インデックス付き
  • 環境研究へのオンライン アクセス (OARE)
  • Jゲートを開く
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • ジャーナル目次
  • シマゴ
  • ウルリッヒの定期刊行物ディレクトリ
  • Global Online Research in Agriculture (AGORA) へのアクセス
  • 電子ジャーナルライブラリ
  • 国際農業生物科学センター (CABI)
  • レフシーク
  • 研究ジャーナル索引作成ディレクトリ (DRJI)
  • ハムダード大学
  • エブスコ アリゾナ州
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • 学者の舵取り
  • SWBオンラインカタログ
  • 仮想生物学図書館 (vifabio)
  • パブロン
  • ミアル
  • 大学補助金委員会
  • ユーロパブ
  • Google スカラー
このページをシェアする
ジャーナルチラシ
Flyer image

概要

Development of Probiotics Based Culture System of Macrobrachium rosenbergii Using Different Stocking Densities

Istiaq Ahmad Chowdhury, Jewel Das and Nani Gopal Das

Owing to the problem of antibiotic resistance and subsequent reluctance of using antibiotics, probiotics use in aquaculture is becoming popular day by day. One experimental design with 150 days culture period of Macrobrachium rosenbergii was conducted with 3 treatments maintaining stocking density of 02/m2, 03/m2 and 04/m2 in T1, T2 and T3 respectively. Each of the treatments was with 3 replicates where each replicate was segmented into two parts to separate probiotics and non-probiotics based culture system. The higher body weight of 63.7 g was recorded in lower SD of T1 in comparison to lower body weight of 55.7 g and 43.0 g in higher SD of T2 and T3 respectively for probiotics application segments. The average body weight of 55.7 g, 46.7 g and 37 g respectively were found for the same treatments in non-probiotics segments. The average survival rate of 69.3%, 62.7% and 58.3% were recorded in probiotics and 68.3%, 63% and 57.7% respectively in non-probiotics treatments. Average daily growth rate and gross production were found better in probiotics than that of non-probiotics segments in all the treatments. Average daily growth rate of T1 was found 0.41 g and 0.36 g respectively for probiotics and non-probiotics segments. Similarly, for T2 and T3 average daily growth rate were found 0.35 g and 0.27 g for probiotics and 0.30 g, 0.23 g for non-probiotics segments respectively. Gross average production showed better result of 103 g/m2/crop in T2 probiotics treated segment than that of other two results of 87.23 g/m2 and 98.10 g/m2 in T1 and T3 treatments respectively where as 74.62 g, 87.23 g and 84.26 g/m2/crop was recorded in T1, T2 and T3 respectively in nonprobiotics treatments. Abiotic parameters in all segments of 3 treatments were within the optimum ranges for M. rosenbergii culture during the study period.