Techniques to Develop Food- Sized Sunfish Lincoln University Charles E. Hicks Principle Investigator *

Year One Bluegill from density studies graded for largest fish Bluegill from density studies graded for largest fish Largest males and females selected and marked with PIT tags Largest males and females selected and marked with PIT tags Largest males and females were divided into four groups (9 males and 15 females) and placed in spawning enclosures. Largest males and females were divided into four groups (9 males and 15 females) and placed in spawning enclosures. Compared the largest and smallest of the four groups. Compared the largest and smallest of the four groups.

Average Weight of Brood Fish for Two Families

Growth Test (F1A vs. F1D) Progeny brought into recycle system (8 tank system, 2 families 4 replicates) Progeny brought into recycle system (8 tank system, 2 families 4 replicates) Fed two weeks ad. lib. Fed two weeks ad. lib. Remainder of test fed/auto feeders at 3% of body weight Remainder of test fed/auto feeders at 3% of body weight Sampled monthly (random grab) length- weight of individual fish taken Sampled monthly (random grab) length- weight of individual fish taken Test completed in April 2005 Test completed in April 2005

Comparison of Two Families

Results of Comparison Test (p < )

Year Two F2 Crosses F2 Crosses –P1 Females x F1 Males –F1 Females x P1 Males –F1 Females x F1 Males Indoor test was completed April, 2006 Family specific marks applied Grow out in ponds

Year Two System & Protocol 12-tank system (719 L) 12-tank system (719 L) Fish hand fed to satiation 3 times daily Fish hand fed to satiation 3 times daily All tanks sampled at 55 days All tanks sampled at 55 days All fish weighed and measured at end All fish weighed and measured at end

Means for Beginning and Ending Weight

Family Comparisons F1 x P1 vs. F1 x F1 (p > ) F1 x P1 vs. F1 x F1 (p > ) F1 x F1 vs. P1 x F1 (p > ) F1 x F1 vs. P1 x F1 (p > ) F1 x P1 vs. P1 x F1 (p > ) F1 x P1 vs. P1 x F1 (p > )

Pond Grow-out During final weighing and measuring all fish were marked with family specific visible injected elastomer (VIE) During final weighing and measuring all fish were marked with family specific visible injected elastomer (VIE) Fish were released into four 0.04 ha ponds Fish were released into four 0.04 ha ponds –200 fish from each family per pond. –600 fish / pond End of growing season all fish are identified by family, weighed and measured. End of growing season all fish are identified by family, weighed and measured.

Observing Marks

Pond Harvest % No Observable Mark 44% No Observable Mark 64% Survival in Pond 7 64% Survival in Pond 7 –Most loss due to predaceous birds 50% Reached Target Weight ( g) 50% Reached Target Weight ( g) –88% Males Reach Target Weight Average Weight of Males 281 grams Average Weight of Males 281 grams

2006 Pond Harvest

Year Three 2007 Three different sires per brood per family Three different sires per brood per family –Mated in laboratory P1 ♀ X P1 ♂ vs. F2 ♀ X F2 ♂ P1 ♀ X P1 ♂ vs. F2 ♀ X F2 ♂ Rear in recycle system (120 days) Rear in recycle system (120 days) –Target 133 g / fish

Midterm Weight by Family (p < )

Year Three Midpoint Sampling (p<0.0001)

Year Three: Pond Grow-out Each fish individually marked with PIT tag Each fish individually marked with PIT tag Stocked in four ponds (6,000/acre) Stocked in four ponds (6,000/acre) –Individuals from each group stocked in each pond Fish fed twice daily floating trout feed in feeding rings Fish fed twice daily floating trout feed in feeding rings Randomized block design (individuals within families are replicates). Randomized block design (individuals within families are replicates). Fish harvested in October Fish harvested in October –All fish weighed, measured and identified by PIT tag number

Pond Grow-out Beginning Weight F3 vs. F1

Pond Grow-out

Ending Weight F3 vs. F1

What Did We Learn Selecting the largest brood-fish: Selecting the largest brood-fish: –produces the largest progeny within a year-class. –eliminates small males (sneakers & satellites). VIE tags are not reliable VIE tags are not reliable By year three over all size increased significantly By year three over all size increased significantly Can reach target weights within 18 months if selective breeding techniques are used. Can reach target weights within 18 months if selective breeding techniques are used. Culture methods are important (indoor rearing phase must be included). Culture methods are important (indoor rearing phase must be included).

Acknowledgements USDA-CSREES Evans Allen Grant for supporting work. USDA-CSREES Evans Allen Grant for supporting work. Lincoln University Lincoln University Dr. Mark Ellersieck, MU for statistical assistance. Dr. Mark Ellersieck, MU for statistical assistance. Lincoln University Personnel Lincoln University Personnel –Russell Gerlach, Dr. Jim Wetzel, Cindy Borgwordt Leslie Hearne, Chris Scheppers, Adam Stamp Leslie Hearne, Chris Scheppers, Adam Stamp Dr. Robert Pierce, MU Fisheries and Wildlife Dr. Robert Pierce, MU Fisheries and Wildlife

Contact Information Charles Hicks Charles Hicks Office: George Washington Carver Farm Telephone Number: