
































Microsoft Word - 59-Article Text-103-1-2-20210420


ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

   
 

 

  



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

   
 

The American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology (AJASET) is 
blind peer reviewed international journal publishing articles that emphasize research, 
development and application within the fields of agricultural science, engineering and 
technology. The AJASET covers all areas of Agricultural Science, Engineering and 
Technology, publishing original research articles. The AJASET reviews article within 
approximately two weeks of submission and publishes accepted articles online immediately 
upon receiving the final versions.  

Published Media: ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print).  

Frequency: 2 issues per year (January, July)  

Area of publication: Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology. The subjects 
covered by the journal includes but not limited to:  

 

Agriculture 
Agricultural Economics and Agri-business  
Agricultural Engineering  
Agricultural Statistics  
Agricultural Extension and Development 
Agro-forestry and Ecotourism  
Agronomy  
Agro-tourism  
Animal Science and Nutrition  
Applied Agriculture  
Applied Economics and Finance 
Aquaculture  
Bioinformatics  
Biotechnology and Biochemistry Climate 
Change and Green Technology 
Collaborative Engineering  
Computer Science and Engineering 
Computational Biology  
Crop Science and Production  
Dairy Science & Poultry Science Decision 
Support System  
Entomology  
Environmental Science and Extension 

Dental and Medical Science  
Experimental Agriculture  
Food science, Engineering and 
Technology Genetics Technology  
Geophysics  
GIS, GPS, and Remote Sensing 
Horticultural Science  
ICT for Agricultural Development  
Irrigation and Water Resource 
Engineering Land Use and Development  
Mathematics  
Modeling of Crop and Animal System 
Pathology and Plant Protection  
Fisheries  
Plant Breeding and Crop Science  
Post-harvesting Technique and 
Technology Precision Agriculture  
Production Engineering  
Social Science and Agricultural 
Development Soil Science  
Tropical Agriculture  
Veterinary Science and Technology 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

   
 

EDITORIAL BOARD 

 

Chief Editor 

Dr Mamun-Or-Rashid 

Professor, Dhaka University, Bangladesh 

 

Board Members  

Dr. Sumit Garg, IL, USA 

Professor Dr. James J. Riley, The University of Arizona, USA 

Dr. Ekkehard KÜRSCHNER, Agriculture Development Consultant, Germany 

Professor Dr. Rodriguez Hilda, USA 

Professor Dr. Michael D. Whitt, USA 

Professor Dr. Wael Al-aghbari, Yemen 

Dr. Clement Kiprotich Kiptum, University of Eldoret, Kenya 

 

Managing Editor 

Md. Roshidul Hasan 

Professor, Department of Computer Science and Information Technology,  
Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman Agricultural University



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  19 
 

EFFECT OF COMMERCIAL FEEDS ON GROWTH AND PRODUCTION 
PERFORMANCE OF SHRIMP (PENAEUS MONODON) IN BAGERHAT COASTAL 
PONDS OF BANGLADESH 

D Sutradhar1, M S Islam2, M Akter3, I N Suravi4, I Jahan5, N C Roy6 

 

DOI: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4716476 
 

 

ABSTRACT 

The experiment was conducted over 120 days from March to June 2019 in Bagerhat sadar 
upazila, Bagerhat. The study was categorized into four treatments indicated as T1 (ACI feed), 
T2 (Quality feed), T3 (Mega feed) and T4 (control) with three replicates. The experimental 
ponds were stocked with shrimp PL at same density of 4 nos./m2. Ponds were treated with 
agricultural lime based on soil and water pH and fertilized with urea and Triple Super 
Phosphate depending on water transparency and depth. Different water quality parameters 
were determined at ten-day intervals. Parameters of water were within acceptable ranges of 
shrimp culture. Higher growth (30.36 g) of shrimp was achieved in T2 compared to T1 (28.53 
g), T3 (27.43 g) and T4 (22.85 g). Growth and survival rate of shrimp were comparatively 
lower in T4 at the same stocking density. Significantly (p<0.05) higher production of shrimp 
was obtained in T2 (971.52 kg/ha) than those of T1 (855.90 kg/ha), T3 (757.07 kg/ha) and T4 

