Potential of nutrient reutilisation in combined intensive–extensive pond systems

Denes Gal • Ferenc Pekar • Tunde Kosaros • Eva Kerepeczki

Received: 30 June 2011 / Accepted: 11 July 2012 / Published online: 24 July 2012� Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Abstract The experiments on the intensive–extensive system were carried out between

2008 and 2010 in three ponds (area 310 m2, depth 1 m) serving as extensive units, where

cages were placed as an intensive units (volume 10 m3) one in each pond. In the intensive

units, African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) was cultured and fed with pellet whilst common

carp (Cyprinus carpio) was stocked in each extensive unit and raised without any artificial

feeding. Three different setups of extensive ponds were tested: the additional artificial

plastic substrate for periphyton development equalled to 0, 100 and 200 % of the pond

surface area (PP0 %, PP100 % and PP200 %) at feed loading level of 1.2, 1.9 and

2.8 gN m-2 day-1 in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. The additional net fish yields in

the extensive unit were 2.8–6.5 t ha-1 in PP0 %, 5.1–8.1 t ha-1 in PP100 % and

2.1–4.3 t ha-1 in PP200 %. The nitrogen recovery in the additional fish yields of extensive

ponds, expressed as the percentage of feed load, was 5.6–6.1, 6.8–10 and 2.1–6.1 % in the

treatments PP0 %, PP100 % and PP200 %, respectively. The combined fish production

resulted in higher protein utilisation by 22–26 %; even this ratio can be increased by

33–45 % with periphyton application.

Keywords Combined pond system � Fishpond � Integrated aquaculture � Nutrient

utilisation � Periphyton � Waste reusing

Introduction

Production of freshwater fish in manmade ponds is often considered as the oldest fish

farming activity in Europe, dating back to mediaeval times. Typical fish ponds are earthen

enclosures in which the fish live in a natural-like environment, where a part of the fish gain

is originated from the natural food growing in the pond itself (Kestemont 1995; Bıro 1995).

However, the demand for carps as the dominant species in the traditional pond culture is

stagnating (e.g. Hungary) or slightly declining (e.g. Czech Republic, Poland) (Adamek

D. Gal (&) � F. Pekar � T. Kosaros � E. KerepeczkiResearch Institute for Fisheries, Aquaculture and Irrigation, Anna-liget 8, Szarvas 5540, Hungarye-mail: gald@haki.hu

123

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937DOI 10.1007/s10499-012-9561-1

et al. 2009) in Central Europe. The key to future development in pond aquaculture is

diversification, either in terms of function, production technology, intensity level or spe-

cies. The major part of farms should function as extensive pond systems providing eco-

system services to the society, whereas another part of the fish industry will focus on

technological development. New combined production systems integrating intensive and

extensive pond culture, allowing increased productivity, improved nutrient utilisation and

fish species diversification are highly desired (Adamek et al. 2009).

The combination of intensive and extensive aquaculture exploits the advantages of both

traditional pond farming and intensive fish culture systems. Valuable predatory fish species

can be produced in the intensive part of the system, whilst the integration of an extensive

pond as a treatment unit results in decreased nutrient loading to the environment and

increased nutrient recovery in fish production (Avnimelech et al. 1986; Diab et al. 1992).

Such integrated systems allow the production of diverse fish species without harm to the

environment due to the high nutrient retention capacity of extensive fishpond (Olah et al.

1994; Knosche et al. 2000; Gal et al. 2008). There are already operating combined pond

systems in Europe, that is, combined intensive–extensive pond systems based on the

integration of traditional large fishponds and small wintering ponds (Gal et al. 2003), as

well as in-pond circulation systems where an intensive floating tank is placed in an

extensive fishpond (Fullner et al. 2007).

The periphyton application in aquaculture (periphyton attached on surfaces that have

been increased by artificial substrates) improves both water quality and aquatic production

(Azim 2001). Several periphyton-based aquaculture systems operate under tropical

(Wahab et al. 1999; Azim et al. 2001; Asaduzzaman et al. 2008) and sub-tropical climate

(Milstein et al. 2008), but they are still not tested in temperate climate; thus, a purpose of

this research was to investigate the potential periphyton applicability on water treatment

and nutrient recovery in combined aquaculture systems.

Combined systems allow to multiply the overall production intensity as compared to

traditional pond culture. The key to the proper operation of such combined systems is the

right balance between the nutrient load of the intensive part and the treatment capacity of

the extensive pond; hence, the aim of this research was to determine the nutrient processing

capacity of combined pond systems, evaluate the potential of nutrient reusing and inves-

tigate the application of periphyton for additional fish production and the water quality.

Materials and methods

The experiments on the intensive–extensive system (IES) were carried out between 2008

and 2010 in three earthen ponds with concrete walls in same size and volume, located next

to each other (area 310 m2, depth 1 m, volume 310 m3) serving as extensive units. The

cages served as intensive units (volume 10 m3) were placed into the extensive ponds, one

in each pond (Fig. 1). Three different setups of extensive ponds were tested: the additional

artificial plastic substrate for periphyton development equalled 0, 100 and 200 % of the

pond surface area (PP0 %, PP100 % and PP200 %), because the widely tested periphyton

density had been 100 % of the pond water surface area at low and medium nutrient loads

(Azim 2001) in tropical fishponds.

All ponds were subjected to the same regime of feeding and fish stocking within a year.

Pelleted fish feed (45 % crude protein) was applied daily only to the intensive ponds using

automatic feeder. The average feed-originated loads were 1.2, 1.9 and 2.8 gN m-2 day-1

in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively (Table 1). In the intensive units, African catfish

928 Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937

123

(Clarias gariepinus) were cultured and fed with pellet—the initial stocking biomass was

200, 300 and 400 kg (20–40 kg m-3) in 2008, 2009 and 2010, respectively. Common carp

(Cyprinus carpio) and Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) were stocked in 2008 (stocking

rate 1:1) and only common carp in 2009 and 2010 in each extensive unit and raised without

any artificial feeding. The fish stocking and feeding in the experimental years is summa-

rised in Table 2.

The ponds were filled up with river water from a nearby branch of River Koros.

Evaporation was regularly compensated in the extensive ponds during the experimental

period. No effluent water was discharged to the environment during the culture period; the

water was only drained from the ponds at fish harvest. A paddlewheel aerator (0.5 kW) was

applied in each pond to provide sufficient oxygen concentrations ([70 %) and maintain the

water circulation between the intensive and extensive units (Fig. 1). The whole water

column of each pond was sampled on a monthly basis during the experiment, and the

samples were analysed for ammonia (TAN), nitrite (NO2–N), nitrate (NO3–N) and total

inorganic nitrogen (TIN), total nitrogen (TN), soluble reactive phosphorus (PO4–P), total

phosphorus (TP) volatile suspended solids (VSS), chemical oxygen demand (COD)

according to standard methods.

The nutrient removal, retention and discharge of the system, the quantity of total

organic carbon, total nitrogen and total phosphorus of the inputs (fish feed, stocked fish,

supplying water) and outputs (harvested fish, effluent water) were estimated, and the

nutrient budgets were calculated as follows (Knosche et al. 2000; Schneider et al. 2005):

Water supply canal

dnopevisnetxEdnopevisnetxEdnopevisnetxE2m0032m0032m003

Fish stocking

etnItinuevisnetnI tinuevisnetnItinuevisn2m012m012m01

Drainage canal

direction of water circulation:Paddle wheal aerator:

%002PP%001PP%0PP

Periphyton 100%

Fish stocking

Periphyton 200%

Fish stocking

Fig. 1 Scheme of the experimental system

Table 1 The daily feed-originated nutrient loads of the experimental system (g m-2 day-1)

Years Feed loads Nitrogen Phosphorus Organic carbon

Average Maximum Average Maximum Average Maximum

2008 Low 1.2 1.8 0.19 0.28 7.3 10.6

2009 Medium 1.9 3.5 0.30 0.56 11.3 21.3

2010 High 2.8 4.8 0.45 0.77 17.0 29.2

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937 929

123

Tab

le2

Fis

hst

ock

ing

,h

arv

esti

ng

and

gro

wth

per

form

ance

Lo

wfe

edlo

adM

oder

ate

feed

load

Hig

hfe

edlo

ad

PP

0%

PP

10

0%

PP

20

0%

PP

0%

PP

10

0%

PP

20

0%

PP

0%

PP

10

0%

PP

20

0%

Inte

nsi

ve

un

it

Sto

cked

tota

lw

eig

ht

(kg

)2

00

20

02

00

30

03

00

30

04

00

40

04

00

Sto

cked

fish

spec

ies

Afr

ican

catfi

shA

fric

anca

tfish

Afr

ican

catfi

sh

Sto

ckin

gd

ate

20

08.0

5.2

22

00

9.0

5.1

92

01

0.0

5.1

9

Har

ves

tin

gd

ate

20

08.0

9.1

02

00

9.0

9.0

22

01

0.0

9.0

9

Ad

ded

feed

amo

un

t(k

g)

61

36

13

61

39

05

90

59

05

1,4

49

1,4

49

1,4

49

Har

ves

ted

tota

lw

eig

ht

(kg

)6

13

59

96

00

94

29

90

98

21

,212

1,1

84

1,1

75

Spec

ific

gro

wth

rate

(%)

1.0

21.0

01.0

01.5

51.4

81.4

51.2

61.2

71.2

3

Fo

od

con

ver

sio

nra

tio

(kg

kg

-1)

1.5

31

.58

1.5

81

.41

1.3

11

.33

1.5

91

.64

1.6

6

Net

yie

ld(t

ha-

1)

13

.21

2.8

12

.82

0.7

22

.22

2.0

29

.32

8.5

28

.2

Ex

ten

siv

eu

nit

Sto

cked

tota

lw

eig

ht

(kg

)2

00

20

02

00

15

01

50

15

01

50

15

01

50

Sto

cked

fish

spec

ies

Com

mo

nca

rp/N

ile

tila

pia

(1:1

)C

om

mo

nca

rpC

om

mo

nca

rp

Har

ves

ted

tota

lw

eig

ht

(kg

)2

88

35

82

85

27

23

41

28

33

52

40

02

15

Net

yie

ld(t

ha-

1)

2.7

95

.05

2.7

23

.94

6.1

54

.29

6.5

28

.07

2.1

0

Com

bin

ed

Fo

od

con

ver

sio

nra

tio

(kg

kg

-1)

1.2

41

.11

1.2

81

.19

1.0

31

.11

1.3

01

.28

1.5

4

Net

yie

ld(t

ha-

1)

16

.01

7.8

15

.52

4.6

28

.42

6.3

35

.93

6.5

30

.3

930 Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937

123

Nretained ¼ ðNinflow þ Nfish stocked þ Nfish feedÞ � ðNfish harvested þ NoutflowÞ½kg�

where N is the nutrient content of the given source. The nutrient content were taken from

literature (Scherz and Senser 1994) for the stocked fish, and from the producer guarantee

for the fish feed.

The proportion of nutrients retained in the fish production (net yield) to the total nutrient

input was calculated according to the following:

Nfish retained ¼ ðNfish out � Nfish inÞ=Ntotal in � 100 ½%�

where Nfish retained: nutrient retention in fish biomass, Nfish out: nutrient content of the

harvested fish, Nfish in: nutrient content of the stocked fish, Ntotal in: total introduced

nutrients.

Results and discussion

Fish growth

The fish growth performance was similar in all intensive units within an experimental year

with the same feed load (Table 2). The only differences were observed in the fish yields of

the extensive units. The net fish yields were highest at a moderate periphyton ratio

(PP100 %) at all feed load intensities in the extensive unit. However, the highest

periphyton ratio (PP200 %) did not result in a higher fish gain over the treatment with no

additional substrate for periphyton production (PP0 %) at low and moderate feed loads (1.2

and 1.9 gN m-2 day-1), but PP200 % showed the lowest net yield at a high feed loading

(2.8 gN m-2 day-1) in the extensive unit. The net fish yields increased continuously with

increasing feed loads in the treatments PP0 % and PP100 %, but the fish yields were

significantly lower at PP200 % and the highest feed load.

Water quality

The water quality parameters are summarised in the Table 3. There were no significant

differences in the measured water quality parameters among the periphyton ratios (PP0 %,

PP100 % and PP200 %) at low and medium feed load levels. However, significant dif-

ferences were found in the water quality parameters between PP0 % and PP100 % at a

high feed load level. The high feed load caused significantly (p \ 0.05) elevated TAN, TIN

and TN concentration in PP0 %. Significant differences between the different feed loads

were not found in either of the treatments with periphyton (PP100 % and PP200 %). The

only difference (p \ 0.05) was found between the feed loading and the water quality

parameters in the treatment without periphyton (P0 %). The water quality parameters

showed that periphyton application could result in reduced TAN levels in extensive ponds

with high nutrient loads.

There was no ammonia nitrogen accumulation in the experimental system at low and

medium feed load levels due to the phytoplankton uptake of ammonia (1.8 g N m-2 day-1)

estimated from the average primary production rate of 10.4 g C m-2 day-1 calculated from in

situ measurements of oxygen levels (McConnel 1962). However, the maximal primary pro-

duction rate was 13 g C m-2 day-1 without periphyton (PP0 %) and 22 g C m-2 day-1 with

periphyton at a density of PP100 %. According to the results of water quality monitoring and

primary production estimations, ammonium removal took place efficiently in the extensive

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937 931

123

Ta

ble

3M

ean

val

ues

(±S

D)

of

wat

erq

ual

ity

of

the

fill

ing

-up

wat

ers,

exp

erim

enta

lsy

stem

atd

iffe

ren

tfe

edlo

ads

du

rin

gth

eex

per

imen

t(a

ver

age)

and

its

effl

uen

ts(m

gL

-1)

Fil

lin

g-u

pw

ater

sP

P0

%P

P1

00

%P

P2

00

%

Av

erag

eE

fflu

ent

Av

erag

eE

ffluen

tA

ver

age

Effl

uen

t

Lo

wfe

edlo

ad

TA

N0

.15

±0

.01

0.3

2±

0.2

30

.28

0.2

1±

0.3

20

.15

0.0

9±

0.0

60

.14

NO

2–

N0

.02

±0

.01

0.4

6±

0.5

71

.51

0.1

9±

0.2

60

.71

0.1

4±

0.2

00

.55

NO

3–

N0

.61

±0

.20

1.4

5±

1.8

64

.33

1.6

5±

2.0

95

.83

1.6

6±

2.1

22

.53

TIN

0.7

9±

0.2

12

.23

±2

.35

6.1

22

.05

±2

.33

6.6

91

.88

±2

.24

3.2

2

TN

2.8

1±

3.1

45

.62

±3

.48

8.3

57

.71

±4

.84

13

.36

.57

±4

.03

5.5

3

PO

4–

P0

.44

±0

.89

0.1

7±

0.1

80

.05

0.2

2±

0.3

60

.05

0.2

5±

0.4

70

.02

TP

0.5

4±

0.9

20

.51

±0

.16

0.4

10

.75

±0

.28

1.2

20

.62

±0

.34

0.5

8

CO

D5

.61

±4

.37

89

.0±

40

.41

02

12

8±

84

.02

01

95

.0±

77

.01

33

t(�

C)

24

.2±

2.0

02

4.2

±2

.00

24

.2±

2.0

0

Med

ium

feed

load

TA

N0

.10

±0

.05

0.4

8±

0.2

80

.48

0.2

7±

0.3

20

.10

0.8

8±

0.7

20

.91

NO

2–

N0

.03

±0

.01

0.2

2±

0.2

10

.26

0.3

2±

0.3

20

.14

0.5

4±

0.4

80

.85

NO

3–

N0

.29

±0

.05

0.5

6±

0.4

40

.88

0.9

1±

0.5

00

.70

0.8

9±

0.7

12

.04

TIN

0.4

2±

0.1

01

.26

±0

.89

1.6

31

.50

±1

.12

0.9

32

.31

±1

.81

3.8

0

TN

1.5

7±

0.1

23

.04

±1

.30

5.5

66

.00

±2

.75

5.9

25

.47

±1

.75

8.4

7

PO

4–

P0

.18

±0

.08

0.1

2±

0.1

00

.18

0.1

0±

0.0

50

.08

0.3

1±

0.2

80

.17

TP

0.2

3±

0.0

70

.63

±0

.22

0.5

00

.57

±0

.26

0.6

40

.49

±0

.40

0.6

5

CO

D1

6.0

±1

.00

59

.3±

19

.75

61

00

±4

3.1

79

52

.0±

13

.27

4

t(�

C)

24

.3±

1.9

72

4.3

±1

.97

24

.3±

1.9

7

Hig

hfe

edlo

ad

TA

N0

.14

±0

.03

3.5

5±

2.1

33

.36

1.1

6±

1.6

11

.79

2.1

0±

3.0

52

.34

NO

2–

N0

.02

±0

.01

0.4

8±

0.2

20

.77

0.4

3±

0.4

00

.76

0.3

8±

0.2

60

.71

NO

3–

N0

.34

±0

.07

1.1

1±

0.5

32

.04

1.0

6±

0.8

32

.83

1.0

9±

0.5

52

.90

932 Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937

123

Ta

ble

3co

nti

nued

Fil

lin

g-u

pw

ater

sP

P0

%P

P1

00

%P

P2

00

%

Av

erag

eE

fflu

ent

Av

erag

eE

ffluen

tA

ver

age

Effl

uen

t

TIN

0.5

1±

0.0

65

.15

±2

.18

6.1

42

.66

±2

.70

5.3

83

.52

±2

.73

5.9

5

TN

1.6

9±

1.3

07

.31

±2

.94

10

.36

.46

±5

.23

13

.45

.27

±3

.92

8.1

2

PO

4–

P0

.12

±0

.01

0.1

1±

0.0

60

.11

0.0

6±

0.0

30

.08

0.2

2±

0.1

90

.20

TP

0.4

3±

0.4

50

.45

±0

.07

0.7

70

.46

±0

.16

0.8

80

.41

±0

.21

0.4

7

CO

D1

1.3

±1

.53

65

.8±

45

.64

79

0.8

±4

5.2

10

62

7.5

±1

2.8

30

t(�

C)

24

.5±

2.0

22

4.5

±2

.02

24

.5±

2.0

2

tw

ater

tem

per

atu

re

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937 933

123

fishpond until reaching feed loads of 2.2 and 3.8 g N m-2 day-1 without (PP0 %) and with

periphyton (PP100 %), respectively. The calculated value for primary production was much

higher than in a traditional fishpond where around 2 g C m-2 day-1 could be measured (Gal

et al. 2003).

Nutrient budget

The nutrient input, output and retention are summarised in the partial nutrient budget

(Table 4). The main nutrient source was the fish feed, which represented 80–88 % of the

total input of nitrogen, 75–85 % of phosphorus and 85–92 % of organic carbon. The

retained nutrients were 52–69, 53–69 and 58–78 % of the nitrogen, phosphorus and

organic carbon introduced into the system, respectively. The amounts of retained nutrients

were in the range of 1,000–2,500 kg ha-1 for nitrogen, 165–400 kg ha-1 for phosphorus

and 5,600–16,000 kg ha-1 for organic carbon. These volumes of the retained nutrients

were 10–20 times higher than reported from traditional fishponds in the temperate climate

(79–103 kg N ha-1 year-1, 5.1–25 kg P ha-1 year-1 and 2,000 kg C ha-1 year-1 by

Olah et al. 1994; Knosche et al. 2000; Gal et al. 2003). The increased feed loading had no

effect on the retained nutrients ratio demonstrating the high nutrient retention capacity of

aerated ponds.

A part of the loaded nutrients accumulated in the sediment of ponds. The average

nutrient concentration in the sediment increased by 3.4, 1,0 and 4.3 mg g-1 (on a dry

weight basis) for nitrogen, phosphorus and organic matter, respectively. The increased feed

load had an effect on elevated nutrient accumulation in the sediment for nitrogen and

phosphorus, but did not affect the organic matter (Table 5).

Table 4 Partial nutrient budgets at different feed loads

PP0 % PP100 % PP200 %

N P C N P C N P C

Low feed load

Input (kg ha-1) 1,770 309 9,520 1,780 309 9,520 1,770 309 9,520

Output (kg ha-1) 762 127 3,200 844 144 3,960 724 126 3,190

Retention (kg ha-1) 1,010 182 6,320 936 165 5,560 1,050 183 6,330

Retention (%) 57 59 66 53 53 58 59 59 67

Medium feed load

Input (kg ha-1) 2,450 408 13,600 2,460 387 13,600 2,460 387 13,600

Output (kg ha-1) 1,170 178 4,720 1,090 179 4,640 1,060 170 4,690

Retention (kg ha-1) 1,280 230 8,880 1,370 208 8,960 1,400 217 9,210

Retention (%) 52 56 65 56 54 66 57 56 68

High feed load

Input (kg ha-1) 3,650 599 20,900 3,660 579 20,900 3,660 579 20,900

Output (kg ha-1) 1,640 234 6,140 1,330 208 5,400 1,140 180 4,550

Retention (kg ha-1) 1,990 362 14,640 2,330 371 15,500 2,520 399 16,350

Retention (%) 55 61 71 64 64 74 69 69 78

934 Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937

123

Nutrient recovery in the extensive pond

The nutrient utilisation of the fish produced in IES expressed as the percentage of the

introduced feed nutrients is summarised in Table 6. The nitrogen recovery in the additional

fish yields of extensive ponds expressed as percentage of feed load was 5.6–6.1, 6.8–10 and

2.1–6.1 % in the treatments PP0 %, PP100 % and PP200 %, respectively. There were only

negligible differences in the nutrient accumulation between the intensive units. The

nutrient reuse by additional fish production in the extensive unit was the highest where the

periphyton density was moderate (PP100 %).

The combined fish production resulted in higher protein utilisation by 22–26 % with

periphyton application; this ratio can be increased by 33–45 % on average but the highest

nutrient utilisation was resulted at low feed load. The amounts of the additional fish yield

increased further at higher feed loads (Table 1), but the ratio of nutrient recovery in fish

Table 5 Nitrogen, phosphorus and organic matter concentrations (mg g-1 dry weight) in the upper 7.5 cmsediment layer of ponds measured before filling up the ponds (at start) and after water discharge (at harvest)

Nitrogen Phosphorus Organic matter

Low Medium High Low Medium High Low Medium High

PP0 %

At start 0.65 0.85 3.16 1.77 1.52 2.18 2.12 4.16 6.42

At harvest 3.14 3.33 6.24 2.49 2.73 3.98 7.31 5.66 10.8

PP100 %

At start 0.78 1.02 1.72 1.93 3.18 4.20 2.14 6.74 5.87

At harvest 3.76 5.70 7.81 2.31 1.91 3.25 8.32 7.50 12.8

PP200 %

At start 1.16 1.39 3.15 1.51 2.81 3.18 2.20 6.65 5.16

At harvest 4.38 3.74 6.49 2.22 1.89 4.30 9.08 6.62 10.9

Table 6 Nutrient accumulation in the fish biomass expressed as percentage of the feed load (%)

PP0 % PP100 % PP200 %

N P C N P C N P C

Low feed load

Intensive 23 23 16 22 22 15 22 22 15

Extensive 6.1 3.3 4.4 10 8.9 7.3 5.9 3.3 4.2

Total 29 26 20 33 31 22 28 25 19

Medium feed load

Intensive 24 24 16 26 26 18 26 26 18

Extensive 5.7 5.4 3.7 8.4 8.5 5.8 6.1 5.9 4.0

Total 30 29 20 35 34 24 32 32 22

High feed load

Intensive 22 22 15 20 20 13 20 20 14

Extensive 5.6 5.6 3.8 6.8 6.9 4.7 2.1 1.8 1.2

Total 27 27 19 27 27 18 22 22 15

N nitrogen, P phosphorus, C organic carbon

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937 935

123

was less than at low feed loads (Table 6). According to our observations, the periphyton

application was able to increase the fish production more effectively at low feed loads in

the extensive unit. However, the periphyton was able to improve the water quality at high

nutrient loads. The high periphyton density (PP200 %) resulted in decreased fish yields in

the extensive pond comparing to the moderate periphyton rate (PP100 %). There was no

positive effect of the high periphyton density on the fish yields comparing the single

combinations of intensive and extensive ponds without additional substrate; even it

resulted in the worst yield at high feed load. It can be explained that the dense substrate

area for periphyton production blocked proper water circulation caused stagnant zones with

insufficient oxygen and nutrient exchange.

The periphyton was able to improve the water quality; and therefore, the feed loads can

be higher in ponds with periphyton application. It was demonstrated in higher utilisation by

33–45 % with periphyton application, whilst this rate was only 22–26 % in a single

combination without periphyton. Detailed results on periphyton development and its

nutrition value are reported by Kosaros et al. (2010, 2011).

Conclusions

Investigations on the nutrient budget of the system demonstrated that the combination of

intensive aquaculture with an adequate size of extensive fishponds enhances the nutrient

utilisation efficiency and fish production. The efficiency of the extensive unit in term of

additional fish yields and water quality was improved by periphyton developed on artificial

substrates. The combined fish production resulted in higher protein utilisation by 22–26 %;

even this ratio can be increased by 33–45 % with periphyton application.

