A Comparative Analysis ofGrowth Performance in
Moreau, J. and D. Pauly. 1999. A comparative analysis of growth performance in aquaculture of tilapia hybrids and their parent species. Asian Fisheries Science 12 (1): 91-103.
Asiau Fisheries Scieuce 12(1999):91·103 Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines
A Comparative Analysis ofGrowth Performance in Aquaculture of Tilapia Hybrids and Their Parent Species J. MOREAU} and D. PAULy2 lTropical Fisheries Research Imil E.N.S.A. T. I.N.P. TOIdouse P.O.Box 107 Auzeville Tolosane 31 326 CASTANET TOLOSAN FRANCE 2Fisheries Ceuter University of British Columbia VANCOUVER BC Cauada.
Abstract Growth parameters of hybrid tilapias (Cichlids) involving Oreochmmis uiloticlls, O. I/lossambicus. O.Ho,.,wrum, and O. aureus as parent species were compiled from existing literature and their growth performances were compared with that of the parent species. Evidence of positive heterosis for growth in the Fl hybrids of these four species emerged. This trend was even clearer when parent species and hybrids were grown under the same culture system.
Introduction There are several reasons why Tilapia hybrids have been produced in the past, some of which are the following: 1) To obtain an all male progenies which eliminates reproduction in culture ponds (Chen and Prowse 1964, Pullin 1988). This leads to better growing individual because male Tilapines grow better than females (pullin and Mac Connell 1982, Trewavas 1983). 2) To combine the genetic properties of parent species. An example is the fast growth of O. niloticus and the cold tolerance of O. au,.eus in Israel (see Lee 1979 and contributions in Pullin 1988 and Pullin et al 1988). These advantages may be more important to the aquaculture industry than to growth performance alone and one should not expect that the hybrids reported in the literature necessarily grow better than their parent species. A few experiments only reported in the literature explicitly compare the growth of parent species with those of the hybrids such as: Avault and Shell (1968), Hickling (1959), Pruginin (1968), Chotiyarnwong (1971), Dunseth (1977), Alvarenga and Green (1986), McAndrew and Majumdar (1989). 91
92 Therefore, a compilation of growth parameters of Tilapia hybrids in aquaculture will be presented in this paper in the maimer of Moreau et al (1986) and Pauly et al (1988). An attempt will be made to compare indices of growth performance of hybrids and their parent species and to interpret the resulting patterns.
Materials and Methods All data used here are taken from published contributions '(Tables 1 and 2). Growth was modelled using the von Bertalanffy Growth Function which has for length the form: Lt = L..,(l - exp (-K(t-to»)
(1)
where Lt is the length at age t Leo is the asymptotic length i.e. the mean length the fish would reach if they were to grow indefinitely according to the model K is a growth parameter with dimension lItime and which expresses the rate at which Loo is approached and to is the abcsisse of the intersection of the curve with the time axis (the theoretical ((age» for which Lt = 0) according to the model. Table L Growth parameters and growth performance indices of 75 «stockSl' of tilapia hybrids in ,aqllaculture. Hybrid Location (% male)
W""
(live weight, g)
(em)
L""
K (year' I)
0'
Reference
O. allreus i O. Ililoticus Taiwan (54)
304.1
19.8
7.i27
O. mossambicus oX 0., hOl"llOrum Auburn
164.0 83.3 107.0 63.0
16.7 13.3 14.3 11.9
6.247 10.153 4.726 7.910
3.24 3.26 2.98 3.05
258.1
19.5
HI·930
2417.6
39.2
1.670
308;3
20.6
5.044
28.6
1.077
3.86 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 3.42 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 3.33 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 2.95. Marshall and De Angelis (1981)
USA (100) O. mossambicus oX O. horllorwlI Tennessee
USA (100)
O. -IIlOSSClIilbicus oX O. hol"llOrUm
944.0
30.0
2.592
Malaysia 000) .
567.7
25.3
2.074
18.2
5.151
20.7
3.402
17.9
4.314
3.45 Sing and Ting 1977
Suffren Suffren Suffren 'Suffren
et et et et
3.37 Chen and (1964) 3.12 Chen and (1964) . 3.23 Chen and (1964) .' 3.16 Chen and (1964) 3.14 Chen and .' (19~4)
a1. al. a1. a1.
