growth performance of kappaphycus alvarezii planted at different intervals using floating monoline...
Post on 03-Nov-2023
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
GROWTH PERFORMANCE OF Kappaphycus alvarezii
PLANTED AT DIFFERENT INTERVALS USING
FLOATING MONOLINE METHOD
SEBILO, JINKY M.
Bachelor of Science in Fisheries Major in Aquaculture
March 2015
GROWTH PERFORMANCE OF Kappaphycus alvarezii
PLANTED AT DIFFERENT INTERVALS USING
FLOATING MONOLINE METHOD
Sebilo, Jinky M.
An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to The Faculty of College of Fisheries
Mindanao State University General Santos City
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Fisheries
Major in Aquaculture
March 2015
ii
APPROVAL SHEET
The thesis attached hereto, entitled “Growth Performance of
Kappaphycus alvarezii Planted at Different Intervals Using Floating
Monoline Method” prepared and submitted by Jinky M. Sebilo in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in Fisheries
major in Aquaculture is hereby approved.
Prof. Rodelyn A. Caliso Prof. Glennville A. Castrence
Member, Thesis Committee Member, Thesis Committee
___________________ _______________________
Date Signed Date Signed
Prof. Ronald P. Sombero
Adviser
_________________
Date Signed
Accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Science in Fisheries major in Aquaculture.
Prof. Ronald P. Sombero
Dean, College of Fisheries
____________________
Date Signed
iii
VITAE
The researcher was born in Alegria, Alabel, Sarangani Province on the
18th of April 1995. She is the second sibling of Mr. Onesimo B. Sebilo and Mrs.
Glenda M. Sebilo.
She completed her elementary education at Alegria Central Elementary
School in 2007. She continued her secondary education at Alegria National High
School and graduated Valedictorian in the year 2011.
In the following academic year, she enrolled at Mindanao State University,
General Santos City. She took up and finished Bachelor of Science in Fisheries
major in Aquaculture.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The researcher would like to extend her gratitude to the following who had
contributed so much in the fulfillment of this study.
To her adviser, Prof. Ronald P. Sombero for the brilliant ideas he
extended and for the moral support he handed in the completion of this study and
to her thesis committee members, Prof. Rodelyn A. Caliso and Prof. Glennville A.
Castrence for the guidance and encouragement they offered.
To Angkol Regie and Ante Minang for their hospitality, to Angkol Ben for
his permission to use his seedlings, to Angkol Tihay for providing the banca and
for the assistance during the culture period, and to all the individuals of Bula
Seaweed Association for their warm accommodation and for the construction of
the raft.
To her colleagues in seaweed study, Charlane M. Diasnes and Mara Lea
A. Cabasag for the friendship and for the inspiration, to Mr. Ervie Flores for the
help he extended during sampling, to her friends and classmates for making her
college life wonderful, to her boardmates, Ate Viv and Yvonne for letting her used
their laptop in making her thesis, to Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship people for
their spiritual counsel and prayers for the success of the study, and to her family
and relatives for their financial provision.
Above all, to God for without Him she is nothing.
The Researcher
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page LIST OF FIGURES vi LIST OF TABLES vii LIST OF APPENDICES viii INTRODUCTION 1 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 3 MATERIALS AND METHODS 6 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 12 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 19 LITERATURE CITED 20 APPENDICES 21
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Mean weight (g), mean weight gain (g), and mean daily growth (g/day) of Kappaphycus alvarezii after 45 days of culture………….…...12
2. Water quality parameters readings after 45 days of culture…………….17
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
1. Geographical location of the experimental site………………………….6
2. Experimental set-up at Zone 6, Barangay Bula,
General Santos City………………………………………………………...7
3. Planting of seaweeds on the 23rd of November 2014…………………..8
4. Initial weighing of Kappaphycus alvarezii……………………………......9
5. Sampling of Kappaphycus alvarezii………………………………….....10
6. Mean Weight gain (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the
45 days of culture………………………………………………………….13
7. Mean daily growth (g/day) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture…………………………………………………………..14
8. “Ice- ice” disease occurred in the plant………………………………....15
9. Water pollution observed in the planting site………………………......16
10. Mean percent recovery (%) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture……………………………………………………..16
viii
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix Page Page
1. Raw data on mean weight (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture………………………………………....…22
2. Raw data on the mean weight gain (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture……………………………........22
3. Raw data on mean daily growth (g/day) of Kappaphycus
alvarezii during the 45 days of culture……………………………........23
