Pond Boss Forums MANAGING AN EXISTING POND Feeding Need input

Ok group I need you input and critical eye. The following is out of a study I am working on analyzing for a Cutting Edge article. Look at this and tell me if you think any of it is wrong (impossible)? What am I missing ? Thanks.


Age-1 (subadult) feed-trained Largemouth Bass averaging
184.7 g (SD, 35.3) and 22.8mm(SD, 1.3) were indiscriminately
stocked into nine, 0.04-ha earthen ponds (volume ≈ 550 m3) at
a density of 10,000 bass/ha.

Floating
pellets were produced (fed to the fish above) with diameters of 5.5 mm (control) and
13.0 mm (large); sinking pellets were 5.5 mm, as manipulated
via pellet expansion during manufacture.

Looks like the length measurement should be in cm and not mm.

Others ?

Those are curiously proportioned bass if I read that correctly. 6.5 ozs but less than an inch long?

Dun know if it is impossible but 400 LMB .4 lbs each in a little less than a 0.1 acre pond.......That's like 1600 lbs+ per acre. Can water quality, DO, etc be maintained with that amount of biomass?

Edit: Just fixed the math. Thanks Sparkie!

I was thinking the same thing, Bill. When I get past the size discrepancy, I'm still faced with a stocking ratio of 405 LMB per 0.1 acre pond. At the assumed weight of 6.5 ozs per, that's approx 165 lbs of biomass. Plus feeding....glad I'm not in charge of maintaining water quality.

edit...that's 0.1 surface acre...

Either the weight should be mg, or length in cm, even though feed trained LMB are VERY disproportioned as compared to non feed trained LMB.

I am guessing the length is 22.8 CM, or just under 9", due to pellet sizes being used.

Assuming the pellet sizes were correct the fish sizes are incorrect. Pellets of 5.5mm are 0.2" and large were 13mm or 1/2". Others are guessing correctly. A 187gram bass of 6.5 oz has a std wt lgn of 9.3". I suggest that you try to contact one of the authors and preferably the student author.

FWIW if I assume that "SD" stands for standard deviation, with 99.7% confidence (+/-3 standard deviations), the weight varies from 78.8 to 290.6 gms (2.8 to 10.3 ounces). The length varies from 18.9 to 26.7 (assuming cms 7.4 to 10.5 inches). Does that seem likely? I have never seen a Rw chart for LMB this small.

I take that as a personal challenge. You know that the WR charts I made start LMB at 6", right? But since you are interested in 7.4-10.5", here you go.

Thanks! So looks like the numbers are plausible.

Thanks guys. Based on the study it must be that the LMB length should be in CM not mm. The study says sub adult age 1 LMB that are feed trained. Feed training is done at and around 2 inches and at a lot less than 6 ozs. Water quality was and stayed good. The study was for 151 days - way to long for 1 inch fish. A 1 inch LMB could not eat anything near 5 mm and certainly not 13 mm.

The results of the study will be in the next issue.