Article Sidebar

Submitted
December 19, 2023
Accepted
March 7, 2024
Published
August 5, 2024
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 16 Download : 8

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The current study was to examine the significance of primary productivity and phytoplankton density in semi-intensive and intensive shrimp (L. Vannamei) ponds located at Haleyangadi, Mangaluru (Taluk), Dakshina Kannada (District), Karnataka. Primary production metrics were examined biweekly throughout a span of 90 days, starting from the time of stocking to harvest (November 2021 to February 2022). A total of 8 species from 3 classes were found in semi-intensive ponds, whereas 12 species from 4 classes were identified in intensive shrimp ponds during the course of the study. The gross primary production in intensive shrimp ponds varied from 239.583 to 302.083 mg C/m3/hr. The gross primary production in semi-intensive ponds varied from 192.708 to 348.950 mg C/m3/hr. During the research period, it was noted that net productivity was quite low, suggesting that a significant proportion of the organic matter produced by photosynthesis was utilized for respiration.


 

Keywords

Shrimp farming Diversity Intensive Primary productivity Litopeneaus vannamei Phytoplankton

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Environment Conservation Journal

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
H.S, P. J., & A.T, R. N. (2024). Study on primary productivity and phytoplankton diversity in different intensive and semi intensive shrimp’s ponds of Dakshina Kannada District, Karnataka . Environment Conservation Journal, 25(3), 734–740. https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.26472777
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Bhutiani, R. Khanna, D.R., Tyagi, Bharti, Tyagi, Prashant Kumar & Kulkarni, Dipali Bhasker (2015): Assessing environmental contamination of River Ganga using correlation and multivariate analysis. Pollution Vol 1(3):265-273.
  2. Cao, H.S., Kong, F.X. & Luo L.C. (2011). Effects of wind and wind-induced waves on vertical phytoplankton distribution and surface blooms of microcystis aeruginosa in lake Taihu. J. Freshw. Ecol., 21(2): 231-238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02705060.2006.9664991
  3. Gaardar T. & Gran N.H. (1927). Investigations of the production of plankton in the Oslo Flord. Rapp. Reun. Commn int. Explore Scient. Mer. Mediterr., 42: 1-46.
  4. Khanna, D.R. ,Bhutiani, R. & Kumar S. Chandra (2009): Effect of the euphotic depth and mixing depth on phytoplanktonic growth mechanism. International Journal of Environmental Research, 3(2):223-228.
  5. Khanna, D.R., Bhutiani, R. & Kumar S. Chandra (2005):Modeling the effect of light on phytoplanktonic growth dynamics : A Review. Environment Conservation Journal. 6(3): 103-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2005.0612315
  6. Khanna, D.R., Bhutiani, R., Matta, Gagan, Singh, Vikas & Bhadauriya, Gaurav (2012): Study of planktonic diversity of river Ganga from Devprayag to Roorkee, Uttarakhand (India). Environment Conservation Journal. Vol 13(1&2):211-217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2012.131240
  7. Kumar,Ashok, Khanna, D.R. & Bhutiani, (2015): Seasonal variations in physico-chemical parameters of River Beas, Himachal Pradesh with special reference to planktonic population. Environment Conservation Journal. 16(3):127-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.2015.16319
  8. Lohani, V., Shah, T.K., Bonika, P., Ram, R.N., Misra, V.K., Singh, C.P.J. & Krishi, V. (2020). Estimation of primary productivity of aquaculture ponds. Krishi vighyan, 85-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5958/2349-4433.2020.00085.9
  9. Makmur, Rachmansyah, & Fahrur, M. (2011). The relationship between water quality and plankton in ponds. Tanjung Jabung Barat regency, Jambi province. Prosiding Forum Inovasi Technology Akuakultur. Bali, 19-21.
  10. Nindarwi, D.D., Masithah, E.D., Zulian, D. & Suyoso, A.L.A. (2019). The dynamic relationship of phytoplankton abundance and diversity in relation to white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) feed consumption in intensive ponds. Earth Env. Sci., 236: 1-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/236/1/012072
  11. Palupi, M., Ren, F., Rudi, W., Purwo, R. & Risa, N. (2022). Diversity of phytoplankton in the whiteleg (Litopenaeus vannamei) shrimp ponds in the south coastal area of Pangandaran, Indonesia. Biodiversita, 23(1): 118-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d230115
  12. Patralekh, M. & Patar, P. (2016). Estimation of Primary Productivity of Shivaganga Pond of Baidyanathdham- Deoghar, Jharkhand. Biobrio., 3(2): 166-170.
  13. Prabhakar, V.M., Vaidya, S.P., Garud, V.S. & Swain, K.K. (2009). Trend in primary production in Khdakwasla reservoir. 13th World lake Conference, Wuhan, China. 1(2):45-49.
  14. Pronob D., Sagar C., Mandal S.K., Bhagabati., Akhtar M.S. & Singh S.K. (2012). Important live food organisms and their role in aquaculture. Frontiers in Aquaculture, 69-86.
  15. Ruhela, M., Bhardwaj, S., Gaurishankar, S. P., Ahamad, F., & Bhutiani, R. (2024). Water quality assessment of Lakhota Lake, Jamnagar, Gujarat, India, with special reference to the water quality index (WQI). Environment Conservation Journal, 25(2), 604–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.27782024
  16. Steemann-Nielson, E. (1963). Productivity, definition and measurement. In: The Sea, Vol 2. M. H. Hill (ed.). Interscience, New York, pp. 129-164.
  17. Utojo U (2015). Plankton diversity and water conditions for intensive and traditional ponds in Probolingo, East Java. Biosfera Scientific J., 32(2): 299-306.
  18. Verma B.S. & Srivastava S.K (2016). Study of factors affecting phytoplankton primary productivity in a pond of Patna, Bihar, India. Nat. Env. Pollu. Tech., 15(1):291-296.
  19. Yang, W., Zhu, J., Zheng, C., Lukwambe, B., Nicholaus, R., LU, K. & Zheng, Z. (2020). Succession of phytoplankton community during intensive shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) cultivation and its effects on cultivation systems. Aquaculture, 5(20): 747-751. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.734733