(1978) (1978) (1978) (1978),
Prowse Pro,wse Prowse ~rowse
Prowse continued
93 Table 1. continued Hybrid Location (% male)
W'" (live weight, g)
(cm)
L""
K' (Year-I)
0'
Reference
O. mossambicus x O. Ililoticus Hong Kong (15)
220.7 433.7 462.0 1153.0
18.3 22.9 23.2 31.5
5.170 1.864 2.847 2.019
3.24 Sin and Chiu (1983) 2.99 Sin and Chiu (1983) 3.19 Sin and Chiu (1983) 3.30 Sin and Chiu (1983)
O. mossambicus x O.aureus
358.6
20.9
6.957
3.48 Sing and Ting (l977)
1868;8
36.9
1.585
3403.6
45.6
1.199
41.1
1.434
3.34 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 3.40 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 3.39 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 2.98 ChotiYllrnwong (1971)
Taiwan (90) O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Indonesia (50)
O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Thailand (70)
76.6
12.7
5.811
O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Taiwan (15)
156.0
16.3
4.803
3.11 Kuo (pers. comm,)
O. niloticlss x 0; aureus Gan Shmuel, Israel (100)
2123.0 1560.0 342.0 1235.0 383.0 272.0 224.0 1232.1 323.0 323.0 627.9
37_6 33.9 20.4 31.4 21.2 18.9 17.8 31.9 20.1 20.1 25.5
1.701 1.693 3.210 1.610 3.117 3.962 4.547 1.018 3.853 4.993 1.075
3.38 3.29 3.13 3.20 3.15 3.15 3.16 3.02 3.19 3.30 2.84
Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Aquaservice Rothbard et Rothbard et Aquase,rvice
O. Ililoticl~S x O.aureus Dor and Nir David Israel (100)
502.0 1026.0 3945.0 9780.0 2210.0
23.2 29.5 46.2 62.5 38.4
4.014 2.161 1.243 0.596 1.062
3.34 3.27 3.42· 3.36 3.19
Hul.ata Hulata Hulata Hulata Hulata
O. niloticlss x O.au-reus Arava, Israel (100)
1324.2 280.0
32.6 19.5
1.095 2.345
3.07 Pru~inin et al (1988) 2.95 Pruginin et al (1988)
O. Ililoticus x O.aureus Bet Dagan, Israel (100)
243.9
18.6
9.298
17.4
9.182
33.1
1.844
22.4
4.547
3.50 Barash (l984) 3.45 Barash (1984) 3.31 Barash (1984) 3.36 Barash (1984)
34.9 23.1 28.4
1.014 2.177 0.933
1416.8
O. niloticus x O.alsreus Taiwan (100)
1579.9 457.3 874.2
et et et et et
81 al al al al
al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) (1984) al (1988) al (1988) (1984) (1988) (1988) (1988) (1988) (1988)
and Schroeder and Schroeder and· Schroeder and Schroeder
3.08 Kuo and Tian (1984) 3.06 Kuo and Tian (1984) 2.88 Sing and Ting (1977) continued
94 Table 1. continued Hybrid Location (% male)
K (year' I)
602.0
24.6
2.850
3.24 Hulata et al (1988)
1401.1 709.8
27.3 29.4 31.1 33.4 28.5
1.724 1.835 1.447 1.081 2.020
3.11 3.20 3.15 3.08 3.15
430.0
22.6
6.735
257.8
19.1
7.181
3.54 Collis and Smitherman (1978) 3.42 Colli~1 and Smitherman (1978)
265.6
19.3
8.016
341.5
21.10
6.617
O. lliloticllS ::c O. honororulIl 308.2 Peru (100)
20.4
3.899
3.21 Alvarenga and Green (1986)
O. lliloticuos ::c O. lIlossalllbicus Thailand (60)
54.2
11.5
8.087
3.03 Chotiyarnwonf: (1971)
O. niloticus ::c O. mossambicus Taiwan (55)
184.8
17.2
5.620
3.22 Kuo. pers. comm;
Red tilipia {O. niloticus ::c O. lIlossambicusJ Thailand (100)
133.4 143.9
15.3 15.7
5.544 3.308
3.11 Jarimopas (1986) 2.91 Jarimopas (1986)
Red tilipia {O. lliloticus ::c O. mossambicusJ Thailand (60)
34.8
9.9
8.966
36.1
10.0
8.353
033.3
9.8
6.872
1250.1
32.3
1.793
2605.2
41.3
1.158
