH3 : ammonia NH4 : ammonium NO2 : nitrite NO3 : nitrate RAS : Recirculation aquaculture system SR : Survival rate SGR : Specific growth rate TSS : Total suspended solids UV : Ultraviolet vi LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Environmental parameters 15 Table 4.1: Mean values for environmental parameters in RAS (mg.L-) (N = 12) 20 Table 4.2: Compare mean values of environmental parameters between the RAS and the FTS (NS, no significant difference; *, significant difference, P < 0.05) 22 Table 4.3: The stocking data of barramundi fingerlings in the FTS and in the RAS 25 Table 4.4: The mean values for barramundi production performance in the FTS and in the RAS 27 Table 4.5: Summary of all parameters monitored from October 2014 to September 2015 with FTS and from October 2015 to September 2016 with RAS at the AAV facility 31 vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Schematic diagram of a basic RAS Figure 2.2: A RAS compared with a traditional FTS Figure 2.3: Distribution map for Lates calcarifer Figure 2.4: Main producer countries of Lates calcarifer Figure 2.5: Global aquaculture production for Lates calcarifer 10 Figure 3.1: Small tanks in AAV nursery 12 Figure 3.2: A schematic design of the basic components of AAV nursery 13 Figure 3.3: Oxygen meters in AAV nursery 16 Figure 4.1: The mean values for pH, DO (mg.L-) and CO2 (mg.L-) in the RAS 21 Figure 4.2: Population and fish weight of nursery period in the FTS and in the RAS 26 Figure 4.3: Survival rate in the FTS and in the RAS during nursery phase 27 Figure 4.4: Feeding rate and growth rate in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery period 28 Figure 4.5: Feed conversion ratio in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery phase 29 viii seventh week, the average of feeding rates in the FTS and the RAS were equivalent, 3.2% and 3.4% respectively Specific growth rates also tended to decrease week by week at the nursery phase The highest mean value was 11.2% in RAS and 8.1% in FTS at the first week and the lowest mean value was 3.6% in the RAS and 4.0% in the FTS at the last week of nursery period (Figure 4.4) Figure 4.4: Feeding rate and growth rate in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery period Feed conversion ratio in the RAS was not significantly changed, the mean values were from 0.94 to 1.2 during the nursery phase Whereas, feed conversion ratio in the FTS continuously went up and down week by week The highest mean value for FCR was 1.28 in the fourth week and the lowest mean FCR was 0.89 in the seventh week in the FTS (Figure 4.5) 28 Figure 4.5: Feed conversion ratio in the FTS and in the RAS of nursery phase 4.2.2 Discussion According to the above results, the RAS showed the ability to produce more fish with high survival rate (93.8%) during nursery period by maintaining stable environmental parameters at optimum levels for fish growth Compared with the 79% of survival rate in FTS, the survival rate in RAS was improved under the effective sterilization of ultraviolet system The presence of some pathogens such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites in water input associated with sudden changes in environmental factors at some specific times in the FTS could lead to disease outbreaks and cause high mortality for fingerling in nursery farm Feeding and waste products reduce the oxygen level in the system These waste products need to be removed because of their potential negative impact on fish growth and mortality Besides there should control feeding rate to ensure supplying enough feed for fish and avoid feed waste as well as risks of poor water quality buildup in the system include high concentration of ammonia and nitrite Compared with the FTS, the feeding rate in this RAS seemed not commensurate with the growth rate (include specific growth rate and absolute growth rate) of fish More feeding rate trials in RAS are needed to determine the appropriate feeding rate