Aquaculture International

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 1333–1342 | Cite as

Assessment of AquaMats for removing ammonia in intensive commercial Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei aquaculture systems

  • Zhitao Huang
  • Rong Wan
  • Xiefa Song
  • Eric Hallerman
Article

Abstract

AquaMats are high surface–area polymer filters whose use produces higher yields with reduced health risks for the aquaculture product. We used AquaMats in pilot-scale systems and in intensive commercial Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei production systems to stabilize and improve water quality by removing ammonia. In the pilot-scale systems, evaluation of the effects of temperature and hydraulic retention time (HRT) on ammonia removal rate indicated that the surface total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) conversion rate (STR, mg TAN/m2-day) increased with increasing temperature and decreasing HRT. The highest STR of 319.8 mg TAN/m2-day was observed at a temperature of 30 °C and a HRT of 5 min. In the commercial shrimp production systems, ammonia levels were significantly greater in the control systems (without AquaMats) than in the treatment systems (with AquaMats) after 6 days (P < 0.05). Results suggested that eight 150 cm × 90 cm pieces of AquaMats (0.057 m2 surface area per m3 culture volume) were sufficient for promoting nitrification in this system. The growth rate of juvenile shrimp was most enhanced in treatment C (with 12 pieces of AquaMats, 0.085 m2/m3), which exhibited a significant decrease in ammonia.

Keywords

AquaMats Ammonia removal Shrimp culture Litopenaeus vannamei 

References

  1. APHA (American Public Health Association), American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 19th edn. American Public Health Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt RE, Routledge MD, Wagner EJ, Mellenthin RF (2002) The use of AquaMats® to enhance growth and improve fin condition among raceway cultured rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). Aquac Res 33:359–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold SJ, Sellars MJ, Crocos PJ, Coman GJ (2006) Intensive production of juvenile tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon: an evaluation of stocking density and artificial substrates. Aquaculture 261:890–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Audelo-Naranjo JM, Martinez-Cordova LR, Voltolina D (2010) Nitrogen budget in intensive cultures of Litopenaeus vannamei in mesocosms, with zero water exchange and artificial substrates. Revista de Biologica Marina y Oceanografia 45:519–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Audelo-Naranjo JM, Martinez-Cordova LR, Gomez-Jimenez S, Voltolina D (2012) Intensive culture of Litopenaeus vannamei without water exchange and with an artificial substrate. Hidrobiologica 22:1–7Google Scholar
  6. Bender J, Lee R, Sheppard M, Brinkley K, Phillips P, Yeboah Y, Wah RC (2004) A waste effluent treatment system based on microbial mats for black sea bass Centropristis striata recycled-water mariculture. Aquac Eng 31:73–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd CE, Gautier D (2000) Effluent composition and water quality standards. Global Aquac Advocate 3:61–66Google Scholar
  8. Bratvold D, Browdy CL (2001) Effect of sand sediment and vertical surfaces (Aquamats™) on production, water quality, and microbial ecology in an intensive Litopenaeus vannamei culture system. Aquaculture 195:81–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen S, Ling J, Blancheton JP (2006) Nitrification kinetics of biofilm as affected by water quality factors. Aquac Eng 34:179–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Colt J, Lamoureux J, Patterson R, Rogers G (2006) Reporting standards for biofilter performance studies. Aquac Eng 34:377–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crab R, Avnimelech Y, Defoirdt T, Bossier P, Verstraete W (2007) Nitrogen removal techniques in aquaculture for a sustainable production. Aquaculture 270:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davidson J, Helwig N, Summerfelt ST (2008) Fluidized sand biofilters used to remove ammonia, biochemical oxygen demand, total coliform bacteria, and suspended solids from an intensive aquaculture effluent. Aquac Eng 39:6–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ennis J, Bilawa K (2000) Golf course ponds are complete ecosystems. Golf Course Manag 68:61–64Google Scholar
  14. Erler D, Pollard P, Duncan P, Knibb W (2004) Treatment of shrimp farm effluent with omnivorous finfish and artificial substrates. Aquac Res 35:816–827CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hagopian DS, Riley JG (1998) A closer look at the bacteriology of nitrification. Aquac Eng 18:223–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kim S, Kong I, Lee B, Kang L, Lee M, Suh K (2000) Removal of ammonia-N from a recirculation aquacultural system using an immobilized nitrifier. Aquac Eng 21:139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kuhn DD, Drahos DD, Marsh L, Flick GJ Jr (2010) Evaluation of nitrifying bacteria product to improve nitrification efficacy in recirculating aquaculture systems. Aquac Eng 43:78–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lezama-Cervantes C, Paniagua-Michel J (2010) Effects of constructed microbial mats on water quality and performance of Litopenaeus vannamei post-larvae. Aquac Eng 42:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moss SM (2002) Dietary importance of microbes and detritus in penaeid shrimp aquaculture. In: Lee CS, O’Bryen P (eds) Microbial approaches to aquatic nutrition within environmentally sound aquaculture production systems. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, pp 1–18Google Scholar
  20. Moss KR, Moss SM (2004) Effects of artificial substrate and stocking density on the nursery production of Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. J World Aquac Soc 35:536–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Otoshi CA, Montgomery AD, Matsuda EM, Moss SM (2006) Effects of artificial substrate and water source on growth of juvenile Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. J World Aquac Soc 37:210–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Scott S, McNeil R (2001) Aquamats: how to provide habitat, feed, and biofiltration for hatchery and nursery tanks. Hatch Int 2:19–21Google Scholar
  23. Song C (2003) The feed and feeding rate of Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. Feed Res 11:41–42 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  24. Stewart NT, Boardman GD, Helfrich LA (2006) Characterization of nutrient leaching rates from settled rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) sludge. Aquac Eng 35:191–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tseng K, Wu K (2004) The ammonia removal cycle for a submerged biofilter used in a recirculating eel culture system. Aquac Eng 31:17–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wortman B, Wheaton F (1991) Temperature effects on biodrum nitrification. Aquac Eng 10:183–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhu S, Chen S (1999) An experimental study on nitrification biofilm performance using a series reactor system. Aquac Eng 20:245–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhu S, Chen S (2002) The impact of temperature on nitrification rate in fixed film biofilters. Aquac Eng 26:221–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhitao Huang
    • 1
  • Rong Wan
    • 1
  • Xiefa Song
    • 1
  • Eric Hallerman
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of FisheriesOcean University of ChinaQingdaoPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Department of Fish and Wildlife ConservationVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations