Biophysical Properties of Waste Water From Fish Pond
ABSTRACT
The biophysical properties of effluent from fishponds were analyzed with standard physicochemical and microbiological methods. The surface bottom water samples were aseptically collected. The population of total heterotrophic bacteria ranges from 3.6×104– 4.1×104.
The total heterotrophic fungal ranges from 1.3×103– 1.8×103. The bacteria associated with fish ponds include Klebsiella sp, Enterobacter sp, Shigella sp, Salmonella sp, Escherichia coli sp, and Pseudomonas sp. The physicochemical characteristics show that the PH of the sample ranged from 6.98-7.11.
The electrical conductivity of the sample ranged from 25-84. The temperature of the sample is 22.5-22.8. The effluent can reduce environmental contamination and improve the use for increase soil fertility in agricultural areas.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Cover Page – – – – – – – – – i
Title page – – – – – – – – ii
Certification – – – – – – – – – iii
Dedication – – – – – – – – – iv
Acknowledgment – – – – – – – – v
Abstract – – – – – – – – – – vi
Table of content – – – – – – – – vii
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction and Literature Review – – – 1
1.1 Introduction – – – – – – – 1
1.2 Objectives of the Study – – – – – 3
1.3 Literature review – – – – – – 4
1.3.1 Environmental Impacts of Fish and Effluents 4
1.3.2 Environmental Impacts from Chemicals – – 6
1.3.3 Environmental Impacts of Sediments – – 7
1.3.4 Management of fish Pond Effluent – – – 8
1.3.5 Use of Aquatic Plant – – – – – 10
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Materials and Methods – – – – 12
2.1 Sample Location – – – – – – 12
2.2 Sample Collection – – – – – – 12
2.3 Media Used – – – – – – – 12
2.4 Sterilization of Materials – – – – – 14
2.5 Microbiological Analysis – – – – – 15
2.5.1 Total heterotrophic bacterial count – – 15
2.5.2 Total coli-form count – – – – – 16
2.6 Characterization and identification of
bacteria isolates – – – – – – 16
2.6.1 Gram Staining – – – – – – 16
2.6.2 Motility test – – – – – – – 17
2.6.3 Catalase test – – – – – – – 18
2.6.4 Citrate utilization test – – – – – 18
2.6.5 Indole test – – – – – – – 19
2.6.6 Test for fermentation of sugars – – – – 20
2.6.7 Methyl red and voges-proskauer cup tests- – 21
2.6.8 Urease test- – – – – – – – 21
2.7 Characterization of fungal isolates – – – 22
2.7.1 Microscopic identification of fungi – – – 23
2.7.2 Microscopic identification of mould – – – 23
2.7.3 Microscopic identification of yeast- – – – 24
2.7.4 Sugar fermentation/acid and gas production – 25
2.8 Physicochemical analysis of the effluent samples 26
2.8.1 Ph and temperature – – – – – 26
2.8.2 Electrical conductivity and total dissolved
solid (tds) – – – – – – – – 27
2.8.3 Turbidity – – – – – – – – 27
2.8.4 Colour – – – – – – – – 28
2.9 Statistical analysis – – – – – – 28
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Results – – – – – – – – – 29
3.1 Microbial load of fish pond waste water samples
Analyzed – – – – – – – – – 29
3.2 Identification of bacteria isolates – – – – 29
3.3 Overall percentage (%) occurrence of bacteria isolates from samples analyzed – – – – – – – 30
3.4 Percentage (%) occurrence of bacteria isolates from surface effluent sample analyzed – – – – – – 30
3.5 Percentage (%) occurrence of bacteria isolates from bottom effluent samples analyzed – – – – – – 31
3.6 Identification and characterization of fungi – – 31
3.7 overall percentage (%) occurrence of fungi isolates from samples analyzed – – – – – – – – 31
3.8 Percentage (%) occurrence of fungi isolates from surface effluent sample analyzed – – – `- – 32
3.9 Percentage (%) occurrence of fungi isolates from bottom effluent sample analyzed – – – – – – 33
3.10 percentage (%) occurrence of mould from surface effluent sample analyzed – – – – – – – 33
3.11 Percentage (%) occurrence of mould from bottom effluent sample analyzed – – – – – `- – – 33
3.12 Percentage (%) occurrence of yeast isolates from surface sample analyzed – – – – – – – – 34
3.13 Percentage (%) occurrence of yeast isolates from bottom sample analyzed – – – – – – – – 34
3.14 Physio-chemical analysis – – – – – 34
CHAPTER FOUR
DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
4.0 Discussion – – – – – – – – 49
4.1 Physio chemistry of the fishpond effluent – – 49
4.1.2 Microbiology of fish pond effluent – – – – 51
4.2 Conclusion – – – – – – – – 54
4.3 Recommendation – – – – – – – 54
References – – – – – – – – 56
Appendix -` – – – – – – – – 61
INTRODUCTION
Agriculture in the early days was generally considered too small an industry to have a significant impact on the environment. The remarkable growth of the agriculture industry in many countries over the past decades has increased adverse impacts on the environment.
(Acketors,2014). The cultivation of organisms in ponds (Tincker, 2012), tanks (Millamena et al., 1991), rivers, and coastal areas may have a great influence on the environment, in addition to the impacts of all humans activities.
According to Hopkins et al., (1995), there are potential and identified environmental impacts of fish farming such as the following. Wetlands, such as mangroves and mudflats, destruction for construction of ponds. Hypernutrification of estuarine ecosystems by fishpond effluent. “Biological pollution” of native fish stocks through the escarpment of agriculture stocks.
The last for impacts can be addressed through improved water management methods. The environmental impact of fish culture has been well documented as a result of the explosive growth of such operation in southeast Asia and to a lesser extent in Latin America (Aiken, 2015) and it has also caused social impacts (Bailey, 2001).
Chamberlin (2015) discovered, from fishpond effluent management study that dissolved oxygen, pH, ammonia, and nitrite, hydrogen sulfide, redox potential, sediments, phytoplankton, and bacterial counts are fishpond parameters to be monitored.
Depending on the stocking density, the concentration of materials, suspended solid,s and oxygen demanding subsistence may be varied.
During the harvest time, the water in ponds is drained and the nutrients, suspended solids, and BOD are the highest in discharged water.
Solid matter, mainly a mixture of uneaten feed, feces, phytoplankton colonizing bacteria, and dissolved matter such as ammonia, urea carbon dioxide, and phosphorus are the major constituents of the effluents of fish farms (Macintosh, and Philips, 1992)”.
REFERENCES
Ackefors, H. (2014). The impact on the environment by cage farming in open water. Oxford and IBH publication Co. Pvt. Ltd: vol. No. 1
Aicken, D. (2015). Shrimp farming in Ecuador whiter the future. World aquaculture 21 (4) 26-30.
Baccarin, A. Camargo, E, A. F. M. (2005). Characterization, and evaluation of the impact of feed management on the effluents on Nile tilapia (oreochromics niloticus) culture Brazilian archives of biology and technology 48:81-90.
Bailey, C. (2001). The social consequences of tropical shrimp mariculture development. Ocean shoreline Management 11:31-44.
Barg, U.C. (2014). Guidelines for the promotion of environmental management of coastal aquaculture development FAO fisheries technological paper no 328 Rome, FAO 122P.
Bergheim A., Austviet. H., Killelsen, A., and Selmer-oysen, A.R. (1985). Estimated pollution loading form Norwegian fish farms. Aquaculture 36:157-168.
Blum, D., Hutty, S.R.A., Okoro, J.I., Akujobi, C., Kirkwood, B.K., and Feachem, R.G. (1987). The bacteriological quality of traditional water sources in North-Eastern, Imo State, Nigeria. Epidem Int. 99:429-437.
Boyd, C. (2003). Guideline for aquaculture affluent management at the farm level. Aquaculture, 226:101-112.
Briggs and Funge-Smith. (1994). In die berg, T., AND Kialtismul, W. 1996. Issues, impacts, and implications of shrimp aquaculture in Thialand. Environmental management. 20 (5): 649-666.
Chamberlin, G. (2015). In Wang, J.K. (1990). Managing shrimp pond water to reduce discharge problem. Aquaculture engineering. 9:61-73.
Costa-pierce, B.A. (1998). Preliminary investigation of an integrated aquaculture Wetland ecosystem using tertiary treated municipal wastewater in Los Angelis country, California. Iecologicla engineering. 10: 341-354.
Cowan, S.T. and Steel, K.J. (2010). Manual for the identification of medical bacteria 2nd eds. Cambridge University press, London.
CRSP, (2005). Connectivity of water resource status, environmental quality. Aquaculture CRSP 22nd Annual technical report.
Cruickshank, R., Duguid, J.P. BOP Marmoin, and Swain, R. H. A. (2012). “Medial microbiology” the practice of medical microbiology 13th (ed) Churchill living stone, Edinbugh. Pp 273-284.
Dupree, H.K. and Humer, J.V. (Eds) (1984). Third report to fish farmers. The status of warm water fish farming and progress in fish farming research United Stated fish and wild-life service Washington D.C Pp 270.
El-sayed, A. F. M. (1999). Alternative dictionary protein sources for farmed tilapia, Orechromis spp Aquaculture, 179:149-168.
Farahbakh Shazad, n. Morison, G.M., Salati, E. F. (2000). Nutrient removal in a vertical upflow Wetland in piracicaba, Brazil. Ambio, 29:74-77.
Greenwang, M. (2005). The role of constructed Wtlands in secondary, effluent treatment and water reuse in subtropical and arid Australia. Ecological Engineering. 25:501-509.
Hadad, H.R., Maine, M.A., Bonetto, C.A. (2006). Macrophyte growth in apilot-scale constructed Wetland for industrial waste water treatment. Chemosphere, 63: 1744-1753.
Henry-Silver, G.G., Camargo, A.F. M. (2006). Interacsoes ecological entre as macrofitas aquaticas flutuantes eichornia crassipes epistia stratiotes. Hoehnea, 32:445-452.
Hopkins, J.S., Sandifer, C.L., Hamilton, R.D. and Heffernan, J.A., (1995). The effluent of Cowrate sand filtration and modified feed management on effluent quality pond water quality and production of intensive shrimp ponds Estuarines Journal. 20 (2): 19-20.
Lin, Y.F., Jing, S.R., Lee, D.Y., Chang, Y.F., Chen, Y.M., Shih, K.C. (2012). Performance of a constructed wetland treating intensive shrimp aquaculture waste water under high hydraulic loading rate. Aquaculture, 134: 411-421.
Macintosh, D.J., and Phillips, M.H., (2014). Environmental Consideration in shrimp farming. Fish International 6:38-42.
Be the first to comment