Mussel culture has been proved as one of the feasible progress for large-scale production of cheap protein food in many of the European

countries having considerable potential for production to the tune of 600 tonnes/hectare as is reported from Spain

Achari, G P Kumaraswamy

CMFRI Digital Repository

CMFRI WORKSHOP ON MUSSEL FARMING 25 - 27 SEPTEMBER, 1980 MADRAS CENTRE OF ADVANCED STUDIES IN MARICULTURE CENTRAL MARINE FISHERIES RESEARCH INSTITUTE P. B. No. 1912, COCHIN-682 018, INDIA CENTRAL MARINE FISHERIES RESEARCH INSTITUTE COCHIN - 682 018 CENTRE OF ADVANCED STUDJES IN JllARICULTU'RE ')ORKSHOP ON MUSSEL FA.-q]VjIN' .. ~ MADRAS 25-27 SEPTEMBER 1980 -------------------------------~-----------------------------------------I TECHNICAL SESSION II): MUSSEr; CULTURE TECHNOLOGY : CMFRI-CAS/MF/aO/BP-10 --------------------------------------------------~----------------------SYSTEM DESIGN FOR MUS3EL CULTURE G.P. KUNJARASWAMY ACHARI Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Cochin - 18 INTRODUCTION Mussel cult~e b..as been proved as one of the feasible progra=es for large-scale production of cheap protein food in many of the European countries having considerable potential for production to the tune of 600 tonnes/hectare as is reported.1i'O TI) Spain. It also opens new avenues for generating employment possibilities for Lmemployed. personnel and; ,-. ' , also for fishermen to take up as a subsidliary source of income in addi-tion to their normal fishing activities, wei.ch ~ay help in improving their social condlitions also. The Frogress in the line of ~crk is rece t in India and the Central ~arine Fisheries Research Institute has initiated the work in 1971 at Vizhinjam on clllturine brown mussels Perna indica and subsequently on green mussels f. viridis at Caliout and l'Ilad.ras. The results produced by 1'Iational Institute of Oceanography (Qasim et .':'l 1977) and the Konkan Krishi Vidya Paath, Ratnagiri are also encoura€fing. The central Marine ~'isheries Research Institute has already , spons9red a pilot project, which has' oeen' taJ-:en up at Ilizhinjam by the Department of Fisheries, Government of Kerala. It is quite approvriate at this context to have a system design for mussel culture for formulating large-seal! programmes to be taken up whereever it is possible in the Indian coa t or elsewhere. The ••• c .2. information given in this paper is only a broad outline of the system developed in many of the advanced countries and the production patential of mussel mlture and the system suitable for our condition which could be considered with marginal vari ations at different places depending upon· the cost of material and physical as well as biological features of the _environrnant while formulating projects. DIFBBF'.ENT ECOSYSTEMS·_AliD: .. 'I',c;,-srI'rKmE METHODOLOGY India is having an extensive ~oastline bordering the different maritime states with rocky as well as sandy shallow areas, intertidal fla ts, lagoons and bays wi th fully marine conditions where mussel culture is possible. As mussels prefer to have saline conditions ranging 25 'to 361«:>,suitable areas are to be identified at the above ecological regions before taking up l arge -scale programmes . As such rope culture using floati ng rafts a nd by us i ng longlines, stake cuI ture l tray culture and relaying or spreading mussels ih favourabl e shallow areas are the methods developed and suitable farming procedures are to be adopted for the respective areas . }!ormally cul ture programme no t only helps in increased production bllt ~ also help3 in conserving enormous quantities of spats or sced-muss~~~h.; inter:tidal areas which in course of time perish due to ·continued exposure. It is worthwhile ecological to mention A • the dirferent methods I sui table conditions in this connection. CULTIVATION IN DEEPER AREAS for the different Ropes suspended from fixed frames, loat i ng raft method or suspending ropes from long-l ines are the met ods adopted in various coUntries whereever the depth is more than _'ve metres. • .. ... ..3..