SUCCESSFUL INCO-DEVArtemia Biodiversity Workshop

SUCCESSFUL INCOSUCCESSFUL INCO--DEVDEVArtemia Biodiversity WorkshopArtemia Biodiversity Workshop

THANKS TO THE GENEROUS SPONSORS:EU/Research DirectorateARC/GentIROSTIran Dept. of EnvironmentWest Azarbaijan Governor’s OficeShahid Kalantary ProjectBonab Research Center, AEO-IranIran Fisheries Org.

CONGRATULATIONS TO:Dr. Naser AghGooya HarirchiISMO, AAARC, UU, IFRO, andeveryone else who assisted in the excellent organization of the conference Non-Alcoholic!

ARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENTARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENTARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENT

GREAT SALT LAKE PROGRAMINVE: Brad Marden and Jaimi Curl

USGS: Dave NaftzSIBERIAN LAKES PROGRAMS

Siberian Research and DesignInstitute of FisheriesAlexander LitvenenkoLudmilla LitvenenkoMarina Vdovchenko

Elena BoykoSiberian Fisheries Project/Altai Branch

Galina TsarevaINVE Kurgan

Nina LitvinenkoARAL SEA UZBEKISTAN PROGRAM

Aral Artemia CompanyKakabay Hankuliev

Saparbay KazakhbaevIskandar Mirabdullaeyev

Zuri MustafaevaIliya Zholdasova

ARAL SEA KAZAHKSTAN PROGRAMIMBR

Ali KurtulusFedya Kalimov

Specific Outcomes of Today’s Workshop:•INCO Resource Assessment Principles and Methods available on INCO website•Cooperative projects that link ecology and life histories with strain characterization and adaptation.•Cooperative project on Artemia population dynamics and production models

Artemia Task Force (ATF)Resource Assessment:

Structure and Methodology

•Develop standardized sampling and testing methods on GSL•Train science team in other geographical locations

•Central data collection location•Standardized reporting and analysis format

•Distribute data to relevant groups and individuals on regular intervals

ATF Resource AssessmentStrategic Approach

Artemia population dynamicsCyst quality assessment

HydrochemistryWeather data & forecasting

Regular ATF Report

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAM

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAMPROGRAM

ARTEMIA:2X VERTICAL PLANKTON NET TOWDISCRETE HORIZONS IN WATER COLUMNAGE CLASS REPRODUCTIONSEX RATIOS

CYST QUALITY CHARACTERIZATIONHATCHING TESTSDIAPAUSE STATUSBUOYANCYOTHER MEASURES OF QUALITY (eg., Cracked Shells)CYST MORPHOMETRICSPERCENTAGE SHELLS

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAM

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAMPROGRAM

HYDROCHEMISTRY AND ABIOTIC MEASUREMENTS:MICRO-NUTRIENTS (essential elements)SALINITYDISSOLVED OXYGEN TRANSPARENCY (SECCHI DISK)TEMPERATURE AT DISCRETE INTERVALSINORGANIC COMPOUNDS

MICROALGAE:RELATIVE ABUNDANCEABSOLUTE ABUNDANCEBIOVOLUME

CHLOROPHYLL A

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAM

ATF RESOURCE ASSESSMENTPROGRAMPROGRAM

WEATHER CONDITIONS:LOCAL WEATHER CONDITIONS (Temp., Precip, Wind Speed, Barometric Pressure)LONG-RANGE WEATHER FORECASTSWATERSHED STATUS (Drainage Basin)

ATF REPORT:GSL: WEEKLYOTHER LOCATIONS: GOAL = BIWEEKLY TO MONTHLYINCLUDING HARVEST FORECASTCOMMENTS ON MANAGEMENT AND OTHER RELEVANT MATTERS

(IF TIME ALLOWS WE CAN REVIEW AN ATF REPORT)

WR-5

MN-2SE-9

GS-4

PP-3

CB-4

HI-2

MC-2

BR-1WC-6 EC-8

ML-8

SK-5.5

SB-3.5

RB-3

IC-8GI-2

•12 Sampling Locations

•Sample Frequency

•Artemia- weekly

•Phytoplankton-biweekly

•2 Plankton Net hauls per site

•Dissolved Oxygen

•Salinity

•Conductivity

•Water Transparency--SecchiDisk

•Water Temperature

•12 Sampling Locations

•Sample Frequency

•Artemia- weekly

•Phytoplankton-biweekly

•2 Plankton Net hauls per site

•Dissolved Oxygen

•Salinity

•Conductivity

•Secchi

•Water Temperature

•Comparative net hauls: DWR vs. USAH

•Artemia

•Population structure and dynamics

•Biomass

•Reproductive endpoints

•Morphological characteristics

•Cyst quality

•Vertical distribution in water column

•Phytoplankton population composition

•Chlorophyll-a analysis

USAH R&D DATAPopulation Dynamics 2003

Cysts and Nauplii

GSL Artemia Population Trends 2001-2004

020406080100120140160

Janu

ary 6

, 200

4

Nove

mbe

r 19,

200

3

Oct

ober

20,

200

3

Sept

embe

r 25,

200

3

Augu

st 2

0, 2

003

July

23, 2

003

June

18,

200

3

May

14,

200

3

April

17,

200

3

Mar

ch 1

0, 2

003

Janu

ary 1

7, 2

003

Dec

embe

r 10,

200

2

Nove

mbe

r 12,

200

2

Oct

ober

9, 2

002

Augu

st 2

6, 2

002

July

24, 2

002

June

5, 2

002

May

2, 2

002

Mar

ch 2

1, 2

002

Janu

ary 9

, 200

2

Dec

embe

r 6, 2

001

Oct

ober

29,

200

1

Sept

embe

r 26,

200

1

Augu

st 2

2, 2

001

July

17, 2

001

June

14,

200

1

May

17,

200

1

April

4, 2

001

Febr

uary

22,

200

1

Dec

embe

r 10,

200

0

DATE

Coun

t per

Lite

r

Nauplii

Meta-nauplii

Total Nauplii

True Cysts

ATF DATAGSL Population Dynamics

Juvenile, Pre-adult, and Adult Population Trends 2001-2003

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Num

ber p

er L

iter

Juveniles

Pre-Adults

Males

Females

Total Adults

ATF RESEARCH ON THE GSLCyst Abundance from 1999 to 2003

CYST/SHELL DYNAMICS1999 to 2003

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

Augu

st 2

5, 1

999

Oct

ober

21,

199

9

April

4, 2

000

July

24, 2

000

Nov

embe

r 3, 2

000

Febr

uary

22,

200

1

April

4, 2

001

May

8, 2

001

June

14,

200

1

July

17, 2

001

Augu

st 2

7, 2

001

Oct

ober

18,

200

1

Nov

embe

r 20,

200

1

Janu

ary

16, 2

002

April

11,

200

2

May

28,

200

2

July

24, 2

002

Sept

embe

r 11,

200

2

Oct

ober

23,

200

2

Dec

embe

r 4, 2

002

Janu

ary

17, 2

003

Mar

ch 2

1, 2

003

April

