Post on 22-Mar-2023
Worms... – about the use and benefits of worms inaquaculture
University of Rostock
Aquaculture & Sea-Ranching
Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Presenter: Dr. Adrian A. Bischoff-Lang
Included scientific staff: Prof. Dr. Harry Palm
M.Sc. Jan Klein
M.Sc. Philipp Sandmann
M.Sc. Sven-Ole Meiske
Contents of the presentation:
• General introduction to the topic and why worms?
• Case studies on worm aquaculture• Bischoff 2003 & 2007; Bischoff et al. (2009) Bischoff et al. (2014)
• Sandmann (2018 – Master thesis); Meiske (2021 – Master thesis)
• Research projects
• IntAPol – Integrated Aquaculture of Polychaetes (Original title:Integrierte Aquakultur von Polychaeten)
General Introduction: Fisheries & Aquaculture…
Global Fisheries
• stagnating
Global Aquaculture
• increasing
FAO (2020)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1950 1957 1964 1971 1978 1985 1992 1999 2006 2013
Mio
. To
nn
en
Global Aquaculture
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1950 1957 1964 1971 1978 1985 1992 1999 2006 2013
Mio
. To
nn
en
Global Fisheries
Fishmeal - an essential resource for aquaculture feeds
• ^
• Fishmeal will be a limited resource in the future, claimed by various users
• Fishmeal production can affect natural fish stocks
• However, limiting fishmeal quantities can also influence aquaculture development
Fish, oil & meal world
2019
IFFO 2009
Nutrient budget of a fish illustrated by nitrogen (N)
Feed
100%
Excretion
36 – 57% als NH3
Fish 14 – 30%
Uneaten
Feed 5%
Faecal material
10 – 20% According toSchneider et al. 2005
Case study: Norwegian salmon production
0,0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1,0
1,2
1,4
195
0
195
2
195
4
195
6
195
8
196
0
196
2
196
4
196
6
196
8
197
0
197
2
197
4
197
6
197
8
198
0
198
2
198
4
198
6
198
8
199
0
199
2
199
4
199
6
199
8
200
0
200
2
200
4
200
6
200
8
201
0
201
2
201
4
201
6
201
8
Mio
. T
Norwegian Salmon production
FAO (2020)
Case study: Norwegian salmon production
• Salmon production 2018: 1.28 million tonnes
• Total feed quantity 2018: 1.6 million tonnes
• Total solids 2018: 0.32 million tonnes (DW)
• Organic material 2018: 29 000 tonnes (DW)
www.ens-newswire.com
Conclusion:A high-quality "resource" is
discarded unused and pollutes
the surrounding environment of
the aquaculture farms.
Feed
Aquaculture production in closed (recirculating) systems
Husbandry
Water
treatment
Primary Production
Conventional Recirculating
Aquaculture System (RAS)
Secundary Production
IMTA - Integrated MultiTrophic
(Multiloop) Aquaculture
Photoautotrophic
Organisms
Detritivorous
Organisms
Feed
Aquaculture production in closed (recirculating) systems
Husbandry
Water
treatment
Primary Production
Why worms?
