Physicochemical and microbiological quality of aquaculture ......Waste and sediment formation in the...

~ 428 ~

International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies 2017; 5(5): 428-437

E-ISSN: 2347-5129

P-ISSN: 2394-0506

(ICV-Poland) Impact Value: 5.62 (GIF) Impact Factor: 0.549

IJFAS 2017; 5(5): 428-437

© 2017 IJFAS

www.fisheriesjournal.com

Received: 15-07-2017

Accepted: 16-08-2017

Ginson Joseph

Assistant Professor, St. Albert’s

College, Ernakulam, Kochi,

Kerala, India

Eborlang Kharnaior

Research Scholar, St. Albert’s


Kerala, India

Remya Kumari KR

Senior Research Fellow, Central

Institute of Fisheries

Technology, Matsyapuri, Cochin,

Kerala, India

Correspondence

Ginson Joseph

Assistant Professor, St. Albert’s


Kerala, India

Physicochemical and microbiological quality of

aquaculture farms of Chellanam Panchayath,

Ernakulam

Ginson Joseph, Eborlang Kharnaior and Remya Kumari KR

Abstract Physicochemical and microbiological qualities of pond water in the shrimp culturing farms of Chellanam

Panchayath, Ernakulam were analyzed and compared. Four representative shrimp farms were selected

based on the area and named as farm A, farm B, farm C and farm D, respectively. Physicochemical

parameters such as pH and hardness of the pond water were in the desirable range in all farms; whereas

farm A showed highest dissolved oxygen, iron and phosphate content. Among the farms, farm C revealed

optimum content of alkalinity, nitrite and nitrate. Total plate count in the farm A, B, C and D was 5.5,

4.29, 3.13 and 4.68 log10 cfu ml-1, respectively. Similarly, pathogenic bacteria such as Vibrio cholera, V.

parahaemolyticus, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella were less than log₁₀ cfu ml-1

in all farms. Coliforms were present in all farms except farm C. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)

revealed homogenous content of DO, hardness, iron, alkalinity, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, total plate count

(TPC) and coliforms in all farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C (p<0.05). This study can be concluded

that lower bacterial load of farm C had better correlation with physicochemical properties of water.

Keywords: total plate count, coliforms, phosphate, hardness, ANOVA

1. Introduction

Aquaculture is a profitable business with better scope for job opportunity and foreign

exchange to the Nation. Increased population and demand for seafood exerted huge fishing

pressure on the natural fishery resources; thus led to decline in the capture fishery at an

alarming rate. Aquaculture is an alternative solution at this crunch; hence this sector boomed

globally including India. Kerala has the tremendous opportunity for the development of

aquaculture sector due to sufficient water resource includes rivers, lakes and reservoirs etc.

However, Varghese (2001) [58] suggested that around 79 % of the brackish water resources in

Kerala remains unused. Even though better scope, this sector also faces several constraints

such as misapplication of husbandry and disease management, collection of seed from wild

and use of fishery resources as feed inputs, habitat alteration, damage to wild fish populations [31], nutrient enrichment, pesticide residue and antibiotic issues, etc. These problems surfaced

many farmers to abandoned aquaculture and changed to other profession.

Moses (1983) [44] suggested that physicochemical and biological parameters of the aquaculture

pond determine water quality, which directly or indirectly influences the productivity of the

pond. Waste and sediment formation in the aquaculture farm was mainly due to fish excreta’s

and dissolved metabolic wastes [9]. Cho & Bureau (1997) [20] suggested that composition of

feed such as protein, lipid and phosphorous content has significant role for the waste

production in the farm. Decomposition of solid waste in the water column release phosphorus [38]. Literature revealed that approximately 3 to 10 kg of phosphorus and 39 to 55 kg of

nitrogen are liberated to the environment for every metric ton of fish production (Bureau et al.,

2003) [17]. Respiration of fish reduces dissolved oxygen concentration in the aquaculture farm.

However, this fluctuation can be managed by adequate water exchange [59]. All living

organisms have a tolerable limit of each water quality parameter in which they perform

optimally. Sharp drop or an increase within these limits can cause an adverse effect on their

metabolic functions. Moreover, aquatic life becomes stressful when the physicochemical and

biological parameters have been altered, which vulnerable the organism for infection.