30,

200

3

June

4, 2

003

July

23, 2

003

Augu

st 2

8, 2

003

Oct

ober

7, 2

003

Nov

embe

r 12,

200

3

Janu

ary

6, 2

004

Full

Cys

ts p

er L

iter

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Full

Cys

t Per

cent

age

Adjusted Mean Cysts/Liter

%Full Cysts

Reproductive Mode2002-2004

2002-2004 Reproductive Mode

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

Apr

il 11,

200

2

May

11,

200

2

June

11,

200

2

July

11,

200

2

Aug

ust 1

1, 2

002

Sept

embe

r 11,

200

2

Oct

ober

11,

200

2

Nove

mbe

r 11,

200

2

Dece

mbe

r 11,

200

2

Janu

ary

11, 2

003

Febr

uary

11,

200

3

Mar

ch 1

1, 2

003

Apr

il 11,

200

3

May

11,

200

3

June

11,

200

3

July

11,

200

3

Aug

ust 1

1, 2

003

Sept

embe

r 11,

200

3

Oct

ober

11,

200

3

Nove

mbe

r 11,

200

3

Dece

mbe

r 11,

200

3

Janu

ary

11, 2

004

Date

Per

cent

age

of A

ll G

ravi

d Fe

mal

es

%FE/Gravid F

%FC/Gravid F

%FN/Gravid F

Diapause Status of Cysts

GSL Water Column Cyst Quality Characteristics: Hatching Percentage

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

Dec

embe

r 1, 2

001

Dec

embe

r 15,

200

1D

ecem

ber 2

9, 2

001

Janu

ary

12, 2

002

Janu

ary

26, 2

002

Febr

uary

9, 2

002

Febr

uary

23,

200

2M

arch

9, 2

002

Mar

ch 2

3, 2

002

April

6, 2

002

April

20,

200

2M

ay 4

, 200

2M

ay 1

8, 2

002

June

1, 2

002

June

15,

200

2Ju

ne 2

9, 2

002

July

13,

200

2Ju

ly 2

7, 2

002

Augu

st 1

0, 2

002

Augu

st 2

4, 2

002

Sep

tem

ber 7

, 200

2S

epte

mbe

r 21,

200

2O

ctob

er 5

, 200

2O

ctob

er 1

9, 2

002

Nov

embe

r 2, 2

002

Nov

embe

r 16,

200

2N

ovem

ber 3

0, 2

002

Dec

embe

r 14,

200

2D

ecem

ber 2

8, 2

002

Janu

ary

11, 2

003

Janu

ary

25, 2

003

Febr

uary

8, 2

003

Febr

uary

22,

200

3M

arch

8, 2

003

Mar

ch 2

2, 2

003

April

5, 2

003

April

19,

200

3M

ay 3

, 200

3M

ay 1

7, 2

003

May

31,

200

3Ju

ne 1

4, 2

003

June

28,

200

3Ju

ly 1

2, 2

003

July

26,

200

3Au

gust

9, 2

003

Augu

st 2

3, 2

003

Sep

tem

ber 6

, 200

3S

epte

mbe

r 20,

200

3O

ctob

er 4

, 200

3O

ctob

er 1

8, 2

003

Nov

embe

r 1, 2

003

Nov

embe

r 15,

200

3N

ovem

ber 2

9, 2

003

Dec

embe

r 13,

200

3D

ecem

ber 2

7, 2

003

Janu

ary

10, 2

004

Janu

ary

24, 2

004

DATE

Net Cysts HO% +H2O2Net Cysts HO% AS IS

Median or Adjusted Mean?

