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.

APPENDICES

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

32

Appendix 20. Preparation of the experimental plant.

Appendix 21. Materials used in the study.