644.0
25.9
1.780
2.92 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 2.91 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 2.80 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.27 Jarirnopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.29 Jarirnopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.07 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986)
282.7
19.6
3.310
613.2
25.5
2~192
1259.9
32.4
1.293
225.4
18.3
6.686
235.0
18.5
4.798
0; niloticl~s ::c O.hornorulIl at oDor, Israel O.lliloticus ::c O.honwrulIl Brazil (100)
O. niloticus ::c O.honwI·ulIl Auburn, USA (lOO)
O. Ililoticus ::c O. hornorulIl Puerto Rico (100)
°
0'
L", (em)
W'" (live weight. g)
Red tilipia [0. lliloticu$ ::c O. mosfiambicus Taiwan (90)
Reference
Verani et al (1983) Verani et al (1983) Veraniet al (1983) Lovshin et al (1977) Lovshin et al (1977)
3.47 Fram and Pagan-Font (1978) 3.46 Fram and Pagan-Font (1978)
3.11 Liao and (1983) 3.15 Liao and (1983) 3.13 Liao and (1983) 3.35 Liao and (1983) 3.22 Liao and (1983)
Chang Chang Chang Chang Chang
95 Table 2. Growth parameters of various species of tilapia in aquaculture not previously documented in Pauly et al (1988). Species
Sex
Moo (g)
L
(em)
K (y'!)
*M *M *M *M
0'
Reference
*M
592.5
24.8
2.860
3.24
*M
605.2
24.9
2.405
3.17
Hopkins et al (1988) Hopkins et al (1988) Sing and Ting (1977) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al
*M M+F M+F M+F M+F M+F
211.9 288.6 658.8 315.3 6862.3 173.0
17.7 19.7 25.9 20.2 56.5 16.6
2.460 1.826 1.081 1.7;13 0.325 2.114
2.89 2.85 2.86 2.84 3.02 2.76
Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo
Oreochromis honlOrum
*M *M M+F M+F M+F M+F M+F
216.7 2305.8 240.0 539.7 423.2 1278.2 139.7
23.1 40.4 19.0 24.9 22.9 33.2 15.9
4.101 0.565 1.936 1.089 1.764 0.821 2.344
3.34 2.96 2.85 2.84 2.97 2.96 2.77
Hickling (1959) guo and Tian (1984) Kuo and Tian(1M5) Kuo and Tian (1986) Kuo and 1'ian (1987) Kuo and Tian (1988) Kuo and Tian (1989)
Oreochromis lIuolicus
M+F M+F M+F M+F *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M
425.5 2782.8 274.9 396.7 233.0 212.4 174.2 232.9 402.8 304.2 241.1 977.2 552.4 365.3
22.4 41.8 19.3 21.9 UI.3 17.7 16.6 18.3 21.8 19.8 18.3 29.5 24.3 21.4
1.946 0.637 2.268 2.718 4.160 3.573 3.813 3.508 3.809 4.138 3.418 2.883 4.566 3.826
2.99 3.05 2.93 3.11 3.15 3.05 3.02 3.07 3.26 3.21 3.06 3.40 3.43 8.24
*M
767.6
27.2
1.399
3.02
Kuo and Tian (1985) Kuo and Tian (1988) Kuo and Tian (1989) Kuo (pers. comm.) Boidy (1984) Boidy (1984) Boidy (1984) Mair et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Lin (1990) Lin (1990) Alvarenga and Green (1986) Kuo and Tian (19841
*M
123.9
15.5
2.655
2.81
*M
93.3
14.1
3.474
2.84
*M
231.5
18.9
4.660
3.22
*M
170.1
17.1
5.718
3.22
*M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M
92.2 94.6 74.5 61.6 109.1 64.1 203.8 144.1 119.1 82.9 114.3 100.4
13.9 14.1 13.0 12.2 16.8 12.3 18.2 16.2 15.2 18.5 15.0 14.8
14.473 15.166 15.518 25.580 21.09 16.621 18.160 7.787 15.269 17.141 13.563 20.029
3.45 3.48 3.42 3.58 3.66 3.40 3.19 3.31 3.55 3.49 3.48 3.61
2.83 3.09 3.08 3.27
*M
Oreochromis mossambicus
3.991
3.28
(1~'
asterisk (*) indicates that parameters were used for Table 3.