• Worms are found almost everywhere
• Represent a large fraction of the natural diet of many animals (birds,fish, small mammals, etc.) - suitable biochemical composition (e.g.amino & fatty acids)
• Short generation times and very broad food spectrum
• Agricultural soils - earthworms (Oligochaeta) up to 600 ind./m²(<300g/m²)
• Seabed - sea worms (Polychaeta) according to Scaps (2002) up to5,000 ind./m² adults and up to 60,000 ind./m² with juveniles) (up to 39g/m² in natural systems)
→ BUT: own investigations 500 - 1,200 g/m²
Investigations concerning the suitability of solid matter utilisation by Hediste (Nereis) diversicolor (O. F. Müller, 1776)
Hediste (Nereis) diversicolor / Common ragworm (Polychaeta)
• Native species
• Variable feeding behaviour(planktivorous, carnivorous, detritivorous)
• Tolerant to temperature and salinitychanges
→ Important part of the naturaldiet of various fish andcrustacean species
Investigations concerning the suitability of solids utilisation by H. diversicolor (ZAFIRA / Bischoff 2003)
zugeführte Energie [Joule Wurm-1
Tag-1
]
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Sp
ezifis
ch
es W
ach
stu
m [d
-1]
-0.04
0.00
0.04
0.08
Algen als Futterquelle
Garnelenfleisch als Futterquelle
Feststoffe als Futterquelle
Fed Energy [J/worm/day]
SG
R
Particulate nutrients
as feed source
n = 25
zugeführte Energie [Joule Wurm-1
Tag-1
]
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500S
pe
zifis
ch
es W
ach
stu
m [d
-1]
-0.04
0.00
0.04
0.08
Algen als Futterquelle
Garnelenfleisch als Futterquelle
Feststoffe als Futterquelle
Investigations concerning the suitability of solids utilisation by H. diversicolor (ZAFIRA / Bischoff 2003)
zugeführte Energie [Joule Wurm-1
Tag-1
]
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Sp
ezifis
ch
es W
ach
stu
m [d
-1]
-0.04
0.00
0.04
0.08
Algen als Futterquelle
Garnelenfleisch als Futterquelle
Feststoffe als Futterquelle
Fed Energy [J/worm/day]
SG
R
Particulate nutrients
as feed source
n = 25
Fed Energy [J/worm/day]
Algae
Shrimp meat
Particulate nutrients
Nielsen et al. 1995
Investigations concerning the suitability of solids utilisationby H. diversicolor (ZAFIRA / Bischoff 2003)
Experiment 1 Experiment 2 Experiment 3
Mo
rta
litä
t [%
] (±
SD
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
niedrig
hoch
Mo
rta
lity [
% ±
SD
]
lowhighStocking density
• positive growth could be
achieved
• growth is lower than described
in the literature, but the feeds
described had higher nutrient
contents and more energy
• unsatisfactory mortality during
the trials
+
-
-
Research questions:
1. What are the biological requirements for the successfulculture of detritivorous organisms?
2. Under which conditions is nutrient recycling bydetritivorous organisms possible?
3. Is a reduction of solid waste possible through integratedaquaculture?
Impact of the sediment on H. diversicolor?
• Experimental setup (partial section)
Sediment 1 Sediment 2
Biofilter
Measurement of the
• initial & final weights
• mortality
Impact of the sediment on H. diversicolor?
Fine sand (grain size ≤ 2mm) Sediment 1 (Sed. 1)
Coarse sand (grain size 2 - 4mm) Sediment 2 (Sed. 2)
Ceramic bodies (Ø inside 5mm) Sediment 3 (Sed. 3)
Without sediment Sediment 4 (sed. 4)
PVC doormat Sediment 5 (Sed. 5)
Aquaclay© (grain size ≤ 3mm) Sediment 6 (Sed. 6)
Impact of the sediment on H. diversicolor?
→ Fine sand (Sed.1) was selected as the most suitablesediment for all further experiments
Sedimenttypen
Sed.1 Sed.2 Sed.3 Sed.4 Sed.5 Sed.6
Sp
ezifis
ch
es W
ach
stu
m (
± S
D)
[d-1
]
-0.03
-0.02
-0.01
0.00
SGR (Specific Growth Rate)
n = 4
Sedimenttypen
Sed.1 Sed.2 Sed.3 Sed.4 Sed.5 Sed.6Üb
erl
eb
en
sra
te [%
] (±
SD
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Survival
n = 4
Su
rviv
al [
% ±
SD
]
SG
R [
%/d
±SD
]
Under which conditions is the culture of H. diversicolor successful?
• Experimental setup
Biofilter
Measurement of the
• mortality
• initial & final weights
• concentrations of dissolved
nutrients
Under which conditions is the culture of H. diversicolor successful?
Versuchstage
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
TA
N [m
g L
-1] (±
SE
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
n = 3 Futtermenge = 1.0 % der Wurmbiomasse (Fischfutter)
Versuchstage
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Mo
rta
litä
t [n
] (±
SE
)
0
5
□
n =
3
Futtermenge = 1.5 % der Wurmbiomasse (Feststoffe)
Versuchstage
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Mo
rta
litä
t [n
] (±
SE
)
0
5
▼
n =
3
Futtermenge = 1.0 % der Wurmbiomasse (Feststoffe)
Versuchstage
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Mo
rta
litä
t [n
] (±
SE
)
0
5+
n =
3
Futtermenge = 0.5 % der Wurmbiomasse (Feststoffe)
Versuchstage
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Mo
rta
litä
t [n
] (±
SE
)
0
5●
n = 3
Experimental days
Experimental days
Daily feeding rate in % worm biomass
Mo
rta
ilty [
% ±
SD
]
TAN concentrations strongly
influence the survival of the worms!