The application of the combined intensive–extensive pond fish production system could

contribute to the sustainable use of natural resources (i.e. higher nutrient utilisation effi-

ciency and reduced environmental emissions) and to the economical sustainability as well

(i.e. increased production capacity). The application of the combined intensive–extensive

pond fish production system could contribute to a better use of water resources and the

sustainability of aquaculture.

Acknowledgments Financial support for the research was provided by the SustainAqua EC-project andMinistry of Rural Development. This study was implemented under the Hungary-Romania Cross-BorderCo-operation Programme and is part-financed by the European Union through the European RegionalDevelopment Fund, and the Republic of Hungary and Romania.

References

Adamek Z, Gal D, Pilarczyk M (2009) Carp farming as a traditional type of pond aquaculture in CentralEurope: prospects and weakneses in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland. Eur Aquac Soc SpecPub 37:80–81

Asaduzzaman M, Wahab MA, Verdegem MCJ, Huque S, Salam MA, Azim ME (2008) C/N ratio controland substrate addition for periphyton development jointly enhance freshwater prawn Macrobrachiumrosenbergii production in ponds. Aquaculture 280:117–123

Avnimelech Y, Weber B, Hepher B, Milstein A, Zorn M (1986) Studies in circulated fish ponds: organicmatter recycling and nitrogen transformation. Aquac Fish Manag 17:231–242

Azim ME (2001) The potential of periphyton-based aquaculture production systems. Dissertation, Wa-geningen University, The Netherlands

936 Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937

123

Azim ME, Wahab MA, van Dam AA, Beveridge MCM, Huisman EA, Verdegem MCJ (2001) The potentialof periphyton-based culture of two Indian major carps, rohu Labeo rohita (Hamilton) and gonia Labeogonius (Linnaeus). Aquac Res 32:209–216

Bıro P (1995) Management of pond ecosystems and trophic webs. Aquaculture 129:373–386Diab S, Kochba M, Mires D, Avnimelech Y (1992) Combined intensive-extensive (CIE) pond system A:

inorganic nitrogen transformations. Aquaculture 101:33–39Fullner G, Gottschalk T, Pfeifer M (2007) Experiments for the production of hybrid striped bass in in-pond

circulation system. Aquacult Int 15:241–248Gal D, Szabo P, Pekar F, Varadi L (2003) Experiments on the nutrient removal and retention of a pond

recirculation system. Hydrobiologia 506(1–3):767–772Gal D, Kerepeczki E, Szabo P, Pekar F (2008) A survey on the environmental impact of pond aquaculture in

Hungary. Eur Aquac Soc Spec Pub 37:230–231Kestemont P (1995) Different systems of carp production and their impacts on the environment. Aquaculture

129:347–372Knosche R, Schreckenbach K, Pfeifer M, Weissenbach H (2000) Balances of phosphorus and nitrogen in

carp ponds. Fish Manag Ecol 7:15–22Kosaros T, Gal D, Pekar F, Lakatos G (2010) Effect of different treatments on the periphyton quantity and

quality in experimental fishponds. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 40:363–366Kosaros T, Pekar F, Gal D, Lakatos G (2011) Periphyton utilisation in aquatic ecosystems: improvement of

fish production and water treatment. Studia Universitatis Vasile Goldis Seria Stiintele Vietii (in press)McConnel WJ (1962) Productivity relations in carbon microcosm. Limnol Oceoanogr 7:335–343Milstein A, Peretz Y, Harpaz S (2008) Periphyton as food in organic tilapia culture: comparison of

periphyton growth on different substrates. Isr J Aquac-Bamidgeh 60(4):243–252Olah J, Szabo P, Esteky AA, Nezami SA (1994) Nitrogen processing and retention on a Hungarian carp

farms. J Appl Ichthyol 10:335–340Scherz H, Senser F (1994) Food composition and nutrition tables. Medpharm Scientific Publishers, Boca

RatonSchneider O, Sereti V, Eding EH, Vereth JAJ (2005) Analysis of nutrient flows in integrated intensive

aquaculture systems. Aquac Eng 32:379–401Wahab MA, Azim ME, Ali MH, Beveridge MCM, Khan S (1999) The potential of periphyton-based culture

of the native major carp kalbaush, Labeo calbasu (Hamilton). Aquac Res 30:409–419

Aquacult Int (2013) 21:927–937 937

123