Decaying of feed, faeces and urinary excretions of fish releases dissolved carbon, nitrogen and

~ 429 ~

International Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Studies

phosphorus to the water (Bureau & Cho, 1999) [16], this

stimulates pelagic bacterial populations (Carr & Goulder,

1990) [18] moreover, salinity, temperature, pH and dissolved

oxygen also plays a significant role for the bacterial load in an

aquatic system. Rheinheimer (1991) [48] reported that

physicochemical properties of water source greatly influence

the bacterial population. It has been observed that good

husbandry practices reduce the incidence of pathogenic

bacteria such as E. coli and Staphylococcus. Anita et al.

(2013) [4] studied the relationship between the water quality

and fish production and the authors suggested that farming

should be carried out in an environmentally sustainable

manner to produce better quality and safety aquatic products

which accept socially. Amagliani et al. (2012) [30] suggested

that majority of outbreaks of food-related illness are due to

the action of pathogenic bacteria than chemical or physical

contaminants. There was a lack of research on the aquaculture

farms of Kerala. Hence this study was designed to evaluate

the physicochemical and microbiological qualities of the

water of aquaculture farms of Ernakulam.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1 Physicochemical analysis

Four representative shrimp culture farms from Chellanam

Panchayath, Ernakulam were selected based on the area and

named as farm A, farm B, farm C and farm D. The

physicochemical parameters such as dissolved oxygen,

phosphate, iron, total hardness, pH, alkalinity, nitrate, nitrite

and ammonia of each pond were analyzed as per APHA

(2012) [7].

2.2 Microbiological analysis

Pond water of farm A, B, C, and D was collected in a

sterilized glass bottle during the early hours of the day and

immediately brought to the laboratory for microbiological

analysis. The following microbiological parameters viz: total

plate count, Coliforms, E. coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Vibrio

parahaemolyticus, V. cholera and Salmonella were analyzed

as per APHA (2012) [7].

2.3 Statistical analysis

One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was carried out to

find the level of significance of physicochemical and

microbiological parameters among the farms. Statistical

analysis software (SAS) version 9.3 (SAS Institute, 2012) was

used for statistical analysis.

3. Results and Discussions

3.1 Dissolved oxygen (DO)

Dissolved oxygen content indicates the level of productivity

in an aquaculture pond. Several factors such as density of fish,

turbidity, organic matters and wind velocity influence the DO

content of an aquaculture pond (Boyd et al., 1978) [14]. There

is a directly proportional relationship with body mass of an

aquatic organism and DO consumption [37]. According to

Banerjea (1967) [8], DO content above 5 ppm is ideal for

better productivity; however, its depletion causes poor

feeding, starvation, reduced growth rate, high mortality and

alteration in the behavior and physiology of an aquatic

organism[10]. Bhatnagar et al., (2004) [11] suggested that 1-3

ppm of DO has sublethal effect on growth and feed

utilization. Optimum level of DO for the shrimp farms is 5-7

ppm [6]. In the present study DO content of farms A, B, C and

D showed 3, 5, 7 and 6.4 ppm, respectively (Figure 1). It was

found that DO content in all farms was in the acceptable

range except farm A. Statistical analysis revealed there was

no significant difference of DO content among the farms

(p>0.05) except farm A and C (p<0.05). According to Saloom

& Duncan (2005) [52], DO content should be maintained at 5

ppm for better production in the tropical aquaculture ponds.

Fig 1: Levels of dissolved oxygen content in the aquaculture farms

3.2 pH of the farms

pH indicates acid base balance of water and it is an essential

factor for the determination of growth and survival of fishes

in the culture pond. According to Ekubo & Abowei (2011) [27]

the aquatic organisms were vulnerable to stress and shows

retarded growth at low (4-6.5) and high range of pH (9-11);

whereas, pH less than 4 and greater than 11 causes mortality

to the entire stoke in the pond. According to Santhosh &

Singh (2007) [53], suitable range of pH for aquaculture is 6.7 to

9.5, whereas 7.5 to 8.5 to be optimum for fish culture. Anita

& Pooja (2013) [5] suggested that pH of aquaculture pond

ranging from 7 to 8.5 is ideal for biological productivity. This

is in agreement with (Anon 2006) [6]. In the present study, pH

of all farms is under desirable conditions and showed a value

of 8, 8.3, 7.5 and 7.8, respectively in the farm A, B, C and D

(Figure 2). Result is in agreement with Kamal et al. (2007) [35].

~ 430 ~


pH was significantly different in farm B and C, farm A and C,

and farm B and D (p<0.05); whereas homogenous pH content

was observed in farm D and C, farm B and A, and farm A and

D (p>0.05).

Fig 2: Levels of pH in the aquaculture farms

3.3 Total hardness

Hardness indicates the concentration of alkaline earth

elements especially calcium, magnesium, iron, manganese,

strontium, zinc and hydrogen ions and it highly fluctuated

based on the level of pH in the water. As per Bhatnagar et al.

(2004) [11], hardness content less than 20 ppm and more than

300 ppm causes stress and lethal to aquatic organisms,

whereas 75-150 ppm is considered as optimum for

aquaculture. This is in well agreement with Santhosh & Singh

(2007) [53]. In the present study, hardness content in all farms

were in the acceptable range and showed a value of 135, 150,

170 and 145 ppm, respectively in Farm A, B, C and D (Figure

3). Among the farms, least hardness content was noticed in

farm A, whereas farm C showed highest hardness content.

One-way ANOVA revealed that there was no significant

difference of hardness content among the farms (p>0.05)

except farm A and C (p<0.05).

Fig 3: Levels of hardness in the aquaculture farms

3.4 Phosphate

Phosphate even at low concentration is essential for the

production of planktons. According to Bhatnagar et al. (2004) [11], an optimum and productive level of phosphate in the

aquaculture pond is in the range of 0.05 to 0.07 ppm; whereas

1 ppm is also good for the production of plankton. This is in

well agreement with Stone & Thormforde (2004) [55].

According to Bhatnagar & Devi (2013) [10], acceptable range

of phosphorous in the aquaculture pond is 0.03 to 2 ppm, and

desirable range is 0.01 to 3 ppm and cause stress to aquatic

organisms at more than 3 ppm concentration. According to

Anon (2006) [6], 0.1 to 0.2 ppm dissolved inorganic phosphate

is ideal for shrimp farm. Phosphate content in farm A, B, C

and D was 0.32, 0.18, 0.23 and 0.13 ppm, respectively (Figure

4). Among the farms, higher phosphate content was noticed in

farm A, whereas least concentration was observed in farm D;

similarly, phosphate content was optimum in farm B and D.

One-way ANOVA revealed that there was no significant

difference of phosphate content among the farms (p>0.05)

except farm A and D (p<0.05).

~ 431 ~


Fig 4: Levels of phosphate in the aquaculture farms

3.5 Iron

Iron is mainly seen in ground water and it acts like a catalyst

to promote dissociation of oxygen molecules in water and

liberate free radicals [23]. Iron combines with oxygen to

produce orange or rusty colour in the pond water. According

to Dryden-Aqua (1997) [26], an iron content of 0.1 ppm in

clean water causes gill damage to the fishes. Farm A, B, C

and D showed an iron content of 0.08, 0.05, 0.02 and 0.025

ppm, respectively (Figure 5). Highest content of iron was

noticed in farm A, whereas farm C showed least content.

Recommended level of iron in an aquaculture pond is 0.3 ppm [33]. Iron content in all farms was in the acceptable ranges.

Statistical analysis revealed there was no significant

difference of iron content among the farms (p>0.05) except

farm A and C (p<0.05).

The level of iron above 0.1 mg/L especially in very clean

water with low organic concentration could damage the gill

(Dryden Aqua 1997).

Fig 5: Levels of iron content in the aquaculture farms

3.6 Alkalinity

Alkalinity indicates the concentration of bases such as

carbonates, bicarbonates, hydroxides, phosphates, borates,

dissolved calcium, magnesium, and other compounds in the

aquaculture pond and it can be adjusted by applying lime.

There is a directly proportional relationship with alkalinity

and productivity in the farms. Boyd & Lichtkoppler (1979) [13]

suggested that alkalinity ranging from 20 to 150 ppm ideal for

the production of planktons. According to Bhatnagar & Devi

(2013) [10], acceptable range of alkalinity in the aquaculture

pond is 50 to 200 ppm, and desirable range is 25 to

100 ppm and cause stress at more than 300 ppm or less

than 20 ppm concentration, which is in agreement with

Guidelines for Water Quality Management for fish culture at

Tripura. Farm A, B, C and D showed an alkalinity content of

184, 195, 215 and 205 ppm, respectively (Figure 6).

Alkalinity of 200 ppm is optimum for a scientific shrimp

culture system [6]. Farm A and B were in the acceptable range,

whereas farm C and D were exceeded this range. One-way

ANOVA revealed that there was no significant difference of

alkalinity content among the farms (p>0.05) except farm A

and C (p<0.05).

~ 432 ~


Fig 6: Levels of alkalinity content in the aquaculture farms

3.7 Ammonia

Ammonia is a primary nitrogenous by-product liberate from

the decomposition of excess feed, faeces, dead planktons and

other organic matters by heterotrophic bacteria [60]. Pettersson

(1988) [46] suggested that time and temperature are the two

major factor which accelerate the formation of ammonia in

the aquatic system. Unionized ammonia is highly toxic than

ionized form. As per EIFAC (1973) [29], 0.6 to 2 ppm of

unionized ammonia is lethal to culture species. Santhosh &

Singh (2007) [53] recommended a level of 0.1 ppm of

ammonia is ideal for aquatic organism. However, according to

Anon (2006) [6] recommended level of ammonia in a shrimp

culture system should be less than 0.01 ppm. Level of

ammonia was in acceptable in farm C; whereas farm A, B and

D showed a value of 0.05, 0.02 and 0.03 ppm, respectively

(Figure 6.1). One-way ANOVA revealed a homogenous

ammonia content in all farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C

(p<0.05).

Fig 6.1: Levels of ammonia in the aquaculture farms

3.8 Nitrite

Nitrite was an intermediate product of the aerobic nitrification

process. Nitrite was highly toxic to aquatic organisms hence;

its content should be minimum in the aquatic system for better

survival of aquatic organisms. Stone & Thomforde (2004) [55]

reported that a nitrite content ranging from 0-1 ppm is

desirable in fish culture; however, a range below 4 ppm is

also still acceptable. OATA (2008) [45], suggested the

acceptable level of nitrite in freshwater and marine water is

0.2 and 0.125, respectively. Similarly, Bhatnagar et al. (2004) [11] suggested that 0.02-1.0 ppm is lethal to many fish

species, more than 1.0 ppm is lethal for many warm

water fishes and less than 0.02 ppm is acceptable for

aquaculture. According to Anon (2006) [6] recommended

level of nitrite in a shrimp culture system should be less

than 0.01 ppm. In the present study nitrite content in

farm A, B, C and D was 0.04, 0.02, 0.009 and 0.03,

respectively (Figure 7). Among the farms, acceptable range

and less nitrite content was noticed in Farm C. One-way

ANOVA revealed that there was no significant difference of

nitrite content among the farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C

(p<0.05).

~ 433 ~


Fig 7: Levels of nitrite content in the aquaculture farms

3.9 Nitrate

Nitrate even at higher concentration is harmless to aquatic

animals, which is produced the combining of nitrite and

oxygen by the action of autotrophic Nitrobacter bacteria.

Stone & Thomforde (2004) [55] suggested that higher content

of nitrate is hazardous to fishes. Santhosh & Singh (2007) [53]

reported the favorable range of nitrate in aquaculture pond is

0.1 to 4.0 ppm, which is in well agreement with the

guidelines of Water Quality Management for fish culture

in Tripura. However, as per Anon (2006) [6], nitrate

content should be less than 0.03 ppm for an ideal

shrimp farming system. In the present study the nitrate

content in Farm A, B, C and D was found to be 0.07, 0.04,

0.02 and 0.06 ppm, respectively (Figure 7.1). It was clearly

evident that nitrate content of Farm C was in the acceptable

range than other farms. One-way ANOVA revealed

homogenous nitrate content in all farms (p>0.05) except farm

A and C (p<0.05).

Fig 7.1: Levels of nitrate content in the aquaculture farms

3.10 Total plate count (TPC)

Water quality significantly influences the bacterial load of an

aquaculture pond and the microbial load of an aquatic

organism [49]. Total plate count in the water of farm A, B, C

and D was 5.5, 4.29, 3.13 and 4.68 log10 cfu ml-1, respectively

(Figure 8). The present result is in agreement with Bisht et al.

(2012) [12]. Lekshmy et al. (2014) [41] recorded 6.7 log10 cfu

ml-1 of total plate count in the extensive Penaeus monodon

culture systems of southwest coast of Kerala. Yousuf et al.

(2008) [61] reported total bacterial count in the range of 2.31 to

5.65 log10 cfu ml-1 in P. monodon culture ponds of

Bangladesh. Highest total viable count was noticed in Farm

A, whereas least count was observed in Farm C. According to

ICMSF (1986) [34], TPC level of about 10⁷ is the maximum

limit under which a product is considered to be good.

However, Lakhmanan et al. (1984) [39], reported TPC above

105 is considered as poor quality. Total plate count of all

farms under the limit of desirable range. One-way ANOVA

revealed that there was no significant difference of TPC

among the farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C (p<0.05).

~ 434 ~


Fig 8: Levels of total plate count in the aquaculture farms

3.11 Vibrio spp.

Human pathogenic species of Vibrio in an aquatic system

indicates the public health safety of water [22]. According to

Ruangpan & Tubakaew (1994) [51] Vibrio spp. is an

autochthonous flora in the coastal ecosystem, which was

found in abundance in the coastal waters of Cochin [2].

Sindermann (1979) [54] suggested that Vibrios are the major

disease causing bacteria normally found in the environment.

Among the Vibrios, Vibrio cholera and V. parahaemolyticus

were the major pathogen which causing diseases to the

aquatic organism by disintegrate the water quality [50].

Karunasagar et al. (1996) [36] pointed out that V.

parahaemolyticus act as a secondary pathogen in the viral

disease outbreak. According to ICMF (1978) [34], reports of V.

parahaemolyticus in the water bodies vary from 35 to 55%.

As per the Centre for Food Safety, satisfactory levels of V.

parahaemolyticus should be <20 cfu/ml (g), however

borderline value can range from 20 ≤10³ cfu ml-1 (g -1). In the

present study V. cholera and V. parahaemolyticus were less

than log₁₀ cfu ml-1 in all farms.

3.12 Escherichia coli

Occurrence of E. coli indicates faecal contamination of warm

blooded animals [43] and it also poses public health hazard [47].

In an aquaculture system, the source of E. coli is mainly

through terrestrial water bodies in which contamination has

been taken place. Budisusilowati & Haryani (1995) [15]

isolated E. coli from the shrimp and sediment of the brackish

water farms of Indonesia and reported a count less than 3 cfu

g-1. Chandran et al. (2009) [19] reported occurrence of E. coli

in Vembanadu lake at Kumarakom region. In the present

study E. coli was less than log₁₀ cfu ml-1 in all farms.

3.13 Staphylococcus aureus

S. aureus is a pathogenic bacterium which cause food

poisoning that lead to public health problem associated with

fish and fishery products [32]. Humans are the main source of

S. aureus and get contaminated through the environment due

to improper hygienic and sanitary conditions. A count of 2.30

log₁₀ cfu g-1 of S. aureus was isolated from the Clarius

gariepinus in selected waste water stabilization ponds at

Kilimanjaro, Tanzania [1]. In the present study S. aureus was

less than log₁₀ cfu ml-1 in all farms.

3.14 Salmonella

Salmonella is very harmful to humans, and its occurrence in

raw or cooked product is considered to be an adulterant [57].

Lunestad et al. (2007) [42] suggested that homemade feed is

one of the major source for the contamination of Salmonella

spp. which can be transmitted to cultured species and finally

to consumers. In an aquaculture system, Salmonella tends to

form biofilms on both inert and organic surfaces, which

provide better shelter against environmental stresses [25].

Presence of Salmonella should be absent for a good

aquaculture system. In the present study Salmonella was less

than log₁₀ cfu ml-1 in all farms. Dalsgaard et al. (1995) [24]

reported that Salmonella does not appear to constitute a

normal part of the bacterial flora in a tropical brackish water

environment. Leangphibul et al. (1986) [40] also reported less

occurrence of Salmonella in water and sediments of shrimp

farms in Thailand.

3.15 Coliforms

Coliforms are not pathogenic to human, but their presence

reveals contamination and the occurrence of several

pathogenic floras in the pond (Cohen & Shuval, 1973) [21].

However, Ampofo & Clerk (2010) [3] suggested that

consumption of faecal coliform contaminated aquatic

organism can cause dangerous disease to humans. Sugumar et

al. (2001) [56] noticed increased coliform count towards the

end of the culture in a shrimp farming system. Count of

coliform in farms A, B, C and D were 3.04, 2.69, 1.17 and 2.3

MPN ml-1, respectively (Figure 9). According to EPA (2003) [28], the permissive level for coliforms should be 0 MPN

100ml-1. Chandran et al. (2009) [19] found that the presence of

coliform was higher in sediment than in overlying water of

Vembanadu lake at Kumarakom region. One-way ANOVA

revealed that there was no significant difference of coliforms

among the farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C (p<0.05).