Adjusted Mean and Median Comparison: Full Cysts Per Liter

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

Janu

ary

7, 2

003

Janu

ary

21, 2

003

Febr

uary

4, 2

003

Febr

uary

18,

200

3

Mar

ch 4

, 200

3

Mar

ch 1

8, 2

003

Apr

il 1,

200

3

Apr

il 15

, 200

3

Apr

il 29

, 200

3

May

13,

200

3

May

27,

200

3

June

10,

200

3

June

24,

200

3

July

8, 2

003

July

22, 2

003

Aug

ust 5

, 200

3

Aug

ust 1

9, 2

003

Sep

tem

ber 2

, 200

3

Sep

tem

ber 1

6, 2

003

Sep

tem

ber 3

0, 2

003

Oct

ober

14,

200

3

Oct

ober

28,

200

3

Nov

embe

r 11,

200

3

Nov

embe

r 25,

200

3

Dec

embe

r 9, 2

003

Dec

embe

r 23,

200

3

Janu

ary

6, 2

004

Janu

ary

20, 2

004

Cys

ts P

er L

iter

Adjusted Mean Cysts/Liter

Median Cysts/Liter

DISSOLVED OXYGEN AND TRANSPARENCY

Great Salt Lake Dissolved Oxygen and Water Transparency2001-2003

020406080100120140160180200

Janu

ary

6, 2

004

Nov

embe

r 25

, 200

3

Nov

embe

r 4,

200

3

Oct

ober

14,

200

3

Sep

tem

ber

25, 2

003

Aug

ust 2

8, 2

003

Aug

ust 7

, 200

3

July

16,

200

3

June

18,

200

3

May

20,

200

3

Apr

il 30

, 200

3

Apr

il 9,

200

3

Mar

ch 1

0, 2

003

Janu

ary

24, 2

003

Dec

embe

r 30

, 200

2

Dec

embe

r 4,

200

2

Nov

embe

r 12

, 200

2

Oct

ober

15,

200

2

Sep

tem

ber

19, 2

002

Aug

ust 1

4, 2

002

July

24,

200

2

June

18,

200

2

May

17,

200

2

Apr

il 23

, 200

2

Mar

ch 2

1, 2

002

Janu

ary

16, 2

002

Dec

embe

r 19

, 200

1

Nov

embe

r 20

, 200

1

Oct

ober

29,

200

1

Oct

ober

3, 2

001

Sep

tem

ber

7, 2

001

Aug

ust 6

, 200

1

July

17,

200

1

June

19,

200

1

May

31,

200

1

May

8, 2

001

Apr

il 4,

200

1

Mar

ch 7

, 200

1

Janu

ary

24, 2

001 P

erc

en

t o

f A

tmo

sph

ere

01234567

Se

cch

i D

isk

in M

ete

rs

DO Bottom

DO Surface

Secchi Disk(m)

WATER TEMPERATURE AND POPULATION SIZE

Total Artemia and GSL Water Temperature2001-2003

020406080100120140160

January

6,

Nove

mber

Octo

ber

Septe

mber

August

20,

July

23,

June 1

8,

May 1

4,

April 17,

Marc

h 1

0,

January

Decem

ber

Nove

mber

Octo

ber

9,

August

26,

July

24,

June 5

,

May 2

,

Marc

h 2

1,

January

9,

Decem

ber

Octo

ber

Septe

mber

August

22,

July

17,

June 1

4,

May 1

7,

April 4,

Febru

ary

Decem

ber

DATE

Ind

ivid

ua

ls p

er

Lit

er

-5.00.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.0

Su

rfa

ce

Te

mp

era

ture

in

C

Total Artemia/LSurface Temp

VERTICAL PROFILE:Cysts,Temperature, Salinity, DO

12

34

56

78

9

AUGU

ST

SEPT

EMBE

R

OCTO

BER

DECE

MBER

JANU

ARY

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Cysts

Per

Liter

DEPTH (m)MONTH

VERTICAL PROFILE:Dissolved Oxygen

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

0.5

1

2

4

6

7.5

VERTICAL PROFILE:Salinity in ppt

160.5 161 161.5 162 162.5 163 163.5 164 164.5 165 165.5

0.5

1

2

4

6

8

VERTICAL PROFILE:Temperature in Degrees C

-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1

0.5

1

2

4

6

8

Cyst Morphometrics: Floating & Sinking CystsFloating Cyst Diameter

020

4060

80100

120140

185

198

210

223

235

248

260

273

285

298

310

323

335

348

360

373

385

Minimum 174.6Maximum 315.7Mean 237.6Stdev 15.8Sterr 0.4Count 1501Confidence95% 236.8Lower Quartile 227.7Upper Quartile 238

Statistics

Minimum 168.2Maximum 317.8Mean 237.3Stdev 14Sterr 0.4Count 1501Confidence95% 236.6Lower Quartile 229.7Upper Quartile 237.9