and and and and and and
Tian Tian Tian Tian Tian Tian
(1984) (1985) (1986) (1987) (1988) (1989)
Pntginin and Arad (1977) Pruginin and Arad (1977) Guerrero and Guerrero (1990) Guerrero and Guerrero (1990) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1975) IF.P.P. (1975) IF.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975)
96 The VBGF can also be expressed for growth in weight as: Wt = W..,( 1- exp (-K(t-to»)"b
(2)
where W.., is the weight corresponding to Loo
K and to are as in (1) and b is the exponent (generally near or equal to 3) of the length-weight relationship of the form. W = a L "b
(3)
-The growth parameters (K, L.., and/or W..) were all estimated from size-atage -data in the literature cited. All estimates refer to aquaculture -b'TOwth experiments lasting at least three months and conducted with fish 19tocked at weight usually not less than 10 g. Most estimates were obtained uSing the ETAL computer program (Gaschutz et al 1980) which allows consideration of seasonal growth oscillation when these wete manifested in the data. In cases where the growth curve iil weight did not exhibit the typical S shape of a VBGF for weight growth (resulting in irrealistic values of W.., when fitted to the data) an alternative to the VBGF was U$ed to describe growth i.e. logistic curve of the form Wt
= Woo I
(1 + Exp(-G(t-ti»)
(4)
where G is a constant of dimension 1/time ti is the age of fish for which Wti = WJ2 (Morea~ 1987). This equatil,)U was fitted to data using the Microsimplex routine of Schnute (1983). Equation (4) i~plies that growth rate dW/dt is maximum when Wti = W..,12 i.e. at ti. Maximum growth rate can thus be computed from -(dw/dt)max = W * G/4
(5)
vshin et al (1977) showed that all males O. Itildticus* O. Hornorum grew' 18% higher than male O. njloticus. A similar result was obtained by Dunseth (1977) in a different culture system. The present paper provides similar information in a culture system basis but does not allow more general statements. This might come from the limits of the suitability of the index of growth performance 0' for the present purposes. It might have been intended to be used in conditions which are beyond its potential sensitivity for growth performance analysis. We have elaborated
4.0
n-27
(100)
(00)
n*16 (100)
Q)
n-27
tica (male) x S. mossambica (female) in Hong Kong, p 506-516. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture Nazareth. Israel. Sing Hwa Hu and Ting Chi Yu. 1977. Hybridization and culture of Sal"Otherodon a1u·elts. Bull. Taiwan Fish. Res. Inst. 29 (10) : 208-220. Smitherman RS. 1984. Suffren J.S., S.M. Adams and B.G. Blaylock. 1978. Growth of monosex hybrids tilapia in the laboratory and sewage oxidation ponds, p 65-81. In AFS Symposium on culture of exotic fishes. American Fisheries Society, Atlanta, Georgia. Trewavas E. 1983: Tilapiine fishes of the genera Sarotherodon, Oreochromis and Danakilia. Pub!. Brit. Museum Nat. Hist. Londres 583 p. Verani J.R, C.S.R.M. Pinto, P. de Paiva and Y.A. Tabata. 1983. Experimental studies on intensive fish culture of the all male hybrids of Sarotherodol/. niloticus (female) x Sal"Othel"OdOlt homomm (male) stocked at various levels, p 517-528. In L. Fishelson and Z. Yaron (eds). Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture. Nazareth, Israel.
ManltsCl'ipt recieped 15 December 1997; Accepted 06 June 1998.
Asiau Fisheries Scieuce 12(1999):91·103 Asian Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines
A Comparative Analysis ofGrowth Performance in Aquaculture of Tilapia Hybrids and Their Parent Species J. MOREAU} and D. PAULy2 lTropical Fisheries Research Imil E.N.S.A. T. I.N.P. TOIdouse P.O.Box 107 Auzeville Tolosane 31 326 CASTANET TOLOSAN FRANCE 2Fisheries Ceuter University of British Columbia VANCOUVER BC Cauada.
Abstract Growth parameters of hybrid tilapias (Cichlids) involving Oreochmmis uiloticlls, O. I/lossambicus. O.Ho,.,wrum, and O. aureus as parent species were compiled from existing literature and their growth performances were compared with that of the parent species. Evidence of positive heterosis for growth in the Fl hybrids of these four species emerged. This trend was even clearer when parent species and hybrids were grown under the same culture system.
Introduction There are several reasons why Tilapia hybrids have been produced in the past, some of which are the following: 1) To obtain an all male progenies which eliminates reproduction in culture ponds (Chen and Prowse 1964, Pullin 1988). This leads to better growing individual because male Tilapines grow better than females (pullin and Mac Connell 1982, Trewavas 1983). 2) To combine the genetic properties of parent species. An example is the fast growth of O. niloticus and the cold tolerance of O. au,.eus in Israel (see Lee 1979 and contributions in Pullin 1988 and Pullin et al 1988). These advantages may be more important to the aquaculture industry than to growth performance alone and one should not expect that the hybrids reported in the literature necessarily grow better than their parent species. A few experiments only reported in the literature explicitly compare the growth of parent species with those of the hybrids such as: Avault and Shell (1968), Hickling (1959), Pruginin (1968), Chotiyarnwong (1971), Dunseth (1977), Alvarenga and Green (1986), McAndrew and Majumdar (1989). 91
92 Therefore, a compilation of growth parameters of Tilapia hybrids in aquaculture will be presented in this paper in the maimer of Moreau et al (1986) and Pauly et al (1988). An attempt will be made to compare indices of growth performance of hybrids and their parent species and to interpret the resulting patterns.
Materials and Methods All data used here are taken from published contributions '(Tables 1 and 2). Growth was modelled using the von Bertalanffy Growth Function which has for length the form: Lt = L..,(l - exp (-K(t-to»)
(1)
where Lt is the length at age t Leo is the asymptotic length i.e. the mean length the fish would reach if they were to grow indefinitely according to the model K is a growth parameter with dimension lItime and which expresses the rate at which Loo is approached and to is the abcsisse of the intersection of the curve with the time axis (the theoretical ((age» for which Lt = 0) according to the model. Table L Growth parameters and growth performance indices of 75 «stockSl' of tilapia hybrids in ,aqllaculture. Hybrid Location (% male)
W""
(live weight, g)
(em)
L""
K (year' I)
0'
Reference
O. allreus i O. Ililoticus Taiwan (54)
304.1
19.8
7.i27
O. mossambicus oX 0., hOl"llOrum Auburn
164.0 83.3 107.0 63.0
16.7 13.3 14.3 11.9
6.247 10.153 4.726 7.910
3.24 3.26 2.98 3.05
258.1
19.5
HI·930
2417.6
39.2
1.670
308;3
20.6
5.044
28.6
1.077
3.86 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 3.42 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 3.33 Marshall and De Angelis (1981) 2.95. Marshall and De Angelis (1981)
USA (100) O. mossambicus oX O. horllorwlI Tennessee
USA (100)
O. -IIlOSSClIilbicus oX O. hol"llOrUm
944.0
30.0
2.592
Malaysia 000) .
567.7
25.3
2.074
18.2
5.151
20.7
3.402
17.9
4.314
3.45 Sing and Ting 1977
Suffren Suffren Suffren 'Suffren
et et et et
3.37 Chen and (1964) 3.12 Chen and (1964) . 3.23 Chen and (1964) .' 3.16 Chen and (1964) 3.14 Chen and .' (19~4)
a1. al. a1. a1.
(1978) (1978) (1978) (1978),
Prowse Pro,wse Prowse ~rowse
Prowse continued
93 Table 1. continued Hybrid Location (% male)
W'" (live weight, g)
(cm)
L""
K' (Year-I)
0'
Reference
O. mossambicus x O. Ililoticus Hong Kong (15)
220.7 433.7 462.0 1153.0
18.3 22.9 23.2 31.5
5.170 1.864 2.847 2.019
3.24 Sin and Chiu (1983) 2.99 Sin and Chiu (1983) 3.19 Sin and Chiu (1983) 3.30 Sin and Chiu (1983)
O. mossambicus x O.aureus
358.6
20.9
6.957
3.48 Sing and Ting (l977)
1868;8
36.9
1.585
3403.6
45.6
1.199
41.1
1.434
3.34 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 3.40 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 3.39 Costa-Pierce et al (1989) 2.98 ChotiYllrnwong (1971)
Taiwan (90) O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Indonesia (50)
O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Thailand (70)
76.6
12.7
5.811
O. mossambicus x O. niloticus Taiwan (15)
156.0
16.3
4.803
3.11 Kuo (pers. comm,)
O. niloticlss x 0; aureus Gan Shmuel, Israel (100)
2123.0 1560.0 342.0 1235.0 383.0 272.0 224.0 1232.1 323.0 323.0 627.9
37_6 33.9 20.4 31.4 21.2 18.9 17.8 31.9 20.1 20.1 25.5
1.701 1.693 3.210 1.610 3.117 3.962 4.547 1.018 3.853 4.993 1.075
3.38 3.29 3.13 3.20 3.15 3.15 3.16 3.02 3.19 3.30 2.84
Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Rothbard et Aquaservice Rothbard et Rothbard et Aquase,rvice
O. Ililoticl~S x O.aureus Dor and Nir David Israel (100)
502.0 1026.0 3945.0 9780.0 2210.0
23.2 29.5 46.2 62.5 38.4
4.014 2.161 1.243 0.596 1.062
3.34 3.27 3.42· 3.36 3.19
Hul.ata Hulata Hulata Hulata Hulata
O. niloticlss x O.au-reus Arava, Israel (100)
1324.2 280.0
32.6 19.5
1.095 2.345
3.07 Pru~inin et al (1988) 2.95 Pruginin et al (1988)
O. Ililoticus x O.aureus Bet Dagan, Israel (100)
243.9
18.6
9.298
17.4
9.182
33.1
1.844
22.4
4.547
3.50 Barash (l984) 3.45 Barash (1984) 3.31 Barash (1984) 3.36 Barash (1984)
34.9 23.1 28.4
1.014 2.177 0.933
1416.8
O. niloticus x O.alsreus Taiwan (100)
1579.9 457.3 874.2
et et et et et
81 al al al al
al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) al (1988) (1984) al (1988) al (1988) (1984) (1988) (1988) (1988) (1988) (1988)
and Schroeder and Schroeder and· Schroeder and Schroeder
3.08 Kuo and Tian (1984) 3.06 Kuo and Tian (1984) 2.88 Sing and Ting (1977) continued
94 Table 1. continued Hybrid Location (% male)
K (year' I)
602.0
24.6
2.850
3.24 Hulata et al (1988)
1401.1 709.8
27.3 29.4 31.1 33.4 28.5
1.724 1.835 1.447 1.081 2.020
3.11 3.20 3.15 3.08 3.15
430.0
22.6
6.735
257.8
19.1
7.181
3.54 Collis and Smitherman (1978) 3.42 Colli~1 and Smitherman (1978)
265.6
19.3
8.016
341.5
21.10
6.617
O. lliloticllS ::c O. honororulIl 308.2 Peru (100)
20.4
3.899
3.21 Alvarenga and Green (1986)
O. lliloticuos ::c O. lIlossalllbicus Thailand (60)
54.2
11.5
8.087
3.03 Chotiyarnwonf: (1971)
O. niloticus ::c O. mossambicus Taiwan (55)
184.8
17.2
5.620
3.22 Kuo. pers. comm;
Red tilipia {O. niloticus ::c O. lIlossambicusJ Thailand (100)
133.4 143.9
15.3 15.7
5.544 3.308
3.11 Jarimopas (1986) 2.91 Jarimopas (1986)
Red tilipia {O. lliloticus ::c O. mossambicusJ Thailand (60)
34.8
9.9
8.966
36.1
10.0
8.353
033.3
9.8
6.872
1250.1
32.3
1.793
2605.2
41.3
1.158
644.0
25.9
1.780
2.92 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 2.91 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 2.80 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.27 Jarirnopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.29 Jarirnopas and Kumnane (1986) 3.07 Jarimopas and Kumnane (1986)
282.7
19.6
3.310
613.2
25.5
2~192
1259.9
32.4
1.293
225.4
18.3
6.686
235.0
18.5
4.798
0; niloticl~s ::c O.hornorulIl at oDor, Israel O.lliloticus ::c O.honwrulIl Brazil (100)
O. niloticus ::c O.honwI·ulIl Auburn, USA (lOO)
O. Ililoticus ::c O. hornorulIl Puerto Rico (100)
°
0'
L", (em)
W'" (live weight. g)
Red tilipia [0. lliloticu$ ::c O. mosfiambicus Taiwan (90)
Reference
Verani et al (1983) Verani et al (1983) Veraniet al (1983) Lovshin et al (1977) Lovshin et al (1977)
3.47 Fram and Pagan-Font (1978) 3.46 Fram and Pagan-Font (1978)
3.11 Liao and (1983) 3.15 Liao and (1983) 3.13 Liao and (1983) 3.35 Liao and (1983) 3.22 Liao and (1983)
Chang Chang Chang Chang Chang
95 Table 2. Growth parameters of various species of tilapia in aquaculture not previously documented in Pauly et al (1988). Species
Sex
Moo (g)
L
(em)
K (y'!)
*M *M *M *M
0'
Reference
*M
592.5
24.8
2.860
3.24
*M
605.2
24.9
2.405
3.17
Hopkins et al (1988) Hopkins et al (1988) Sing and Ting (1977) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al (1988) Hargreaves et al
*M M+F M+F M+F M+F M+F
211.9 288.6 658.8 315.3 6862.3 173.0
17.7 19.7 25.9 20.2 56.5 16.6
2.460 1.826 1.081 1.7;13 0.325 2.114
2.89 2.85 2.86 2.84 3.02 2.76
Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo Kuo
Oreochromis honlOrum
*M *M M+F M+F M+F M+F M+F
216.7 2305.8 240.0 539.7 423.2 1278.2 139.7
23.1 40.4 19.0 24.9 22.9 33.2 15.9
4.101 0.565 1.936 1.089 1.764 0.821 2.344
3.34 2.96 2.85 2.84 2.97 2.96 2.77
Hickling (1959) guo and Tian (1984) Kuo and Tian(1M5) Kuo and Tian (1986) Kuo and 1'ian (1987) Kuo and Tian (1988) Kuo and Tian (1989)
Oreochromis lIuolicus
M+F M+F M+F M+F *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M
425.5 2782.8 274.9 396.7 233.0 212.4 174.2 232.9 402.8 304.2 241.1 977.2 552.4 365.3
22.4 41.8 19.3 21.9 UI.3 17.7 16.6 18.3 21.8 19.8 18.3 29.5 24.3 21.4
1.946 0.637 2.268 2.718 4.160 3.573 3.813 3.508 3.809 4.138 3.418 2.883 4.566 3.826
2.99 3.05 2.93 3.11 3.15 3.05 3.02 3.07 3.26 3.21 3.06 3.40 3.43 8.24
*M
767.6
27.2
1.399
3.02
Kuo and Tian (1985) Kuo and Tian (1988) Kuo and Tian (1989) Kuo (pers. comm.) Boidy (1984) Boidy (1984) Boidy (1984) Mair et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Edwards et al (1990) Lin (1990) Lin (1990) Alvarenga and Green (1986) Kuo and Tian (19841
*M
123.9
15.5
2.655
2.81
*M
93.3
14.1
3.474
2.84
*M
231.5
18.9
4.660
3.22
*M
170.1
17.1
5.718
3.22
*M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M *M
92.2 94.6 74.5 61.6 109.1 64.1 203.8 144.1 119.1 82.9 114.3 100.4
13.9 14.1 13.0 12.2 16.8 12.3 18.2 16.2 15.2 18.5 15.0 14.8
14.473 15.166 15.518 25.580 21.09 16.621 18.160 7.787 15.269 17.141 13.563 20.029
3.45 3.48 3.42 3.58 3.66 3.40 3.19 3.31 3.55 3.49 3.48 3.61
2.83 3.09 3.08 3.27
*M
Oreochromis mossambicus
3.991
3.28
(1~'
asterisk (*) indicates that parameters were used for Table 3.