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
Under which conditions is the culture of H. diversicolor successful?
Gereinigtes Sediment Gealtertes Sediment
Sp
ezifis
che
s W
ach
stu
m [d
-1]
-0.010
-0.005
0.000
0.005
0.010
SG
R [
d-1
]
Clean sediment „Aged“ sediment
Cleaned sediment→low microbiological
activity within the
sediment
Aged sediment→Established micro-
biological activity
How does H. diversicolor perform in an integrated RAS?
Particulate nutrients
Dissolved nutrients
Dissolved nutrients
MARE I
MARE II
experimental days
0 50 100 150 200
avera
ge w
orm
weig
ht
[mg]
0
500
1000
1500
experimental day 216experimental day 119experimental day 91experimental day 65experimental day 33experimental day 0
rel. abundance
0 1siz
e c
lasses
<0,15
<0,30
<0,45
<0,60
<0,75
<0,90
>0,90 (n = 150) (n = 56) (n = 100) (n = 86) (n = 31) (n = 9)
How does H. diversicolor perform in an integrated RAS?
• MARE I
experimental days
0 50 100 150
avera
ge b
odyw
eig
ht
[mg]
0
500
1000
1500
experimental day 162experimental day 143experimental day 124experimental day 101experimental day 80experimental day 57experimental day 35
rel. abundance
0 1siz
e c
lasses
<0.15 g
<0.30 g
<0.45 g
<0.60 g
<0.75 g
<0.90 g
>0.90 g (n = 26) (n = 32) (n = 32) (n = 28) (n = 24) (n = 26) (n = 47)
How does H. diversicolor perform in an integrated RAS?
• MARE II
Does the production in the integrated system influence the composition of the fatty acids of H. diversicolor?
Abundanz [%] (± SD)
0 10 20 30 40
8:010:012:013:014:014:115:015:116:016:117:118:0
18:1 (n-9/n-12)18:1 (n-7)18:2 (n-6)18:3 (n-6)18:3 (n-3)
20:020:1 (n-9)20:2 (n-6)20:3 (n-6)20:4 (n-6)
21:020:3 (n-3)20:5 (n-3)
22:022:1 (n-9)22:2 (n-6)22:6 (n-3)
Abundanz [%] (± SD)
0 10 20 30 40
8:010:012:013:014:014:115:015:116:016:117:118:0
18:1 (n-9/n-12)18:1 (n-7)18:2 (n-6)18:3 (n-6)18:3 (n-3)
20:020:1 (n-9)20:2 (n-6)20:3 (n-6)20:4 (n-6)
21:020:3 (n-3)20:5 (n-3)
22:022:1 (n-9)22:2 (n-6)22:6 (n-3)
Abundance [% ± SD] Abundance [% ± SD]
Conclusion 1:
• Polychaetes are suitable for IMTA production, thusincreasing the nutrient efficiency of the system
• Hediste diversicolor is able to selectively enrich fatty acidsor to re-synthesise them by itself
Project IntAPol – Integrated Aquaculture of Polychaetes
• Saltwater recirculation system for European sea bass (Dicentrachuslabrax) on the southern edge of the Lüneburger Heide
• Solids removal via 2 drum filters (faeces of the fish = solids 1 andexcess bacterial biomass of the biofilter = solids 2).
