RAS systems for shrimps and their farm management strategies

Bert Wecker

Key facts German market penaeid shrimp

• Import 30.000t per year (BLE 2016)

• Export 10.000t per year (BLE 2016)

• Consumption 20.000t per year (BLE 2016)

• Second place in consumer popularity (NSC)

• German production appr. 50t

• Expected market volume 300-500t (own estimations)

Clear Water RAS Shrimp Farming

• Easier Biomass Determination

• Better Feeding Management

• In Situ-Control of Behaviour & Health

• Controlled Hygienic Condition

• Constant and Reliable Product Quality

Clear Water vs. Turbid Water

0

5

10

15

20

0 40 80 120

Wei

ght

[g]

Days

Turbid Water Clear Water

Waller, Kulakowski, Wecker 2013

Challenge Production Efficiency

Stocking Density Survival Rate

3,0 kg / m²633 ind. / m²Weigth 4-5g

Expected Survival<20%

Comfort-Zone? %

How much space is needed?

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 10 20 30 40 50

Shri

mp

are

a [c

m²]

Weight [g]

Modelling Shrimp Area

Length

Width

0

500

1.000

1.500

2.000

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

0 10 20 30 40 50

Sto

ckin

g d

en

sity

[In

d./

m²]

Sto

ckin

g d

en

sity

[kg

/m2]

Weight [g]

100% Use of Available Area (no real comfort zone) 100%

Performance month before:Mortality 25%Growth 1,3g (best value 8,1g)

65% Use of Available Area 65%

30-50% Use of Available Area 50%

0

200

400

600

800

1.000

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 10 20 30 40

Sto

ckin

g d

en

sity

[In

d./

m²]

Sto

ckin

g d

ensi

ty [

kg/m

2]

Weight [g]

30%

Online Biomass Control Nursery System

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Co

un

ts p

er

Day

[Th

ou

san

d]

Days

Real Model

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Co

un

ts p

er

Day

[Th

ou

san

d]

Days

Online Biomass Control Nursery System

Biomass Control Production System

Important Production Criteria

• Sufficient Area

• Quality of Post Larvae

• Water Quality / Abiotic Conditions

• Good Feed and Feeding Practices

• Shrimp Handling

Water Quality Parameter: Temperature

Optimum range 26 – 30 °C (Wickins & Lee 2002)

26,0

27,0

28,0

29,0

30,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Tem

per

atu

re[°

C]

Days

Temperature

Water Quality Parameter: Salinity

Optimum range 15-25 g / L (Boyd 1989); 10-15 g / L (Briggs et al. 1991)

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[g

/L]

Days

Salinity

Water Quality Parameter: Ammonia nitrogen

0,00

0,01

0,02

0,03

0,04

0,05

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[m

g/L

]

Days

NH3-N

Optimum range <0,03 mg N / L (Van Wyk et al. 1999)

Water Quality Parameter: Nitrite nitrogen

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[m

g/L

]

Days

NO2-N

Optimum range <0,3 mg N / L (Elovaara 2001)

Water Quality Parameter: Oxygen

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[m

g/L

]

Days

O2

Optimum range >80 % (Van Wyk et al. 1999)

Water Quality Parameter: pH Value

7,0

7,2

7,4

7,6

7,8

8,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[m

g/L

]

Days

pH

Optimum range 7,0 – 8,3 (Elovaara 2001)

Water Quality Parameter: Alkalinity

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[°

dH

]

Days

Alkalinity (°dH)

Optimum range 5,6 - 8,4 (Ebeling et al. 2006)

Water Quality Parameter: Carbon dioxide

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n[m

g/L

]

Days

CO2

Optimum range <6,2 mg/L (Wasielesky et al. 2014)

Relation between CO2, pH & Alkalinity (28°C, 15 g/L Salinity)

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

7,00 9 12 14 16 19 21 23 26 28

7,10 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 20 22

7,20 6 7 9 10 12 13 15 16 18

7,30 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14

7,40 4 5 6 7 7 8 9 10 11

7,50 3 4 4 5 6 7 7 8 9

7,60 2 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7

7,70 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6

7,80 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4

7,90 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 4

8,00 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3

8,10 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6

8,20 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4

Optimum high CO2 high pH

low alkalinity high alkalinity

CO2 [mg/L]Alkalinity [°dH]

pH

-Va

lue

Influence of Light Wave Length on Shrimp Growth

© Nadine Lefering

Influence of Light Wave Length on Shrimp Growth

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Bio

mas

s G

row

th [

g]

Nadine Lefering 2017

Influence of Light Wave Length on Shrimp Growth

© Nadine Lefering

Influence of Light Wave Length on Shrimp Growth

Nadine Lefering 2017

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Bio

mas

s G

row

th [

g]

High Stocking Density Low Stocking Density

Challenges

• Genetic quality of postlarvae

• Feed

• Control of bacterial diseases

Thanks for your attention.