4. Raw data on the mean percent recovery (%) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture………………………………....23
5. Mean weight (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture......................24 6. Mean weight gain (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture…….......24 7. Mean daily growth (g/day) of K. alvarezii after 45 days
of culture……………………………………………………………….......25 8. Mean percent recovery (%) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture………………………………………………………………..….25
9. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean weight (g)ofK. alvarezii after 45 days of culture…………………………………………………...26
10. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean weight gain (g) after 45 days of culture………………………………………………….........26 11. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean daily growth (g/day)
of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture…………………………….......27 12. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean percent recovery (%) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture...................................................27 13. Water quality parameters monitored every other day………………28
14. Experimental plant, Kappaphycus alvarezii.....................................29 15. Initial weight of seaweed, Kappaphycus alvarezii………………..…29
viii
16. Final weight of seaweed, Kappaphycus alvarezii……….......…....30
17. Monitoring of water quality parameters..…………………………...30
18. Instruments used in measuring water quality parameters……..…31
19. Construction of the raft………………...……………………………..31
20. Preparation of the experimental plant……………………………...32
21. Materials used in the study……………………………………...…...32
ix
ABSTRACT
SEBILO, JINKY M. Mindanao State University, General Santos City, March 2015. Growth Performance of Kappaphycus alvarezii Planted at Different Intervals Using Floating Monoline Method. Adviser: Prof. Ronald P. Sombero An experiment was conducted to compare the growth performance of Kappaphycus alvarezii planted at different intervals using floating monoline method at Zone 6 Bula, General Santos City. K. alvarezii seedlings with an initial weight of 100 g were tied in polyethylene (PE) ropes planted at different intervals of 25 cm, 30 cm, and 35 cm as Treatments I, II, and III respectively. Sampling was done weekly by getting 50 % representative samples. Water quality parameters such as temperature, salinity, and transparency were also monitored using thermometer, refractometer, and secchi disk, respectively. The temperature ranged from 28-23oC, salinity was within the range of 29-33 ppt, and transparency was clear. After 45 days of culture, the highest mean weight gain (g) was obtained in Treatment III with 326.89 g followed by Treatment II with 305.08 g and Treatment I with 232.83 g while the highest mean daily growth (g/day) was attained in Treatment III with 8.07 g followed by Treatment II with 6.77 g and Treatment I with 5.17 g. Mean percent recovery (%) of Treatment I, Treatment II, and Treatment III were 70 %, 86.67 %, and 86.67 % respectively. Differences of values, however, were not statistically significant among treatments (P>0.05).
Under the conditions of the experiment, results indicated that Treatment III obtained better growth compared to the other treatments. Growth of K. alvarezii planted in floating monoline method was affected by distance of plants due to the
effect of wider space and sunlight can penetrate well.
Further study about intervals utilizing different species of seaweeds is highly recommended.
INTRODUCTION
The Philippines is one of the world’s biggest producers of red seaweeds
Eucheuma supplying about 60% of the world’s raw material requirements for
carrageenan production. Seaweed is the number one aquaculture commodity in
terms of production (Philippine Fisheries Profile, 2006). It is of great demand in
the global market due to its diversified uses of carrageenan, which is used as
stabilizer, gelling agent, thickener, binder and additive for various dairy products,
cosmetics, pet food, meat processing and beer bottling industries. The demand
for carrageenan has been predicted to grow by 5 - 7 % per annum over the next
ten years (Mojica et al 1997).
Kappaphycus alvarezii is economically important red tropical seaweeds,
which is highly demanded for its cell wall polysaccharides, and is the most
important source of kappa carrageenan. This seaweed accounts for the largest
consumption worldwide (Kumar et al 2008).
Seaweed farming is presently the most productive form of livelihood
among coastal communities in the southwestern part of the Philippines.
Moreover, it requires less capital than other aquaculture species, not labour-
intensive and does not need inputs that are potentially harmful to the
environment.
The most common technique used in the commercial farming of seaweed
is vegetative propagation of seedlings which are tied to long lines using tie-tie
2
method technique (Ask and Azanza, 2002). The most commonly practiced are as
follows: off bottom monoline method, raft method, floating monoline method and
floating long line method. The main method used for culturing Eucheuma and
Kappaphycus is the monoline (Trono 1997) in which cuttings of seaweed are tied
at 25-30 cm intervals.
The major problems faced by seaweed industries are microbial infestation
(“ice-ice” disease) and overgrowth of undesirable seaweeds (epiphytes). In “ice-
ice disease”, affected plant parts become whitish, soft, and eventually
disintegrates resulted by the sudden changes in the environment such as salinity,
temperature, and light intensity. Overcrowding of seaweed is also a factor in the
occurrence of disease. This renders them susceptible to opportunistic pathogens,
like some Vibrios and Cytophagas. Thus, manipulation of planting distances, at
higher intervals, can remedy the problem stated. Less crowding of plants also
enhances light penetration and therefore enhances growth.
The objective of this study is to determine the growth performance of
seaweed Kappaphycus alvarezii at varying planting distances using floating
monoline method.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Seaweeds are macroscopic marine algae attached to solid substratum
and growing in the shallow waters of sea. Seaweed comes under the primitive
group of Thallophyta and is classified into three major classes: Chlorophyceae
(green algae), Phaeophyceae (brown algae) and Rhodophyceae (red algae).
Kappaphycus is a red seaweed commonly called ‘guzo’ or ‘tambalang’
and there are three common strains which are appropriate for farming- brown,
green and red strains. Kappaphycus is naturally found below 0 tide line on
sandy-rocky to corally substrate in the tropical intertidal and subtidal waters.
Kappaphycus alvarezii is one of the main seaweed cultivated in the world
and this species changed the social and economic aspects of several countries
in which commercial farms were well established in a relatively short period, such
as the Philippines, Indonesia and Tanzania (Hayashi et al., 2010). Commercially
known as "cottonii", is the main raw material for kappa carrageenan industry, a
hydrocolloid used as a food additive, acting as a gelling, emulsifying, thickening
and stabilizing agent in both pharmaceutical and nutraceutical products
(Pickering et al., 2007).
Farming of Kappaphycus seaweed started in southern Mindanao in the
mid ’60s, and has expanded to other parts of the Philippines and to other
countries like Indonesia, Fiji, Micronesia, Vietnam, China, and South Africa. It
forms 80% of the Philippine seaweed export and is one of the three marine-
4
based export winners of the country. It is the raw material for the manufacture of
kappa carrageenan which is an important food additive.
Seaweed farming has frequently been developed as an alternative to
improve economic conditions and to reduce fishing pressure and over exploited
fisheries. Seaweeds have been harvested throughout the world as a food source
as well as an export commodity for production of agar and carrageenan products.
The earliest seaweed farming guides in the Philippines recommended
cultivation of Laminaria seaweed and reef flats at approximately 1m depth at low
tide (Juanich 1988, Trono and Ganzon-Fortes1989). Seedlings are then tied to
monofilament lines and strung between mangrove stakes pounded into the
substrate. This off-bottom method is still one of the major methods used today.
Long line cultivation methods that can be used in deeper water
approximately 7 m in depth (FMC 1999) were also introduced. Floating cultivation
lines anchored to the bottom are the primary methods used in the villages
of North Sulawesi, Indonesia (Pollnac et al. 1997a, 1997b).
The most common technique used in the commercial farming of seaweed
is vegetative propagation of seedlings which are tied to long lines using tie-tie
method technique (Ask and Azanza, 2002). The most commonly practiced are as
follows: off bottom monoline method, raft method, floating monoline method and
floating long line method. However, seaweed farmers sometimes modify some
aspect of the production as they become familiar to the conditions of the
5
operation. The main method used for culturing Eucheuma and Kappaphycus is
the monoline (Trono 1997) in which cuttings of seaweed are tied at 25-30 cm
intervals.
Domestic and agro-industrial wastes are affecting production. The
deteriorating quality of seedlings and nutrient-deficient coastal areas is reducing
farm productivity. Microbial infestation (“ice-ice” disease) and epiphytes
infestations; pitting, tip darkening and silting are additional factors. There has
also been a reduction of carrageenan yield due to the harvesting of young plants.
