Effects of Family, Feeding Frequency, and Alternate Food Type on Body Size and Survival of Hatchery-Produced and Wild-Caught Lake Sturgeon Larvae

Abstract

Studies that evaluate the effects of different feeding strategies (e.g., feeding frequency and food type) on larval fish growth and survival are important for aquaculture productivity. We quantified the effects of common feeding strategies on the growth and survival of larval Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens. At 30 d after initiation of exogenous feeding, the TL and body weight of larvae reared under a treatment regime of three feedings per day (TL [mean ± SE] = 46.83 ± 0.43 mm; body weight = 0.41 ± 0.01 g) were significantly greater than those of fish reared under a regime of 12 feedings per day (TL = 45.73 ± 0.54 mm; body weight = 0.39 ± 0.02 g). Alternate food type and family were documented to have significant effects on the body weight of hatchery-produced larvae at 14 d postexogenous feeding: body weight was significantly greater for larvae that were fed brine shrimp Artemia spp. (family 1 [mean ± SE]: 0.31 ± 0.004 g; family 2: 0.35 ± 0.006 g) than for larvae that received formulated food (family 1: 0.06 ± 0.006 g; family 2: 0.08 ± 0.014 g). Furthermore, alternate food type had a significant effect on the survival of hatchery-produced larvae at 14 d postexogenous feeding, as survival was greater for larvae that were fed Artemia (97.0 ± 3.0%) than for those that were given formulated food (34.0 ± 7.0%). In addition, alternate food type had significant effects on the body weight and survival of wild-caught Lake Sturgeon larvae, with both variables being greater for fish that received Artemia (body weight [mean ± SE] = 0.41 ± 0.02 g; survival = 94.0 ± 2.0%) than for fish that were given formulated food (body weight = 0.03 ± 0.01 g; survival = 17.0 ± 6.0%). Our results provide guidance to direct feeding strategies that can be used to develop standard operating procedures for the culture of Lake Sturgeon, a species of conservation concern.

Received September 25, 2015; accepted November 23, 2015

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Funding for this study was provided by the Great Lakes Fishery Trust, the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), and the Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program. We thank Jim Holser (MDNR); Nathan Barton, Kari Dammerman, Adam Umstead, Troy Smith, Lindsey Adams, and especially Sarah Walton (Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University [MSU]); David Reyes-Gastelum (Center for Statistical Training and Support, MSU) for statistical consultation; Jim Tucker (Tower-Kleber Limited Partnership); and Gerald R. Gray (Sturgeon for Tomorrow, Cheboygan, Michigan).