Acta Nat. Sci.   |  e-ISSN: 2718-0638
Acta Natura et Scientia
Acta Nat. Sci.

Original article | Acta Natura et Scientia 2020, Vol. 1(1) 82-95

Meat yield and length-weight relationship of freshwater crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz, 1823)) population in nine different inland water resources in Turkey

Selçuk Berber, Süleyman Akhan, Yusuf Bektaş & Gökhan Kalaycı

pp. 82 - 95   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/actanatsci.2020.313.10   |  Manu. Number: MANU-2009-23-0002.R1

Published online: December 31, 2020  |   Number of Views: 472  |  Number of Download: 973

Save PDF

Abstract

In this research, length-weight relationships and meat yields of freshwater crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus) were investigated in Apolyont Lake, İznik Lake, Manyas Lake, Terkos Lake, Küçükçekmece Lake, Sera Lake, Çıldır Lake, Ulugöl Lake and Eğirdir Lake between July and September 2010. For this purpose, 698 individuals were sampled from nine different inland water resources in Turkey. a total of 62 individuals (34♀♀-28♂♂) from Apolyont Lake, 103 individuals (45♀♀-58♂♂) from İznik Lake, 129 individuals (85♀♀- 44♂♂) from Manyas Lake, 156 individuals (89♀♀-67♂♂) from Terkos Lake and 63 individuals (41♀♀-22♂♂) from Küçükçekmece Lake, 44 individuals (24♀♀-20♂♂) from Sera Lake, 34 individuals (13♀♀-21♂♂) from Çıldır Lake, 59 individuals (16♀♀-43♂♂) from Ulugöl Lake, and 48 individuals (25♀♀-23♂♂) from Eğirdir Lake were sampled during the field studies. For female individuals, the highest mean values for both carapace length and total weight were found in Manyas Lake as 52.34 mm, 34.16 g, respectively. For male individuals, the highest values for carapace length was found in Çıldır Lake as 61.34 mm, and the highest values for total weight was found in Apolyont Lake as 43.25 g. The results of the regression analyses indicated that allometric growth was found for both male and female individuals caught from Çıldır Lake, Sera Lake, Ulugöl Lake, and Eğirdir Lake. In addition, negative allometric growth was found for both male and female individuals caught from Manyas Lake, Terkos Lake and Küçükçekmece Lake, while positive allometric growth was found for male individuals caught from Apolyont Lake and İznik Lake and with regard to the carapace length-total weight relationship. For female specimens, the highest value for total meat yield was found in İznik Lake (19.76%) and the highest value for abdominal meat yield was found in Apolyont Lake (16.08%). Moreover, the highest values for both total meat yield and abdomen meat yield of male specimens were found in Sera Lake as 20.43% and 14.28%, respectively.

Keywords: Meat yield, Growth, Length-weight relationship

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Berber, S., Akhan, S., Bektas, Y. & Kalayci, G. (2020). Meat yield and length-weight relationship of freshwater crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz, 1823)) population in nine different inland water resources in Turkey . Acta Natura et Scientia, 1(1), 82-95. doi: 10.29329/actanatsci.2020.313.10

Harvard
Berber, S., Akhan, S., Bektas, Y. and Kalayci, G. (2020). Meat yield and length-weight relationship of freshwater crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz, 1823)) population in nine different inland water resources in Turkey . Acta Natura et Scientia, 1(1), pp. 82-95.

Chicago 16th edition
Berber, Selcuk, Suleyman Akhan, Yusuf Bektas and Gokhan Kalayci (2020). "Meat yield and length-weight relationship of freshwater crayfish (Pontastacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz, 1823)) population in nine different inland water resources in Turkey ". Acta Natura et Scientia 1 (1):82-95. doi:10.29329/actanatsci.2020.313.10.
References
  1. Abrahamsson, S. A. A. (1972). Fecundity and growth of some populations of Astacus astacus Linné in Sweden with special regard to introductions in northern Sweden. Institute of freshwater Research Drottningholm, Report, 52, 23–37. [Google Scholar]
  2. Aksu, Ö., & Kaya, G. K. (2017). Aktaş Gölü (Ardahan, Türkiye) kerevitlerinin (Astacus leptodactylus, Eschscholtz, 1823) ağırlık uzunluk ilişkisi ve et verimi. BAUN Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2), 283-295. https://doi.org/10.25092/baunfbed.346123 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Aydın, H., Harlıoğlu, M. M., & Deniz T. (2015). An investigation on the population parameters of freshwater crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Esch., 1823) in Lake İznik (Bursa). Turkish Journal of Zoology, 39(4), 660-668. https://doi.org/10.3906/zoo-1406-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Balık, İ., Çubuk, H., Özkök, R., & Uysal, K. R. (2005b). Some biological characteristics of crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) in Lake Eğirdir. Turkish Journal of Zoology. 29, 295-300. [Google Scholar]
  5. Balık, S., Ustaoğlu, M. R., Sarı, H. M., & Berber, S. (2005a). Demirköprü Baraj Gölü (Manisa) tatlısu ıstakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823)’nun bazı büyüme ve morfometrik özelliklerinin belirlenmesi. Su Ürünleri Dergisi, 22(1-2), 83-89. [Google Scholar]
  6. Barım, Ö. (2007). Keban Baraj Gölü, Çemisgezek bölgesi tatlısu ıstakozu, Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823’un morfometrik analizi ve et verimi. Fırat Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(3), 301-307. [Google Scholar]
  7. Benzer, S., Benli, Ç. K., & Benzer, R. (2015). The comparison of growth with length-weight relationand artificial neural networks of crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus, in Mogan Lake. Journal of the Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment, 21(2), 208-223. [Google Scholar]
  8. Benzer, S., & Benzer, R. (2015). Determine some morphological characteristics of crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) with traditional methods and artificial neural networks in Dikilitas Pond, Ankara, Turkey. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 24(11A), 3727-3735. [Google Scholar]
  9. Benzer, S., & Benzer, R. (2018). New perspectives for predicting growth properties of crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) in Uluabat Lake. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 50(1), 35-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2018.50.1.35.45 [Google Scholar]
  10. Benzer, S., Benzer, R., & Günal, A. Ç. (2017). Artificial neural networks approach in morphometric analysis of crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus) in Hirfanlı Dam Lake. Biologia, 72(5), 527-535. https://doi.org/10.1515/biolog-2017-0052 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Berber, S. & Balık, S. (2009). Apolyont Gölü (Bursa-Türkiye) tatlısu ıstakozunun (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) boy-ağırlık ilişkisi ve et verimi. Journal of FisheriesSciences.com, 3(2), 86-99. [Google Scholar]
  12. Berber, S. (2005). Manyas, Apolyont, İznik göllerindeki kerevit (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) popülasyonlarının biyo-ekolojik ve morfometrik özellikleri ile hastalık yönünden karşılaştırmalı olarak araştırılması. [Doktora Tezi. Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  13. Berber, S., Yıldız, H., Ateş, A. S., Bulut, M., & Mendeş, M. (2010). A study on the relationships between some morphological and reproductive traits of the Turkish crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823 (Crustacea: Decapoda). Reviews in Fisheries Science, 18(1), 131–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641260903491003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  14. Bolat, Y. (1996). Eğirdir Gölü’ndeki kerevit (Astacus leptodactylus salinus, Nordmann, 1842) popülasyonunun bazı özellikleri ve hastalığının morfolojik incelenmesi. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Isparta, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  15. Bolat, Y. (2001). Eğirdir Gölü Hoyran Bölgesi tatlısu istakozlarının (Astacus leptodactylus salinus, Nordmann, 1842) popülasyon büyüklüğünün tahmini. [Doktora Tezi, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi, Isparta, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  16. Boyalık, F. (2018). Kocahıdır Göleti (İpsala/Edirne) kerevit (Pontastacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823)  popülasyonunun biyo-ekolojik ve morfometrik özellikleri yönünden araştırılması. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart Üniversitesi, Çanakkale, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  17. Büyükçapar, H. M., Alp, A., Kaya, M., & Çiçek, Y. (2006). Mamasın Baraj Gölü (Aksaray-Türkiye) tatlısu istakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823)’nun boy-ağırlık ilişkisi ve et verimi. E.Ü. Su Ürünleri Dergisi, 23(1-2), 21-25. [Google Scholar]
  18. Chien, Y. C., & Avault, J. W. Jr. (1983). Effects of flooding dates and type of disposal of rice straw on the initial survival and growth of caged juvenile crayfish, Procambarus clarkii in ponds, Freshwater Crayfish 5, 344-350. [Google Scholar]
  19. Crandall, K. A., & De Grave, S. (2017). An updated classification of the freshwater crayfishes (Decapoda: Astacidea) of the World, with a complete species list. Journal of Crustacean Biology, 37(5), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcbiol/rux070 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Çevik, C. (1993). Seyhan Baraj Gölünde yaşayan tatlısu ıstakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823)’nun bazı biyo-ekolojik, morfometrik özellikleri ile hastalık durumunun saptanması. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Çukurova Üniversitesi, Adana, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  21. Dabrowski, T., Kolakowski, E., Wawreszuk, H., & Choroszucha, C. (1966). Studies on chemical composition of American crayfish (Orconectes limosus) meat as related to its nutritive value, Journal Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 23(11), 1653-1661. [Google Scholar]
  22. Dartay, M., & Ateşşahin, T. (2013). A study on catching freshwater crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz 1823, and its some population characteristics. Turkish Journal of Science and Technology, 8(2), 125-130. [Google Scholar]
  23. Deniz, T. B., Aydın, C., & Ateş, C. (2013). A study on some morphological characteristics of Astacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz 1823) in seven different inland waters in Turkey. Journal of the Black Sea/Mediterranean Environment, 19, 190˗205. [Google Scholar]
  24. Duman, E., & Pala, M. (1998). Keban Baraj Gölü Ağın Bölgesi’nde yaşayan kerevit (Astacus leptodactylus salinus, Nordmann, 1842) popülasyonunun büyüme özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Ege Üniversitesi Su Ürünleri Dergisi, 15(1-2), 9-17. [Google Scholar]
  25. Erdem, U., & Erdem, Ü. (1994). Ayrancı Baraj Gölündeki (Karaman) tatlısu istakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823)’nun bazı biyo-ekolojik ve morfometrik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. XII. Ulusal Biyoloji Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, Edirne, Türkiye. pp. 358-361. [Google Scholar]
  26. Erdem, Ü., Cebeci, M., Selçuk, S., Tunç, N., Özbay, A., & Çildem, B. (2001). İznik Gölündeki tatlısu ıstakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz, 1823) XI. Ulusal Su Ürünleri Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, Hatay, Türkiye. pp. 449-456. [Google Scholar]
  27. Erkebay, C. (2004). Sera Gölü (Trabzon) kerevit (Astacus leptodactylus eschscholtz, 1823) stoğunun biyolojik özellikleri, stok yapısı ve Doğu Karadeniz koşullarında yetiştiricilik olanakları. [Doktora Tezi. Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Trabzon, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  28. FAO. (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2018). Fishery and Aquaculture Statistics. Global capture production 1950-2018 (FishstatJ). In: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department [online]. Rome. Updated 2019, www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj/en. [Google Scholar]
  29. Goddard, S. 1988. Food and feeding (pp. 145–166). In Freshwater crayfish: Biology, management, and exploitation. Holdich, D. M., & Lowery, R. S. (Eds.), Croom-Helm, London. [Google Scholar]
  30. Gu, H., Mather, P. B., & Capra, M. F. (1994). The relative growth of chelipeds and abdomen and muscle production in male and female red claws crayfish, Cherax quadricarinatus von Martens, Aquaculture, 123, 249-257. [Google Scholar]
  31. Gürel, A. (1998). Keban Baraj Gölü tatlısu ıstakozlarının (Astacus leptodactylus Esckschholtz, 1823) et verimi ve kimyasal bileşimi üzerine araştırmalar. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Fırat Üniversitesi, Elazığ, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  32. Harlıoğlu, M. M., & Türkgülü, İ. (2000). The relationship between egg size and female size in freshwater crayfish, Astacus leptodactylus, Aquaculture International, 8, 95-98. [Google Scholar]
  33. Harlıoğlu, M. M. (1999). Keban Baraj Gölü, Ağın Yöresi tatlısu ıstakozu, Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholtz popülasyonunda ağırlık-uzunluk ilişkisi ve et verimi. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 23(3), 949-957. [Google Scholar]
  34. Harlıoğlu, M. M., & Harlıoğlu, A. G. (2005). Eğirdir, İznik Gölleri ve Hirfanlı Baraj Gölünden avlanan tatlısu istakozu Astacus leptodactylus (Eschscholtz, 1823)’un morfometrik analizleri ile et verimlerinin karşılaştırılması. Fırat Üniversitesi Fen ve Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(2), 412-423 [Google Scholar]
  35. Holdich, D. M. (2002) Present distribution of crayfish in Europe and some adjoining countries. Bulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture, 367, 611–650. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae:2002055 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  36. Hubenova, T., Zaikov, A., & Vassileva, P. (2004). Untersuchungen über die Fleischmenge beim Sumpkrebs (Astacus leptodactylus Esch.), Fischer & Teichwirt, 6, 690-692. [Google Scholar]
  37. Huner, J. V., Lindqvist, O. V., & Kononen, H. (1988). Comparison of morphology and edible tissues of two important commercial crayfish, the noble crayfish, Astacus astacus Linné, and the red swamp crayfish, Procambarus clarkii (Girard) (Decapoda, Astacidae and Cambaridae), Aquaculture, 68, 45-57. [Google Scholar]
  38. Huner, J. V., & Romaire, R. P. (1979). Size at maturity as a means of comparing populations of Procambarus clarkii (Girard) (Crustacea, Decapoda) from different habitats. Freshwater Crayfish. 4, 53-64. [Google Scholar]
  39. Kalma, M. (1998). Konya Konuklar Beşgöz Gölü ıstakozlarının (Astacus leptodactylus salinus, Nordmann, 1842) çeşitli vücut özellikleri ve yenilebilir et oranı üzerinde bir araştırma. C.Ü. Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. 6, 83-95. [Google Scholar]
  40. Kleanthids, P. K., Sinis, A. I., & Stergiou, K. I. (1999). Length˗weight relationships of freshwater fishes in Greece. Naga, ICLARM Q, 22, 37˗41. [Google Scholar]
  41. Köksal, G. (1980). Biometric analysis on the freshwater crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus, Eschscholtz, 1823). Which is produced in Turkey, relationship between the major body components and meat yield. Ankara Üniversitesi Veterinerlik Fakültesi, Dergisi C: XXVI(3-4), 93-114. [Google Scholar]
  42. Köksal, G., Korkmaz, A. Ş., & Kırkağaç, M. (2003). Ankara-Dikilitaş Göleti tatlısu istakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Esch. 1823) popülasyonunun incelenmesi. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(1), 51-58. [Google Scholar]
  43. Köksal, S. (1988). Mogan gölü tatlısu ıstakozlarının (Astacus leptodactylus esch, 1823) mantar hastalığının ortaya çıkmasını kolaylaştıran olumsuz kimyasal ve fiziksel parametreler. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  44. Lindquist, O. V., & Lahti, E. (1983). On the sexual dimorphism and condition index in the crayfish Astacus astacus L. in Finland. Freshwater Crayfish, 5, 3–12. [Google Scholar]
  45. Lindqvist O. V., & Louekari K. (1975). Muscle and hepatopancreas weight in Astacus astacus L. (Crustacea, Astacidae) in the trapping season in Finland. Annales Zoologici Fennici, 12(4), 237-243. [Google Scholar]
  46. McDonald, M., DeVore, P., Richards, C., Skurla, J., & Gunderson, J. (1992). Economic and technologie development for the crayfish industry in Minnesota: Final Report, Natural Resources Research Institute, Technical Report NRRI/TR-92/15, 74p. [Google Scholar]
  47. Rhodes, C. P., & Holdich, D. M. (1984). Length-weight relationship, muscle production and proximate composition of the Freswater Crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes (Lereboullet). Aquaculture, 37, 107-123. [Google Scholar]
  48. Romaire, R. P., Forester, J. S., & Avault, J. W. Jr. (1977). Length-weight relationships of the commercialy important crayfishes of the genus Procambarus. Freshwater Crayfish, 3, 463-470. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sint, D., Dalla Via, J., & Füreder, L. (2007). Phenotypical characterization of indigenous freshwater crayfish populations. Journal Zoology, 273(2), 210–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7998.2007.00318.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  50. Tesch, F. W. (1971). Age and growth (pp. 99˗130). In Ricker, W. E. (Ed.), Methods for Assessment of Fish Production in Fresh Waters. Blackwell Scientific Publications. [Google Scholar]
  51. Tüzün, İ. (1987). Mogan Gölündeki kerevit (Astacus leptodactylus, Eschscholtz, 1823)’in biyolojisi. [Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.] [Google Scholar]
  52. Wetzel, J. E. (1993). Morphological and physiological characteristics of orconectid crayfishes important to aquaculture. [M.S Thesis, Purdue University, West Lafayette IN]. [Google Scholar]
  53. Yıldırım, M. Z., Gülyavuz, H., & Ünlüsayın, M. (1997). Eğirdir Gölü kerevitlerinin (Astacus leptodactylus salinus, Nordmann, 1842) et verimi üzerine bir araştırma. Turkish Journal of Zoology, 21(1), 101-105. [Google Scholar]
  54. Yılmaz, E., Harlıoğlu, A., & Yılmaz, A. (2011). Gaga Gölü (Ordu, Türkiye)’nde yakalanan tatlısu ıstakozu (Astacus leptodactylus Eschscholt, 1823)’nda ağırlık-uzunluk ilişkisi ve et verimi. Su Ürünleri Dergisi, 28(3), 75-80. [Google Scholar]
  55. Yüksel, F., & Duman, E. (2012). Keban Baraj Gölü kerevitlerinin (Astacus leptodactylus Esch., 1823) bazı morfolojik özelliklerinin incelenmesi. Journal of FisheriesSciences.com, 6(4), 271-281. [Google Scholar]
  56. Zimmerman, J K M. (2012) Noble crayfish (Astacus astacus) in a changing world—implications for management. [PhD. Dissertation, University of Sweden.] [Google Scholar]
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 1 Issue 1

December 2020

All Articles

Acta Natura et Scientia

Acta Nat. Sci..
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License.
Privacy policy     |     Terms of Use     |     Use of Cookies
Creative Commons Lisansı
© 2012 - 2024 - THDSoft e-Journal Management System.