(566.68 kg/ha). Highest net profit (US$ 2570.2/ha) of shrimp farming was found in T
2 

than 

that of T
1
 (US$ 2105.7), T

3 (US$ 1786.6) and T
4 (US$ 1298.1). Results of the study indicate 

that among different commercial feeds Quality feed (T2) is better than other feeds in respect 
of survival rate, growth, production and net profit. So, farmers may be encouraged to use 
Quality feed for getting higher production and significant return in a short period of time. 

 
Keywords: Penaeus monodon, growth, production, water quality parameters, net profit. 
 
1D Sutradhar, MS student, Department of Coastal and Marine Fisheries, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Bangladesh,  
2M S Islam, Professor, Department of Coastal and Marine Fisheries, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Sylhet-3100; Email: islamms2011@yahoo.com 
3M Akter, Lecturer, Department of Coastal and Marine Fisheries, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Bangladesh 
4I N Suravi, Lecturer, Department of Coastal and Marine Fisheries, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Bangladesh  
5I Jahan, MS student, Department of Coastal and Marine Fisheries, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Bangladesh 
6N C Roy PhD, Professor, Department of Fish Biology & Genetics, Sylhet Agricultural 
University, Sylhet, Bangladesh, E-mail: ncroy@sau.ac.bd; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-
0001-8157-4898 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  20 
 

INTRODUCTION 

Bangladesh is considered one of the most suitable country in the world for shrimp and prawn 
farming, because of its resources and favorable agro–climatic conditions. A sub-tropical 
climate and a vast area of shallow waterbodies provide a unique opportunity for shrimp and 
prawn production (Islam et al., 2008). The culture of shrimp and prawn in the coastal zone is 
a major export earning activity for Bangladesh. Total shrimp and prawn production including 
capture has been increased from 1.60 lakh MT in 2002-03 to 2.39 lakh MT in 2018-19 (DoF, 
2020). This culture is ongoing in the coastal belt during the early 1980s to supply 
international markets and earning foreign currencies (Islam et al., 2001). 

The giant tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon is the largest brackish water shrimp, which is 
widely distributed throughout the Indo-Pacific region. It has been harvested from the sea and 
cultured in many countries of the world. The most important characteristic is its fast growth. 
It is a euryhaline and grow well in salinities from 5 ppt to 25 ppt. Survival rate is usually 
between 70-80% and it adapts well to intensified culture system (Liao, 1987). Bailey-Brock 
and Moss (1992) described shrimp as omnivorous scavengers, opportunistic omnivores, 
detritus feeders, carnivores and predators. They consume detrital aggregates including 
bacteria, meiofauna, protozoa, micro-algae, zooplankton, macrobenthos and other items 
(Dall, 1968; Chong and Sasekumar, 1997; Moriarty, 1997). The widely diverse feeding 
behaviors offer possibility to culture shrimp in polyculture as either the main species or a 
secondary species. 

The nutrients in artificial feeds are well balanced to meet the nutritional needs of the cultured 
shrimp. The nutrients that should be included in shrimp feeds include protein for body 
building, fat for normal functioning of the body and for energy, carbohydrates for energy, 
mineral salts for bone structure and body functions and vitamins for good health. Regular 
supply of artificial feeds in shrimp culture pond generally increases shrimp production two 
times than that without artificial feeding (Shofiquzzoha and Alam, 2008). 

Locally available ingredients such as fish meal, soya, maize and wheat are some ingredients 
that provide the nutrients listed above. The cost of feeds is the highest cost of production in 
commercial shrimp/fish farming. It ranges from 40% to 60% of the total cost of production. 
Use of formulated low-cost feed with locally available feed ingredients instead of expensive 
commercial feed may be a means to reduce feed cost as well as production cost. In many 
times, all ingredients of balanced feed are not available at local level round the year. Easily 
available low-cost commercial feeds such as Quality feed, ACI feed, Maisa feed, Mega feed 
and Nourish feed may be used instead of locally made low quality feed for increasing shrimp 
production as well as for higher net return. 