StatisticsSinking Cysts Diameter

020406080

100120140

185

198

210

223

235

248

260

273

285

298

310

323

335

348

360

373

385

Cyst Morphometrics: Sinking/Floating Cysts

SUMMARY STATISTICS

FLOATING CYSTSCyst-diameter: 237.6 ± 15.8 µmEmbryo-diameter: 217.9 ± 14.4 µmChorion-thickness: 9.85 µm

SINKING CYSTSCyst-diameter: 237.3 ± 14.0 µmEmbryo-diameter: 218.6 ± 13.0 µmChorion-thickness: 9.35 µm

CYST BUOYANCY TESTS: Oct & Nov. 2003Percentage of Floating Cysts

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

GSL H2O 160 PPT DH2O

Water Treatment Group

Perc

enta

ge F

loat

ing Cysts Collected on Nov 25

Cysts Collected on Nov 19

Buoyancy Response Curve

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0 25.0 50.0 75.0 100.0 125.0 150.0 175.0 200.0 225.0

Salinity in PPT

Perc

enta

ge o

f Flo

atin

g Cy

sts

OCTOBER 7, 2003PERCENTAGE FLOATING CYSTS

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

0 30 60 90 120

150

180

210

240

Sex Ratios:1995 to 2000

Sex Ratio: Female:Male

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

Aug-

95

Dec

-95

Apr-

96

Aug-

96

Dec

-96

Apr-

97

Aug-

97

Dec

-97

Apr-

98

Aug-

98

Dec

-98

Apr-

99

Aug-

99

Dec

-99

Apr-

00

Aug-

00

Dec

-00

DATE

Sex Ratios:2001 an Unusual Year

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

3/20

/01

4/3/

01

4/17

/01

5/1/

01

5/15

/01

5/29

/01

6/12

/01

6/26

/01

7/10

/01

7/24

/01

8/7/

01

8/21

/01

9/4/

01

9/18

/01

10/2

/01

10/1

6/01

10/3

0/01

11/1

3/01

11/2

7/01

12/1

1/01

12/2

5/01

DATE

Rat

io F

emal

e:M

ale

Phytoplankton Trends 1996 to 2001

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Rela

tive

Abun

danc

e

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Year

Chlorophyte Diatom Other

Hydrological and Hydrochemical ResearchHydrological and Hydrochemical Research

♦Nutrient and isotopic data

♦Dissolved-gas data

♦Gage installation/discharge measurements

♦Bathymetric map update

♦Update on GSL standards/LTHO activities

♦Plans of next quarter

♦Nutrient and isotopic data

♦Dissolved-gas data

♦Gage installation/discharge measurements

♦Bathymetric map update

♦Update on GSL standards/LTHO activities

♦Plans of next quarter

Great Salt Lake Research Team

POM δ15N CHANGES AT INFLOW SITES

Feb Mar Apr May3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Farmington Bay inflow Bear River inflow Weber River inflow

δ15N,

PER

MIL

N ISOTOPE (POM/SHRIMP)

2000 2001 2002 2003 20044

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14 2267 2820 3510 4069

δ15N

GSL POM5/04

Mean input POM (Apr/May)

FB POM04/01/2004

+ 3 trophicenrichment

?N2 fixers

ARAL SEA STUDYSeasonal Dynamics of Artemia Nauplii Abundance in the

Aral Sea

0.001.002.003.004.005.006.007.008.009.00

10.00

12-A

ug-0

1

16-O

ct-0

1

15-D

ec-0

1

01-F

eb-0

2

07-A

pr-0

2

07-M

ay-0

2

04-J

ul-0

2

06-S

ep-0

2

15-N

ov-0

2

15-J

an-0

3

15-M

ar-0

3

11-M

ay-0

3

20-J

un-0

3

17-A

ug-0

3

Coun

t per

Lite

r Nauplii

Meta-nauplii

Total Nauplii

Water Temperature of Western Aral Sea by Depth

2001 to 2003

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

Jul-0

1

Sep-

01

Nov-

01

Jan-

02

Mar

-02

May

-02

Jul-0

2

Sep-

02

Nov-

02

Jan-

03

Mar

-03

May

-03

Jul-0

3Tem

pera

ture

in D

egre

es C

entig

rade 1m

20m

30m

ARAL SEA MICRO-ALGAERelative Abundance of Phytoplankton:

Aral Sea/UzbekistanJuly 21, 2003

Cyanophyta27%

Chlorophyta67%

Bacillaryophyta6%

Temporal Changes in the Algal Cell AbundanceCell Counts per ml

Aral Sea 2002 to 2003

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Jul-0

2

Aug

-02

Sep-

02

Oct

-02

Nov-

02

Dec-

02

Jan-

03

Feb-

03

Mar

-03

Apr

-03

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Cou

nts

per

ml

Cyanophyta

Bacillaryophyta

Pyrrhophyta

Euglenophyta

Chrysophyta

Chlorophyta

Bolshoye Yarovoje, SiberiaArtemia parthenogenetica .. Parthenogenic Artemia sp. + characteristics

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

17/0423/0407/0517/0528/0505/0625/0610/0724/0713/0822/0811/0916/10

Juve n.

N/a dult.

Adult.

Bolshoye Diapause Status

020406080

100

octob

erde

cembe

r10

-20/01

1-10/0

220

-30/02 ap

ril june

1996199819992000

ARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTOPICS OF CONCERN

ARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENTARTEMIA RESOURCE ASSESSMENTTOPICS OF CONCERNTOPICS OF CONCERN

• SAMPLING PROGRAM– Qualitative– Quantitative.

• LABORATORY STUDIES– Life History Traits– Feeding Studies– Cyst Quality Characteristics

• ECONOMICS– Cost of Production– Market Trends– Commercial Viability

• MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES

– Sustainable Management– Ecosystem Functions

SETTING PRIORITIES AND OBJECTIVES

What do you want to accomplish?Quick surveyCommercial potentialLong-term and systematic monitoring programDetailed study on a particular aspect of Artemia

biology.

What are the most important outcomes?Artemia population/production model.Management approach.Successful commercial exploitationAdvancement of science through published

papers.Nobel Prize

Preliminary (qualitative) Sampling Program

– Collect all available reports, data, information on lake of interest.

– Identify spatial and temporal patterns and unique characteristics.

– Compartmentalize lake in terms of theoretical functional characteristics.

– Create ecological (functional) zones.– Link logical associations of ecological zones with Artemia

biology.– Define initial experimental design (use stratified random

approach)– Be realistic in terms of time, manpower, and expense– Begin small-scale sampling program – Review results and CRITICALLY examine initial assumptions.– Use results to define final experimental design.

DEFINITIVE RESOURCE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM

COMPONENTS OF PROGRAM.– Artemia population dynamics– Cyst quality assessment– Micoalgae studies.– Hydrochemistry – Weather conditions

ITERATIVE PROCESS:– Collect data, evaluate, modify and improve methods

LABORATORY STUDIES

Cyst trait characterizationMicro-algae identificationChlorophyll Hydrochemical analysesFeeding experiments

Cyst Characterization

Quality• Hatching results and optimization of hatching conditions• Diapause• Morphometrics• Buoyancy• Nutritional Profile• Shelf Life

