littopenaeus vannamei sujit

Fisheries andAquaculture Department

  Home  

Identity

Penaeus vannamei  Boone, 1931 [Penaeidae]FAO Names:  En - Whiteleg shrimp,   Fr - Crevette pattes blanches,  Es - Camarón patiblanco

View SIDP Species fact sheet

Biological features

Rostrum moderately long with 7-10 dorsal and 2-4 ventral teeth. In mature males petasma symmetrical and semi-open. Spermatophores complex, consisting of sperm mass encapsulated by sheath. Mature female has open thelycum. Six nauplii, three protozoeal, and three mysis stages. Coloration normally translucent white, but can change depending on substratum, feed and water turbidity. Maximum size 23 cm, with maximum CL of 9 cm. Females commonly faster growing and larger than males.

Images gallery

w ebapps/f igis/sh adv_result http://w w w .fao.o search

1

Female broodstock (Photo: Briggs, M.) Maturation tanks in Latin America (Photo: Briggs, M.)

Extensive ponds (Photo: Briggs, M.) Harvesting (Photo: Briggs, M.)

ProfileHistorical background

The first spawning of this species was achieved in Florida in 1973 from nauplii spawned and shipped from a wild-caught mated female from Panama. Following good pond results and the discovery of unilateral ablation (and adequate nutrition) to promote maturation in Panama in 1976, commercial culture of Penaeus vannamei began in South and Central America. Subsequent development of intensive breeding and rearing techniques led to its culture in Hawaii, mainland United States of America, and much of Central and South America by the early 1980s. From this time, the commercial culture of this species in Latin America showed a rapidly increasing trend (with peaks every 3–4 years during the warm, wet 'el niño' years), punctuated by declines co-incident with disease outbreaks during the cold 'la niña' years. Despite these problems, production of P. vannamei from the Americas has been increasing – after declining from its earlier peak production of 193 000 tonnes in 1998 to 143 000 tonnes in 2000 it had grown to over 270 000 tonnes by 2004. Asia has seen a phenomenal increase in the production of P. vannamei. Although no production was reported to FAO in 1999, it was nearly 1 116 000 tonnes by 2004 and had overtaken the production of P. monodon in China, Taiwan Province of China and Thailand, due to a number of favourable factors. However, due to fears over importation of exotic diseases, many Asian countries have been reluctant to promote farming of P. vannamei, so that its culture remains officially confined to experimental testing only in Cambodia, India, Malaysia, Myanmar and the Philippines. Thailand and Indonesia both freely permit its commercial culture but have official restrictions, so that only SPF/SPR broodstock may be imported. Similarly, most Latin American countries have strict quarantine laws or bans to prevent importation of exotic pathogens with new stocks.

Main producer countries

The main producer countries of Penaeus vannamei are shown in the map, while the whole list include: China, Thailand, Indonesia, Brazil, Ecuador, Mexico, Venezuela, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Belize, Viet Nam, Malaysia, Tawian P.C., Pacific Islands, Peru, Colombia, Costa Rica, Panama, El Salvador, the United States of America, India, Philippines, Cambodia, Suriname, Saint Kitts, Jamaica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Bahamas.

Main producer countries of Penaeus vannamei (FAO Fishery Statistics, 2006)

Habitat and biology

The whiteleg shrimp is native to the Eastern Pacific coast from Sonora, Mexico in the North, through Central and South America as far South as Tumbes in Peru, in areas where water temperatures are normally >20 °C throughout the year. Penaeus vannamei live in tropical marine habitats. Adults live and spawn in the open ocean, while postlarvae migrate inshore to spend their juvenile, adolescent and sub-adult stages in coastal estuaries, lagoons or mangrove areas. Males become mature from 20 g and females from 28 g onwards at the age of 6–7 months. P. vannamei weighing 30–45 g will spawn 100 000–250 000 eggs of approximately 0.22 mm in diameter. Hatching occurs about 16 hours after spawning and fertilization. The first stage larvae, termed nauplii, swim intermittently and are positively phototactic. Nauplii do not feed, but live on their yolk reserves. The next larval stages (protozoea, mysis and early postlarvae respectively) remain planktonic for some time, eat phytoplankton and zooplankton, and are carried towards the shore by tidal currents. The postlarvae (PL) change their planktonic habit about 5 days after moulting into PL, move inshore and begin feeding on benthic detritus, worms, bivalves and crustaceans.

ProductionProduction cycle

Production systems

Seed supply 

Captured wild seeds were used in Latin America for extensive pond culture of Penaeus vannamei until the late 1990s. Domestication and genetic selection programmes then provided more consistent supplies of high quality, disease free and/or resistant PL, which were cultured in hatcheries. Some were shipped to Hawaii in 1989, resulting in the production of SPF and SPR lines, leading to the industry in the United States of America and Asia.

Broodstock maturation, spawning and hatching 

There are three sources for broodstock P. vannamei:

Where they occur naturally, broodstock are sea-caught (usually at 1 year of age and weighing >40 g) and spawned.

Cultured shrimp harvested from ponds (after 4–5 months at 15–25 g), are on-grown for 2–3 months and then transferred to maturation facilities at >7 months of age when they weigh 30–35 g.

Purchased from tank-reared SPF/SPR broodstock from the United States of America, (at 7–8 months of age and weighing 30–40 g).

Broodstock are stocked in maturation tanks in dark rooms supplied with clean, filtered seawater. Feeds consist of a mixture of fresh and formulated broodstock feeds. One eyestalk from each female is ablated, leading to repeated maturation and spawning. Females of 8–10 months of age reproduce effectively, whilst males peak at >10 months. Spawning rates of 5–15 percent/night are achieved, depending upon broodstock source. Females are either spawned in communal or individual tanks (to avoid disease transmission). The following afternoon, the healthy nauplii are attracted by light, collected and rinsed with seawater. They are then disinfected with iodine and/or formalin, rinsed again, counted and transferred to holding tanks or directly to larval rearing tanks.

