4.7 Article

A comparison among different Pavlova sp products for cultivation of Brachionus plicatilis

期刊

AQUACULTURE
卷 435, 期 -, 页码 424-430

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.10.029

关键词

Brachionus plicatilis; Pavlova sp.; Live feed cultivation; Microalgae

资金

  1. DBU - Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt [AZ 28183-34]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present study the potential of different products of the marine microalga Pavlova sp. for the cultivation of rotifers (Brachionus plicatilis) was tested. Two growth performance trials were conducted: In a first laboratory scale experiment rotifers were cultivated for 14 days with Pavlova viridis concentrate, P. viridis fresh culture, Pavlova sp. fresh culture, baker's yeast and Nannochloropsis sp. concentrate. The P. viridis fresh culture fed groups resulted in significantly the highest rotifer density (109.2 rotifers mL(-1)) and instantaneous growth rate (G = 0.14 +/- 0.02 d(-1)). There were no significant differences found of the G between the P. viridis concentrate group and the Pavlova sp. fresh culture group. The baker's yeast fed group showed significantly the lowest rotifer numbers and growth rate. Based on the high growth rate of the P. viridis fresh culture group in the first experiment, different P. viridis products (concentrate, fresh culture, frozen concentrate, and freeze- dried powder) were examined in the second (larger scale) experiment and compared to Nannochloropsis sp. concentrate. The highest rotifer growth rate G in experiment 2 was determined for the frozen P. viridis group (G = 0.09 +/- 0.03 d(-1)), although it was not significantly different in comparison to the G of the rotifers fed with Nannochloropsis sp. and the Pavlova concentrate and fresh culture. The frozen Pavlova product seems the most suitable Pavlova product for the cultivation of live feed and it provides advantages of storability and application. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据