at which fish achieve the best growth rates In addition, the ability to metabolize feed and growth rate of fish also 29 depends on some environmental parameters such as temperature, DO, NH3 and NO2 (Helfrich and Libey, 1990; Bhatnagar et al., 2004; Bhatnagar & Singh, 2010) Although the production in FTS got high mortality and the feeding rates were lower than the feeding rates in RAS, the growth rates and FCR was good, 5.84% and 0.99 respectively To achieve this result, it was likely that the environmental parameters at FTS were within the optimal range for fish cultured However, water quality was not well controlled at some points, pathogens still remained in the system, caused diseases and led tothe low survival The average FCR in the RAS was 1.04, it was not the best FCR for fish in the nursery phase If the growth rate can be improved by adjusting feeding rate, FCR of fish in RAS become better Moreover, minimizing FCR is also the first solution to reduce the environmental impacts of aquaculture system According to Roque d’Orbcastel et al (2009c), a 30% reduction of FCR in a trout farm resulted in a reduction of almost 20% of the global environmental impact, excluding energy use 4.3 Preliminary assessment of comparative economics 4.3.1 Comparison of economic parameters between the RAS and the FTS Data on biological parameters such as fingerlings, survival rate, feed, FCR and economic parameters were recorded and summarized in Table 4.5 The data obtained are analyzed and used in the economic model (budget) estimations for the production 30 Table 4.5: Summary of all parameters monitored from October 2014 to September 2015 with FTS and from October 2015 to September 2016 with RAS at the AAV facility Costs factors FTS ($) RAS ($) Initial costs - Facility 20,000 20,000 - Tanks construction 44,500 44,500 - Pumps 14,000 5,000 - UV lights 40,000 40,000 - Drum filter N.A 12,000 - Up-weller N.A 7,000 - Skimer N.A 4,000 - CO2 stripper N.A 9,000 - Bio-filter N.A 45,000 - Heat pump N.A 23,000 - Air blower 2,000 N.A 250,000 390,000 5,000 7,000 Fixed costs - Fingerlings - General administration, office expenses Variable costs - General equipments 9,000 9,000 - Electricity 2,000 5,000 - Liquid oxygen 15,000 25,000 - Fresh water N.A 6,000 - Labors 22,000 33,000 - Maintenance 1,500 6,000 - Feed 73,200 151,600 - Chemicals 12,000 10,000 - Water quality assessment 800 5,000 - Depreciation 2,500 9,000 1,830,000 2,832,200 Biological variables - Fingerlings stocking (fish) - Survival rate (%) 79.0 93.8 - Weight gain (kg) 41,098 80,300 - Feed consumpsion (kg) 40,718 83,255 - FCR 0.99 1.04 31 Data are gathered for this study between October 1st, 2014 and September 30th, 2016 All financial data presented in the study are recorded in United States dollars (USD) Total costs in a year were $513,000 for the FTS and $866,000 for the RAS in the same facility With a complex water treatment center, RAS required high costs to invest for machines and equipments Along with this, RAS also consumed more electricity and the amount of fresh water that used to maintain salinity of 15‰ Although the RAS was invested 1.69 times higher than the FTS, this system increased the fingerlings stocking up to 1.55 times, the fish biomass gained approximately times compared with the FTS Moreover, mostly costs were the initial investment costs, the system could be used for several years Profitability from the stable production can be dealt with this 4.3.2 Discussion The FTS was used as a popular and cost effective approach traditional aquaculture where water sources were plentiful and easy to harness supply of clean water along with limited environmental requirements However, regulations and officials are becoming more stringent on these systems in recent years Discharge water from aquaculture farms can contaminate the downstream portion of the water sources, the duty of farm managers and farmers is how to minimize the impact of the discharge water and control over the