~ 435 ~


Fig 9: Levels of coliforms in the aquaculture farms

4. Conclusion

The present study was under taken to determine the level of

water quality of farm A, B, C & D in Ernakulam with

reference to physicochemical and microbiological parameters.

Among the farms, farm ‘A’ revealed better physicochemical

properties such as pH, phosphate, iron, nitrite and nitrate;

similarly microbiological parameters viz: TPC and Coliforms.

Pathogenic bacteria such as V. cholera, V. parahaemolyticus,

E. coli, S. aureus and Salmonella were less than log₁₀ cfu ml-1

in all farms. Statistical analysis revealed a homogenous value

for DO, hardness, iron, alkalinity, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate,

TPC and coliforms in all farms (p>0.05) except farm A and C

(p<0.05). In farm C, alkalinity, nitrite and nitrate content were

in acceptable range and showed better physicochemical and

microbiological parameters compared to other farms.

5. Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the financial assistance provided by

the University Grant Commission (UGC), Govt. of India

(Grant No: 1810-MRP/14-15/KLMG007/UGC-SWRO), for

carrying out this work.

6. References

1. Ahamdi-Habibu Mkali, Jasper Ijumba, Karoli Nicholas

Njau. Effects of wastewater characteristics on fish quality

from integrated wastewater treatment system and fish

farming in Urban Areas, Tanzania. J. Agri. Fore. Fish.

2014; 3(4):292-298.

2. Alavandi SV. Heterotrophic bacteria in the coastal waters

of Cochin. Indian J. Mar. Sci. 1989; 18:174-176.

3. Ampofo JA, Clerk GC. Diversity of Bacteria

Contaminants in Tissues of Fish Cultured in Organic

Waste-Fertilized Ponds: Health Implications. The Open

Fish. Sci. J. 2010; 3:142-146.

4. Anita Kumar A, Verma AK, Gupta MK, Rahal A. Multi

drug resistant pathogenic Escherichia coli in water

sources and Yamuna River in and around Mathura, India.

Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2013; DOI 10.3923/pjbs/2013.

5. Anita-Bhatnagar, Pooja-Devi. Water quality guidelines

for the management of pond fish culture. Int. J. Env. Sci.

2013; 3:6.

6. Anon. Coastal Aquaculture Authority - Compendium of

Act, Rules, Guidelines and Notifications, pp 107, Govt.

of India, Chennai. ISBN 81-901701-0-5; 2006.

7. APHA. Standard methods for examination of water and

water waste. 22nd Edition, American Public Health

Association, American Water Works Association, Water

Environmental Federation, Washington, D.C; 1998.

8. Banerjea SM. Water quality and soil condition of

fishponds in some states of India in relation to fish

production. Indian J. Fish. 1967; 14:115-144.

9. Beveridge MCM. Lake-based or land-based tilapia

hatcheries. ICLARM. News l. 1984; 7(1):10-11.

10. Bhatnagar A, Garg SK. Causative factors of fish

mortality in still water fish ponds under sub-tropical

conditions. Aquacult. 2000; 1(2):91-96.

11. Bhatnagar A, Jana SN, Garg SK, Patra BC, Singh G,

Barman UK. Water quality management in aquaculture.

In: Course Manual of Summer School on Development

of Sustainable Aquaculture Technology in Fresh and

Saline Waters, CCS Haryana Agricultural, Hisar (India).

2004, 203-210.

12. Bisht A, Singh UP, Pandey NN. Bacillus subtilis as a

potent probiotic for enhancing growth in fingerlings of

common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Indian J. Fish. 2012;

59(3):103-108.

13. Boyd CE, Lichtkoppler F. Water Quality Management in

Fish Ponds. Research and Development Series No. 22, pp

45-47, International Centre for Aquaculture (J.C.A.A)

Experimental Station Auburn University, Alabama, 1979.

14. Boyd CE, Romaire RP, Johnston E. Predicting early

morning dissolved oxygen concentrations in channel

catfish ponds. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1978; 107:488-492.

15. Budisusilowati S, Haryani ES. Influence of

environmental conditions on the microbiological quality

(Vibrio parahaemolyticus and Salmonella) of cultured

shrimp. FAO Fish Rep. 1995; 514:57-60.

16. Bureau DP, Cho CY. Phosphorus utilization by rainbow

trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): estimation of dissolved

phosphorus waste output. Aquacult. 1999; 179:127-140.

