Manufacture of artificial diet to feeding of western white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) in larval stages and in comparison with import diet

Abstract

For the accomplish of project, nine treatments with three replicate in each treatment, used as follows. Control treatment: Feeding with natural foods (Chaetoceros sp and artemia nauplii) Treatment 1: Feeding with combination of inner artificial diet and natural foods. Treatment 2: Feeding with combination of imported artificial diet and natural foods. Treatment 3: feeding from zoea 1 to mysis 1 with chaetoceros sp and from mysis 1 to pl15 with inner artificial diet. Treatment 4: feeding from zoea 1 to mysis 1 with chaetoceros sp and from mysis 1 to pl15 with imported artificial diet. Treatment 5: feeding from zoea 1 to pl15 with project artificial diet. Treatment 6: feeding from zoea 1 to pl15 with imported artificial diet. Treatment 7: Feeding in zoeal stages with chaetoceros sp and from mysis 1 to pl15 with chaetoceros sp+artemia nauplii+ imported artificial diet. Treatment 8: Feeding in zoeal stages with chaetoceros sp and from mysis 1 to pl15 with chaetoceros sp+artemia nauplii+ project artificial diet. Larvae stocked at a density of 100 nauplii/ L-1 (1000 nauplii in each tank each tank), at the beginning of culture period The results showed that, in treatments 1 , 2, 7 and 8 from zoea 1 to pl15, growth indexes were suitable and noticible, and in most treatment better than control treatment. Survival percent, in pl15 in treatment 1, 2, 7 and 8 was more than control treatment, and differention between treatment 1, 2 and 8 in comparision with control treatment was statictically significant (p<0.05). Survival percent in treatments 5 and 6 from stages zoea 1 to late zoea 3 stage, in comparision with other treatments were lesser, but without statictically significant (p>0.05). But thereafter, significantly decresed. In treatments 3 and 4 from zoea 1 to late mysis 3 stage, survival percent in comparision with other treatments were suitable, and thereafter, significantly decreased, and with statictically significant with other treatments (p<0.05). The means of final weight in treatments 1, 3 and 8 was more than control treatment, but without statictically significant (p>0.05), but in treatment 8, was more than other treatments. The mean of final length between treatments 1, 2, 6, 7, 8 and in comparision with control treatment, were not statistically significant (p>0.05). But in treatment 2, more than control treatment, and in other treatments less than control treatment.