and and and and and and
Tian Tian Tian Tian Tian Tian
(1984) (1985) (1986) (1987) (1988) (1989)
Pntginin and Arad (1977) Pruginin and Arad (1977) Guerrero and Guerrero (1990) Guerrero and Guerrero (1990) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1976) I.F.P.P. (1975) IF.P.P. (1975) IF.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975) I.F.P.P. (1975)
96 The VBGF can also be expressed for growth in weight as: Wt = W..,( 1- exp (-K(t-to»)"b
(2)
where W.., is the weight corresponding to Loo
K and to are as in (1) and b is the exponent (generally near or equal to 3) of the length-weight relationship of the form. W = a L "b
(3)
-The growth parameters (K, L.., and/or W..) were all estimated from size-atage -data in the literature cited. All estimates refer to aquaculture -b'TOwth experiments lasting at least three months and conducted with fish 19tocked at weight usually not less than 10 g. Most estimates were obtained uSing the ETAL computer program (Gaschutz et al 1980) which allows consideration of seasonal growth oscillation when these wete manifested in the data. In cases where the growth curve iil weight did not exhibit the typical S shape of a VBGF for weight growth (resulting in irrealistic values of W.., when fitted to the data) an alternative to the VBGF was U$ed to describe growth i.e. logistic curve of the form Wt
= Woo I
(1 + Exp(-G(t-ti»)
(4)
where G is a constant of dimension 1/time ti is the age of fish for which Wti = WJ2 (Morea~ 1987). This equatil,)U was fitted to data using the Microsimplex routine of Schnute (1983). Equation (4) i~plies that growth rate dW/dt is maximum when Wti = W..,12 i.e. at ti. Maximum growth rate can thus be computed from -(dw/dt)max = W * G/4
(5)
vshin et al (1977) showed that all males O. Itildticus* O. Hornorum grew' 18% higher than male O. njloticus. A similar result was obtained by Dunseth (1977) in a different culture system. The present paper provides similar information in a culture system basis but does not allow more general statements. This might come from the limits of the suitability of the index of growth performance 0' for the present purposes. It might have been intended to be used in conditions which are beyond its potential sensitivity for growth performance analysis. We have elaborated
4.0
n-27
(100)
(00)
n*16 (100)
Q)
n-27
tica (male) x S. mossambica (female) in Hong Kong, p 506-516. In Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture Nazareth. Israel. Sing Hwa Hu and Ting Chi Yu. 1977. Hybridization and culture of Sal"Otherodon a1u·elts. Bull. Taiwan Fish. Res. Inst. 29 (10) : 208-220. Smitherman RS. 1984. Suffren J.S., S.M. Adams and B.G. Blaylock. 1978. Growth of monosex hybrids tilapia in the laboratory and sewage oxidation ponds, p 65-81. In AFS Symposium on culture of exotic fishes. American Fisheries Society, Atlanta, Georgia. Trewavas E. 1983: Tilapiine fishes of the genera Sarotherodon, Oreochromis and Danakilia. Pub!. Brit. Museum Nat. Hist. Londres 583 p. Verani J.R, C.S.R.M. Pinto, P. de Paiva and Y.A. Tabata. 1983. Experimental studies on intensive fish culture of the all male hybrids of Sarotherodol/. niloticus (female) x Sal"Othel"OdOlt homomm (male) stocked at various levels, p 517-528. In L. Fishelson and Z. Yaron (eds). Proceedings of the First International Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture. Nazareth, Israel.
ManltsCl'ipt recieped 15 December 1997; Accepted 06 June 1998.