17. Bureau DP, Gunther S, Cho CY. Chemical composition

and preliminary theoretical estimates of waste outputs of

rainbow trout reared on commercial cage culture

operations in Ontario. N. Am. J. Aquacult. 2003; 65:33-

38.

18. Carr OJ, Goulder R. Fish-farm effluents in rivers-I.

Effects on bacterial populations and alkaline phosphatase

activity. Water Res. 1990; 24(5):631-638.

~ 436 ~


19. Chandran A, Sheeja KM, Hatha AAM, Sherin V, Thomas

AP. Role of biological factors on the survival of

Escherichia coli, Salmonella paratyphi and Vibrio

parahaemolyticus in a tropical estuary, India. Water Res.

2009; 1:76-84.

20. Cho CY, Bureau DP. Reduction of waste output from

salmonid aquaculture through feeds and feeding. Prog.

Fish Cult. 1997; 59:155-160.

21. Cohen J, Shuval HI. Coliforms, fecal coliforms and fecal

streptococci as indicators of water pollution. Wat. Air

Soil Pollut. 1973; 2:85-95.

22. Colwell RR, Kaper J. Vibrio spp. as bacterial indicators

of potential health hazards associated with water.

American Society for Testing and Materials. 1977, 115.

23. Crichton RR, Wilmet S, Legssyer R, Ward RJ. Molecular

and cellular mechanisms of iron homeostasis and toxicity

in mammalian cells. J. Inorg. Biochem. 2009; 91:9-18.

24. Dalsgaard A, Huss HH, H-Kittikun A, Larsen JL.

Prevalence of Vibrio cholerae and Salmonella in a major

shrimp production area in Thailand. Int. J. Food

Microbiol. 1995; 28:101-113.

25. Donlan RM, Costerton JW. Biofilms: survival

mechanisms of clinically relevant microorganisms. Clin.

Microbiol. Rev. 2002; 15(2):167-193.

26. Dryden-Aqua. Toxic effect of iron on aquaticanimals and

fish. Dryden Aqua Ltd., Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 1997.

27. Ekubo AA, Abowei JF. Review of some water quality

management principles in culture fisheries. Res. J. Appl.

Sci. Engin. And Technol. 2011; 3:1342-1357.

28. EPA. US Environment Protection Agency, Safe Drinking

Water Act, EPA816-F-0-016; 2003.

29. European Inland Fisheries Advisory Commission

(EIFAC). Water Quality Criteria for European

Freshwater Fish. Report on Ammonia and Inland

Fisheries, Water Res. 1973; 7:1011-1022.

30. G Amagliani, G Brandi, GF Schiavano. Review -

Incidence and role of Salmonella in seafood safety. Food

Res. Int. 2012; 45:780-788.

31. Gross MR. One species with two biologies: Atlantic

salmon (Salmo salar) in the wild and in aquaculture. Can.

J. Fish Aquat. Sci. 1998; 55(1):131-144.

32. Henson S, Humphrey J. The impacts of private food

safety standards on the food chain and on public

standard-setting processes. Rome: Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations (FAO), 2009.

33. Huguenin JE, Colt J. Design and Operating Guide for

Aquaculture Seawater Systems, Elsevier, Amsterdam,

1989.

34. International Commission on Microbiological

Specifications for Foods. Microorganisms in Foods 2.

Sampling for Microbiological Analysis: Principles and

specific applications. 2nd Edition, pp-293. International

Association of Biological Societies, University of

Toronto Press, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1986.

35. Kamal D, Khan AN, Raham MA, Ahmed A. Study on

physico-chemical properties of water of Mouri River,

Khulna, Bangaladesh. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 2007; 10:710-

717.

36. Karunasagar I, Otta SK, Karunasagar I, Joshua K.

Applications of Vibrio vaccine in shrimp culture. Fish.

Chimes. 1996; 14:205-254.

37. Karuppasamy A, Mathivanan V, Selvisabhanayakam.

Comparative growth analysis of Litopenaeus Vannamei

in different stocking density at different farms of the

Kottakudi Estuary, South East Coast of India. Int. J. Fish.

Aquat. Stud. 2013; 1:40-44.

38. Kelly LA. Dissolved reactive phosphorus release from

sediments beneath a freshwater cage aquaculture

development in West Scotland. Hydrobiologia. 1992;

236:569-572.

39. Lakshmanan PTC, Mathen C, Lyer TSG, Verma PRG.

Assessment to quality of fish landed at the Cochin

fisheries harbour. Fish. Technol. 1984; 21:98-105.