“Ice-ice” disease is a major problem in seaweed farming. An affected plant
part become whitish, soft and eventually disintegrates. This is a result of a
sudden change in environmental conditions such as salinity, temperature, and
light intensity. Also, overcrowding of seaweeds is another factor in the
occurrence of the said disease. This renders them susceptible to opportunistic
pathogens, like some Vibrios and Cytophagas. This can be remedied through
manipulation of planting distances at higher intervals. Less crowding of plants
also enhances light penetration and therefore enhances growth.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Experimental Site and Facilities
The study on the Growth Performance of Kappaphycus alvarezii Planted
at Different Intervals Using Floating Monoline Method was conducted at Zone 6,
Barangay Bula, General Santos City for a period of 45 days from November 23,
2014 to January 6, 2015 (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Geographical location of the experimental site.
7
One (1) unit of 4 x 5 floating raft with nine (9) cultivation lines was
constructed in the experimental site (Figure 2). Bamboo poles and polyethylene
(PE) rope were used in the construction. It was anchored with cement
blocks.Fish net was tied under the raft to avoid grazing.
Figure 2. Experimental set-up at Zone 6, Barangay Bula, General Santos City.
Experimental Design and Treatment
The study made use of a Complete Randomized Design (CRD) having
three (3) treatments, each replicated 3 times. The treatment represented the
variation of the interval in planting and as follows:
8
Treatment Interval
I 25 cm
II 30 cm
III 35 cm
Experimental Planting Method
Floating monoline method was used in the study. Nine (9) cultivation lines
(PE rope # 10) were attached. The lines were 50 cm apart from each other. Each
line contained ten (10) seedlings attached horizontally using a soft tie. A total of
ninety (90) seedlings were utilized (Figure 3).
Figure 3. Planting of seaweeds on the 23rd of November 2014.
9
Stocking and Stock Management
The seedlings were provided by Bula Seaweed Farmers Association in
cooperation with the BFAR Region XII, General Santos City.
Well branched with good quality seedlings weighing approximately 100 g
per line were inserted. A total of 1 kg was utilized per line.
The seaweed was weighed individually using a mini grammer (3 kgs
capacity) to get the initial weight (Figure 4). Sampling was done weekly. Fifty
percent (50 %) of the population of seaweed in each cultivation line was taken as
samples for weight (Figure 5).
Figure 4. Initial weighing of Kappaphycus alvarezii.
10
Figure 5. Sampling of Kappaphycus alvarezii.
Maintenance and Water Quality Management
The study was visited and was monitored every other day. Removal of
undesirable objects attached to the plant was part of the routine. Water quality
parameters such as temperature, salinity, and transparency were monitored
every other day throughout the culture period using thermometer, refractometer
and secchi disk, respectively (Appendix 18).
Data Analysis
Weight gain was computed using the formula:
Weight gain: WG = Wf– Wi
11
Where:
Wf – final weight
Wi – initial weight
Daily Growth (g/day) was computed using the formula:
DG = Wf– Wi
T
Where:
DG- Daily Growth (g/day)
Wf- final fresh weight (g)
Wi- initial fresh weight (g)
T-number of culture period
Percent Recovery (%):
PR (%)= no. of species recovered X 100
Total no. of species
Statistical Analysis
Data was analyzed statistically using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). The
significance among treatments was determined using Duncan’s Multiple Range
Test (DMRT) (Gomez and Gomez, 1984).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Growth expressed in mean weight gain (g) and mean daily growth (g/day)
of Kappaphycus alvarezii planted at different intervals is presented in Table 1.
Growth curves are shown in Figures 6 and 7.
After 45 days of culture, the highest mean weight gain (g) was obtained in
Treatment III with 326.89 g followed by Treatment II with 305.08 g and Treatment
I with 232.83 g while the highest mean daily growth (g/day) was attained in
Treatment III with 8.07 g followed by Treatment II with 6.77 g and Treatment I
with 5.17 g. Differences of values, however, were not statistically significant
among treatments (P>0.05).
Table 1. Mean weight (g), mean weight gain (g), and mean daily growth (g/day) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture.
Treatment Initial Weight (g)
Final Weight (g)
Weight Gain (g)
Daily Growth (g/day)
I
100
332.80
232.83 ns
5.17 ns
II
100
405.10
305.08 ns
6.77 ns
III
100
462.90
362.89 ns
8.07 ns
ns=not significant
13
Figure 6. Mean weight gain (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of
culture. The mean weight gain (g) in all treatments generally presents an
increasing pattern up to the 30th day (276.7g, 235.3 g, and 299.7 g in Treatments
I, II, and III, respectively).Treatments IIand III continuously exhibited an
increasing growth until the 45th day of culture with 305.1 g and 305.1 g,
respectively. However,Treatment I manifested a decreasing growth from the 31st
up to the 45th day of culture.
