Sunteți pe pagina 1din 19

Egypt. J. Zool., 60 : 397-415 (December, 2013)

DOI: 10.12816/0003300

BIOMETRIC STUDIES OF GROWTH PATTERN AFFECTING PEARL PRODUCTION IN PEARL OYSTER PINCTADA RADIATA Moussa, R.M.

National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries- Alexandria-Egypt

ABSTRACT Comparative studies were made on the growth and biometric relationships of the pearl oyster Pinctada radiata which is a candidate species for mariculture and pearl production in Egypt. A total of 613 oysters were collected from three stations along Egyptian Mediterranean coast, of Alexandria. The size structure of the sampled populations was described and the relative growth parameters were estimated. It appeared that the majority of collected specimens were dominated by individuals in size range of 40-64 mm DVL. The maximum size (113 mm DVL, 144.71g T.wt), recorded in S1 (Abu-Qir), was bigger than that recorded elsewhere. The biometric relationships between dorso-ventral length [DVL] and hinge length [HL]; thickness [THK], anterior-posterior length [APL]; nacre width [NW], and nacre length [NL] were studied. All populations showed high to moderate correlations between various combined parameters, with some variability from one station to another. Further correlations were studied between DVL and THK, NL, NW for each size class in all stations. It was concluded that S1 (Abu-Qir) is one of the most suitable sites for specimens collection for seed implantation since oysters attained the highest thickness ,flesh weight values, and largest nacreous layer area. Also, 65-89mm size range of P. radiata is recommended for seed implantation. KEY WORDS: Biometry; Morphometry; Pearl oyster; Pinctada radiata; Egyptian Mediterranean coastline

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

INTRODUCTION The pearl oyster Pinctada radiata (Leach, 1814) is one of the first lessepsian immigrants that arrived to the Mediterranean Sea through the Suez Canal (Monterosato, 1878). This indo-pacific bivalve has successfully passed from the Red Sea and spread throughout the Mediterranean basin colonizing continually new habitats. It has been recorded several times in both eastern and western Mediterranean basins (Galil and Zenetos, 2002; Gofas and Zenetos, 2003; Zenetos et al. 2005). In Egypt, P. radiata was reported for the first time in 1874 as Meleagrina sp. in the Egyptian Mediterranean coast (Dogan and Nerlovic, 2008). It is commonly known as the Atlantic pearl-oyster or the Gulf pearl oyster. It is considered a habitat- modifying gregarious bivalve capable of impacting native fauna by forming oyster banks (Yassien et al., 2000). P. radiate represents an edible, cheap and feasible source of commercial importance. As a result, it has been extensively exploited in Egyptian coastal water of Mediterranean Sea and Red Sea. Additionally, it is the greatest source of natural pearls in the world, since ancient times. It played a crucial role in the natural pearl industry in the world from time immemorial, meeting the world's demand for both mother-of-pearls and pearls (Almatar, 1992). Growth information is of interest for pearl farming, since flesh weight is useful indicator for pearl oyster health and suitability of the environment as they represent the integrated response of the entire physiological activity of the organisms (Pouvreau et al., 2000). In addition, shell dimensions give precious information on pearl growth, since shell increment and deposition of nacreous matter on the implanted nucleus are strongly correlated (Coeroli and Mizuno, 1985). Therefore, the main objective of the present study was to investigate the biometric relationship of different populations

398

Moussa R.M.

of P. radiata to provide the baseline information of establishing Egyptian cultured pearl production and oyster mariculture and understanding the ecological variations with the oyster populations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS A total of 613 individuals of wild Pinctada radiata specimens were collected from three stations; S1, S2, and S3 which are Abu-Qir; Maamoura, and Miami, respectively along Alexandria coastline by divers from 10-15m depth (Fig.1). The oysters were removed from the place of attachment by severing the byssus threads, using a long narrow chisel. Oysters were transported in cool moist condition to the Invertebrate Aquaculture laboratory at National Institute of Oceanography and Fisheries (NIOF), Alexandria, Egypt. Collected oysters were scrubbed to remove the fouling organisms and silt, washed thoroughly in seawater and measured. Specimens were measured for dorso-ventral length (DVL) ; hinge length (HL);anterior-posterior length (APL); nacre width (NW) nacre length (NL), and thickness (THK) in millimeters using digital vernier calipers to a precision of 0.01 mm. Total weight (T.wt), wet flesh weight (W.wt), and shell weight (S.wt) in grams (g) were taken using a digital balance. A population from each station was grouped in three size class (40-64, 65-89, 90-114 mm DVL) with 24 mm class interval. Biometric relations such as DVL-HL;DVL-APL; DVL-THK; DVL-NL, and DVL-NW were done by the least square method, using the linear regression equation ‘Y = a ± b X’, where, ‘a’ is the intercept and ‘b’ the slope. The length-weight relationship was calculated using standard exponential equation W=a L b . Both relations were estimated for each sampling station. The correlations between various parameters were

399

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

analyzed by means of Spearman’s correlation, using SPSS software. The level of significance of the regression coefficient (R 2 ) value was determined using a simple one-way ANOVA test. Biometric relationships were studied for DVL-THK, DVL-NL, and DVL-NW to provide information about the suitable size for seed implantation and the preferred station for specimen selection among the studied ones. Regression statistics of slope, intercept, regression coefficient and significance of these variables are presented in Table 3.

RESULTS During the period of investigations, the number of collected P. radiata was 150in S1, 362 in S2, and 101in S3. The majority of the analyzed oyster subpopulations in S1 and S2 were dominated by individuals in size class 40-64 mm (Fig. 2). However, most of collected oysters in S3 were in size range of 65-89 mm. The larger size class of 90-114mm was only observed in S1 and represent 10% of the collected S1 subpopulation. Mean DVL and T.wt values of the collected specimens ranged between 61.15±6.80 mm and 67.07±15.34 mm, and 31.54±12.36g and 48.70±30.81g, respectively (Table.1).The maximum size (113 mm DVL, 144.71g T.wt) reported during the present study was recorded in S1. There was significant difference between the mean values of DVL; NL; NW,T.wt; W.wt, and S.wt between studied stations. In contrast, mean values of HL; APL, and THK were closely related to each other showing no significant difference. The highest mean parameters values recorded in S1are decreased in S3 and the lowest in S2. The dimensional relationships between DVL and HL, APL, THK, NL, and NW are shown in Fig. 3. The regression equations of various

400

Moussa R.M.

parameters in the three stations are given in Table 2. All relationships were positive with respect to DVL. The Spearman correlation coefficient values were varied among studied stations. The highest Spearman correlation coefficient values were recorded in S1. Biometric relationship of DVL-NL

and DVL-NW were strong in S1 as compared to moderate biometric

relationship in S2and S3. The relationship between DVL-T.wt, DVL-W.wt, and DVL-S.wt in the

different studied sites are shown in Fig. 4 and Table 2.In all stations, there

was an increase in total, wet and shell weight with respect to length. The highest coefficient (R 2 =0.856) was obtained with DVL-T.wt in S1. DVL-THK relationships showed no significance within the size class 40-64mm, while the other size classes had significant co-relation. Likewise, DVL-NL and DVL-NW positive relationships followed the same trend of DVL-THK relationship as nacreous area increase with size increase (Table 3).

DISCUSSION The growth of a bivalve is the total result of many interacting endogenous and exogenous factors. Among endogenous factors, age is

presumably the most important. However, food supply and temperature are considered from exogenous factors (Pouvreau et al., 2000). In the present study, the size structure showed that with the exception of S3, which characterized by the dominance of Pinctada radiate specimens of (65-89

mm DVL) class size, the other stations (S1, S2) were dominated by small

pearl oysters of class size (40-64mm DVL). Differences in size distribution among stations might be due to various environmental factors, such as temporally and spatially variable predation or exploitation or adverse

401

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

environmental episodes as suggested by Tlig-Zouari et al.(2010) in studying the morphometry of P. radiata along Tunisian coastline. It is worth noting that the maximum size reported during the present study (113 mm DVL, 144.71g T.wt) was the highest recorded size for P. radiata among available published literature. The previous recorded maximum sizes were 100.5mm in Bizerta lagoon, Tunisia (Tlig-Zouari et al., 2010), 93.2mm size in Alexandria, Egypt (Yassien et al., 2000), 74mm size in Kerkennah islands (Tlig-Zouari, 1993), 85mm size in Gabes Gulf (Seurat 1929), and 64mm in Red Sea (Yassien, 1998). The comparison of mean growth parameters values of P. radiata among different stations showed that the highest values were recorded in S1. Additionally, the maximum size and highest regression coefficient values among all variables were recorded in S1. These findings may be due to food availability which has been considered as one of the major factors responsible for bivalve growth (Leighton, 1979, Urban, 2000). It is noted that the relationship between the DVL and other shell dimensions is generally positive and linear, which indicates isometric growth pattern in the shell of P. radiata population of the studied stations. The spearman correlation coefficient values varied among different studied stations. This may be attributed to environmental conditions, in particular to wave action, salinity and temperature as suggested by Beaumont and Khamdan (1991). Also, it may be due to xenomorphism, which is the process of oyster shape determination by contour of the substrate where they grow (Quayle and Newkirk, 1989), and shell infestation that alter the shell growing pattern (Seed, 1968). Moreover, genetic factors were reported to be related to the existence of morphometric variations with P. radiata in each of Australia (Colgan and Ponder, 2002), Japan (Wada 1975,

402

Moussa R.M.

1982), and Bahrain (Beaumont andKhamdan, 1991). As a result, dimensional relationships undergo modifications by the environmental conditions under which the oyster grows (Hickman, 1979). Linear DVL-THK, DVL-NL, and DVL-NW significant relationships showed strong correlation (R 2 = 0.739-0.814) in different stations. In order to investigate the growth pattern of thickness and nacreous layer area which are the critical factors in pearl production, DVL-THK, DVL-NL, and DVL- NW relationships were studied in various size classes in each station. Absence of correlation between DVL and THK, NL, and NW in the size class (40-64mm) was noticed; however, strong significant linear relationships were observed in the other size classes (65-89mm) and (90- 114mm) in all stations. Similarly, in most pteroid oysters belonging to the genus Pinctada, there is an increase in THK-DVL ratio with age (Hynd, 1955). Besides, Hwang et al. (2007) stated that oyster thickness is a prime factor and the most important morphological character in the aquaculture of many Pinctada species, since it greatly affects the number and size of the inserted pearl nuclei. Many bigger nuclei can be implanted in pearl oysters with larger thickness. The present findings on the biometric relationships DVL-THK, DVL-NL, and DVL-NW of P. radiata collected from natural beds suggested that the selection of oysters in size range of 65-89 mm DVL is the best for implantation of round nucleus and may be for cultured pearl production. Length weight relationships DVL-T.wt, DVL-W.wt, and DVL-S.wt were positive in all studied stations. DVL-T.wt relationship had reasonably good fit in (R 2 = 0.664-0.856) as compared to DVL-W.wt (R 2 = 0.5- 0.769).This result is in agreement with that mentioned by Pouvreau et al. (2000); growth rates in shell or tissue are strongly linked with the

403

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

progressive investment in reproduction, since the part of the scope for

growth which is allocated to reproduction (called the reproductive effort,

ER, Thompson, 1984) is lost for shell or tissue growth.

The present findings are considered as baseline for establishing pearl

production in Egypt that can be summarized in:(1) for seed implantation,

S1 (Abu-Qir) is one of the suitable and recommended sites for specimens

collection, where oysters attained high thickness, flesh weight and large

nacreous layer area (2) environmental conditions in S1 seem to be the

optimum for oyster growth that was indicated by recording the highest

maximum sized P. radiata in published studies, and (3) the suitable size for

seed implantation is 65-89mm. Further studies are needed to investigate,

assess and manage the oyster banks along Egyptian Mediterranean

coastline.

REFRENCES Beaumont A.R. and Khamdan S.A.A. 1991. Electrophoretic and morphometric characters in population differentiation of the pearl oyster, Pinctada radiate (Leach), from around Bahrain. J. Molluscan Stud. 57:

433442.

Coeroli, M., and Mizuno, K. 1985. Etude des different facteurs influants sur la production perlière de l'huître perlière à lèvres noires. Proc. 5th. Int. Coral reef Congress, Tahiti, 5 : 551-556.

Colgan D.J. and Ponder W.F. 2002. Genetic discrimination of morphologically similar, sympatric species of pearl oysters (Mollusca:

Bivalvia: Pinctada) in eastern Australia. Mar. Freshwater Res. 53: 697

709.

Dogan, A., and Nerlović, V. 2008. On the occurrence of Pinctada radiate (Mollusca: Bivalvia: Pteriidae), an alien species in Croatian waters. Acta Adriatica, 49: 155-158.

Galil, B.S., and Zenetos , A. 2002. A sea change -exotics in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.p.325-336. In Invasive Aquatic Species in Europe.

404

Moussa R.M.

Distribution, Impacts and Management. E. Leppakoski, S., Gollasch& S. Olenin (Eds.), Dordrecht, Boston, London. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Gofas , S., and Zenetos , A. 2003. Exotic molluscs in the Mediterranean basin: current status and perspectives. Oceanography and Marine Biology:

An Annual Review.41: 237-277.

Hickman, R. W. 1979. Allometry and Growth of the Green-Lipped Mussel Pema canaliculus in New Zealand.Marine Biol., 51: 311-327.

Hwang J.J., Yamakawa T. and Aoki I. 2007. Growth of wild pearl oysters Pinctada fucata, Pinctada margaritifera and Pinctada sugillata (Bivalvia:

Pteriidae) in Taiwan. Fish. Sci. 73: 132141.

Hynd, J.S. 1955. A revision of the Australian pearl shells genus Pinctada (Lamellibranchia). Aust. J. Mar. Freshw. Res.6: 98-137.

Leighton, D.L. 1979. A growth for the rock scallop Hinnites multirugosus held at several depths, California. Marine Biology.51: 229-232.

Monterosato, T.A. 1878. Enumerazione e sinonimia delle conchiglie Mediterranee. Giornale di scienze naturali ed economiche di Palermo.13:

61-113.

Pouvreau, S.; Tiapari, J.; Gangnery, A.; Lagarde, F.; Garnier, M.; Teissier, H.; Haumani, G.; Buestel, D., and Bodoy, A. 2000. Growth of the black-lip pearl oyster Pinctada margaritifera, in suspended culture under hydro biological conditions of Takapoto lagoon (French Polynesia). Aquaculture. 184: 133-154.

Quayle, D. B., and Newkirk, G. F. 1989. Farming Bivalve Molluscs:

Methods for Study and Development, Advanced in World Aquaculture, Volume 1; International Development Research Centre; Canada; 294 pp.

Seed, R. 1968. Factors influencing shell shape in the mussel Mytilius edulis. J. Mar. Bio. Ass. UK. 48: 561-581.

Seurat L.G. 1929. Observations sur les limites, les faci`es et les associations animales de l’étage intercotidal de la petite Syrte (Golfe de Gab`es). Bull. Inst. Nat. Sci. Techn.Mer.Salammbô.3: 171.

405

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

Thompson, R.J. 1984. Production, reproductive effort, reproductive value and reproductive cost in a population of the blue mussel Mytilus edulis from a subartic environment. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 16: 249-257.

Tlig-Zouari S. 1993. Contribution `a l’étude écobiologique de deux esp`eces de mollusques lamellibranches Pinctada radiate (Leach, 1814) et Pinna nobilis, Linné 1758 des ˆıles Kerkennah.Th`ese en Sciences, Eco- biologie marine, Université de Tunis, Faculté des Sciences de Tunis.215 pp.

Tlig-Zouari S.; Rabougi, L.; Irathni, I; Diwara, M., and Ben Hassine, OK. 2010. Comparative morphometric study of the invasive pearl oyster Pinctada radiata along the Tunisian coastline. Biologia.65: 294-300.

Urban, H. 2000. Culture potential of the pearl oyster (Pinctada imbricata) from the Caribbean. II. Spat collection and growth and mortality in culture systems. Aquaculture.189:375-388.

Wada K.T. 1975. Electrophoresis variants of leucine animopeptidase of the Japanese pearl oyster Pinctada fucata (Gould).Bull. Nat. Pearl Res. Lab. 19: 21522156.

Wada K.T. 1982. Inter- and intraspecific electrophoretic variation in three species of the pearl oysters from the Nansei Islands of Japan. Bull. Nat. Res. Inst. Aquac.3: 110.

Yassien M.H. 1998. Biological and ecological studies on the pearl oyster, Pinctada radiata (Mollusca, Lamellibranchia) from the Red Sea, with special reference to its tolerance to water pollution. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Science, Ain Shams University, Egypt, 191 pp.

Yassien, M.H.; Abdel-Razek, F.A., and Kilada, R.W. 2000. Growth estimates of the pearl oyster, Pinctada radiata, from the Eastern Mediterranean. Egypt. J. Aquat. Biol. & Fish.4: 105-118.

Zenetos, A.; Cinar, M.E.;PancucciPapadopoulou, M.A.; Harmelin J.G.;Furnari G.;Andaloro F.; Bellou N.; Streftaris N., and Zibrowius, H. 2005. Annotated list of marine alien species in the Mediterranean with

records of the worst invasive species. Mediterranean Marine Science.2: 63-

118.

406

Moussa R.M.

Table (1): maximum range and mean ±SD of dorso-ventral length (DVL) ; hinge length (HL); anterior-posterior length (APL); nacre width (NW) nacre length (NL), thickness (THK) in millimeters , total weight (T.wt), wet weight (W.wt), and shell weight (S.wt) in grams in the three stations

S1

S2

S3

F

p

DVL

41.0 113.0

40.0 80.0

52.0 77.0

21.848

S ***

67.07±15.34 61.15±6.80 64.39±5.40

 

4.0 72.0

16.0 60.0

35.0 57.0

HL

0.675

NS

 

47.17±12.73 46.44±4.61 47.10±3.92

 

4.0 66.0

17.0 56.0

22.0 53.0

APL

2.766

NS

 

44.25±12.75 42.46±6.04 43.52±4.93

 

1.0 46.0

13.0 54.0

15.0 44.0

THK

2.210

NS

 

21.59±8.33 21.35±4.67 22.68±3.62

 

NL

3.0 70.0

28.0 46.0

34.0 59.0

3.776

S *

44.24±12.26 42.60 ± 4.99 44.34±4.94

 

NW

2.0 69.0

25.0 54.0

29.0 51.0

6.840

S

***

42.50±13.03 39.75±5.32 41.28±4.72

 

T. wt

12.93 144.71 6.31 73.0 19.69 72.38 46.930

S

***

48.70±30.81 31.54±12.36 34.64±9.27

 

W. wt

4.44 98.50

0.48 48.77

7.03 53.73

25.040

S

***

22.54±14.73 15.72±9.0 15.52±5.78

 

S. wt

6.34 83.55

3.53 36.41

6.47 35.04

54.869

S ***

26.17±17.92 15.87±5.82 19.12±5.0

Values are expressed as: (Mean ± SD)

F: F test (ANOVA)

*: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05, **: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01,***: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.001

407

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

Table (2): Biometric statistics of shell dimensions and length-weight relationship in three stations

Station

N

X

Y

Intercept

Slope

R 2

R

Sig.

 

“a” value

“b”

value

S1

150

DVL

HL

2.359

0.6681

0.647

0.885

S

***

150

DVL

APL

8.1536

0.5604

0.839

0.841

S

***

 

Shell dimension

150

DVL

THK

5.936

0.4102

0.814

0.842

S

***

 

150

DVL

NL

0.998

0.6481

0.707

0.802

S

***

150

DVL

NW

7.7115

0.7516

0.830

0.849

S

***

150

DVL

T.wt

0.003

2.252

0.856

0.898

S

***

 

Length weight

150

DVL

W.wt

0.012

1.770

0.769

0.848

S

***

 

150

DVL

S.wt

0.007

2.464

0.854

0.868

S ***

S2

362

DVL

HL

3.096

0.7564

0.793

0.890

S ***

362

DVL

APL

2.348

0.6650

0.697

0.733

S **

 

Shell dimension

362

DVL

THK

0.884

0.3236

0.739

0.823

S ***

 

362

DVL

NL

0.937

0.7087

0.681

0.780

S

**

362

DVL

NW

4.039

0.7511

0.618

0.707

S **

362

DVL

T.wt

0.003

2.2232

0.752

0.832

S ***

 

Length weight

362

DVL

W.wt

0.005

2.443

0.566

0.705

S

*

 

362

DVL

S.wt

0.003

2.1318

0.528

0.740

S *

S3

101

DVL

HL

17.563

0.9823

0.779

0.879

S ***

101

DVL

APL

11.787

0.8810

0.692

0.792

S **

 

Shell dimension

101

DVL

THK

3.796

0.4030

0.806

0.856

S ***

 

101

DVL

NL

12.126

0.8811

0.688

0.759

S

**

101

DVL

NW

12.521

0.8806

0.637

0.741

S

**

101

DVL

T.wt

0.004

2.2425

0.664

0.749

S **

 

Length weight

101

DVL

W.wt

0.003

2.2310

0.500

0.631

S

*

 

101

DVL

S.wt

0.003

2.0840

0.521

0.664

S *

R: Spearman coefficient *: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05, **: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01, ***: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.001

408

Moussa R.M.

Table (3):

Intercept (a), slope (b) parameters and regression coefficient (R 2 ) for the linear relationships Of THK, NL and NW vs DVL in different size groups of Pinctada radiata

Station Size class
Station
Size class
 

S1

 

S2

 

S3

N

X

Y

a

b

R

2

Sig.

N

a

b

R

2

Sig.

N

a

b

R

2

Sig.

40-64

83

DVL

THK

0.531

13.701

0.363

NS

246

0.065

24.32

0.004

NS

49

0.513

9.048

0.244

NS

83

DVL

NL

0.915

14.831

0.307

NS

246

0.571

6.676

0.508

S

*

49

0.731

3.013

0.360

NS

83

DVL

NW

0.833

13.226

0.355

NS

246

0.301

20.26

0.115

NS

49

0.774

7.828

0.377

NS

65-89

52

DVL

THK

0.518

11.38

0.727

S

**

116

0.621

18.80

0.521

S

*

52

0.550

13.35

0.500

S

*

52

DVL

NL

0.994

20.73

0.812

S

***

116

1.131

42.61

0.554

S

*

52

1.111

28.47

0.511

S

*

52

DVL

NW

0.735

5.104

0.544

S

*

116

1.204

34.96

0.500

S

*

52

1.100

28.51

0.504

S

*

90-114

15

DVL

THK

0.168

15.99

0.764

S

**

                   

15

DVL

NL

0.771

9.38

0.734

S

**

                   

15

DVL

NW

0.339

31.13

0.713

S

**

                   

*: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05 **: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01 ***: Statistically significant at p ≤ 0.001

409

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata Fig. (1): coastline, of Alexandria: S1- Abu-Qir; S2-

Fig. (1):

coastline, of Alexandria: S1- Abu-Qir; S2- Maamoura, and S3- Miami

Map showing sampling stations along the Egyptian Mediterranean

showing sampling stations along the Egyptian Mediterranean Fig. (2): Distribution of Pinctada radiata according to

Fig. (2): Distribution of Pinctada radiata according to dorso-ventral length (DVL) size class (mm) in different stations.

410

Moussa R.M.

S1

Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3
Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3

S2

DVL vs HL

Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3

DVL vs APL

Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3

411

S3

Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3
Moussa R.M. S1 S2 DVL vs HL DVL vs APL 411 S3

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK
Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK

DVL vs THK

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK

DVL vs NL

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK

412

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK
Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata DVL vs THK

Moussa R.M.

Moussa R.M. DVL vs NW Fig.(3): Comparison of relative growth parameters of Pinctada radiate collected from

DVL vs NW

Moussa R.M. DVL vs NW Fig.(3): Comparison of relative growth parameters of Pinctada radiate collected from
Moussa R.M. DVL vs NW Fig.(3): Comparison of relative growth parameters of Pinctada radiate collected from

Fig.(3): Comparison of relative growth parameters of Pinctada radiate collected from three stations considering dorso ventral length ( DVL ) as a variable reference.

413

Biometric studies of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata

S1

S2

of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata S1 S2 S3 DVL vsT.wt
of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata S1 S2 S3 DVL vsT.wt

S3

DVL vsT.wt

of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata S1 S2 S3 DVL vsT.wt

DVL vs W. wt

of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata S1 S2 S3 DVL vsT.wt

414

of growth pattern affecting pearl production in pearl oyster Pinctada radiata S1 S2 S3 DVL vsT.wt

Moussa R.M.

Moussa R.M. DVLvsS.wt Fig.(4): Comparison of length-weight relationship of Pinctada radiate collected from three
DVLvsS.wt
DVLvsS.wt
Moussa R.M. DVLvsS.wt Fig.(4): Comparison of length-weight relationship of Pinctada radiate collected from three

Fig.(4): Comparison of length-weight relationship of Pinctada radiate collected from three stations.

415