Considering the growth, production potential, feeding behavior and economic benefit, shrimp 
(P. monodon) culture is practicing in many countries of the world. In maximum time, shrimp 
farmers of this country could not properly harvest shrimp due to viral diseases. Most of the 
shrimp farmers of Bangladesh do not use any type of feed for shrimp. Natural foodstuffs 
present in the shrimp pond are not sufficient to fulfill the demand of the growing biomass. 
Growth and production of farmed shrimp is largely dependent upon the supply and intake of 
dietary nutrient inputs and feed. So, economic loss due to low growth of shrimp might be 
partially minimized using commercial feed. Production and profitability of shrimp depend on 
several factors. Use of commercial feed is one of the most imperative factors among them. 
Some sporadic works on effects of commercial feed on growth and production of shrimp 
have been done in Bangladesh. Keeping the above facts in mind, the present study was 
undertaken to assess the effects of different commercial feeds on survival, production and 
economic return of shrimp culture at brackish water earthen ponds in Bagerhat region. 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  21 
 

METERIALS AND METHODS 

Experimental area and design 

The experiment was conducted in twelve brackish water earthen ponds situated at Bagerhat 
sadar upazila of Bagerhat district (Fig. 1). Average area of the pond was 400 m

2
 and average 

depth of water was 0.8-1.6 m each. The experiment was performed for a period of 120 days 
from March to June 2019. The experiment was designated as four treatments having three 
replications each. The treatments were T1, T2, T3 and T4. Selected ponds were randomly 
allocated under each treatment. Stocking density of shrimp was same each of the treatment. 

 
 

Fig. 1. Map of Bagerhat sadar upazila showing the experimental area. 

Pond preparation and management 

All selected ponds were drained out and were fully exposed to sunlight. Ponds were prepared 
by repairing the embankments and by removing all types of weeds. Before the trial, ponds 
were treated with agricultural lime (CaCO3) at a rate of 250 kg/ha based on soil pH. Ponds 
were then filled with tidal water gradually up to a depth of 0.9 m from the nearby tidal canal 
through screen net. All unwanted organisms were eliminated using rotenone at a rate of 3 
ppm and then lime (CaCO3) was applied at a rate of 125 kg/ha for neutralizing its action. 
After 5 days of cleaning, ponds were fertilized with urea and TSP at a rate of 50 and 100 
kg/ha, respectively. After 4-5 days of fertilization, the color of water turned into green. Fine 
meshed nylon net was used as fence on the dikes around ponds to prohibit the potential 
disease carrier’s fauna such as snail, snake and others from outside. 

Collection, stocking and feeding of shrimp  

After collection of shrimp PL from local market of Rampal in Bagerhat, the polythene bags 
were kept in the experimental ponds for about 40 minutes and water was exchanged between 
bags and ponds to acclimatize with pond water temperature. After conditions, PL were 
released in all ponds. Commercial shrimp feed as Quality feed (29.0% protein, 11.0% 
moisture, 6.0% crude lipid and 5.0% crude fiber), ACI feed (33% protein, 10.0% moisture, 
6.0% crude lipid and 7.0% crude fiber) and Mega feed (35.0% protein, 11.0% moisture, 6.0% 
crude lipid and 5.0% crude fiber) procured from local market was applied 6 days in a week to 
ponds at a rate of 10% of total shrimp biomass for first month, 6% for 2nd month and 
gradually decreased up to 3% until the end of the study. 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  22 
 

Water quality determination 

Water quality parameters of ponds like temperature, salinity, transparency, dissolved oxygen 
(DO) concentration, pH, total alkalinity and ammonia were measured between 9.00-10.00 am 
after 10-day intervals. Salinity of water was measured using a portable refractometer 
(ATAGO, Hand Refractometer). Surface water temperature was determined in situ using a 
standard centigrade thermometer. Transparency was recorded using Secchi disc. Dissolved 
oxygen was determined using a portable DO meter (YSI 58 digital DO meter, HANNA, 
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387 USA). pH of water was recorded using pH meter (HANNA, 
USA). Total alkalinity was measured by titrimetric method (APHA, 2000). Ammonia 
nitrogen was measured using ammonia test kit (Biosol, A.A. Biotech PVT Ltd., Fishtech BD 
Ltd). 

Sampling of shrimp  

Fortnightly sampling of 15-20% stocked shrimp to estimate the biomass and to adjust the 
feeding rations and also to observe the physical conditions of stocked shrimp. Shrimp were 
sampled using cast net. Weight and length of 40 individuals of shrimp were recorded for 
growth assessment. Weight (g) was measured using a portable balance and length (cm) by 
measuring scale. Sampling was continued until harvest.  

Estimation of growth, survival and production of shrimp  

After 120 days of culture, bamboo poles and leaves were removed, water was drained out of 
ponds and all shrimp were harvested by repeated netting (cast net and surrounding net). All 
shrimp harvested from each pond were counted, measured and weighted individually to 
determine survival rate, growth and production. Specific growth rate (SGR), feed conversion 
ratio (FCR) and survival rate (%) were calculated following the equation as cited by Pechsiri 
and Yakupitiyage (2005). The equations are as follows:  
 
Weight gain (g) = Mean final weight (g) - mean initial weight (g). 
Specific growth rate (SGR) (%/day) = {Ln (final body weight) - Ln (initial body                
                                                                    weight) × 100}/cultured period (days). 
 
Feed conversion ratio (FCR) = Feed consumed (g dry weight)/live weight gain 
                                                      (g wet weight) of shrimp. 
Survival rate (%) = (Number of shrimps harvested ÷ total number of shrimps stocked)   
                       × 100. 
Production of shrimp= No. of shrimp caught × average final weight of shrimp. 

Yield and economic analysis  

The following equations were used to calculate production and profitability (Chowdhury et 
al., 2020; Dillon and Hardaker, 1993). The currency was converted from BDT to US$ (BDT 
84 = US$ 1).  
Gross return (GRi) =Σi PiQi  
Net return (π) =Σi (PiQi) - TFC - TVC  
Benefit cost ratio (BCR) = GRi/TC  
Here, Pi = market value of harvested shrimp in US$, Qi = production (kg/ha), i = treatments 
(T1, T2, T3 and T4), TFC = total fixed cost, TVC = total variable cost, TC = total cost (TFC + 
TVC). 
 
 
 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  23 
 

Statistical analysis  

The data were expressed as mean with their standard error mean (SE). All data were analyzed 
using IBM SPSS Statistics version 23. Data were initially tested for normality (Shapiro-Wilk 
test) and homogeneity of variance (Levene’s test for equality of variance) before conducting 
one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). All data were normally distributed and variances 
were approximately equal. As both conditions were fulfilled, growth and economic data were 
tested through ANOVA. Significant difference among means was compared with Tukey’s 
HSD test at P<0.05. Linear regression was conducted to examine how well feed could predict 
growth parameters.  

 
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

Growth, production and profit of shrimp farming 

Growth, survival rate and production of shrimp (P. monodon) in four treatments are depicted 
in Table 1. Average body weight (ABW) of PL of P. monodon during stocking was same 
(0.006 g) in all shrimp ponds. Mean final weight of shrimp was the highest in T2 (30.36 g) 
followed by T1 (28.53 g), T3 (27.43 g) and T4 (22.85 g), respectively (Fig. 2). Khanam et al. 
(2018) reported the final weight of shrimp as 23.40-31.76 g at different stocking densities (3-
5 pcs/m2) for 120 days at farmer’s level, which supports the findings of the present study. 
Ghosh et al. (2013) recorded the final weight of shrimp as 40 g at a stocking density of 5 
pcs/m2 for 150 days in Pranti Shrimp Farming (PSF), Koira, Khulna, which is higher than the 
findings of the present study. Masud et al. (1997) demonstrated that final weight of shrimp as 
15.5 to 26 g at different stocking density for 120 days in Elite Aquaculture Farm Ltd. in 
Teknaf of Cox´s Bazar, which is lower than the findings of the present work. Hossain et al. 
(1992) reported that shrimp attained an average weight of 21.65 g after rearing of 120 days 
with a stocking density of 5 PL/m² in earthen ponds, which is also lower than the present 
findings. 
 
Table 1. Growth, survival rate and production (Mean±sd) of Penaeus monodon in different  
               treatments.        

Mean values in the same row with same superscript letters are not significantly different 
(p>0.05) 

Parameters 
Treatments 

T1 (ACI feed) T2 (Quality feed) T3 (Mega feed) T4 (control) 

Stocking density (nos./m2) 4 4 4 4 

Average initial weight (g) 0.006±0.002 0.006±0.001 0.006±0.002 0.006±0.001 

Average final weight (g) 28.53
b
 ±1.05 30.36

a
 ±2.23 27.43

c
±1.53 22.85

d
 ±1.38 

Daily weight gain (g) 0.24
b
 ±.09 0.25

a
±0.05 0.23

c
±0.04 0.19

d
±0.07 

FCR 3.1
b
±0.10 2.5

c
±0.15 3.3

a
±0.19 3.5

a
±0.20 

Specific growth rate (%/day) 7.06
b
±1.02 7.11

a
±1.01 7.02

c
±1.02 6.87

d
±0.22 

Survival rate (%) 75.00
b
±6.06 80.00

a
 ±5.49 69.00

c
±7.91 62.00

d
±2.00 

Production (kg/ha) 855.9
b
±15.33 971.52

a
±27.83 757.07

c
±32.96 566.68

d
±9.68 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  24 
 

In present study, daily weight gain of shrimp was recorded as 0.24, 0.25, 0.23 and 0.19 g, 
respectively in T1, T2, T3 and T4 for 120 days. Khanam et al. (2018) reported the daily weight 
gain of shrimp as 0.19 to 0.26 g for 120 days at 3-5 pcs/m2, which is in agreement with the 
present findings. Ghosh et al. (2013) measured the daily weight of shrimp as 0.20 to 0.28.5 g 
of 150 days at 5 to 15 pcs/m² density at PSF, Koira, Khulna, which is coincided with the 
present finding. Masud et al. (1997) reported that the daily weight of shrimp was 0.128 to 
0.216 g at different stocking density for 120 days in Cox´s Bazar, which is slightly lower than 
the findings of the present study. 

Fig. 2. Growth (g) of P. monodon in four treatments. 
 

Specific growth rate (SGR) of shrimp varied from 6.87 to 7.11%, which is consistent with the 
findings of Khanam et al. (2018), who recorded the SGR of shrimp as 6.89-7.14%. Islam et 
al. (2008) found the SGR of shrimp as 6.79-6.91% in farmers´ shrimp farms of Bagerhat, 
which is in agreement with the findings of the present experiment. Sharma and Reddy (1996) 
reported SGR of shrimp as 2.01% using commercially available feed, which is lower than the 
present findings. 

Feed conversion ratio (FCR) of P. monodon in the present study ranged between 2.5-3.5%, 
which is close to the findings of Khanam et al. (2018), who found the FCR of shrimp as 2.45 
to 3.00. The findings of the present study are higher than the findings of Masud et al. (1997), 
who recorded FCR of shrimp as 1.78 to 2.02. Chekait et al. (1995) observed the FCR ranged 
from 1.5 to 1.55 using microencapsulated diets, which is lower than present findings of the 
study. Wyban and Sweeney (1989) found that shrimp as 2.0 to 2.5, which is slightly lower 
than the findings of the present study. Chanratchakool et al. (1995) stated that FCR varies 
with the stocking density, quality of feed, depth of water, quality of PL and the size at which 
shrimp were harvested.  

Survival rate of shrimp in this study was 62.00 to 80.00%. Higher survival rate of shrimp was 
found in T2 (80.00%) followed by T1 (75.00%), T3 (69.00%) and T4 (62.00%), respectively. 
Khanam et al. (2018) obtained survival rate of shrimp as 76.00-85.00%, which is slightly 
higher than the findings of this study. Ghosh et al. (2013) found survival rate of shrimp as 58-
76%, which is lower than the present findings. Islam and Mahmud (2010) and Islam et al. 
(2008) recorded survival rate of shrimp as 58-72.5 and 64.5-71.0%, respectively in shrimp 
farms of Bagerhat, which are lower than the present findings. Masud et al. (1997) obtained 
the survival rate of shrimp as 49 to 70%, which is also lower than the present study.  

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

1 Mar 15 Mar 30 Mar 15 Apr 30 Apr 15 May 30 May 15 Jun 30 Jun

G
ro

w
th

 (
g)

 o
f 

sh
ri

m
p 

Date of sampling

T1 T2 T3 T4



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  25 
 

Production of shrimp in all treatments ranged from 566.68 to 971.52 kg/ha with the highest 
production (971.52 /ha) in T

2
 and the lowest production (566.68 kg/ha) in T

4 
for 120 days 

culture period. This finding is close to the findings of Khanam et al. (2018), who found 
production of shrimp as 809.88 to 990.00 kg/ha for 120 days in farmer’s pond. Ghosh et al. 
(2013) obtained production of shrimp as 1498 to 2058 kg/ha in the stocking densities of 5 to 
15 pcs/m², which is higher than the production of the present study. The findings of present 
study are higher than the findings obtained by Islam and Mahmud (2010) and Islam et al. 
(2008), who recorded shrimp production as 416.9-641.7 and 404.0-509.0 kg/ha in shrimp 
ponds of Bagerhat stocked with 3 PL/m² for 120 days fed with different feeds. Chen et al. 
(1989) found that production of shrimp as 848-1550 kg/ ha, which is higher than the findings 
of present study.  

Profit of shrimp farming in present study obtained the highest (US$ 2570.1/ha) in T2 
followed by T1 (US$ 2105.7/ha), T3 (US$ 1786.6/ha) and T4 (US$ 1298.1/ha). Benefit cost 
ratio (BCR) was also highest in T2 (1.56) than those of T1 (1.50), T3 (1.47) and T4 (1.45) (Fig. 
3). The findings of this study are higher than the findings of Khanam et al. (2018), who 
obtained the profit from shrimp farming as US$ 1615.9 to 2336.2/ha for 120 days at a density 
of 3-5 pcs/m2. Observed profit was higher than the findings of Ghosh et al. (2013), who 
recorded the net profit as US$ 1892.9/ha at a stocking density of 10 pcs/m

2
. So, it is indicated 

that the highest net profit and BCR were obtained from the treatment of Quality feed (T
2
) 

than others. 

 
 

Fig. 3. Cost and economic return of P. monodon farming during study period. 
 

Water quality parameters 

Values of water temperature varied from 28.23 °C to 33.20°C, which is in agreement with the 
findings of Khanam et al. (2018) and Ghosh et al. (2013), who found water temperature 

ranges from 26.17 to 32.93°C and 25 to 32°C, respectively in farmer’s shrimp pond of 
Bagerhat and Khulna (Fig. 4a). Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration ranged from 4.10 to 
5.33 mg/l, which supports the findings of Khanam et al. (2018) and Ghosh et al. (2013) who 
found the DO ranges from 4.02 to 5.01 mg/l and 4.0 to 6.0 mg/l, respectively (Fig. 4b).  
Salinity of water varied from 3.44 to 6.97 ppt. Ghosh et al. (2013) reported that the ranges of 
salinity for shrimp was 12 to 26 ppt, which is higher than the findings of present study (Fig. 

6317.1

7171.2

5587.8

4182.6
4211.4

4601.1

3801.2

2884.5

2105.7
2570.1

1786.6
1298.1

0.0

1000.0

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

6000.0

7000.0

8000.0

9000.0

T1 T2 T3 T4

U
S

$/
ha

Treatments

Total gross return (US$/ha)
Total cost (US$/ha)
Net profit (US$/ha)



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  26 
 

4c). Islam and Mahmud (2010) reported the salinity ranged from 1.2-11.0 ppt in shrimp 
ponds, which are slightly higher than the present findings. Concentrations of ammonia 
nitrogen (NH3-N) varied from 0.004 to 0.089 mg/l, which is similar with the findings of 
Khanam et al. (2018), Islam and Mahmud (2012) and Islam et al. (2008) who recorded 
ammonia nitrogen ranged from 0.003-0.008mg/l and 0.028-0.029 mg/l, respectively (Fig. 4d). 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Fig. 4a. Variation of water temperature (°C) during study period. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

   Fig. 4b. Variation of dissolved oxygen (mg/l) during study period. 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

                                          
Fig. 4c. Variation of salinity (ppt) during study period. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  27 
 

     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

         Fig. 4d. Variation of ammonia nitrogen (mg/l) during study period. 

 

CONCLUSIONS 

Sustainable of shrimp culture is dependent on various factors. Effect of commercial feeds is 
one of the most important among these factors. Most of the shrimp farmers are not aware of 
application of commercial shrimp feeds. But it is utmost imperative to know the quality, 
application and management of feeds for more production and more income. Based on the 
findings of the present study, it can be concluded that treatment 2 (Quality feed) is the best 
among all treatments in respect of survival, growth, production and net profit. Therefore, this 
commercial feed may be used in shrimp culture system in the coastal area for boost up shrimp 
production with a significant return. 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  28 
 

REFERENCES 

Alam, M. J., Islam, M. L. & Tuong, T. P. (2008). Introducing tilapia (GIFT) with shrimp 
(Penaues monodon) in brackishwater rice-shrimp system: impact on water quality and 
production. Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries Research, 12(2), 187-195. 

Bailey-Brock, J. H. & Moss, S. M. (1992). Penaeid taxonomy, biology and zoogeography. 
Developments in aquaculture and fisheries science, 23, 9-27. 

Chowdhury, M. A., Roy, N. C. & Chowdhury, A. (2020). Growth, yield and economic 
returns of striped catfish (Pangasianodon hypophthalmus) at different stocking 
densities under floodplain cage culture system. Egypt. J. Aquat. Res. 46, 91-95.  

Chong, V. C., Sasekumar, A. & Wolanski, E. (1997). The role of mangroves in retaining 
penaeid prawn larvae in Klang Strait, Malaysia. Oceanographic Literature Review, 
6(44), 621. 

Chakraborty, S. C., Paul, A. K. & Hossain, M. A. (1996). Effect of stocking density on 
growth of tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon) fed on commercial formulated diets. 
Bangladesh Fisheries Research Institute. Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries Research, 
1(1), 53-63. 

Chanratchakool, P. J. F., Turnbul, S., Fung, S. & Wan, C. L. (1995). Health Management in 
shrimp ponds, 2nd edition. Published by Aquatic Animal Health Research Institute. 
Dept. of Fisheries. Kasetsart University Campus, Jatujak, Bankok 10900, Thailand. 
pp. 111. 

Chekait, N. G. (1995). Micro-encapsulation applications in aquaculture. Aqua Int. 140, 28-29.       
Chen, J. C., Liu, P. C. & Lin, Y. T. (1989). Culture of Penaeus monodon in an intensified 

system in Taiwan. Aquaculture, 77, 319-328. 
DoF (Department of Fisheries) (2020). Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics of Bangladesh 2018-

2019. Fisheries Resources Survey System, Department of Fisheries, Ministry of 
Fisheries and Livestock, Matshya Bhaban, Dhaka. pp. 124. 

Das, S. K., Tiwari, V. K., Venkateshwarlu, G., Reddy, A. K., Parhi, J., Sharma, P. & Chettri, 
J. K. (2007). Growth, survival and fatty acid composition of Macrobrachium 
rosenbergii (de Man, 1879) post larvae fed HUFA-enriched Moina micrura. 
Aquaculture, 269(1-4), 464-475. 

Dillon J. L. & Hardaker, J. B. (1993). Farm Management Research for Small Farmer 
Development. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.  

Dall, W. (1968). Food and feeding of some Australian penaeid shrimp. FAO Fisheries 
Report, 2, 251-258. 

Ghosh, A. K., Sarkar, S., Bir, J., Islam, S. S., Huq, K. A. & Naser, M. N. (2013). Probiotic 
tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon) farming at different stocking densities and its impact 
on production and economics. International Journal of Research in Fisheries and 
Aquaculture, 3(2), 25-29. 

Hossain, S. M. Z., Corre, J. R. V. & Tolcdo, C. E. (1992). Effect of stocking densities on the 
growth, survival and production of Penaeus monodon (Fabricius). Bangladesh 
Journal of Zoology, 20, 35-42.  

Islam, M. S. & Mahmud, Y. (2012). Impact of stocking density of freshwater prawn 
(Macrobrachium rosenbergii) and monosex tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) on 
production and economic return under polyculture systems in brackishwater ponds. 
Eco-friendly Agricultural Journal, 5(12), 257-263. 

Islam, M. S. & Mahmud, Y. (2010). Impact of different feeds on production and economic 
return of tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon) in coastal aquaculture farm. Bangladesh 
Journal of Agriculture, 35(1), 119-126. 



ISSN: 2158-8104 (Online), 2164-0920 (Print), 2021, Vol. 5, Issue.1 
http://journals.e-palli.org 

    American Journal of Agricultural Science, Engineering and Technology 
 

  29 
 

Islam, M. S., Mahmud, Y. & Faruque, A. M. O. (2008). Effects of different types of feeds on 
growth and production of tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon at Bagerhat region, 
Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries Research, 12(2), 205-212. 

Islam, M. S. & Ahmad, S. U. (2001). By-catch mortality during collection of Penaeus 
monodon (FAB) post-larvae from the rivers of Khulna Bangladesh. Journal of the 
National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka, 29, 3-4. 

Khanam, A., Islam, M. S., Akter, M. & Hasan, M. M. (2018). Effect of stocking densities on 
survival and production of black tiger shrimp in coastal earthen ponds. Journal of the 
Sylhet Agricultural University, 5(1), 87-93. 

Liao, C. (1987). Prawn culture from Taiwan’s experience. Round Table Panel, 18th annual 
meeting of World Aquaculture Society, Contrib. B−52 Tungkang Marine Laboratory. 
Guayaquil, Ecuador. pp. 24. 

Masud, A. K. M. S., Rahmatullah, S. M. & Islam, M. A. (1997). Effect of stocking density on 
the growth, survival and production of black tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon). 
Bangladesh journal of fisheries, 20 (1-2), 117-120.  

Moriarty, D. J. (1997). The role of microorganisms in aquaculture ponds. Aquaculture, 
151(1-4), 333-349. 

Pechsiri, J. & Yakupitiyage, A. (2005). A comparative study of growth and feed utilization 
efficiency of sex-reversed dipliod and triploid Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.). 
Aquaculture Research, 36, 45-51. 

Shofiquzzoha, A. F. M. & Alam, M. J. (2008). Culture feasibility of silver barb (Barbodes 
gonionotus Bleeker) and GIFT with shrimp (Penaeus monodon Feb.) in brackishwater 
pond. Bangladesh Journal of Fisheries Research, 12(1), 69−74. 

Wyban, J. A. & Sweeney, J. N. (1989). Intensive shrimp grow out trials in a round pond. 
Aquaculture, 76(3-4), 215-225.  