The decrease in mean weight gain specifically in Treatment I was due to
the reduction of the plants weight caused by the disease which occurred during
the culture period called “ice-ice”. From the start of the culture until the 30th day,
the plant in all treatments is of good condition, however, in Treatment I it started
to drop its weight in the 5th sampling (37th day) because the disease was
observed very plenty during those times.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
7 15 22 30 37 45
Me
an W
eig
ht
Gai
n (
g)
Days of Culture
Treatment I
Treatment II
Treatment III
14
Figure 7. Mean daily growth (g/day) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45
days of culture.
Generally, the mean daily growth of seaweeds in all treatments showed
rapid increase from days 7 (6.4 g/day, 6.4 g/day, and 7.9 g/day for Treatments I,
II and III, respectively) to 22 (9.5 g/day, 10.3 g/day, and 10.4 g/day in Treatments
I, II, and III, respectively). However, in the 30th day up to the end of the culture,
there was a decline.
The reduction of the plants weight might have been due to several factors
that were noted and were observed during the experiment. Occurrence of “ice-
ice” disease was very evident during the culture period that had caused the
decline in weight of seaweeds (Figure 9). "Ice-ice" is generally caused by
unfavourable environmental conditions. Also, epiphyte infestation was detected.
Epiphytes refer to organisms, small or large, that colonize the surfaces of
seaweeds decreases photosynthetic activity and nutrient absorption reasonably
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 7 15 22 30 37 45
Me
an D
aily
Gro
wth
(g/
day
)
Days of Culture
Treatment I
Treatment II
Treament III
15
causes stress to the seaweeds. Furthermore, wastes floating in the water were
noticed which seemed to be one of the significant factors that triggers ice-ice
disease occurrence. Lebosada (Undergraduate Thesis) conducted her study at
the same area and pointed that water pollution was markedly higher (Figure 10).
Largo(1999) found that the combined effect of stress and biotic agents, such as
opportunistic bacteria are primary factors of the ice-ice disease.
Tip bleaching in the plant was also observed during the experiment that
can also be a reason of the weight reduction of the plant. This was due to
exposure to high temperature and high light intensity (Weinberger et al. 1994).
The waves lift up seaweeds exposing them to sunlight causing the tip of the plant
to bleach and eventually disintegrate.
Figure 8. “Ice-ice” disease occurred in the plant.
16
Figure 9. Water pollution observed in the area.
Mean percent recovery (%) was also calculated. Figure 11 shows the
declining pattern of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of the culture.
Figure 10. Mean percent recovery (%) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45
days of culture.
1 7 15 22 30 37 45
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Days of Culture
Me
an P
erc
en
t R
eco
very
(%
)
Treatment I
Treatment II
Treatment III
17
The mean percent recovery (%) in all treatments manifested a decreasing
pattern. The start of the decline of Treatment II and Treatment III were on the 7th
day both with a mean percent recovery of 96.7 % while Treatment I was on the
22nd day of culture with 96.7 %. After 45 days of culture, the highest decline was
in Treatment I with 70 % mean percent recovery. However, differences of mean
percent recovery were not statistically significant among treatments (P> 0.05).
The water quality parameters such as temperature, salinity, and
transparency were also monitored and the readings are presented in Table 2.
Table 2.Water Quality Parameter readings after 45 days of culture.
Parameters
Days of Culture
7 15 22 30 37 45
Temperature (˚C)
29 29 29 29 30 28
Salinity (ppt) 29 30 30 32 33 32
Transparency (cm)
Clear Clear Clear Clear Clear Clear
In the study conducted, temperature ranged from 28-30 ˚C; salinity was
within 29-33 ppt and transparency was clear up to 200 cm. The optimum range of
temperature for the growth of Kappaphycus alvarezii is 25-28 ˚C (Doty, 1987;
Ask & Azanza 2002; Paula & Pereira, 2003 Pellizari et al., 2011). The readings
on the temperature showed that it extends to the optimum range excluding the
45th day. However, Kinch et al., 2003 reported that Kappahycus/ Eucheuma
18
species can tolerate 21-31 ˚C temperature. As of the salinity, the optimum range
for Kappahycus species is 30-40 ppt (Ask & Azanza, 2002; Reis et al., 2010;
Pellizari et al., 2011). Except in the 7th day of culture, salinity readings were
within the ranged.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
After 45 days of culture, the highest mean weight gain (g) was obtained in
Treatment III with 362.9 g, followed by Treatment II with 305.1 g, and the lowest
mean weight gain was in Treatment I with 232.8 g.