water source include both water quality and volume If disease enters the farm in large quantities, the entire volume of water used is required to treat Climate change risks often increase production costs, thus making technology unaffordable and raise the capital needs (Kamaruddin and Siwar, 2008) Thus, small scaled and low intensity farms are unable to survive due to increasing cost of production and lack of support systems to cover the production from the impacts of production risks (Hamdan and Kari, 2015) After considering the results from the experimental systems as well as comparing with all aquaculture production systems in use today, Martin et al (2010) suggested that RAS basically offers the possibility to achieve a high production, maintaining optimal environmental conditions, securing animal welfare while creating a minimum ecological impact However, due to the high initial capital investments, the application of RAS for high yield grow-out farm is still 32 difficult Based on disease resistance and increased utilization of maximum total biomass limits in land, researchers (Martins et al., 2010; Joensen, 2008 and Bergheim et al., 2009) suggested that hatchery and nursery production should be shifted towards RAS technology In the challenge of the world population boom, Godfray et al., 2010 wrote “Producing more food from the same area of land while reducing the environmental impacts requires what has been called sustainable intensification” Sustainable aquaculture production is determined by environmental factors such as that a suitable atmosphere for aquaculture activities will increase the survival, growth, and reproduction of fish (Sungan, 2002) Biophysical factors such as climatic change and extreme weather affects the sustainable growth of the aquaculture sector (Tisdell & Leung, 1999; De Silva, 2007) 33 Chapter 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 5.1 Conclusion  Mean values for pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), nitrite, nitrate, densities of vibrio and total bacteria were significantly different between the RAS and the FTS The water temperature and ammonia concentrations were greater in the RAS than the FTS, but they were not significantly different  Fingerlings stocking, densities, specific growth rate and survival rate were significantly greater in RAS (1.8 million fish, 66 kg.m-3, 6.12%, 93.8%) than in FTS (2.8 million fish, 40.2 kg.m-3, 5.22%, 79%) FCR was not significantly different between the RAS (1.04) and the FTS (0.99)  The RAS required the high costs of investment ($866,000) but produced more fish with high survival rate and more biomass ouput compared with the FTS ($513,000) 5.2 Recommendation  From the results of water quality, barramundi production parameters and comparative economics assessment, the commercial scale RAS model of AAV suggests one of the adaptation options that can be helpful in mitigating and adapting to climate change  Another approach, increasing biomass of seaweed by re-using waste water from the RAS is being considered as a solution to minimize the impact of productions on the environment 34 REFERENCES Ali, S.A., 2012 A techno-Financial Analysis of Tilapia production in recirculating aquaculture system Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 29 (4), 1583-1602 APHA 1975 Method 208D Total Nonfilterable Residue Dried at 103-105 C (Total Suspended Matter) in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th Edition American Public health Association Washington, D.C 460pp Appiah-Kubi, F., 2012 An economic analysis of the use of recirculating system in production of Tilapia Master’s thesis, Department of Animal and Aquaculture Sciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norway Asian Development Bank [ADB] 2009 The economics of climate change in Southeast Asia:A regional review.Philippines: Asian Development Bank Ayson, F.G, Sugama, K., Yashiro, R and Grace de Jesus-Ayson, E., 2013 Nursery and Grow-outCulture