USAH R&D DATAIn situ Cyst Quality Assessments

Hatching Percentage for Water Column Cysts

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Whi

te R

ock

Mol

lys

Gra

ntsv

ille

Spi

t

Plu

g P

eak

Car

ringt

on B

ay

Hat

Isla

nd

Eas

t Cul

vert

Wes

t Cul

vert

Bom

bing

Ran

ge

Mag

Cor

p

Sou

th E

nd

Mid

Lak

e

As Is

10ppm Peroxide

Percentage of Cracked Cysts in the Water Column on Date, 2003

0%

1%

1%

2%

2%

3%

3%

Whi

te R

ock

Mol

lys

Gra

ntsv

illeSp

it

Plug

Pea

k

Car

ringt

onBa

y

Hat I

slan

d

East

Cul

vert

Wes

tC

ulve

rt

Bom

bing

Ran

ge

Mag

Cor

p

Sout

h En

d

Mid

Lak

eEarly Breaking of Water Column Cysts

0%

1%

1%

2%

2%

3%

3%

4%

4%

5%

Whi

te R

ock

Mol

lys

Gra

ntsv

ille S

pit

Plug

Pea

k

Carr

ingt

on B

ay

Hat I

slan

d

East

Cul

vert

Wes

t Cul

vert

Bom

bing

Ran

ge

Mag

Cor

p

Sout

h En

d

Mid

Lak

e

Perc

enta

ge o

f Cra

cked

She

lls

Hatching Results by Vertical Distribution(5 ppm Peroxide)

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

0.5

2

4

6

7.5

Dep

th in

Met

ers

Hatching Percentage (H +)

AS IS

Plus H2O2

Not enough time, manpower, or money so what can be done?

• Intensive effort at critical times of year.• Reduce expectations and refine objectives.• Teamwork approach (GET HELP): Solicit

interpretations, advice, equipment, applicable research results from “Artemia Family”.

• Seek alternative funding sources.• Clone Dr. Naser Agh.

GSL CYST DENSITY (cysts/liter)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Aug

-95

Nov-

95

May

-96

Aug

-96

Feb-

97

May

-97

Sep-

97

Dec-

97

Apr

-98

Jul-9

8

Nov-

98

Mar

-99

Jun-

99

Sep-

99

Oct

-99

Nov-

99

Mar

-00

Jun-

00

Sep-

00

Oct

-00

Nov-

00

Jan-

01

DATE

NUM

BER

PER

LITE

R

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

8/3/

95

9/25

/95

2/7/

96

4/29

/96

5/31

/96

8/19

/96

11/2

0/96

3/11

/97

5/5/

97

6/23

/97

9/23

/97

11/3

/97

1/21

/98

4/8/

98

5/18

/98

7/15

/98

10/5

/98

11/1

9/98

2/12

/99

5/6/

99

6/28

/99

8/11

/99

9/28

/99

10/1

8/99

11/9

/99

11/2

9/99

1/24

/00

3/29

/00

6/12

/00

7/18

/00

9/6/

00

9/28

/00

10/2

5/00

11/2

0/00

12/5

/00

1/24

/01

DATES

NU

MB

ER P

ER L

ITER

NAUPLIIJUVTOTAL ADULTS

Sex Ratio: Female:Male

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

Aug-

95

Dec

-95

Apr-

96

Aug-

96

Dec

-96

Apr-

97

Aug-

97

Dec

-97

Apr-

98

Aug-

98

Dec

-98

Apr-

99

Aug-

99

Dec

-99

Apr-

00

Aug-

00

Dec

-00

DATE

Forecasting and Predictive Models:Moving Beyond Simple Descriptive Statistics

2002 Reproductive Mode

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%

May

2, 2

002

May

9, 2

002

May

16,

200

2

May

23,

200

2

May

30,

200

2

June

6, 2

002

June

13,

200

2

June

20,

200

2

June

27,

200

2

July

4, 2

002

July

11,

200

2

July

18,

200

2

Date

Per

cent

age

of A

ll G

ravi

d Fe

mal

es

%FE/Gravid F

%FC/Gravid F

%FN/Gravid F

020406080100120140160

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

Year

Pa

rts

pe

r T

ho

us

an

d

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Rel

ativ

e A

bu

nd

ance

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

YearChlorophyte Diatom Other

Utah State UniversityPopulation Growth Model

Establishes the Standard for Management

0 20 40 60 80 100SPRING CYSTS (#/liter)

