No reason for keeping 0+ perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) with the prey fish

Abstract

Growth and survival of 0+ perch were studied in 4 ponds with the topmouth gudgeon (Pseudorasbora parva) and without it. In the end of April, all ponds were stocked by free-swimming perch larvae (120,000 ind ha−1). In June, topmouth gudgeon was introduced as forage fish (40 kg ha−1) into two of the experimental ponds. Topmouth gudgeon significantly influenced neither the total abundance of zooplankton nor the abundance of its groups (Rotifera, Cladocera, Copepoda). The most important food item for perch (TL > 29 mm) was macroinvertebrates (especially Chironomidae). In the ponds with topmouth gudgeon, copepods and cladocerans were more important than in ponds without it. Specific growth rate of perch was 0.01 mm day−1 in all ponds. Final mean total length (TL ± SD) of perch was 73 ± 13 and 70 ± 6 mm in the ponds with topmouth gudgeon and without it, respectively. Only 1 % of the perch reached higher TL than that recorded in the ponds without the topmouth gudgeon. Survival rate of perch varied from 12 to 36 % depending on ponds. Piscivory was recorded in all ponds from the age of 57 days (post-stocking); however, perch siblings were preferred to topmouth gudgeon. The highest asymptotic growth (L∞ = 88 mm) was calculated in the pond stocked with topmouth gudgeon. This corresponded with the highest cannibalism and lowest survival rate (12 %). Perch growth rate increased till 42–53 days of perch age and then started to decrease. There was no significant influence of potential prey fish (topmouth gudgeon) on the growth of 0+ perch; however, two size cohorts were found in the ponds with the topmouth gudgeon. Presence or absence of littoral macrophytes seems to be more substantial for rearing perch in ponds than stocking with the prey fish.