of Asian Seabass, Lates calcarifer, in Selected Countries in Southeast Asia In: Jerry, D R (Ed.) Biology and Culture of Asian Sea Bass (Lates calcarifer) CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 273 – 292 Baran, E., Schwartz, N., & Kura, Y., 2009 Climate change and fisheries: Vulnerability andadaptation in Cambodia (Issue brief no, 2008) Penang, Malaysia: The World Fish Center Bergheim, A., Drengstig, A., Ulgenes, Y., Fivelstad, S., 2009 Production of Atlantic salmon smolts in Europe – Current characteristics and future trends Aquaculture Eng 41, 46 – 52 Bhatnagar and Devi, 2013 Water quality guidelines for the management of pond fish culture.International journal of environmental sciences Volume 3, Issue 6, 2013 Bijo, P.A., 2007 Feasibility study of a Recirculation Aquaculture System, pp – 13 10 Blancheton, Roque d’orbcastel, Belaud, A., 2009 Water quality and rainbow trout performance in a Danish Model Farm recirculating system: Comparison with Flow through system Aquaculture Engineering Volume 40, Issue 3, p 135 – 143 11 Buric, M., Bláhovec, J., Kouril, J., 2014 A simple and effective recirculating hatchery for salmonids.Aquac Res Development 5: 271 12 Clark, M., 2003 Comparison of water quality, rainbow trout production, and 35 economics in oxygenated and aerated raceways Master’s thesis, the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, USA 13 Colt, J.E., Orwicz, K., Bouck, G., 1991 Water quality considerations and criteria for high-density fish culture with supplemental oxygen In: Colt, J., White, R.J (Eds.), Presented at the Fisheries Bioengineering Symposium 10, American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD, pp 372–385 14 Davidson, J., Good, C., Welsh, C., Summerfelt, S., 2011 The effects of ozone and water exchange rates on water quality and rainbow trout Oncorhynchusmykiss performance in replicated water recirculating systems Aquacultural Engineering, Volume 44, Issue 3, page 80 – 96 15 De Ionno, P.N., Wines, G.L., Jones, P.L and Collins, R.O., 2006 A bioeconomic evaluation of a commercial scale recirculating finfish grow-out system – An Australian perspective Aquaculure, 259 (1), 315-327 16 De Silva, S.S and Soto, D., 2009 Climate change and aquaculture: potential impacts, adaptation and mitigation In K Cochrane, C De Young, D Soto and T Bahri (eds) Climate change implications for fisheries and aquaculture: overview of current scientific knowledge.FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No 530 Rome, FAO pp 151-212 17 Duning, Rebecca, D., Losordo, Thomas, M and Hobbs, Alex, O., 1998 The economics of Recirculation Tanks Systems, A spreadsheet for individual analysis, Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, SRAC Publication No 456 18 Flaherty, M., Vandergeest, P., & Miller, P., 1999 Rice paddy or shrimp pond: tough decisions in rural Thailand World Development, 27(12), 2045-2060 19 Gammanpila, M and Singapupuli, M.S., 2012 Economic viability of Asian sea bass (Latescalcarifer) and Tilapia (Oreochromisniloticus) small scale aquaculture systems in Sri Lanka Sri Lanka Journal Aquatic Science17 (2012): 47 – 57 20 Gubbins, M., Bricknell, I., 2013 Impact of climate change on Aquaculture 21 Gullian-Klanian, M and Arámburu-Adame, C., 2013.Performance of Nile tilapia Oreochomisniloticus fingerlings in a hyper-intensive recirculating aquaculture system with low water exchange Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research, 41 (1): 150 – 162 22 Hamdan, R., Othman, A and Kari, F., 2015 Climate change effects on aquaculture 36 production performance in Malaysia: an environmental performance analysis International Journal of Business and Society, Vol 16, No 3: 364 – 385 23 Handisyde, N.T., Ross, L.G., Badjeck, M.C and Allison, E.H., 2006 The effects of climatechange on world aquaculture: A global perspective (Final technical report DFID) UK: Aquaculture and Fish Genetics Research Program, Stirling Institute of Aquaculture 24 Harrison, P., Calogeras, C and Phillips, M., 2013 Farming of Barramundi Asian Seabass: An Australian Industry Perspective.In: Jerry, D R (Ed.) Biology and Culture of Asian Sea Bass (Lates calcarifer) CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 258 – 272 25 Helfrich, L.A and Libey, G., 1990 Fish farming in recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, Virginia Tech, New York, 19 pp 26 Jacob Bregnballe, 2015 FAO and EUROFISH International Organization A Guide to Recirculation Aquaculture 27 Joensen, R., 2008 Resirkuleringavvandioppdrett Presentation at Seminar of Recirculation of water in Aquaculture, 27 – 28 February 2008, Sunndalsøra, Norway (In Danish) 28 Johansson, O., Wedborg, M., 1980 The ammonia-ammonium equilibrium in seawater at temperatures between and 25°C J Solution Chem 9, 37-44 29 Kelly, P.M and Adger, W.N., 1999 Assessing vulnerability to climate change and facilitating adaptation (Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment Working Paper GEC 99-07) Norwich: University of East Anglia 30 Lang, Š., Mares, J., Kopp, R., 2012 Does the water reuse affect the fish growth welfare? Actauniv, agric Etsilvic Mendel Brun LX, No 6, pp 369 – 374 31 Lekang, Odd-Ivar, 2013 Aquaculture Engineering – Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Drobakveien, Norway – 2nd Edition 32 Losordo, T.M., Masser, M.P and Rakosy, J., 1998 RecirculatingAquaculture Tanks Production System An Overview of Critical Considerations Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, SRAC Publication No 451 33 Losordo, T.M., 1998a Recirculating aquaculture production systems: The status and 37 future Aquaculture Magazine 24 (1): 38 – 45 34 Losordo, T M., 1998b Recirculating production systems: The status and future, part ii Aquaculture Magazine 24 (2): 45 – 53 35 Mallya, Y.J., 2007 The effects of dissolved oxygen on fish growth in aquaculture Final project, UNU-Fisheries Training Programme, P.O Box 1390, Skulagata 120 Reykjavik, Iceland 36 Martins, C.I.M, Eding, E.H., Verdegem, M.C.J, Heinsbroek, L.T.N., Schneider, O., Blancheton, J.P., Roque d’Orbcastel, E and Verreth, J.A.J., 2010 New developments in recirculating aquaculture systems in Europe: A perspective on environmental sustainability.Aquacultural Engineering, Volume 43, Issue 3, page 83 – 93 37 Masser, M.P, Rakosy, J and Losordo, T.M 1999 Recirculating Aquaculture Tanks Production System, Management of Recirculating System Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, SRAC Publication No 452 38 Meynecke, J.-O, Robins, J., Bolston, J., 2013 Climate effects on recruitment and catch effort of Lates calcarifer In: Jerry, D R (Ed.) Biology and Culture of Asian Sea Bass (Lates calcarifer) CRC Press, Boca Raton, 326 pp 39 Molleda, M.I., Marinos, D.C., 2007 Water quality in recirculating aquaculture systems for Arctic Charr (Salvelinusalpinus L.) culture 40 Oguntuga, O.A., Adesina, B.T., &Akinwole, A.O., 2009 The challenges of climate change in fisheries and aquaculture: Possible adaptation measures in Nigeria Capacity Development and Career Prospects in Conservation Science, 56 41 Pham Thi Anh Ngoc, Miranda P.M Meuwissen, Le Cong Tru, Roel H Bosma, Johan Verreth and Alfons Oude Lansink, 2016 Economic feasibility of recirculating aquaculture systems in Pangasius farming Aquaculure economics and Management, 2016 Volume 20, No 2, 185 – 200 42 Siwar, C., Alam M.M., Murad M.W and Al-Amin, A.Q., 2009 Impacts of climate change on agricultural sustainability and poverty in Malaysia Proceedings of the 10thInternational Business Research Conference, Dubai, UAE, 1-15 43 Summerfelt, S.T., Wilton, G., Roberts, D., Rimmer, T., Fonkalsrud, K., 2004 Developments in recirculating systems for Arctic char culture in North America 44 Swaminathan, M.S., 2012 Aquaculture and sustainable nutrition security in a 38 warming planet, Keynote Address In R.P Subasinghe, J.R Arthur, D.M Bartley, S.S De Silva, M Halwart, N Hishamunda, C.V Mohan & P Sorgeloos, eds Farming