442
J. Iglesias and L. Fuentes
A different Artemia enrichment process has been proposed by Seixas et al.
(2010). They suggested that a microalgae combination of I� galbana and Rhodomonas lens was the best because it provides a high level of PUFAs ( I� galbana) and a
very high level of protein ( R� lens).
The higher protein to lipid ratio present in Artemia can also positively affect
paralarvae growth (Fuentes et al. 2011). Seixas et al. (2010) reached a similar conclusion and suggested that in order to sustain good paralarvae growth, a minimum
dietary protein to lipid ratio should be maintained.
Other authors have used enrichments other than microalgae. Kurihara et al.
(2006) enriched Artemia with fish egg powder (Plus Aquaran, BASF Japan), which
was supplemented with frozen A� personatus flakes (improving DHA content), and
obtained 10 % survival rate at day 42. Hamasaki and Takeuchi (2001) used Artemia
biomass (2 mm), enriched or not with yeast or shark egg powder, with Nannochloropsis sp. in the tank and obtained 24 % survival rate at day 20.
23.5.4 Crustacean Zoeae as Optimal Prey
Very few studies of the natural prey of O� vulgaris paralarvae have been published
because almost no early stages of this species have been found in nature. Roura et al.
(2012) used a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method with group-specific
primers selected to identify prey consumed by O� vulgaris paralarvae in the wild;
they identified 12 families of crustaceans (11 belonging to the order Decapoda and
1 to the order Euphausiacea) and two families of fishes (Gobiidae and Carangidae).
Additionally, Couto (2012) found that a high number of attacks on cirripede larvae
were registered when live wild zooplankton was provided to 2-day-old O� vulgaris
paralarvae in first feeding laboratory experiences.
As an approach to determining the hypothetical optimal composition of prey
for O� vulgaris paralarvae, Navarro and Villanueva (2000, 2003), Villanueva and
Bustamante (2006) and Villanueva et al. (2004, 2009) studied the lipids, fatty acids,
amino acids, essential and nonessential elements and vitamins A and E of mature
ovaries, eggs, early stages and juveniles of wild O� vulgaris.
In general, the best growth and survival of paralarvae in culture conditions were
attained using crustacean larvae alone or as a complement to enriched Artemia.
Villanueva and Norman (2008) provided a detailed review of prey offered, survival and
duration of the planktonic period. Itami et al. (1963), using shrimp ( P� serrifer) zoeae
of 2–4 mm body length as prey, obtained the first benthic juveniles (10–15 mm TL)
after 33 days, with survival rates of 9 % at 40 days and 4 % after 3 months of culture.
Villanueva (1994, 1995) obtained benthic juveniles with settlement starting after 47
days with a survival rate of 9 %. Wet weight after 60 days was 173.2 mg. They used
crustacean zoeae ( Liocarcinus depuratus and Pagurus prideaux) as prey. Afterwards,
Moxica et al. (2002), using adult Artemia up to 2 mm and spider crab zoeae ( Maja
brachydactyla) as food, obtained 8.3 % survival rate after 1 month and 0.2 % after 56
days when the mean dry weight of the paralarvae was 9.21 ± 0.92 mg.
The complete culture cycle at an experimental level was attained for the first
time in 2001 (Iglesias et al. 2004) using both Artemia and spider crab ( Maja
J. Iglesias and L. Fuentes
A different Artemia enrichment process has been proposed by Seixas et al.
(2010). They suggested that a microalgae combination of I� galbana and Rhodomonas lens was the best because it provides a high level of PUFAs ( I� galbana) and a
very high level of protein ( R� lens).
The higher protein to lipid ratio present in Artemia can also positively affect
paralarvae growth (Fuentes et al. 2011). Seixas et al. (2010) reached a similar conclusion and suggested that in order to sustain good paralarvae growth, a minimum
dietary protein to lipid ratio should be maintained.
Other authors have used enrichments other than microalgae. Kurihara et al.
(2006) enriched Artemia with fish egg powder (Plus Aquaran, BASF Japan), which
was supplemented with frozen A� personatus flakes (improving DHA content), and
obtained 10 % survival rate at day 42. Hamasaki and Takeuchi (2001) used Artemia
biomass (2 mm), enriched or not with yeast or shark egg powder, with Nannochloropsis sp. in the tank and obtained 24 % survival rate at day 20.
23.5.4 Crustacean Zoeae as Optimal Prey
Very few studies of the natural prey of O� vulgaris paralarvae have been published
because almost no early stages of this species have been found in nature. Roura et al.
(2012) used a polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based method with group-specific
primers selected to identify prey consumed by O� vulgaris paralarvae in the wild;
they identified 12 families of crustaceans (11 belonging to the order Decapoda and
1 to the order Euphausiacea) and two families of fishes (Gobiidae and Carangidae).
Additionally, Couto (2012) found that a high number of attacks on cirripede larvae
were registered when live wild zooplankton was provided to 2-day-old O� vulgaris
paralarvae in first feeding laboratory experiences.
As an approach to determining the hypothetical optimal composition of prey
for O� vulgaris paralarvae, Navarro and Villanueva (2000, 2003), Villanueva and
Bustamante (2006) and Villanueva et al. (2004, 2009) studied the lipids, fatty acids,
amino acids, essential and nonessential elements and vitamins A and E of mature
ovaries, eggs, early stages and juveniles of wild O� vulgaris.
In general, the best growth and survival of paralarvae in culture conditions were
attained using crustacean larvae alone or as a complement to enriched Artemia.
Villanueva and Norman (2008) provided a detailed review of prey offered, survival and
duration of the planktonic period. Itami et al. (1963), using shrimp ( P� serrifer) zoeae
of 2–4 mm body length as prey, obtained the first benthic juveniles (10–15 mm TL)
after 33 days, with survival rates of 9 % at 40 days and 4 % after 3 months of culture.
Villanueva (1994, 1995) obtained benthic juveniles with settlement starting after 47
days with a survival rate of 9 %. Wet weight after 60 days was 173.2 mg. They used
crustacean zoeae ( Liocarcinus depuratus and Pagurus prideaux) as prey. Afterwards,
Moxica et al. (2002), using adult Artemia up to 2 mm and spider crab zoeae ( Maja
brachydactyla) as food, obtained 8.3 % survival rate after 1 month and 0.2 % after 56
days when the mean dry weight of the paralarvae was 9.21 ± 0.92 mg.
The complete culture cycle at an experimental level was attained for the first
time in 2001 (Iglesias et al. 2004) using both Artemia and spider crab ( Maja