Mean daily growth (g/day) of Treatment I was 5.2 g/day having the lowest
result, followed by Treatment II with 6.8 g/day, and the highest was in Treatment
III with 8.1 g/day.
Highest mean percent recovery (%) was attained in Treatment II and III
with 86.7 % while the lowest was in Treatment I with 70 %.
Mean water quality parameter readings for the temperature, salinity, and
transparency ranged from 28-30 ˚C, 29-33 ppt, and clear up to 200 cm,
respectively.
Under the conditions of the experiment, results indicated that Treatment III
obtained better growth compared to the other treatments. It is recommended for
future researchers to conduct similar studies at different area or site utilizing
different species.
Furthermore, tip bleaching was observed during the experiment that had
also caused the weight reduction of the plant. Thus, it is also recommended to
put weight in the planting materials so that the plant could not be lifted up by the
wave action. Lowering the plant to a depth range of 50–100 cm could also be an
option.
LITERATURE CITED
Ask, E.I & Azanza, R.V (2002). Advances in cultivation technology of commercial Eucheumatoid species: a review with suggestions for future research. Aquaculture, 206,257- 277.
Ganzon-Fortes, E.T., R. Reynaldo-Campos, M.A. Castro, M.A.P. Soriano and E.M. Boo. 1991. Philippine Seaweeds: Abstracted Bibliography. Seaweed Information Center, Marine Science Institute, University of the Philippines. Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines. 64p.
Gomez K, Gomez A. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. Second Edition
Hayashi L, Hurtado AQ, Msuya FE, Bleicher-Lhonneur G, Critchley AT 2010. A review of Kappaphycus alvarezii farming: prospects and constraints. In: Israel A, Einav R (org.). Seaweeds and their role in globally changing environments. Dordrecht Heidelberg London New York: Springer, p. 255-283.
Hurtado AQ, Critchley AT (2006). Seaweed industry of the Philippines and the problem of epiphytism in Kappaphycus farming.
Juanich, G.L. 1988. Manual on Seaweed Farming (1.Eucheuma spp.) ASEAN/SF/88/Manual No. 2. ASEAN/UNDP/FAO Regional Small-Scale Coastal Fisheries Development Project. Manila, Philippines. 25p.
Largo, DB, K Fukami, and T Nishijima.1995b. Occasional pathogenic bacteria promoting "ice-ice" disease in the carrageenan-producing red algae Kappaphycus alvarezii and Eucheuma denticulatum (Solieriaceae.Gigartinales, Rhodophyta). J. Appl. Phycol. 7: 545-554.
Lebosada, Yennesa (Unpublished Undergraduate Thesis). Growth Performance of Kappaphycus alvarezii and Kappaphycus striatum Using Free swing Method.
Pickering TD, Skelton P, Sulu JR 2007. Intentional introductions of commercially harvested alien seaweeds. Bot Mar 50:338-350.
Pollnac, R.B., B.R. Crawford and A. Sukmara. 2002. Community-Based Coastal
Resources Management: An Interim Assessment of the Proyek Pesisir
Field Site in Bentenan and Tumbak Villages, North Sulawesi, Indonesia.
Technical Report TE-02/01-E. University of Rhode Island, Coastal
Resources Center, Narragansett, Rhode Island, USA. 70p.
22
Appendix 1.Raw data on mean weight (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture.
Days of Culture
Treatment
I II III
7 145 145 155
15 223.3 230 255
22 310 326.7 329.2
30 376.7 335.3 399.7
37 364.4 378.3 439.4
45 332.8 405.1 462.9
Appendix 2.Raw data on the mean weight gain (g) of Kappaphycus alvarezii
during the 45 days of culture.
Days of Culture
Treatment
I II III
7 45 45 55
15 123.3 130 155
22 210 226.7 229.2
30 276.7 235.3 299.7
37 264.4 278.3 339.4
45 232.8 305.1 362.9
23
Appendix 3.Raw data on mean daily growth (g/day) of Kappaphycus alvarezii during the 45 days of culture.