the Waters for People and Food.Proceedings of the Global Conference on Aquaculture 2010, Phuket, Thailand 22–25 September 2010 pp 3–19 FAO, Rome and NACA, Bangkok 45 Terjesen, B F., Ulgenes, Y., Færa, S O., Summerfelt, S T., Brunsvik, P., Baeverfjord, G., Nerland, S., Takle, H., Norvik, O C., Kittelsen, A., 2008 RAS research facility dimensioning and design: a special case compared to planning production systems In Aquaculture Engineering Society Issues Forum Proceedings Roanoke, Virginia, 23rd-24th July, 223-238 46 Timothy, J.C., Prasada Rao D.S., O’Donnell C.J., Battese G.E., 2005 An introduction of efficiency and productivity analysis (second edition) 47 Timmons, M.B., and Ebeling, J.M., Wheaton, F.W., Summerfekt, S.T., and Vinci, B.J., 2007 Recirculating Aquaculture, 2nd Edition NRAC Publication No 01-002 Cayuga Aqua Ventures, Ithaca, pp 948 48 Tisdell, C.A., and Leung, P.S., 1999 Overview of environmental and sustainability issues in aquaculture Aquaculture Economics and Management, 3(1), 1-5 49 USEPA 1979 Method No 160.2 (with slight modification) in Methods for chemical analysis of water and wastes United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development Cincinnati, Ohio Report No EPA-600/4-79-020 March 1979 1193 pp 50 Yazdi, S and Shakouri, B., 2010 The effects of climate change on aquaculture 51 http://www.fao.org/fishery/cultured species/Lates-calcarifer/en 52 www.aquamaps.org 53 www.thebetterfish.com 39 APPENDICES Mean values for environmental parameters in FTS O2 T˚ NH3 NO2 mg/L ˚C mg/L mg/L mg/L CFU/mL 8.1 6.6 31.1 0.005 0.2 12.6 211 475 Nov-14 7.9 5.8 29.6 0.009 0.3 18.4 325 871 Dec-14 8.1 6.8 26.4 0.007 0.2 24.8 246 1074 Jan-15 8.3 6.3 25.0 0.007 0.3 32.9 136 282 Feb-15 8.1 7.6 26.2 0.005 0.2 22.4 106 151 Mar-15 8.1 6.4 29.7 0.006 0.5 27.8 75 131 Apr-15 8.3 6.5 30.1 0.005 0.2 24.7 85 197 May-15 8.3 6.3 31.4 0.005 0.3 10.3 186 411 Jun-15 8.3 5.6 31.7 0.005 0.5 26.9 150 472 Jul-15 8.2 5.5 30.7 0.006 0.5 31.6 152 444 Aug-15 8.2 5.8 31.7 0.007 0.6 34.4 117 294 Sep-15 8.3 6.2 32.1 0.005 0.6 33.0 129 379 MEAN 8.1 6.3 29.6 0.006 0.4 25.0 159.7 431.7 FTS pH Oct-14 NO3 Vibrio Total bacteria CFU/mL Barramundi production in FTS and in RAS Treatment SGR Replicate Wi (kg) Wf (kg) 1 629.30 7098.65 4.95 6997.2 1.08 76.34 646.95 8713.69 6.19 7112.9 0.88 88.96 604.51 6901.47 4.97 6931.0 1.10 69.33 637.70 7044.32 4.90 5959.7 0.93 78.47 617.64 7307.29 5.04 6248.6 0.93 79.37 591.54 7760.31 5.25 7469.3 1.04 81.82 860.72 12540.61 6.38 10984.5 0.94 94.76 2 809.17 12763.02 6.57 12996.9 1.09 95.67 815.29 11608.75 6.32 11326.1 1.05 93.93 811.49 12611.45 5.60 11522.3 0.98 91.84 863.78 11501.89 6.16 10986.1 1.03 93.79 782.62 12650.81 5.68 13410.0 1.13 92.76 (%/day) FI (kg) FCR SR (%) SPSS results for mean values Group Statistics System N Mean Std Deviation Std Error Mean FTS 12 8.183 1267 0366 RAS 12 7.208 1311 0379 FTS 12 6.283 5813 1678 RAS 12 5.775 4093 1181 FTS 12 29.642 2.4303 7016 RAS 12 31.650 1.2310 3554 FTS 12 00600 001279 000369 RAS 12 00525 001288 000372 FTS 12 367 1614 0466 RAS 12 1.325 3646 1053 FTS 12 24.983 7.9205 2.2864 RAS 12 49.592 8.6812 2.5060 FTS 12 159.83 72.120 20.819 RAS 12 00 000 000 FTS 12 431.75 282.530 81.560 RAS 12 00 000 000 pH value Dissolved oxygen value Temperature value NH3 level NO2 level NO3 level Density of Vibrio bacteria Density of total bacteria SPSS results for T-Test ...MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NHA TRANG UNIVERSITY VO THI LUU COMPARISON OF WATER QUALITY AND PRODUCTION PERFORMANCE OF BARRAMUNDI (Lates calcarifer) FINGERLINGS IN TWO SYSTEMS: ... Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: a recirculation system and a flow-through system ABSTRACT The comparison of water quality and barramundi (Lates calcarifer) production performance. .. Faculty of Graduate Studies: KHANH HOA - 2018 UNDERTAKING I undertake that the thesis entitled: ? ?Comparison of water quality and performance of Barramundi (Lates calcarifer) fingerlings in two systems: