IMO the study that ewest provided above produced those results because the test ponds were fertilized. Fertilization is very important here. Proper fertilization allows a lot more plankton, sometimes to excess, to be produced which is why fertilizer is used. However, if the study was conducted in unfertilized ponds the outcome would be different and IMO the opposite due to BG and TFS both having to compete for a now limiting, not an excess plankton resource.
For understanding a research study's results it is very important to know all the methods used and the implications of what effects those methods are capable of causing.
Here is my 2 cents on this talking point:
Forage is forage. TFS and another species such as tilapia will diversify the food base. As noted TFS feed in a different niche than the BG and many of the other common forage items. Tilapia are also adaptable to feed on various types of foods. Each type of forage item can serve a purpose which generally enhances the food base as the diversity increases. As the BG and other forage tends to get depleted the TFS are hopefully abundant. TFS can get to 7" and maximum reported is 8". Each of those even at 4.5"-6" make a good meal when a few are eaten each day. Plus TFS are high in food value more than BG. LMB are very adaptable when it comes to feeding so they will easily figure out and switch to the pelagic feeding opportunity. I haven't read Lusks post yet. But your question or my answer may be appropriate for the thread. I will decide when I read Lusk's input. Lusk says he is going to make more time to post on the forum.
Last edited by Bill Cody; 01/24/17 12:36 PM.
