z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Density‐Dependent Pond Growout of Single Year‐Class Cohorts of a Freshwater Crayfish Cherux tenuimanus (Smith) to Two Years of Age
Author(s) -
Morrissy Noel M.
Publication year - 1992
Publication title -
journal of the world aquaculture society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.655
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1749-7345
pISSN - 0893-8849
DOI - 10.1111/j.1749-7345.1992.tb00764.x
Subject(s) - crayfish , log normal distribution , biology , zoology , cage , dominance (genetics) , statistics , biomass (ecology) , growth rate , ecology , mathematics , biochemistry , geometry , combinatorics , gene
Pond growout of Cherax tenuimanus to two years of age provided data for mean crayfish weight, surviving density and distribution of individual sizes at intervals and final harvest for 12 single year‐class cohorts. Final mean size (47–156 g) was most significantly related to surviving density (4.5–0.7/m 2 ). A hyperbolic model with a harvest date variable accounted for 89% of the variation in mean weight. The biological basis of this model is that the reciprocal of density, i.e., pond area per crayfish, represents food supply for a bottom‐dwelling crayfish. By incorporating the Richards growth function, the hyperbolic model can be more realistically fitted to include the limit to potential size at very low densities. The growth‐density relationship developed after an initial period of 300 days of low growth (to ∼ 10% of final size) and high mortality. Then, mean weight increased rapidly and density stabilized. Final cumulative production (1.401–3,922 kg/ha) and harvest biomass (1,110–2,991 kg/ha) both increased linearly with density. Survival of the total amount of crayfish produced was about 75% at harvest. Although cohort size distributions were positively skewed, the arithmetic mean size employed in the model was very closely and linearly related to the geometric mean of the lognormal distribution, The causal basis and assumptions of the growthdensity model are discussed in relation to resource sharing by individuals and the disproportionate influence of size‐related dominance behaviour.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here