GROWTH PERFORMANCE OF CLARIAS GARIEPINUS FEDGRADED LEVEL OF MELON SHELL AND MELON BACK CUCUMEROPSIS MANNII AS REPLACEMENT FOR MAIZE MEAL ZEA MAYS L.

ABSTRACT

This study assessed the effect of partial and complete replacement of maize (ZeaMaysL.) with graded levels of melon shell and melon back (Cucumeropsis mannii) in the diet of clariasgariepinus. In a 60 days study in which 10 clarias gariepinus fingerlings   stocked in each of 6 rectangular plastic tanks with dimension 10x12x20 filled with water to half its capacity and made in duplicates,were fed with feed which contains (20% maize, 10% melon shell, 20% melon shell) as one treatment and another treatment which contains (20% maize, 10% melon back, 20% melon back), the fish were fed to satiation twice daily, and the water parameters were monitored. The weight gains in the different treatments subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed no significant difference (P<0.05) among treatments. T-test showed no significant difference (P<0.05)between the melon shell and melon back treatments even though there were no significant difference (P<0.05) among treatments, it was observed that melon back meal (MBM) 20% had the highest weight gain (23.86g), the highest specific growth rate (0.91%), and the highest daily weight gain (1.2g).  This was attributed to the fact that feed which contains 20% melon back floated longer, giving the fingerlings greater opportunity to feed on. The acceptance of melon back meal by clarias gariepinus is an indication that replacement of maize with melon back meal could be more profitable to fish farmers as maize is more expensive than melon back which is considered as waste.  This study therefore suggest that melon back could be added to feed to enhance its floating ability.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           I

CERTIFICATION     –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           II

DEDICATION           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           III

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT    –           –           –           –           –           –           –           IV

ABSTRACT –            –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           VI

TABLE OF CONTENT-       –           –           –           –           –           –           –           VII

LIST OF TABLES     –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           X

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION      –           –           –           –           –           1

1.1 Background of the study          –           –           –           –           –           –           1

1.2 Justification of the study          –           –           –           –           –           –           6

1.3 General objectives        –           –           –           –           –           –           –           6

1.4 Specific objectives        –           –           –           –           –           –           –           7

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW    –           –           –           –           8

2.1.      Dietary Replacement Effects of Maize with Graded

Levels ofMelon Shell on Growth Performance of Clarias

gariepinus Fingerlings.       –           –           –           –           –           –           8

2.2       Growth performance at various stages of Clarias

Gariepinus (BURCHELL, 1822) fed various inclusion

levels of processed water melon (CITRULLUS LANATUS,

MANSF).Seedcake diets.    –           –           –           –           –           –           9

CHAPTER THREE: MATERIALS AND METHODS            –           –           12

3.1       Experimental site     –           –           –           –           –           –           –           12

3.2       Sources and processing of ingredients     –           –          –           –           12

3.3       Formulation of experimental diet  –           –           –          –           –           13

3.4       Experimental procedures    –           –           –           –           –           –           15

3.5       Experimental fish     –           –           –           –           –           –           –           15

3.6       Feeding of experimental fish         –           –           –           –           –           16

3.7       Physico-chemical parameters of experimental water-   –           –           16

3.8       Statistical data analysis       –           –           –           –           –           –           16

3.9       Calculation of Feed conversion ratio (FCR)        –           –           –           17

3.9.1   Calculation of specificgrowth rate (SGR)            –           –           –           17

3.9.2   Calculation of daily weight gain (DWG)  –           –           –           –           17

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS      –           –           –           –           –           –           18

4.1       Growth performance           –           –           –           –           –           –           18

4.2       Feed utilization        –           –           –           –           –           –           –           20

4.3       Integrity test  –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           21

4.4.      Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for comparing MM20%,

MSM 10% and MSM 20%  –           –           –           –           –           –           22

4.5       Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for comparing MM20%,

 MBM 10% and MBM 20%            –           –           –           –           –           22

4.6       T-test for comparing MSM and MBM      –           –           –           –           23

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION –           –           24

5.1       Discussion     –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           24

5.2       Summary       –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           25

5.3       Conclusion    –           –           –           –           –           –           –           –           26

References