Project IntAPol – Integrated Aquaculture of Polychaetes
• The experiment was successful (including positive growth)
• Amino acid profile of the worm groupsAmino Acid Initial values Solids 1 Solids 2
Asparagine (asp) 54 (± 1,32) 64 (± 3,35) 63 (± 1,39)Glutamic acid (glu) 76 (± 1,39) 89 (± 4,66) 90 (± 1,86)Serine (ser) 24 (± 0,62) 29 (± 1,51) 29 (± 0,75)Threonine (thr) 16 (± 0,80) 24 (± 0,83) 23 (± 0,55)Histidine (his) 11 (± 0,50) 14 (± 0,66) 14 (± 0,54)Glycine (gly) 29 (± 0,96) 38 (± 2,53) 37 (± 1,30)Arginine (arg) 31 (± 0,51) 39 (± 3,08) 40 (± 1,21)Alanine (ala) 35 (± 0,76) 40 (± 2,13) 42 (± 1,03)Tyrosine (tyr) 18 (± 0,45) 22 (± 1,19) 23 (± 0,83)Valine (val) 25 (± 0,50) 31 (± 1,32) 34 (± 1,29)Methionine (met) 10 (± 0,28) 12 (± 0,93) 13 (± 0,33)Tryptophan (trp) 30 (± 0,64) 38 (± 1,47) 42 (± 1,55)Phenylalanine (phe) 22 (± 0,52) 27 (± 1,12) 28 (± 1,03)Leucine (leu) 28 (± 0,68) 34 (± 1,49) 36 (± 1,10)
Conclusion 2:
• Nitrogen content of worm biomass increases duringfeeding with solids from an aquaculture recirculationsystem
• Amino acid spectrum improves during feeding with solidsfrom an aquaculture recirculation system
Master thesis Philipp Sandmann (2018): Utilization ofsediments from the culture of African Catfish (Clariasgariepinus) for cultivating the Polychaete Hedistediversicolor (Müller, 1776)
• Special characteristics of this work:
• Culture of a marine polychaete with solids from freshwateraquaculture
• Transferability of the principle (?)
• Avoiding the transfer of potential pathogens
• African catfish is considered to be a very good nutrient utiliser,especially nitrogen, and the solids are therefore classified as"nutrient-poor"
• Master thesis Philipp Sandmann (2018)
• Positive growth and biomass increase during the experimental phase (temperature effect ?)
initial final initial final initial final0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
min
div
idu
al[g
]
12°C
16°C
20°C
• Master thesis Philipp Sandmann (2018)
• Specific Growth Rates (SGR)
System A (12°C) System B (16°C) System C (20°C)
Replicat 1 2.38 % 2.66 % 1.58 %
Replicat 2 2.73 % 2.20 % 1.53 %
Replicat 3 2.32 % 2.27 % 1.28 %
Mean±SD 2.48 ± 0.18% a 2.38 ± 0.20% a 1.46 ±0.13 % b
Conclusion 3:
• Feeding Hediste diversicolor with solids from freshwateraquaculture is possible and successful
• Feed quality does not influence the growth and survivalrate of Hediste diversicolor to the extent suspected
• Unfortunately, the effects of temperature on gametematuration and somatic growth could not be clearlyexplained
Master thesis Sven-Ole Meiske (2021): Suitability of nutrientrecovery from particulate nutrients of a commercial troutpond system (Oncorynchus mykiss Walbaum, 1792) usingvermifiltration
• Evaluation of the potential of Eisenia fetida (Bouché, 1972) forfurther utilisation of solids from aquaculture
• Verification of the fate of heavy metals present in the culture ofEisenia fetida
• Evaluation of the compost produced
Conclusion 4:
• Feeding Eisenia fetida with solid excreta from freshwateraquaculture is possible and can be successful
• Feed quality influences the growth, survival rate andreproductive potential of Eisenia fetida
• The cultured worms accumulate some heavy metalsaccording to the feed supply (Co & Cd), but others to alesser extent (Ni, Pb & Cr)
Final conclusions:
• Culture of detritivorous organisms - with regularreproductive events - is possible, culture conditionsdescribed
• Nutrient recycling through the culture of detritivorousorganisms is possible; high-quality and healthy rawmaterials, as alternatives for future animal feed, can beproduced through integrated aquaculture
• The bioreactors for the cultivation of Hediste (Nereis)diversicolor as well as Eisenia fetida can be used asadditional biological filters to stabilize or improve waterquality
BUT (so far):• Implementing the production of worms in integrated
aquaculture systems in accordance with
• EU regulation 178/2002 „food law & safety“
• EU regulation 183/2005 „feed hygiene“
• EU regulation 767/2009 „placing on the market and use of feed“
• EU regulation 68/2013 „catalogue of feed materials“
is (theoretically) only possible with substantial administrative
effort.
Thanks to the
• Aquaculture & Sea-Ranching teamat Rostock University
• Mariculture Working Groupat Institute for Marine Sciences in Kiel
• Department Marine Aquacultureat the Institute for Marine Resourcesin Bremerhaven
and (of course) your attention
Contact details:
University of Rostock (UROS)
Facultuy of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences
Department Aquaculture & Sea-Ranching
Justus-von-Liebig-Weg 6
18059 Rostock
Germany
Dr. Adrian Bischoff-Lang
adrian.bischoff-lang@uni-rostock.de
Phone: +49-381-498 3738