Days of Culture
Treatment
I II III
0 0 0 0
7 6.4 6.4 7.9
15 8.2 8.7 10.3
22 9.5 10.3 10.4
30 9.2 7.8 10
37 7.1 7.5 9.1
45 5.2 6.8 8.1
Appendix 4. Raw data on the mean percent recovery (%) Kappaphycus alvarezii
during the 45 days of culture.
Days of Culture
Treatment
I II III
0 100 100 100
7 100 96.7 96.7
15 100 93.3 96.7
22 96.7 93.3 90
30 96.7 90 90
37 73.3 86.7 90
45 70 86.7 86.7
24
Appendix 5.Mean weight (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture. TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
1 2 3
1 385.00 202.50 411.00 998.50 332.80
2 378.00 461.00 376.25 1215.25 405.10
3 491.67 413.00 484.00 1388.67 462.90
G.T. 3602.42
G.M. 400.27
Appendix 6. Mean weight gain (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture. TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
1 2 3
1 285.00 102.50 311.00 698.50 232.83
2 278.00 361.00 276.25 915.25 305.08
3 391.67 313.00 384.00 1088.67 362.89
G.T. 2702.42
G.M. 300.27
25
Appendix 7. Mean daily growth (g/day) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture. TREATMENT
REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
1 2 3
1 6.30 2.30 6.90 15.50 5.17
2 6.20 8.00 6.10 20.30 6.77
3 8.70 7.00 8.50 24.20 8.07
G.T. 60.00
G.M. 6.67
Appendix 8. Mean percent recovery (%) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture. TREATMENT REPLICATION TOTAL MEAN
1 2 3
1 50.00 70.00 90.00 210.00 70.00
2 80.00 100.00 80.00 260.00 86.67
3 80.00 90.00 90.00 260.00 86.67
G.T. 730.00
G.M. 81.11
26
Appendix 9. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean weight (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture.
Sum of squares
df Mean squares
f Sig.
Treatment 25476.410 2 12738.205 2.230ns .189
Error 34272.641 6 5712.107
Total 59749.051 8
Appendix 10. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean weight gain (g) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture.
Sum of squares
df Mean squares
f Sig.
Treatment 25476.410 2 12738.205 2.230ns .189
Error 34272.641 6 5712.107
Total 59749.051 8
ns=not significant
27
Appendix 11. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) on mean daily growth (g/day) of K. alvarezii after 45 days of culture.
Sum of squares
df Mean squares
f Sig.
Treatment 12.660 2 6.330 2.299 ns .181
Error 15.520 6 2.753
Total 29.180 8
Appendix 12. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) onmean percent recovery (%) of K.
alvarezii after 45 days of culture.
Sum of squares
df Mean squares
F Sig.
Treatment 555.556 2 277.778 1.471ns .302
Error 1133.333 6 188.889
Total 1688.889 8
ns=not significant
28
Appendix 13. Water quality parameters monitored every other day.
Date Temperature (°C)
Salinity (ppt) Transparency (cm)
Nov.23 (Stocking) 29 30 Clear
Nov.25 29 30 Clear
Nov.27 30 30 Clear
Nov.29 (Sampling) 29 29 Clear
Nov.30 29 30 Clear
Dec.01 29 30 Clear
Dec.03 29 30 Clear
Dec.05 29 30 Clear
Dec.07 (Sampling) 29 30 Clear
Dec.09 29 30 Clear
Dec.11 29 30 Clear
Dec.13 29 30 Clear
Dec.14 (Sampling) 29 30 Clear
Dec.16 30 30 Clear
Dec.18 29 30 Clear
Dec.20 30 32 Clear
Dec.22 (Sampling) 29 32 Clear
Dec.24 29 33 Clear
Dec.26 29 33 Clear
Dec.28 29 33 Clear
Dec.29 (Sampling) 30 33 Clear
Dec.30 30 33 Clear
Jan.02 29 32 Clear
Jan.04 29 32 Clear
Jan.06 (Termination) 28 32 Clear
29
Appendix 14. Experimental plant, Kappaphycus alvarezii.
Appendix 15. Initial weight of seaweeds, Kappaphycus alvarezii.
30
Appendix 16. Final weight of seaweed, Kappaphycus alvarezii.
Appendix 17. Monitoring of water quality parameters.
31
Appendix 18. Instruments used in measuring water quality parameters.
Appendix 19. Construction of the raft.
thermometer
secchi disc
refractometer
top related