------- 3 -The method of suspending ropes from fixed frame is common in southern France, Spain, Yugoslavia and Italy (Maso n, 1972). However, this can be possibl e only along the border areas of the lakes in shallow regions and is a flourishing industry in Naples, Italy. An i mprovement on this method is made by suspending ropes from gloating frame work and this has been impressively developed in Spain. These structures are known as floating parks and are anchored in the Galici'an rias which fray extend up to 25 km length-wise and 3 to 12 kill width~ise ~nd having a maximum depth of 60 m. Earlier these rafts are constructed on old hulls of boats and at present four or more floats coated with cement or fibre. glass are used for floation. If the float is single it is 12 x 4 x 2 m and if four floats are used it is 2.5 x 2 .5 x 1.9 m. (Andreu, 196€",;hyther,1968 ) . A f r ame-work of Eucalyptus beams is fixed over these floats and i s supported by iron stays from the end of beams to the masts fixed on the floats. Generally a typical raft su?ports 500 to 600 ropes and is of 20m2 area with a working platform and shelter for wor.kers. There are even larger rafts supporting even 1500 ropes (Andreu,1968 b) andl the estimated cost in 1968 for a typical raft is about £2200-2800 (\.iborg and Bohle, 1968). Anchoring is done by chain, 32-36 !!'or, tbic~me s s and 6 to 7 times that of the depth and using hllge cement blod,s as a chors. The annual mllssel prOduction is estimated at 50 tonnes per wch aft (Andreu,1968 0). At vif:hinjam, rafts of 5m x 5m are corstruc.twLl!.S~.l1IL~6 bamboos and using nylon rope of 4 mm th:i:ckn=s-.U>-·4;i;e-·them into a frame-work. Each raft is floate d using 4-6 empty oil barrels (200 litre) and in few cases a coating of fibre glass is given. Fhe raft i s anchored using 12 mm nylon rope at four cornpr s and using grarite stones with iron clamps as anchors . This is found to be the c hpapest method for cal~ areas . }'or rough cond it ions additional teak pb les are llsed for the frame along wi th iron chain and iron anchors for anchoring- i:n·-the---epen sea as is done at Calicut. Experiment is in prof gres~ for a de sign of .. . ... 4 .. ..- - ~- -- - '-- - . - 4 -submerged raft at Kovalam, liladras. ,A raft of the above dimension can support 50 ropes for culture. The annual production is estimated at 3 to 4 tonnes if six metre seeded ropes are suspended. The production potential and rate of growth of ' brovm mussel Perna indi ca at Yi zhinjam bay is presented in table I and fig. I for further details. (1) Open Sea If wave~action i s prevailing heavy inve stment is required for keeping floating structures, at l ea st an average l ength of 5-6 metre is to be retained for the seeded portion of t he rope for getting good returns. The production per raft and per hectare will depend upon the number of ropes suspended in the area as well as the length of the seeded portion of each ropes and invariably whenever heavy inves tment is required for the construction of the raft as we ll as for anchoring them in the sea the above factor is to be given special consideration. It is already observed that a reliable average production of 10 kg/metre of rope l ength co uld be obtained per metre of seeded rope at Yizhinjam (Achary and Thangavelu, 1980 ) and the production cos t and returns can be computed as given el sewhere in thi s paper. If rafts cannot be permanently retained in the sea due to rough weather, an additi onal expendi ture for the Iseasonal operation also is to be anticipated. (2) ' Bays and Lagoons . Raft culture i s most successful in bays and l agoons whe r e depth is more than ' 5 me'tres and having a r ich production of phytoplank-ton. Areas protected. by r eafs and or islands ' also can be included under this type of ecosyst em but the pro.duction can be at a. higher rate because of the frequent replacement of water by tidal action • • . . •• . 5. GROWTH OF CULTURED MUSSELS ( VIZHINJAM) i I HARV~ST BEGINS r====-..... APR. DEC. w ::~ .c' , , , , (.!) <! ft MAR. NOV 40 I , I , I-, , 20 Z w FEB. OCT. v 40 I 0:: 20 W I ~ Q.. JAN. I SEP. 40 I 20 z DEC. AUG. -4 '", 20 '" ~ ... >- NOV JUL. 40 V Z 20 w OCT. JUN. ::> 40 no",£ CULTUnE I 0 20 BAM800 CIA..TURE I RETARDED SEED • W UUSSELS 0:: SEP. MAY u.. 40 TRANSPLANTATK)N ON ROPE AND BAliBOO 20 5 15 25 .. 4' 55 65 75 85 9535 4, 55 •• 75 8 • 9. 105 115 125 S Z E R A N G E IN MM - 5 -CULTIVATION IN SHALLOW '1'IATERS The principle' involved is .to give a favourable environment, .. , for the mussels to grow at a faster rate compared wi th the growth at the normal mussel beds by either spreading them on very shallow areas having hard substratum or if the depth is at least 2 m. during the low tide; culturing them on stakes utilizing the three dimensional culture procedure. Since the procedure is too simple these methods have been evolved in U.K and France respectively much earlier to the introducti6n of hanging cu.lture in Spain. (1) Stake culture. This method is used since the 13th century on the western coast of France and even now is the principal method in France, (Aud~in, 1954) and is known as 'bouchot' system. Fine stakes are planted as collector bOUchots off from the shore. ' Poles of 4-5 m lebgth protruding 1.6-2 m are planted 35 cm. apart on the tidal flats. From these mussel spats of 20 mm size are collected and transferred to . earing bouchots planted at a distance of 75 em aod horrizontally interw ven with branches of willow or chestmlt tree. Seed mussels are then transferred to them in bags of fine mesh netting and after disinte ation of the netti~g, mllssels attach themselves to the rearing'hll;u:ch()l\;;s (lilason, 1972). The total length of bouchots exceeds 600 kID on the mid western coast of France (Lambert, 1939). Young (1969) reports about 900 kID of them. Since natural spat fall is not Brittany they are collected by available on me northern coast of . I suspending ~Ji T'DV"O ropes at the na tural be ds at laRochelle and are transferred o Brittany and wrapped spirally around the poles (Ryther, 19613) • At family , n average a maintains 10,000 to 25,000 pol,es in 1 ~:3.nce (lta on Loc cit) and the ,-_._-total mussel production in France a!1X)unts to 3 -' 000 tonne s (FAa, 1970). •••• 6. - 6 -Obusen and Urbano (1968) ha"'re described the methods of Philippines. By this the stake method is used in two ways. In areas of about 2.5 m depth during low tide , bamboos are staked at a di s t ance of one metre in two rows and they are interconnected at the top by ho=izonta l bamboos. The second IOOthod Which is known as 'wigwam' is by planting 8 radial bamboos just like the ribs of an umbrella from a central pole and the bottom portion of each bamboo will be staked at a slanding position 1 .5 to 2 metres away from the central pole. These nethods are known to give good prodl4ction of ml4ssels in philippines. In India, stake method is to Qe developed in shallow suitable areas. Experimental trials conducted at Vizhinjam bay using' transplanted bamboo poles has been fOWld successful and the production potential is given in t able I ani II. At Madras also this experiment is conducted at Kovalam in the open sea. BOTTOM CULTIVATION OR RELAYING I N FAVOURABLE AREAS 'rhis method, being the su", ~,le s t, ha s been practiced in Great Britain, Ire land and many of t he Europe a n countries including Denmark and West Germany (Korring::>., 1970) 3J1 d!bas beccIDe the chief method in HollmJl. (Lambert, 1951) and D~.t ch mL:S~e l production has . I reached 1,00,000 tonnes per year (FAO, 1970). I Areas of 5 to 10 hectares are alloted to f a rmers as IDusse l parks on a rental basis by the Government. Seeds are first transplanted to shallow grounds • and subse quently t o deeper areas (Havinga, 1956) and thinning is done to avoid overcroV.ding and for faster growth (::l'verson, 1968; Havinga, 1964). As a ver y thriving industry, bottom c ultivation is a mechaJ1i.sed, activity in Balland using dredges of capacity 40 tonnes per hour " I ( 'Valne, 1963). In Norfolk,England the annua~ output per man reaches . 