40. Leangphibul P, Nilakul C, Soranchai C, Tantimavanich

S, Kasemsuksakul K. Investigation of pathogenic bacteria

from shrimp farms. Kasetsart. J. 1986; 20:333-7.

41. Lekshmy S, Nansimole A, Minin M, Athira N, Tresa-

Radhakrishnan. Occurrence of Vibrio cholera in shrimp

culture environment of Kerala. Indian J. Sci. Res. 2014;

5(2):156.

42. Lunestad BT, Nesse L, Lassen J, Svihus B, Nesbakken T,

Fossum K, et al., Salmonella in fish feed; occurrence and

implications for fish and human health in Norway.

Aquacult. 2007; 265:1-8.

43. Mandal S, Pal NK, Chowdhury IH, Debmandal M.

Antibacterial activity of ciprofloxacin and trimethoprim,

alone and in combination, against Vibrio cholerae O1

biotype El Tor serotype Ogawa isolates. J. Microbiol.

2009; 58(1):57-60.

44. Moses BS. Introduction to Tropical Fisheries.

UNESCO/ICSU Part, Ibadan University Press; 1983,

102-105.

45. Ornamental Aquatic Trade Association (OATA). Water

Quality Criteria-ornamental fish. Company Limited by

Guarantee and Registered in England No 2738119

Registered Office Wessex House, 40 Station Road,

Westbury, Wiltshire, BA13 3JN, UK, 2008.

46. Pettersson K. Ensiling of forages. Factors affecting silage

fermentation and quality. Report 179, Swedish University

of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden, 1988.

47. Rao CCP, Gupta SS. Enteropathogenic E. coli and other

coliforms in marine fish. Fish Tech. 1978; 15:45-47.

48. Rheinheimer G. Aquatic Microbiology. Wiley, New

York, 1991.

49. Roy S, Kalita JC, Mazumdari M. Histopathological

effects of Bisphenol A on Liver of Heteropneustes

fossilis (Bloch). The Ecosan. 2011; 1:187-190.

50. Ruangpan L, Kitao T. Vibrio bacteria isolated from black

tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon (Fabricius). J. Fish. Dis.

1991; 14:383-388.

51. Ruangpan L, Tabkaew R. Vibrio bacteria associated with

black tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon in Thailand. In:

NTCT-JSPS- Joint Seminar on Marine Science,

Chulalogkorn Univ. Bangkok, Thailand; 1994, 216-220.

52. Saloom, Duncan RS. Low dissolved oxygen levels reduce

anti-predator behaviours of the fresh water clam

Corbicula fluminea. Fresh water Biol. 2005; 50:1233-

1238.

53. Santhosh B, Singh NP. Guidelines for water quality

management for fish culture in Tripura, ICAR Research

Complex for NEH Region, Tripura Center, Publication

no .29, 2007.

54. Sindermann CJ. Pollution-associated diseases and

abnormalities of fish and shellfish: a review. Fish. Bull.

(United States). 1979; 76(4).

55. Stone NM, Thormforde HK. Understanding your fish

pond water analysis report, University of Arkansas Co-

operative Extension Printing Services; 2004, 31-42.

~ 437 ~


56. Sugumar G, Abraham TJ, Shanmugham S. Human

pathogenic bacteria in shrimp farming system. Indian J.

Microbiol. 2001; 41:269-274.

57. U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Food Code.

DHHS/PHS/FDA, Washington, D.C, 2004.

(www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/foodcode.html#get01)

58. Varghese AG. Fish. Chimes. 2001; 20(10-11):65.

59. Veenstra J, Nolen S, Carroll J, Ruiz C. Impact of net pen

aquaculture on lake water quality. Wat. Sci. Tech. 2003;

47(12):293-300.

60. Wetzel RG. Limnology. In: Lake and River Ecosystems.

3rd Edition, Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA, 2001.

61. Yousuf AHM, Ahmed MK, Yeasmin S, Ahsan N,

Rahman MM, Islam MM. Prevalence of microbial load in

shrimp, Penaeus monodon and prawn, Macrobrachium

rosenbergii from Bangladesh. World. J. Agric. Sci. 2008;

4:852-855.

Physicochemical and microbiological quality of aquaculture ......Waste and sediment formation in the...

Documents

Transcript of Physicochemical and microbiological quality of aquaculture ......Waste and sediment formation in the...