-1

0

1

2

3

AN

NU

AL

POP U

LATI

ON

GR

OW

T H R

ATE

Spring, 2001

Spring, 2002

Minimum Post-harvest cyst density=21 c/l

SIMPLE FORECASTNG TOOL

Correlation between 2nd Generation and Cyst Production

y = 42.048Ln(x) - 82.914R2 = 0.8613

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

2nd Generation Nauplii Per Liter

Pre-

Harv

est C

ysts

Per

Li

ter

Correlation Between 2nd Generation and Harvest Quantity

y = 4384.1Ln(x) - 9653.9R2 = 0.9799

02000

40006000

800010000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

2nd Generation Nauplii Per Liter

Met

ric T

onne

s Ha

rves

ted

EARLY FORECAST PREDICTIONS

• EARLY FORECAST PREDICTIONS• May/June 2001

– Pre-Season Cyst Density

• Prediction = 87 c/l• Actual = 87 c/l

– Industry Harvest in Metric Tonnes

• Prediction = 8040 mt (modified in September to 8269)• Actual = 8312 mt

• May 23, 2002– Pre-Season Cyst Density

• Prediction = 92 c/l• Actual = 104 c/l

– Industry Harvest in Metric Tonnes

• Prediction = 8606 mt (not modified in September)• Actual Harvest = 11, 588 mt

ARTEMIA POPULATION MODELS

• DUE TO TIME CONSTRAINTS, AND LIMITATIONS IN SKILLS, OUR DATA INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN ALMOST ENTIRELY LIMITED TO DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS.

• IT IS ABUNDANTLY OBVIOUS THAT THERE ARE MUCH BETTER AND MORE SOPHISTICATED MODELS AND INFERENTIAL STATISTICS THAT SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THESE DATA.

• WE APOLOGIZE FOR THE LACK OF CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE DATA.

Sustainable Exploitation and

Management Strategies• Maintain ecosystem functions of the

Artemia.• Consideration given to economic

efficiency in management objectives: limited entry, open competition, transferable harvesting quotas.

• Use the commercial development to support research and protect the ecosystem.

COMPARISON OF BOLSHOE YARAVOE

ANDTHE GREAT SALT LAKE

GENT BELGIUMAPRIL 24, 2001

GSL Brine Shrimp Industry:Demonstrated capability to harvest more than 500 MT per day.

RESOURCE MANAGEMENTScale Considerations:•Resource Size & Harvesting Capacity

ECONOMICS OF EXPLOITATIONGUIDING PRINCIPLES:• Benefit local communities.• Provide dignity and quality to life.• Use harvest fees for research and management.• Appropriate scale of development

ECONOMIC REALITIES:• Volatile pricing and demand • Substantial global competition: GSL, PRC, Central

Asia.• Production facilities are extremely costly to develop

and operate• Aquaculture industry is becoming more efficient in

use of Artemia….global consumption has decreased in recent years (from 2,300 MT to around 2,000 MT per year)

• VERY HIGH RISK BUSINESS……but with risk comes rewards.

FURTHER CONSIDERATIONSOF COMMERCIAL EXPLOITATION

DON’T EXAGGERATE EXPECTED FINANCIAL GAINS

DO EXTENSIVE RESEARCH INTO:• TRANSPORT COSTS• LABOR COSTS• EQUIPMENT COSTS (Especially Replacement Costs)• POTENTIAL HARVESTING COSTS• UNDERSTAND ALL ASPECTS OF YOUR RESOURCE• EVALUATE SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM MARKET TRENDS.• START SMALL AND GROW INCREMENTALLY• ALWAYS RE-EVALUATE ASSUMPTIONS

RESOURCE ASSEMENT FUNDAMENTALS

Clearly define objectivesThorough background researchIterative process:

research, design, implementation, and critical self-evaluation

Be systematicTeamwork/International cooperationUse appropriate technology and scale

ENJOY THE WORK! THERE IS TREMENDOUS SATISFACTION INECOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS.

PLEASE ASK QUESTIONS!