论文部分内容阅读
1997年 6月～ 1998年 5月用现场方法测定了烟台四十里湾海区栉孔扇贝 Chlamys( Azumapecten) farreri肥满度和生长率与 TPM(总颗粒物质 )和 POM(颗粒有机物 )现存量、饵料质量 ( POM/ TPM,Q)、栉孔扇贝同化率 ( AE)和同化量 ( AR)的关系。结果表明 :( 1) TPM对软体部干重的瞬时生长率 IGR2 并没有影响 ,而对于干贝指数 IA、干内脏指数 IV以及壳高的瞬时生长率 IGR1却有明显的影响 ,其中 ,IA和 IV与 TPM呈正相关关系 ,回归方程分别为 IA=5.2 149( TPM) 0 .2 4 78,IV =5.2 62 ( TPM) 0 .4 40 5,而 IGR1与 TPM呈负相关关系 ,回归方程分别为 IGR1=6.0 756( TPM) -2 .4 36;( 2 ) POM对于栉孔扇贝所有的肥满度指标和瞬时生长率指标均有明显的影响 ,并且都呈正相关关系 ,回归方程分别为 IA=6.12 78( POM) 0 .2 74 9,IV=7.1837( POM) 0 .60 86,IGR1=0 .1160( POM) 1.8586,IGR2 =0 .170 8( POM) 2 .4 994 ;( 3) Q对 IV没有明显的影响 ,而对于 IA以及所有瞬时生长率指标都有明显的影响 ,回归方程分别为 IA=8.2 881( Q) 0 .3 2 11,IGR1=1.84 2 8( Q) 1.780 7,IGR2 =6.4 2 16( Q) 2 .0 4 0 4 ;( 4 ) AE只对 IA和 IGR1有显著影响 ,回归方程分别为 IA=2 0 .72 80 ( AE) -0 .3 13 7,IGR1=0 .0 0 68( AE) 1.1193,AE对于
From June 1997 to May 1998, the fatness and growth rate of Chlamys (Azumapecten) farreri in Zhiliu Bay, Yantai were measured with the existing stocks of TPM (total particulate matter) and POM (particulate organic matter) The relationship between the feed quality (POM / TPM, Q), the rate of assimilation (AE) and the assimilation (AR) of chlamys farreri was studied. The results showed that: (1) TPM had no effect on the instantaneous growth rate IGR2 of soft body, but had significant effects on the index of scallop IA, the index of dry viscera IV and the instantaneous growth rate of shell height IGR1. IA and IV And TPM, the regression equation was IA = 5.2149 (TPM) 0.2478 and IV = 5.262 (TPM) 0.4455, respectively. The correlation between IGR1 and TPM was negative. The regression equations were IGR1 = 6.0756 (TPM) -2.46; (2) POM had a significant effect on all fatness index and instantaneous growth rate index of Chlamys farreri, and both had a positive correlation, the regression equation was IA = 6.12 78 (POM) 0.274 9, IV = 7.1837 (POM) 0.6086, IGR1 = 0.1160 (POM) 1.8586, IGR2 = 0.1170 8 (POM) 2.4949 IV had no significant effect on IA and all instantaneous growth rate indicators, the regression equation was IA = 8.2881 (Q) 0.3211, IGR1 = 1.8428 (Q) 1.7807, IGR2 = 6.4 2 16 (Q) 2 .0 4 0 4; (4) AE only had significant effect on IA and IGR1, the regression equations were IA = 20.7280 (AE) -0.3137, IGR1 = 0 .0 0 68 (AE) 1.1193, AE For