Growth of Amazon ornamental fish Nannostomus beckfordi larvae (Steindachner, 1876) submitted to different stocking densities and feeding management in captivity conditions

Abstract

The study evaluated productive performance of larvae Nannostomus beckfordi submitted to feeding management (Experiment one) and different stock density (Experiment two) in captivity conditions. The first experiment evaluated feeding rate (100 and 200 nauplii of artemia larvae −1 day −1 ) and feeding frequency (2 and 4× per day). Second experiment evaluated different stock density (1, 5, 10, 20, 40 larvae per litre). At the end of 15 days, for both experiment, the survival and productive performance such as total length (TL), final weight (FW), specific development rate (SDR), specific growth rate (SGR), uniformity for weight (UW) uniformity for length (UL) and relative condition factor (Kr) was determined. For the main results, there is no significant difference to the rate and feeding frequency. The stock density has no significant difference for UW, Kr and survival. Nonetheless, a reduction in the TL, FW, SDR, SGR and FW with the increase in density (20 for 40 larvae per litre) was observed. Thus, for this species Nannostomus beckfordi during to initial stage using exogenous feeding, it is recommended 20 larvae per litre fed with 100 nauplii per larvae having two meals per day.

Feed management and stocking density for larviculture of the Amazon ornamental fish L333 king tiger pleco Hypancistrus sp. (Siluriformes: Loricariidae)

“…nauplii obtain satisfactory results when given from the first feeding, promoting larval growth and development (Jomori et al., 2008; Leitão et al, 2011; Luz et al., 2011; Takata et al, 2014). This has been observed for the Amazon ornamental fish species Nannostomus beckfordi (Abe et al., 2019), Pyrrhulina brevis (Abe et al., 2016), Heros severus (Abe et al., 2018), Astronotus ocellatus (Jomori et al., 2013) and others, such as pacu Piaractus mesopotamicus (Jomori et al., 2012; Leitão et al., 2011; Portella et al., 2014), Rhinelepis aspera (Santos et al., 2012), Lophiosilurus alexandri (Santos et al., 2016), tambaqui Colossoma macropomum , matrinxã Brycon amazonicus (Barros et al, 2019) and piau Leporinus macrocephalus (Jomori et al., 2013). However, it is necessary to evaluate the capacity of fish larvae to adapt to this kind of live food, as it is not a natural food source of freshwater fish (Jomori et al., 2012).…”

“…Larviculture is one of the critical phases of production in captivity and considered the bottleneck in fish production because it encompasses several changes during larval development (Dabrowski & Portella, 2005; Portella & Dabrowski, 2008; Portella et al., 2012), such as alterations in feeding management, water parameters and other stress‐related factors (Abe et al., 2019; Couto et al, 2018; Fabregat et al., 2017; Hui et al., 2019; Luz et al, 2013; Santos & Luz, 2009; Souza et al, 2015).…”

“…The live food amount (prey concentrations) and the stocking density are among the most important factors in larviculture (Abe et al., 2018, 2019; Luz et al., 2011). Plankton is the main live food for larvae in the natural environment (Godinho et al, 2010) and in the semi‐intensive larviculture system (Jomori et al., 2003).…”

“…However, it is necessary to evaluate the capacity of fish larvae to adapt to this kind of live food, as it is not a natural food source of freshwater fish (Jomori et al., 2012). Moreover, the amount of live food offered should be evaluated, since it is an important parameter of larval growth and development (Abe et al., 2019; Luz et al., 2011; Santos et al, 2012, 2015).…”

Terminalia catappa improves growth performance and survival of the Amazon leaf fish ( Monocirrhus polyacanthus ) larvae submitted to handling stress

“…Total ammonia also showed increased values for the higher concentrations of T. catappa . However, it occurred because of the density and provided amount of artemia nauplii at the treatments with greater survival, making it release more nitrogen compounds (Abe et al, 2019). Even altered, the water quality parameters remained adequate for that species (Ramos et al., 2016).…”