Hatchery production 

Hatchery systems range from specialized, small, unsophisticated, often inland, backyard hatcheries to large, sophisticated and environmentally controlled installations, together with maturation units. Nauplii are stocked into flat, or preferably 'V' or 'U' shaped tanks with a volume of 4–100 m³, made from concrete, fibreglass or other plastic lined material. The larvae are either cultured to PL10–12 in a single larval rearing tank, or harvested at PL4–5 and transferred to flat-bottomed raceways/tanks and reared to PL10–30. Survival rates to PL10–12 should average >60 percent. Water is exchanged regularly (at 10–100 percent daily) to maintain good environmental conditions. Feeding normally consists of live food (microalgae and Artemia), supplemented by micro-encapsulated, liquid or dry formulated diets. From hatching, it takes about 21 days to reach harvest at PL12. Care is taken to reduce bacterial/pathogen contamination of the larval facilities using a combination of periodic dry-outs and disinfections, inlet water settlement, filtration and/or chlorination, disinfection of nauplii, water exchange and the use of antibiotics or (preferably) probiotics.

Nursery 

Most farming operations for P. vannamei do not use nurseries, but transport PL10–12 at reduced temperature either in plastic bags or oxygenated transportation tanks to the pond and introduce them directly. In some instances, nursery systems are used and comprise separate concrete nursery tanks or earth ponds, or even net pens or cages located within production ponds. Such nursery systems may be used for 1–5 weeks. Nurseries are useful in colder areas with limited growing seasons, where PL are nursed to a larger size (0.2–0.5 g) in heated tanks/ponds, before stocking into ponds. The use of super-intensive, temperature-controlled, greenhouse-enclosed, concrete or lined raceways have given good results in the United States of America.

Ongrowing techniques 

Ongrowing techniques can be sub-divided into four main categories: extensive, semi-intensive, intensive and super-intensive, which represent low, medium, high and extremely high stocking densities respectively.

Extensive

Commonly found in Latin American countries, extensive grow-out of P. vannamei is conducted in tidal areas where minimal or no water pumping or aeration is provided. Ponds are of irregular shape, usually 5–10 ha (up to 30 ha) and 0.7–1.2 m deep. Originally, wild seeds entering the pond tidally through the gate, or purchased from collectors

were used; since the 1980s hatchery reared PL are stocked at 4–10/m². Shrimp feed mainly on natural foods enhanced by fertilization, and once-daily feeding with low protein formulated diets. Despite low stocking densities, small shrimp of 11–12 g are harvested in 4–5 months. The yield in these extensive systems, is 150–500 kg/ha/crop, with 1–2 crops per year.

Semi-intensive

Semi-intensive ponds (1–5 ha) are stocked with hatchery-produced seeds at 10–30 PL/m²; such systems are common in Latin America. Regular water exchange is by pumping, pond depth is 1.0–1.2 m and aeration is at best minimal. The shrimp feed on natural foods enhanced by pond fertilization, supplemented by formulated diets 2–3 times daily. Production yields in semi-intensive ponds range from 500–2 000 kg/ha/crop, with 2 crops per year.

Intensive

Intensive farms are commonly located in non-tidal areas where ponds can be completely drained, dried and prepared before each stocking, and are increasingly being located far from the sea in cheaper, low salinity areas. This culture system is common in Asia and in some Latin American farms that are trying to increase productivity. Ponds are often earthen, but liners are also used to reduce erosion and enhance water quality. Ponds are generally small (0.1–1.0 ha) and square or round. Water depth is usually >1.5 m. Stocking densities range from 60–300 PL/m². Heavy aeration at 1 HP/400–600 kg of harvested shrimp is necessary for water circulation and oxygenation. Feeding with artificial diets is carried out 4–5 times per day. FCRs are 1.4–1.8:1.

Since the outbreak of viral syndromes, the use of domesticated disease free (SPF) and resistant (SPR) stocks, implementation of biosecurity measures and reduced water exchange systems have become commonplace. However, feed, water exchange/quality, aeration and phytoplankton blooms require carefully monitoring and management. Production yields of 7–20 000 kg/ha/crop, with 2–3 crops per year can be achieved, up to a maximum of 30–35 000 kg/ha/crop.

In the 'bacterial floc' system, the ponds (0.07–1.6 ha) are managed as highly aerated, recirculating, heterotrophic bacterial systems. Low protein feeds are fed 2–5 times per day, in an effort to increase the C:N ratio to >10:1 and divert added nutrients though bacterial rather than algal pathways. Stocking at 80–160 PL/m², the ponds become heterotrophic and flocs of bacteria are formed, which are consumed by the shrimp, reducing dependence on high protein feeds and FCR and increasing cost efficiency. Such systems have realized productions of 8–50 000 kg/ha/crop in Belize and Indonesia.

Super-intensive

Recent research conducted in the United States of America has focused on growing P. vannamei in super-intensive raceway systems enclosed in greenhouses, using no water exchange (only the replacement of evaporation losses) or discharge, stocked with SPF PL. They are thus biosecure, eco-friendly, have a small ecological footprint and can produce cost-efficient, high quality shrimp. Stocking 282 m² raceways with 300–450 0.5–2 g juveniles/m² and ongrowing for 3–5 months has realized production of 28 000–68 000 kg/ha/crop at growth rates of 1.5 g/week, survivals of 55–91 percent, mean weight of 16–26 g and FCRs of 1.5–2.6:1.

Feed supply 

P. vannamei are very efficient at utilizing the natural productivity of shrimp ponds, even under intensive culture conditions. Additionally, feed costs are generally less for P. vannamei than the more carnivorous P. monodon, due to their lower requirement for protein (18–35 percent compared to 36–42 percent), especially where bacterial floc systems are used. Feed prices for P. vannamei range from USD 0.6/kg in Latin America and Thailand to USD 0.7–1.1/kg elsewhere around Asia; FCRs of 1.2–1.8:1 are generally obtained.

Harvesting techniques 

Extensive and semi-intensive ponds are harvested by draining the pond at low tide through a bag net installed in the outlet sluice gate. If the tide does not allow harvesting, the water can be pumped out. In some larger farms, harvesting machines pump shrimp and water up to the pond bank where they are dewatered. Intensive ponds may be harvested similarly and small 2–6 man seine nets are dragged around the pond to corral shrimp to the side of the pond from where they are removed by cast or dip net or perforated buckets.

Partial harvesting is common in Asian intensive culture after the first 3 months. In Thailand, artificial sluice gates are temporarily installed inside one corner of the pond to harvest closed system ponds. Shrimp are then trapped in nets attached to this temporary gate when the pond is pumped out.

In super-intensive systems, the shrimp are simply harvested with large scoop nets when required for processing.

Handling and processing 

If shrimp are sold directly to processing plants, specialized teams for harvesting and handling are commonly used to maintain shrimp quality. After sorting, shrimp are washed, weighed and immediately killed in iced water at 0–4 °C. Often sodium metabisulphate is added to the chilled water to prevent melanosis and red-head. Shrimp are then kept in ice in insulated containers and transported by truck either to processing plants or domestic shrimp markets. In processing plants, shrimp are placed in iced bins and cleaned and sorted according to standard export sizes. Shrimp are processed, quickly frozen at -10 °C and stored at -20 °C for export by ship or air cargo. Due to an increasing demand, no taxes and higher profit margins, many processing plants operate value-added product lines.

Production costs 

Production costs vary depending on many factors. Operational costs for seed production averages USD 0.5–1.0/1 000 PL, whilst sales prices vary from USD 0.4/1 000 PL8–10 in China and USD 1.0–1.2/1 000 PL12 in Ecuador to USD 1.5 3.0/1 000 PL12 around Asia. Lower feed costs and higher intensity levels result in mean production costs for ongrowing of approximately USD 2.5–3.0/kg for P. vannamei, compared to USD 3.0–4.0/kg for more extensive P. monodon culture.

Diseases and control measures

The major disease problems suffered by P. vannamei are shown in the table below. The availability of SPF and SPR broodstock provide a means of avoiding these diseases, although biosecurity procedures are also important, including:

Thorough drying/scraping of pond bottoms between cycles. Reducing water exchange and fine screening of any inlet water. Use of bird netting or scarers. Putting barriers around ponds. Sanitary procedures.

Once viruses do enter the ponds, there are no chemicals or drugs available to treat the infections, but good management of pond, water, feed and the health status of stocks can reduce their virulence.

In some cases antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals have been used in treatment but their inclusion in this table does not imply an FAO recommendation.

DISEASE AGENT TYPE SYNDROME MEASURES

White spot (WSD); also known as WSBV or WSSV

Part of the white spot syndrome baculovirus complex (recently renamed in a new family as a nimavirus)

Virus

Acutely infected shrimp show reduced food consumption; lethargy; high mortality of 100% within 3–10 days of onset of clinical signs; loose cuticles with white spots of 0.5–2.0 mm diameter, most apparent inside the carapace; moribund shrimp often have pink to reddish-brown colouration due to expansion of cuticular chromatophores & few if any white spots

Use SPF broodstock; wash & disinfect eggs/nauplii with iodine, formalin; screen broodstock, nauplii, PL & pond stages; avoid rapid changes in water quality; maintain water temperature >30 °C; avoid stress; avoid use of fresh feeds such as trash fish; minimize water exchange to prevent entry of virus carriers; treat infected ponds & hatcheries with 30 ppm chlorine to kill infected shrimp & carriers; disinfect associated equipment

Taura Syndrome (TS); also known as Taura syndrome Virus (TSV) or red tail disease

Single-stranded RNA virus (Picornaviridae)

Virus

Occurs during single moult in juvenile shrimp beginning 5–20 days after stocking, or has a chronic course over several months; weakness, soft shell, empty gut & diffuse expansion of red chromatophores in appendages; mortality varies 5–95%; survivors may have black lesions, & remain carriers for life

Use SPF & SPR broodstock; wash & disinfect eggs & nauplii; clean & disinfect contaminated vehicles & equipment; scare away birds (vectors); destroy all stock & thoroughly disinfect infected facilities

Infectious Hypodermal &

Systemic parvovirus Virus Low mortality for resistant P. vannamei; however, reduced

Use SPF broodstock; wash & disinfect eggs & nauplii; if

Haematopoietic necrosis (IHHNV), causing Runt Deformity Syndrome (RDS)

feeding, growth & feed efficiency; cuticular deformities (bent rostrum – RDS) occurs in <30% of infected populations, increasing variance of final harvest weight & reducing market value

infected, culture facility must be completely & very carefully disinfected to avoid re-introduction

Baculoviral Midgut Gland Necrosis (BMN); also known as midgut gland cloudy disease, white turbid liver disease, & white turbidity disease

Non-occluded enteric baculovirus

Virus

Infects larval & early PL stages, causing high mortality; white turbidity of hepatopancreas caused by necrosis of tubule epithelium; larvae float inactively on surface; later stages show resistance; positive broodstock are source of infection

Separate eggs from faeces, wash eggs & nauplii with running clean seawater & disinfect with iodine &/or formalin; disinfect infected culture facility to avoid re-introduction

Vibriosis

Vibrio spp., particularly V. harveyi & V. parahaemolyticus

Bacteria

May cause various important syndromes, such as luminescence & the so-called zoea-2 & bolitas syndromes

In hatchery; seen as luminescence in water &/or shrimp body; disruption of gut; fouling of body; reduced feeding & high mortality

In ponds, high levels of vibrios are associated with red discoloration of shrimp (especially tails) & internal & external necrosis; low feeding & chronic mortality; often a secondary infection resulting from poor environmental management; weakens shrimp which become susceptible to viral infections

Careful system management

In hatcheries, disinfect facilities, equipment, water & workers; use bacteria-free live feeds; cover culture tanks with plastic sheet to prevent transfer

In ponds, prevent by proper preparation; bloom control; good water & feed management; control stocking density & aeration to maintain optimal environmental conditions throughout culture cycle

Suppliers of pathology expertise

Assistance can be provided from the following sources:

Prof. Lightner, D. Aquaculture Pathology SectionDepartment of Veterinary Science University of ArizonaBuilding 90, Room 202Tucson, AZ85721, United States of AmericaTelephone: (+1) 520 6218414Fax: (+1) 520 6214899

Prof. Chen, S.N. Department of ZoologyDirector, Institute of Fishery BiologyNational Taiwan UniversityNo. 1 Roosevelt Road, Section 4.Taipei, Taiwan 10764, Taiwan, Province of China

Telephone: (+886) 2 3687101 Fax: (+886) 2 3687122

Prof. Flegel, T. Centex Shrimp, Chalern Prakiat BuildingFaculty of ScienceMahidol UniversityRama 6 RoadBangkok, 10400, ThailandTelephone: Personal (+66) 2 2015876Mobile Phone (+66) 1 4035833Office (+66) 2 20158-70 or -71 or -72Fax: (+66) 2 2015873

Dr. Walker, P. Associate Professor and Principal Research ScientistCSIRO Livestock IndustriesPMB 3 IndooroopillyQueensland 4068, AustraliaTelephone: (+61) 7 32143758 Fax: (+61) 7 32142718

StatisticsProduction statistics

Global aquaculture production of Penaeus vannamei(FAO Fishery Statistic)

FAO statistics show that the total farmed production of P. vannamei increased steadily from 8 000 tonnes in 1980 to 194 000 tonnes in 1998. After a small decline in 1999 and a more significant decline in 2000 due to the arrival of WSSV in Latin America, FAO data show a rapid increase in production to over 1 386 000 tonnes in 2004, due to the recent rapid spread of this species to Asia. Main producer countries in 2004 were: China (700 000 tonnes), Thailand (400 000 tonnes), Indonesia (300 000 tonnes) and Vietnam (50 000 tonnes).

Market and trade

Products

Frozen head-on, head-off, and peeled shrimp were formerly the major products for export to the main global

markets of United States of America, European Union and Japan. The trend now is for the processing of value-added products. This is due to the lack of anti-dumping tariffs for processed products to the United States of America market, fewer people eating out and the desire for ready-to-cook or ready-to-eat products for home dining.

Prices and market statistics

The major market for shrimp is the United States of America, which was expected to import approximately 477 000 tonnes worth USD 3.1 billion in 2005, 1.8 times more than the 264 000 tonnes imported in 2000. The United States of America was traditionally supplied with small frozen or processed headless shrimp from Latin America. More recently, the United States of America has looked to Asia to supply its increasing demand (1.9 kg/capita in 2004). Major suppliers to the United States of America in 2005 were Thailand, Ecuador, India, China and Viet Nam. However, the rapidly increasing production of P. vannamei has led to serious price depression in the international markets. Similarly, farm gate value for 15–20 g size whiteleg shrimp has steadily decreased from USD 5/kg in 2000 to about USD 3.0–3.5/kg in 2005.

The next most important market is the European Union (importing 183 000 tonnes in the first half of 2005), which favours small (31/40 count), whole, frozen shrimp. Japan, whose market mainly requires large headless (16/20 count) shrimp, is typically supplied by P. monodon from large extensive Asian farms.

Market regulations

Standards for sanitation and the use of drugs and chemicals, and common food safety regulations for seafood (particularly shrimp) are already high in all major importing countries. However, the European Union market has more strict regulations (zero tolerance) on residues of chemicals and antibiotics, as well as the Generalized System of Preference (GSP) on import tax. The United States of America market enforces more strictly on a sanitary standard such as HACCP or Sensory Assessment, but has also instigated strict controls over banned antibiotics in shrimp. From June 2005, the final antidumping tariffs on cultured shrimp imported into the United States of America from 6 main shrimp producing countries were finalized and set (for the general rate) at approximately 113 percent for China, 26 percent for Viet Nam, 10 percent for India, 7 percent for Brazil, 6 percent for Thailand, and 4 percent for Ecuador. Mexico and Indonesia escaped these tariffs.

Status and trendsResearch

The following are some of the highest priority areas for research into P. vannamei culture:

Continued development of SPR lines of P. vannamei for viruses including TSV, WSSV, IHHNV, BMNV and IMNV.

Development of faster growing lines of SPF/SPR stocks. Continued development of biosecure, high density and low salinity culture systems. Vaccination and other effective treatments for shrimp viruses. Replacement of non-eco friendly and costly marine meals in shrimp feeds. Efficient water treatment and management systems for closed culture systems. Techniques for reducing bacterial loads in shrimp culture systems. Effective disinfection procedures for eggs, nauplii and PL in hatcheries. Effective replacements (i.e. probiotics and immunostimulants) for antibiotics.

Development

While the expansion of P. vannamei culture has been rapid in recent years, particularly in Asia, it has led to reduced value of harvested shrimp. This trend is expected to continue. Under such circumstances, the less efficient producers may not be able to compete with those capable of producing either more eco-friendly or cheaper products. Recent worldwide trends have been towards the integration of the industry, in response to the ever increasing requirement for traceability and control within the culture system.

Market

There has been a slowly increasing demand for shrimp in world markets, as capture fisheries stagnate and people became more affluent and conscious of healthy food choices. Despite the increased demand, the price for P. vannamei has been declining steadily. In the future, the market for P. vannamei is expected to become more competitive, due mainly to the saturation of export markets and reduction in world economic growth, as well as the emergence of non-tariff barriers in shrimp trade. Additionally, the industry will need to accommodate importing countries requirements on:

Chemical residues.

Food safety. Certification. Traceability. Eco-labelling. Environmental sustainability.

Recommendations

All shrimp farmers are becoming acutely aware of the growing need to farm shrimp in a responsible, traceable and low impact manner which can enhance biosecurity, and help protect the environment, whilst producing shrimp in a cost efficient manner. The newly developed intensive bacterial floc and super-intensive systems may have potential to address all of these concerns and should be investigated more thoroughly. In order to continue the growth of shrimp farming smoothly in the long term, domestic consumption should be promoted (as in China) to supplement the problematic export markets.

Main issuesThe recent expansion of shrimp culture has generated many public debates over its effects on the environment and its sustainability, such as the perceived:

Use of protective mangrove ecosystems for pond construction. Slash and burn style use of ponds for a few years, before moving to new areas. Salinization of groundwater and agricultural land. Pollution of coastal waters by pond effluents. Overuse of marine meals leading to inefficient use of vital protein sources and disruption of marine

ecosystems. Biodiversity issues arising from collection of wild seed and broodstock and introduction of non-native

species and their attendant pathogens. Social conflicts with other resource users. Farm discharges, causing self-pollution in shrimp growing areas.

Governments and the shrimp industry are trying to mitigate the above impacts. The new intensive systems do not require the use of tidal mangrove areas and mangroves have been replanted. Culture technology in inland areas has been improved using minimal seawater and closed, lined systems to prevent salinization. Closed systems using no new water and no discharge, together with better management practices, are being applied to prevent the pollution of coastal waters. Overfishing of wild seeds and broodstock has been resolved through the use of domesticated stocks of P. vannamei. Fishmeal use has been reduced through the transfer to the culture of P. vannamei, which is more capable of utilizing low protein feeds than P. monodon. Social conflicts remain, but the shrimp culture industry employs thousands of rural people, who would be far worse off without it. The adoption of more eco-friendly shrimp culture practices should further reduce such conflicts.

Responsible aquaculture practices

Due to rapid expansion and increasing awareness of the negative impacts of shrimp farming practices on the environment and its own production, many shrimp producing countries are making sincere efforts to comply with the concept of responsible aquaculture as detailed in Article 9 of the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (CCRF). The formulation and adoption of BMPs (or Good Aquaculture Practices – GAP) is gaining prevalence to enhance biosecurity, increase cost efficiency, reduce chemical residues and increase traceability. Organic certification for shrimp farming is being seriously considered. HACCP and ISO standards, already used in processing/feed plants, are being adopted in farms and hatcheries. FAO and other organizations have developed a system of guidelines and BMPs to help shrimp producing countries comply with the various aspects of the CCRF (FAO et.al, 2006).

ReferencesBibliography 

Boyd, C.E. & Clay, J.W. 2002. Evaluation of Belize Aquaculture Ltd: A superintensive shrimp aquaculture system. Report prepared under the World Bank, NACA, WWF and FAO Consortium Program on Shrimp Farming and the Environment. Published by the Consortium and obtainable through NACA, Bangkok, Thailand. 17 pp.Briggs, M., Funge-Smith, S., Subasinghe, R. & Phillips, M. 2004. Introductions and movement of Penaeus vannamei and Penaeus stylirostris in Asia and the Pacific. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific. RAP

Publication 2004/10:1–12. Browdy, C.L., Moss, S.M., Lotz, J.M., Weirich, C.R., Otoshi, C.A., Ogle, J.T., Macabee, B.J., Montgomeries, A.D. & Matsuda, E.M. 2003. Recent USMSFP advances in the development of biosecure environmentally sound

superintensive shrimp production systems. p. 35 In: Abstracts of Aquaculture America 2003. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.

FAO. 1995. Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. FAO, Rome, Italy. 41 pp. Macabee, B.J., Bruce, J.W., Weirich, C.R., Stokes, A.D. & Browdy, C.L. 2003. Use of super-intensive greenhouse-enclosed raceway systems for the production of juvenile Litopenaeus vannamei. p. 169 In: Abstracts of Aquaculture America 2003. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA.Parker, J.C., Conte, F.S., MacGrath, W.S. & Miller, B.W. 1974. An intensive culture system for penaeid shrimp. Proceedings of the World Mariculture Society, 5:65–79.Pérez Farfante, I. 1969. Western Atlantic shrimps of the genus Penaeus. Fishery Bulletin, 67(3): 461–591. Pérez Farfante, I. & Kensley, B. 1997. Penaeoid and sergestoid shrimps and prawns of the world. Keys and diagnoses for the families and genera. Memoires du Museum National d'Historie Naturelle, Paris, France. 233 ppSamocha, T.M., Lawrence, A.L., Collins, C.A., Castille, F.L., Bray, W.A., Davies, C.J., Lee, P.G. & Wood, G.F. 2004. Production of the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei, in high-density greenhouse enclosed raceways using low-salinity groundwater. Taw, N. 2005. Indonesia Shrimp Production. Presented in the Indonesian shrimp farmers session of World Aquaculture 2005, May 9–13, 2005, Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia. Charoen Pokphand, Jakarta Indonesia. 18 pp.Wyban, J.A. & Sweeney, J.N. 1991. Intensive shrimp production technology. High Health Aquaculture, Hawaii, USA. 158 pp.

Related links

AquafindAquamediaAquatic Animal Pathogen and Quarantine Information System – AAPQISAquatic NetworkDatabase on Introductions of Aquatic Species – DIASFishStat Plus – Universal software for fishery statistical time seriesGlobal Aquaculture Alliance – GAANational Marine Fisheries Service – NMFSNetwork of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific – NACAOffice International des Epizooties – OIEShrimp News InternationalU.S. Marine Shrimp Farming ProgramWorld Aquaculture Society – WAS

Home • Previous Page • Site Map • Submit News • Search Site

Click Here to Send This Page to a Friend

Click Here to Print This Page

Vannamei Versus Monodon in IndiaA Long Discussion from the Shrimp List

 The Indian Government is likely to approve the farming of the western white shrimp, Penaeus vannamei, soon! India’s shrimp production has stagnated at around 150,000 metric tons annually. 

The introduction of P. vannamei would help shrimp farmers reduce costs and increase production. A.J. Tharakan, a member of the board and former national president of the Seafood Exporters Association of India, said, “The Agriculture Ministry appears to be in favor of introducing the new variety.  It will draw up the guidelines...with the National Development Fisheries Board, or NDFB,” which is responsible for the management of India’s fishery resources. Currently India’s shrimp farmers produce the giant tiger shrimp (P. monodon), which has higher production costs and lower yields than vannamei.  Vannamei costs $2.29 per kilogram to produce—half the cost of monodon!  Farmers can produce 20 tons of small to medium vannamei per hectare, but only 2-3 tons of large monodon per hectare. 

The Shrimp List  The prospect of permitting vannamei farming in India stimulated a long discussion on the Shrimp List (a mailing list for shrimp farmers): Satish ([email protected]): The giant tiger shrimp (Penaeus monodon), the most popular farmed species in India, is falling out of favor with shrimp farmers, not because of crop failures, but because it is expensive to produce and market prices for it have collapsed. It seems that everything is set for vannamei farming to take off in India. Sujeet Kumar ([email protected]): Yes, it is true that monodon production is suffering, but this does not mean that one should switch to vannamei.  One should keep in mind that vannamei farming is not without problems.  If you research this topic, you’ll discover that wherever vannamei is farmed, disease problems arise. Many countries farm vannamei.  By switching to it, we would lose our leadership in monodon farming and have to compete with countries like China and Thailand.

 We made a mistake a few years back by importing monodon seedstock from Thailand.  It brought whitespot to India.  We should not import vannamei because it isn’t native to our waters. Monodon farming has suffered from bad management.  Hatcheries don’t follow the best practices.  Farmers try anything that looks promising, without getting the proper guidance.  We all must take responsibility for the current panic with monodon farming. Krishan Murthy ([email protected]): In Thailand, monodon slow growth syndrome (MSGS) was noticed only after vannamei was introduced.  Researchers say slow growth syndrome is due to IHHNV, but farmers argue that IHHNV has been in Thailand for more than ten years, and that there was no problem with monodon slow growth until vannamei was introduced. There might be a growth suppressing factor introduced with vannamei.  If so, wherever vannamei is introduced, it could have an adverse effect on native species.  Researchers should look into this and give the farmers an answer. Dallas Weaver ([email protected]): There is apparently more than one strain of IHHNV.  One strain I saw in monodon didn’t transfer to vannamei, but showed up on a standard test.  It also didn’t seem to have any impact on either species. Rajendra Damle ([email protected]): It is very important not to loose focus and mix issues like leadership, sentiments and presumptions into the discussion.  Regarding India’s leadership in monodon farming, even a cursory look at production figures makes it clear that India was never a leader in monodon production.  As a matter of fact, India was a latecomer to shrimp farming.  It was not our leadership, but the preeminence we accorded to monodon over other species because of its suitability and profitability.  This situation has changed dramatically because of whitespot, loose shell syndrome (LSS), falling prices and stiff competition from vannamei in international markets. The advent of specific pathogen free (SPF) broodstock and the inherent attributes of

vannamei, along with advances in its culture technology, have made mind-boggling production possible at very low costs. High production costs, diminishing selling prices, the absence of quality seed, high incidence of disease, and frequent crop failures will make monodon culture in India unviable sooner or later. Already, an increasing number of farmers have refrained from stocking this season because of falling prices across India.  It is very important to note that farmers sustained the onslaught of WSSV primarily because monodon was commanding exorbitantly high prices in international markets.  MSGS and LSS have made the situation worse because they strike in the middle and late stages of growout, while whitespot usually strikes in the first month when the farmer has less money invested in his crop. Vannamei farming has spread to most of Asia.  Until now, no ecological damage, apart from the inconclusive tie to MSGS, has been attributed to it.  There are and always will be pros and cons to every issue, but it is wrong to jump to a hasty conclusion based on hearsay.  To demonize vannamei and say that it would damage the ecology and monodon farming is downright hypocritical and highly irresponsible because WSSV, MSGS and LSS have already caused enough damage to monodon farming in India.  The current situation is on the verge of getting out of control.  It might sound pessimistic, but continuing with monodon will surely spell doom for the Indian shrimp farming industry.  We must acknowledge the fact that nothing is permanent; the days of $10.21 a kilogram for 30-count monodon are long gone and the world has moved on to vannamei. Also, since vannamei is cheaper to produce, it opens the door to our vast domestic market.  It is high time that we abandon purely dogmatic, bookish and fruitless talk.  We need to do a reality check and make some hard policy decisions without prejudice or presumption.  With proper import regulations and a framework of rules, permission must be given to everyone who wants to culture vannamei without further delay. P. indicus could have been an alternative to monodon, but it fell out of favor with the Indian farmer long ago.  Time is running out for shrimp farming in India, and

vannamei seems to offer a beacon of hope. Saji Chacko ([email protected]): I am sure the so-called pro-monodon saviors of the Indian shrimp farming sector are chasing unknown demons.  No farmer is against farming of monodon.  Show us a way to produce monodon successfully and profitably.  Where is the SPF broodstock for monodon?  Has anybody developed a low cost feed for monodon?  Do we have a foolproof mechanism to produce jumbo size monodon? Job Villaruel ([email protected]): Farmers need more information so that they can make these decisions on their own. Maybe we should look at indicus again.  Farmers still know how to grow it, but now there are no hatcheries for it. Kalyanaraman ([email protected]): The heat generated by the debate on monodon and vannamei is, to a certain extent, melting the ice jam in the Indian shrimp farming industry. Indian Shrimp farming, characterized by consistently inconsistent production and market price, has shaken the confidence of corporations, entrepreneurs and professionals, both physically and financially.  Outbreaks of incurable diseases have destroyed our professional pride and the farmer’s confidence.  Best management practices, biosecurity and sustainability have become topics of seminars and workshops, but have not been implemented at the farm level. Avaricious corporations, greedy entrepreneurs, opportunistic professionals, luring chemical suppliers, glorified feed boys, technicians from overseas, eccentric farmers and perplexed regulating authorities—all are responsible in one way or another for the state of affairs today! In the beginning, indicus was the champion of the Indian shrimp farming industry.  It was replaced by monodon.  Vannamei is in the race now!  Change is nothing new to Indian shrimp farmers.  They have seen nothing but boom and bust. Scientifically, with regard to susceptibility of diseases (under field conditions), there

seems to be very little difference between monodon and vannamei. Love India!  Grow Shrimp!!  Long Live Indian Shrimp Farming!!! Jim Wyban ([email protected]): The safest way to introduce vannamei to India and avoid the risk of exotic disease introduction is to import certified SPF broodstock from the USA.  There is no scientific evidence of any slow growth pathogen resident in USA-produced SPF vannamei. Exhaustive comparisons of the production economics of vannamei versus monodon in Thailand and elsewhere show a clear and significant advantage (higher production, reliable production and higher profits) by growing vannamei.  Vannamei is now accepted in all world markets, including Japan.  The future of shrimp farming will be based on production of top quality products (clean, safe and nutritious) at a low cost.  The best method for farmers to reduce their production costs and increase reliability is through use of high health PLs produced from domesticated SPF vannamei broodstock. Kalyanaraman ([email protected]): Dr. Jim Wyban, to substantiate your claim on the performance of imported SPF vannamei broodstock, would you please provide the names of some people in Thailand who might provide the following information: 1. How long has Thailand been using the SPF vannamei seed from the USA? 2. Are the yields from this seed consistent? 3. Have any trials been run to determine how SPF seed compares to ordinary seed? 4. Do you have crop summaries that provide the following information? Stocking densitySize at stockingArea stockedDuration of cropSize at harvestSurvival

Feed Conversion RatioYieldCost of production per kilogram of shrimpMarket priceNumber of crops per year Jim Wyban ([email protected]): The following table is from my manuscript that appeared in the May/June 2007 issue of the Global Aquaculture Advocate.  The numbers were generated from many discussions with farmers in Thailand and represent my attempt at quantifying the difference between vannamei and monodon farming in Thailand. The profits from vannamei farming were almost three times greater than those for monodon. 

Comparison of P. monodon and P. vannamei Production in Thailand

  P. monodon P. vannamei

Density in Postlarvae Stocked Per Square Meter 40 to 50 120 to 200

Crop Duration in Days 110 to 140 105 to 120

Harvest Size in Grams 22 to 28 21 to 25

Yield in Metric Tons Per Hectare 8 24

Crop Value in USA Dollars Per Hectare $45,000 $96,000

Crop Costs in USA Dollars Per Hectare $32,000 $60,000

Production Profit $13,000 $36,000

  Eric De Muylder ([email protected]): There are many misconceptions regarding the term “SPF”.  SPF doesn’t guarantee that shrimp are disease free.  It only means that they are free of certain known diseases.  It is possible that SPF

vannamei carry diseases that it has been resistant to for ages, and those diseases could affect other species or even the same species from another region that has not been in contact with the pathogens. I suggest a quarantine with imported vannamei broodstock or PLs and local species in the same tank.  That will show you if the imported broodstock is disease free, which is likely, but also if the local species (monodon, indicus) is suffering from something.  Has anyone on the list done this test? Dallas Weaver ([email protected]): The problem with that test is the source of the animals.  Where will you find clean or SPF monodon?  Using wild, apparently healthy animals may just transfer some pathogens to your clean SPF vannamei. I believe that Jim Wyban has SPF monodon along with his SPF vannamei so his SPF animals have already been tested against monodon and apparently didn’t have anything that would make the monodon status non-SPF. In terms of vannamei versus monodon, perhaps we should note that vannamei is a real garbage gut that will eat almost anything.  Monodon is a lot more carnivorous and requires higher protein feed.  Full size vannamei will filter 50-micron-size organisms and bacterial/algal flocks out of the water column.  They will also rise off the bottom to eat rotifers in the water column, which gives them an ecological advantage under normal pond rearing conditions.  I don’t understand how they do it, but they can strip the water column of rotifers very quickly. BONDADA ([email protected]): Besides the many advantages cited by Jim Wyban and others for vannamei, the biggest reason why it spread to Southeast Asia and the Middle East (Iran) was the availability of SPF broodstock from the USA. In Saudi Arabia, National Prawn Company has been running a breeding program for indicus for the past five years.  If any private companies or public institutions want to launch SPF indicus in India in collaboration with National Prawn Company, please contact us at [email protected] or [email protected]. Dallas Weaver ([email protected]): There seems to be a

misunderstanding about the value of SPF and SPR (specific pathogen resistant) broodstock.  If you are running a sloppy system with no controls, contaminated water input from other farms discharges, which contain more pathogen species than there are resistance strains, SPF will do you no good at all. If you run a minimal water exchange system and filter the input water to remove all organisms larger than 50 microns and have a reasonable water supply, using SPF and SPR broodstock and postlarvae will at least allow you to get a clean start.  If you are good, you will stay clean and produce a bumper crop of very healthy animals. If you want consistent results, it is best to run a clean system with SPF and SPR seed (SPR if you need resistance to a pathogen endemic in your area that is not removed by filtering or water treatment). Without SPF and a lot of biosecurity, producing consistent postlarvae is problematic. Without a reliable supply of postlarvae, the farm’s economics are destroyed. Most people underestimate the economic significance of reliability.  Just a few failed crops can put a farm out of business and the farm owner into the poorhouse.  It’s a lot more cost effective to cut your risks with SPF seedstock. BONDADA ([email protected]): At National Prawn Company in Saudi Arabia, which has been operating a 3,500 hectare shrimp farm since 2004, we compared normal seedstock with SPF seedstock under field conditions.  In 2007, we stocked 630 million SPF indicus fry and 77 million non-SPF fry.  We concluded that biosecurity and SPF fry were the key factors for our company’s sustainability.  In 2007, we produced 12,500 metric tons of shrimp and hope to increase that to 35,000 tons by 2010. It’s time for hatcheries in India to move away from their dependence on wild broodstock. Philippe Leger ([email protected]): With assistance from the National Fisheries Development Board, India is going to set up a specific pathogen free seed multiplication center for monodon in Andhra Pradesh as part of a joint venture with

the USA-based Moana Technologies.  The $7.6 million center will be located near Sompeta in Srikakulam District. In Andhra Pradesh, over the last decade, shrimp have been hit hard by the whitespot virus, shrinking the industry to 24,000 hectares from a high of 78,000 hectares. Nagaraj Jayaram ([email protected]): It’s indeed nice to hear that Moana Technologies in partnership with the Indian government is starting an SPF-monodon center in India.  I’ve heard that earlier efforts to produce SPF-monodon have failed.  Why?  Was it because of failed biosecurity during growout or the cost of SPF seedstock? Eric Pinon ([email protected]): Yes, some past ventures have failed, but I think Moana Technologies is different for a number of reasons: • First, past efforts were made with much less understanding of shrimp genetics and without the vannamei experience as a model. • Moana Technologies has been working silently on its SPF-monodon project for more that seven years.  Most of its monodon lines have been bred for several generations in captivity. • Moana is not only producing SPF animals; it is also improving the animals with genetic selection programs.  It is reported to have assembled a monodon shrimp library exceeding 120 SPF genetically different families.  This probably gives them the broadest array of genetic resources of any monodon breeding company in the world. • I think Moana will be able to protect its genetic lines from poachers. Here is a long-term investment that’s intended to revive monodon’s popularity as a farmed species.  It’s being carefully monitored by several regional authorities and governments.  It certainly should not be ignored! Durwood Dugger ([email protected]): Folks you’re complicating the SPF

issue.  In my opinion the decision to use SPF stock (regardless of the species) is a simple one.  If you have a biosecure culture environment, SPF stock will certainly significantly reduce bad performance, diseases and economic loss. Ah, but you must have a biosecure environment!  You need to understand biosecurity and something about shrimp viral diseases—particularly whitespot—in order to assess whether purchasing SPF seedstock is economically feasible for a specific farm.  Whitespot is endemic in most crustacean species all over the world, especially in shrimp farming areas.  Its carriers include all kinds of crabs, freshwater shrimp, isopods, and small waterborne crustaceans such as wild penaeid postlarvae, mysid shrimp, and perhaps even copepods—pretty much any crustacean.  If you have an open shrimp farm (no barriers to whitespot carriers) and pump from an estuary with less than 125-micron filtration, chances are you will eventually experience a whitespot infection whether you use SPF stock or not.  If this is typical of your shrimp farm’s description (nonbiosecure), you might be better off putting your resources into extensive and comprehensive disease testing of the broodstock and seedstock from your local hatchery, assuming this option is less expensive than buying certified SPF stock. If you are inland and away from estuaries and other bodies of water, use well water as your farm’s water source, and don’t have other shrimp farms within ten miles, then SPF stock may be your cheapest insurance.  It can reduce risks and return higher yields.  Basically your seedstock quality, whether SPF or not, is never any better than the risks related to your farms background pathogen levels. Contemplating using SPF seedstock without having first implemented an effective and well-tested biosecurity plan for your shrimp farm is simply putting the cart before the ox. Marine industry plans to introduce vannamei shrimp

INDIA - India produces mainly black tiger shrimps; processing facilities are operating at less than one-third capacity. Its marine industry is planning to introduce vannamei shrimp, a native species from South America, to increase production that has remained stagnant at around 150,000 tonnes annually.

India produces mainly black tiger shrimp and processing facilities are running at only about 30% of their capacity. Asian export rivals, such as Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia, have already introduced this variety and have seen their production rise.

“India needs to look at alternatives and the vannamei variety is the best bet,” says Ravi Reddy, president of the Seafood Exporters Association of the Tamil Nadu region.

According to Reddy, China produces 650,000 tonnes every year, Thailand 450,000 tonnes, Indonesia 400,000 tonnes and Vietnam 350,000 tonnes with over 90% of the total produce being vannamei shrimp.

Meanwhile, the prices of Indian black tiger shrimps have dropped by $1-10 (about Rs40-400) a kg in the last two months.

Coupled with the appreciation of the rupee against the dollar, earnings of shrimp exporters here have taken a hit.

G. Mohanty, president of the Orissa region of the Association, says that though Indian black tiger shrimps are now well accepted in international markets, the aquaculture business remains under pressure. A shift to vannamei could mean higher yields and lower costs of production, he says.