50-60 tonnes using hand net, rake, fork and , mall boat (navies, 1968). - 7 -Howeve~inIndia t his method is yet to be developed and suitable areas are to be identified for introducing the bottom culture of mussels. SYSTEM DESIGN FOR MUSSE L CULTURE IN INDIA The foregoing account gives a general picture of the various types of culture practiced in many of the developed countries and in Indi~ Rillall, medium and large-scale culture of mussels is to be taken up by identifying suitable areas in the different maritime states. Based on the e'I'Perimental re'sul ts obtained by Sta.k:3 and the rope culture method at Vizhinjam it has been pos sibae to trace the production pattern of the brown mussels (Achary and Thangavelu, 1980) and the investment required for taking up the work oy single fisherman, a group of fishermen wmrking under a village society or an enterpreneur may work as follows: SINGLE RAFT SYSTEM (5 m :x: 5 m) I Investment 1. Bamboo @ lis. 15 x 36 2. Nylon rope 0)) Rs. 30 x 6kg x 8kg 3· " 4. " x 50 kg 5. Granite block and Iron clamp @ Rs. 40 x 4 6. Diesel barrel (200 litre ) @ Rs. 60 x 6 7. Fabrication and Launching 8. Unfo== expenditure and working capital Total Rs 540 180 240 1500 160 360 120 400 3500 .. .. 8. II Operational cost 1 • collection of seed, 2. Cotton netting ). Mainte :1anQ8 of Raft 6 drums (150 + 360) 40 Unfor"s~'1 expenses - 8 ~ seeding etc. and cost of Rs o 300 190 510 100 Total operat ional cost 1100 ' III Sale value of Mussel 3000 kg @ Rs . 1. 6 (6 m rope @10 rlg/m x 50 ropes) per Kg. 4800 IV Gross surplus (III-II) 3700 V interest 'on capital @ 9% 315 VI Depreoi ation @ 20 % 700 VII ' Net surplus 2685 ,VIII Income of Fis mrman 2685 IX Percentage retllrn on Capital 76.71 X Income for fi sherman i.f two rafts are maintained 5370 If imo rafts are managed by a single fisherman family the , ~~turns may COFB to Rso 5370/- per season provided the '~uality of seed and transplantation season are properly maintained and periodic husbandry work is ' done upto the harvest stage properly . This system can I wor-k as a small sca.le prol::,Tamrue whereever seed mussels a.re available in the nearby area and suitable farming area is also availabl e near the farmer's village . - 9 -50 RAFT SYSTEM FOR MEDIUM SCAlE OPERATION I Investment for 50 r afts (Rs, )500 x 50 ), ' Manage:rent and other expenses @ 30.10 Total II Operational cost (Rs', 1100 x 50) III Sale value of musse l Rs, 1,75,000 52,500 2,27,500 55,000 (3 tonnes x 50 x Rs 1600/ tonne) IV Gros s sll:rplus (III-II) V Int erest on capi tal @ 9 % VI Depreciation @ 20 % VII Net surplus VIII Ne t profit I X Per centage return on capital 20.475 45,500 1, 19, 025 52 . 31 2,40,000 1,85.000 1,19,025 X Man power re'l.uirement 4250 man days for farming work. This coul d be t ake n up by a g~oup of fishermen or by coopera tive aotivity, . The s uihtability of the area is to be considere d with priority and technical as well as management support is also to bs given bsfora cOITrrnitt ing with heavy inv8stm,",nt . .. ." - .. - . • ••• • 10. • - 10 -STAKE METHOD Fm MEDIUM lEVEL OPERATION (System of 10,000 stakes of 2+' m length and areal stake' per he ctare ) 1 .5 m settlemtnt I Investment 1. Bamboo 5 m. 2500': :@Rs. 15 (split and cut into 4 pieces) 2. Netting 2500- m. 3. Seed (2 kg/m . and 1.5 m. each for 10,000 poles) 4. Seeding charges Re. 1/Pole for 10,000 stakes . 5. Unfo~~n expenditure Total II Sale value of mussels 150 tonnes @ Rs • 1600/tonne (@ 10Kg/m production for 1.5 m) III Gross surplus (II-I) Interest @ 9 1~ IV Net profit V Percentage return on capital Rs. 37,500 15,000 30,000 10,000 7,500 1, 00,000 9,000 31 % 2,40,000 1,40,000 1,31,000 VI Man power requirement 4000 man ays fo r farming work. Even though this system is to vo.rk .. ag . ..a. med.ium l evel operation .-_.-this method Ci.lso ~s _ a,n advantage that those f shermen who can operate wi th even 100 or 200 stakes adjacent to their esidence, where shallow areas and seeds are available, it can be a sub idiary income for the ' family and such small unit system alSo can be 'ntroduced in suitable ar.aas. • ••• 11-. - 11 -BEFEEENCES ACBA..'l.Y, G.P.K. and R. Thangavelu 1980. Mussel Culture, its problems and prospects. SympositJ.m on Coastal Agtlactllture (Mar. BioI. Ass. Ind i a) Jan 12-18, 1980 ANDREU, B. 1968ao Publnes tech. Jtlnta Est. Pesca Madrid, 1, 303-320. ANDREU, B. 1968b. The importance and possibilitieB ·of mussel culture. ,;!orking paper 5. Seminar German FOtlndation for developing countrie s Be;::Un ('1:'egel) Sept. {%8. ANDr~u, B. 1968c. Fishery and Ctllture of mtlssel and oysters in Spain. IJroc. ~. mollusca (Mar~Biol. Ass" India) III 835 - 846. AUDOUIN, J. 1954. Science Peche, 1 (16), 7-10 DAVIES, G. 1968: ;,Iussels as a world food reSO\lrce. Froc. Syrn.£.,.. Molltlsca (I\k'H. BioI. Ass. India) III 873-884. F.A.O. 1970. Yb. Fisb. satlst., 28 (1969) HAVINGA, B. 1956. Rapp. P.V. Renn. Cons. Perm int Explor. Mer. 140 (3) 49-52.--HAVINGA, B. 1964. Sea Front, 19. (3), 155-161 IVERSEN, E.S. 1968. Farmin~ tbe edge of the sea. Fisbing news (Books) Lft, London, .~301 · trp. KORRINGA, F. 1970. Froe. Symp. Mollllsca (Mar. BioI. Ass. India) 818-823. LAMBERT, L. 1939. La Joi!oule at la Mytiliculttlre LAMBERT, L. MASON, J. A. Guillot, Versailles, 55 pp. 1951. Revtle Trav. off. (Scient. ech) Pech. Marit., 1§., '11 1-128-- --1972. The cl1lture of the E~tlro-pean , u8sels, Mitiltls edulis L. Oc,,"-anosgr. Mar. Bi0l.. Ann. Hev lQ: 437-460 • • .... 12 .. Ol'lUSAN .•. R~A~ and K.E. URBANO ~' 968. Tahong - Food for the mU'iions. QAS~, \. I Proc~ l.~,,!,.~ . 14 .. 25, Oct{> 1968. 1 .. 18 S.Z, A.H" PARULEKAR, S.l'. HARKAN'1'RA, Z.A. ANSARI and A. NAIR. 1977. Aquamilture of green mussel MYtilus viridis.L.." Cultivation on ropes from floating rafts. Indian 1:. mar. SCi.. .§.: 15-25. RYTH$R. J.H. 1968. The status and potential of Aquaculture, Particul_ arly invertibrates and Algae culture. Part II. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Natn . Bureau of standards, 261 pp. WALNE;'I P.R • . 1963. In the Bitter use of the world' s faWla for food, ~. lnst .. Biol. .• No.11. 147-154. ~IIBORG,\ K.F. and B. BO!ILE 1968. Fiskets Gang, 54 (6):91-95. YONGE, C.M. 1969 . In. Marine lliolog~· . Ed.J.D. Costlow, Jr. Gardon and Beach, New York 2: 517-569 • . . . . - 13 -TABlE I Average production per metre by culture at Vizhinjam (Weight in Kg . including on e 11) - ------------Month • By rope culture ----------March April May June July August september October November December , .. 10.166 12.942 ·~5 . 816 17,. 360 18.512 22~969 16.204 13.697 13.258 Average production per ruetre (in Kg.) By bamboo culture 8.621 10·505 12.835 16 .065 14.352 19.163 15.577 14.545 11.063 Average for Rope & Bamboo 9.640 12.115 14·831 16.947 18.613 21 .737 15·987 13·977 12.533 Retarded seed mussel 1.848 3.045 2.467 2.292 2 .222 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --••. 14· - 14 -TABLE II Average yield of flesh in ~ . per me tre by calture at Vizljinjam I - - - - - - - "- - - ... - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------Month Average prodaction per mtre (in Kg. ) By rope culture By bamboo culture Average for Rope & bamboo -------------------------March April 3.773 3.123 3. 551 May 5.895 4.369 5. 377 June' 6.499 5.211 6.025 July · 7.362 5-5C)O 6.764 August 7.083 4·918 6.383 September 9.735 7.222 8.942 October 6. 262 6.039 6.185 November 5.120 5.786 5.340 December 5.283 4.389 4.981 - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Re t arded seed mllsse l 0.631 1.1 04 0. 914 0.728 0.819 

System design for mussel culture

http://eprints.cmfri.org.in/7670/1/7_1-14_kumaraswami_achari.pdf

System design for mussel culture

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CMFRI Digital Repository