4.7 Article

Suspended versus bottom oyster culture in eastern Canada: Comparing stocking densities and clearance rates

期刊

AQUACULTURE
卷 410, 期 -, 页码 57-65

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2013.06.017

关键词

Aquaculture; Oyster; Clearance; Density

资金

  1. DFO's Program for Aquaculture Regulatory Research (PARR project) [2012-G-05]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objectives of this study were to compare the stocking density of suspended versus bottom oyster (Crassostrea virginica) culture in Atlantic Canada and to estimate the capacity of these oysters to clear particles from the water column. Surveys of multiple leases indicated that stocking densities for floating bag and floating cage culture techniques were on average 0.3 +/- 0.1 and 0.5 +/- 0.1 kg oysters m(-2), respectively. Bottom culture density was estimated at 1.0 +/- 0.1 kg oysters m-2, whereas natural reef density was assessed at 2.2 +/- 1.1 kg oysters m(-2). In terms of grazing potential, suspended oysters had significantly lower gill areas per unit dry tissue weight than bottom oysters. This result was consistent with power functions relating clearance rate (CR, l h(-1)) to dry tissue weight (DTW, g). CR increases relative to DTW were significantly lower in the suspended oyster category than in the bottom oyster category, as indicated by the exponent in the relationships CR = 6.35 +/- 0.59 x DTW0.78 (+/-) (0.08) (bottom) and CR = 4.34 +/- 0.32 x DTW0.41 (+/-) (0.08) (suspended). Based on this information it was calculated that CR per unit area (CRArea) in the most heavily exploited leases was 66.5 +/- 8.5 (floating bags), 86.5 +/- 8.6 (floating cages), and 197.3 +/- 144.4 (bottom culture) l h(-1) m(-2). The CRArea for suspended techniques was on average 10 to 14 times lower than the CRArea for healthy oyster reefs. A bay-scale assessment of an intensive culture site led to the conclusion that cultivated oysters do not exert a dominant top-down control on phytoplankton abundance. Crown Copyright (C) 2013 Published by 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