# Productivity of phytoplankton by using different organic fertilizers in the glass aquarium

Sharmin Rikta, Md Sherazul Islam, Shammi Aktar, Asif Abdulla Al

► To cite this version:

Sharmin Rikta, Md Sherazul Islam, Shammi Aktar, Asif Abdulla Al. Productivity of phytoplankton by using different organic fertilizers in the glass aquarium. Research & Reviews: A Journal of Bioinformatics, 2019, 6 (1), pp.25-37. 10.37591/(rrjobi).v6i1.371. hal-04991207

HAL Id: hal-04991207

https://hal.science/hal-04991207v1

Submitted on 22 Mar 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Productivity of Phytoplankton by Using Different Organic Fertilizers in the Glass Aquarium

Sharmin Rikta<fnref n="1" />, Md. Sherazul Islam<fnref n="1" />, Shammi Aktar<fnref n="1" />, Abdulla-Al-Asif<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" />,*

## Abstract

The experiment intended to estimate the productivity using different organic fertilizer and to identify the species of phytoplankton in the aquarium tanks. The study was conducted in the laboratory of Department of Fisheries and Marine Bioscience (FMB), Jashore University of Science and Technology, Jashore, Bangladesh during November to December, 2013. Phytoplankton samples for culture were collected from fisheries experimental pond by using conical-shaped monofilament nylon net (phytoplankton net). Three treatment such as control (T₁), chicken manure (T₂) and treatment (T₃) were designed. Each treatment had two replicates. In each treatment, 10 g of fertilizer was used in each aquarium tank. Sampling of phytoplankton for counting and identification was done every week and 1 litre of water sample was taken from each tank. Phytoplankton sample for identification were preserved by Lugol's solution. Three physicochemical parameters namely water temperature, dissolved oxygen (DO) and pH were measured in every sampling week during the study period. Water quality parameters of the aquarium tank varied with the variation of sampling week. There was no significant difference between water temperature, pH and DO in case of three treatments. The mean water temperature, pH and DO were 21.85±1.95 °C, 8.38±0.23 and 5.55±0.58 mg/l, respectively. The abundance of phytoplankton in T₁, T₂ and T₃ were 25-65, 25-105 and 6-20 individual/l, respectively. The phytoplankton abundance was influenced by different organic fertilizer and noticed higher in number by using chicken manure. Irregular relationship between phytoplankton abundance and water temperature was found. Phytoplankton showed positive relationship with DO. In this study 15 species of phytoplankton were identified under four groups namely Chlorophyta, Cyanophyta, Bacillariophyta and Euglenophyta. Chlorophyta (52%) was the dominant group in the aquarium. The findings of the present study will help to improve the management strategies of water quality, for estimating the productivity of phytoplankton and for the best use of organic fertilizer especially chicken manure.

**Keywords:** Phytoplankton, organic fertilizers, glass aquarium

*Author for Correspondence E-mail: m15160218@bau.edu.bd

## INTRODUCTION

Plankton is the main natural food particles in pond ecosystem [1]. Plankton is a microscopic organism that originates the base of food chain and food web in all aquatic ecosystems. It is an enormous group of aquatic organism drifting about in water under the action of water movement. These creatures are mostly small, many of them are minute, and their structure can only be seen clearly with the aid

of a compound microscope, with the exception of some large animals, such as some medusa (Chynea, Physalia etc), heteropods (pterotrachea) and tunicates (Pyrosoma). Although they belong to different taxa, they have one thing in common, i.e. owing to the lack of locomotion organ (like fish fins); they are weak in locomotion and can only drift about on water at the mercy of waves and currents, being incapable of moving anywhere

<footnote n="1">¹Department of Fisheries and Marine Bioscience, Jashore University of Science and Technology, Jashore, Bangladesh</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Department of Animal Science and Fishery, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Universiti Putra Malaysia, UPM Bintulu Sarawak Campus, P.O. Box 396, Jalan Nyabau, Bintulu, Sarawak, Malaysia</footnote>
as fish do [2]. The first links in food chains in inland waters are phytoplankton and are an indicator of production level [3]. Aquatic environments are subject to high temporal variation, with frequent reorganization of relative abundance and species composition of phytoplankton, as a result of interaction between physical, chemical and biological variables [4]. Scientific management for good production of fish in water bodies such as ponds, lakes, sometime requires practical knowledge of the environmental factors of water which affect the aquatic community, as well as the fish production [5]. The zooplankton forms the principle source of food for fish within the water body [6] and zooplankton feeds on phytoplankton. Phytoplankton is the only source of food for the tiny zooplankton. Water quality, i.e. the physicochemical and biological characteristics of water, plays a big role on plankton productivity as well as the biology of the cultured organism and final yields. Water quality determines the species optimal for culture under different environments [7]. The overall productivity of a water body can easily be deducted from its primary productivity, which forms the backbone of the aquatic food chains [8]. Both the qualitative and quantitative abundance of plankton in a fishpond are of great importance in managing the successful aquaculture operations, as they vary from location to location and pond to pond within the same location even within similar ecological conditions [9]. Plankton inhabits oceans, seas, lakes, and ponds [10, 11]. Local abundance varies horizontally, vertically and seasonally. The primary cause of this variability is the availability of light. All plankton ecosystems are driven by the input of solar energy, confining primary production to surface waters, and to geographical regions and seasons having abundant light. A secondary variable is nutrient availability. Although large areas of the tropical and subtropical oceans have abundant light, they experience relatively low primary production because they offer limited nutrients such as nitrate, phosphate and silicate. This results from large-scale ocean circulation and water column stratification. The main production systems for freshwater

aquaculture in Bangladesh are extensive and semi-intensive pond poly culture of Indian and Chinese major carps [12]. The growth of fish is strongly correlated with increase in phytoplankton and zooplankton productivity as a result of fertilization. Under poly culture system, the fertilizers increase the level of primary productivity, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH and total phosphorus [13]. The growth of fish is strongly correlated with increase in phytoplankton and zooplankton productivity as a result of fertilization [12]. The relationship between the physical and chemical environment and phytoplankton species composition has been the subject of much discussion [14]. The use of organic and inorganic fertilizers provides basic nutrients and elements required for the production of phytoplankton and zooplankton which serve as a major source of food for fish [15]. Supplementary feeding plays a vital role in semi-intensive system, offering the best means to enhance fish production within shortest possible time. Supplementary feed exerted a significant effect on the body weight, fork length and total length of fish species [16]. In Bangladesh there are millions of ponds and lakes where extensive fish culture is mainly practiced depending on natural food (phytoplankton) which is produced through fertilization [17]. Moreover, systematic studies for selecting suitable organic fertilization between cow dung and chicken manure to produce more plankton for the culture of fish and to increase the fisheries production. Considering the above facts, the present study was therefore, conducted to know the phytoplankton productivity by using cow dung and chicken manure; to identify the species of phytoplankton; and to know the relationship between physicochemical parameters and phytoplankton productivity in treatments.

# MATERIALS AND METHODS

## Study Area

The experiment was conducted in the laboratory of Department of Fisheries and Marine Bioscience (FMB), Jashore University of Science and Technology (JUST), Jashore, Banagladesh (23°14'01.8"N 89°07'31.3"E). This study was conducted from November to December 2013.
**Experimental Design**

The experiment was designed in three treatments (T₁, T₂ and T₃) to know the production of plankton in different organic fertilizer and without fertilization. The treatment with cow dung was treated as T₁, treatment with chicken manure was T₂ and treatment with only supply water was treated as T₃ means control (Table 1). Every treatment had one more replication. All the aquariums were same in size and same amount of water were used in every tank.

**Aquarium Preparation**

The experiment was conducted in rectangular glass aquarium (36-inch x 14 inch x 15 inch), each containing 10 l of tap water. The aquariums were placed near the window for proper lighting. The aquariums were washed properly with running water. These aquarium tanks were placed in the fisheries laboratory.

**Sample Collection**

Plankton samples were collected from the Fisheries experimental pond in JUST campus. The sample was collected by passing water through conical-shaped monofilament plankton net. It was collected from different parts of the pond. Sample collection was varied with water depth. Collected plankton samples were then taken into big glass jar with water and carried to the Fisheries laboratory for culture and kept into the aquarium slowly with care. About 25 l of pond water was filtered to collect the plankton samples for culture in the aquarium tank.

**Use of Organic Fertilizer**

Cow dung and chicken manure were used for this experiment. For culture, 10 g of cow dung was used in each tank of T₁ and 10 g of chicken manure in each tank of T₂. At first the collected fertilizers were weighted in electric balance and mixed with water and then sieved with net. Then the solution was mixed with tank water. The solution was sieved to remove other materials in the fertilizer and to get a pure solution. The solution was mixed with water properly.

**Plankton Collection and Preservation**

Plankton samples were collected in 7 days interval on each sampling date from

November to December 2013 by conical-shaped monofilament nylon net (plankton net). About 1000 ml of water was passed through the net from each tank at a time. The mesh size of the plankton net was 90 µm and the diameter of the net at mouth was 30 cm. The plankton condensed at the end of the plankton net. Then it was collected in a beaker in 25 ml of water and fixed firmly. After collection the plankton materials were preserved with Lugol's solution (20 g potassium iodide and 10 g iodine crystals dissolved in 200 ml distilled water) [18]. Lugol's solution was added in an amount of 0.3 ml per 50 ml of sample. After preservation the plankton samples were observed through photographic microscope and photos of the plankton were taken.

**Sampling Periods**

The experiment was done from November to December 2013. Sampling for identification of phytoplankton was conducted at seven days interval.

**Counting**

Phytoplankton sample was counted under photographic microscope (Axio cam ERc 5s with axiovixim driver, Carl Zeiss Germany). Glass slide was used for plankton counting. The glass slide was set under the microscope before putting water. Then some drops of water was kept over the glass slide using dropper. Before putting water, the glass slide was cleaned properly. Then the water was observed, the plankton were counted and photos of the plankton were taken. By moving the mechanical stage, the entire bottom of the slide area was examined carefully. About 10–15 ml of water was examined. After this the plankton in 25 ml of water were counted. So 11 water contains the plankton species in 25 ml

<table><caption>**Table 1: Experimental Design for Different Treatment for the Production of Phytoplankton.**</caption><thead><tr><th>Treatment</th><th>Tank name</th><th>Fertilizer</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2">T<sub>1</sub></td><td>A<sub>1</sub></td><td rowspan="2">Cow dung</td></tr><tr><td>A<sub>2</sub></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">T<sub>2</sub></td><td>B<sub>1</sub></td><td rowspan="2">Chicken manure</td></tr><tr><td>B<sub>2</sub></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">T<sub>3</sub></td><td>C<sub>1</sub></td><td rowspan="2">No fertilizer</td></tr><tr><td>C<sub>2</sub></td></tr></tbody></table>
of water. After that this plankton population
was multiplied with 10 1 of water and the
whole plankton population was calculated.

Measurement of Physicochemical
Parameter

Temperature

Water temperature was measured at each tank
using a mercury thermometer of (0–50) °C
range. The thermometer was kept into tank
water for about 1 min. Thereafter the
thermometer was kept up and the temperature
was measured by observing the centigrade
scale of thermometer and the temperature was
recorded. The unit of this instrument was °C.

pH

Water pH was measured by an electrometric
pH meter model no: EZDO, 7200. Before
using the instrument, it was calibrated with pH
7 and pH 10 buffer solutions. Before taking
each reading, the electrode was washed well
by distilled water.

Dissolved Oxygen (DO)

Dissolved oxygen (DO) was measured by DO
meter model no: YK-22DO, made in Taiwan.

Classification and Identification of
Observed Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton cells were enumerated under a
photographic microscope by using glass slide.
Recognition of species is a matter of
experience. Phytoplankton genera and species
were identified using variety of bibliographic
references. Identification was done by using
different books and checklist of scientists
especially followed by Arnold and Vuuren et
al. [19, 20].

Statistical Analysis

Standard deviations of water quality
parameters were done using Microsoft Excel
Program 2007 and Statistical Program for
Social Science (SPSS).

RESULTS

Water Quality Parameters During Culture
Period

Water Temperature

Temperature showed considerable variations
during the study period. The maximum water
temperature which was 24.9°C was recorded

in 1st week and minimum was 19.1 °C which
was recorded in 2nd week (Figure 1). The highest
and lowest water temperature was found in T₁.

Water pH

Highest pH was 8.7 and lowest was 8.00 recorded in 2nd week and 1st week, respectively (Figure 2). The lowest and highest pH was found in T₁.

Dissolved Oxygen (DO)

The range of DO was 4.8–6.7 mg/l. The highest DO was 6.7 mg/l which was recorded in 4th week and the lowest DO was 4.8 mg/l which was recorded in 3rd week (Figure 3). The highest and lowest DO was found in T₃ and T₁, respectively.

Productivity of Phytoplankton in Different
Week with Different Organic Fertilizer

The productivity of plankton was measured
from each aquarium tanks. The number of
plankton cells was counted after processing in
the laboratory. The productivity was
calculated as the number of unit per litre. The
productivity of different groups of
phytoplankton was studied weekly, which
showed fluctuation both quantitatively and
qualitatively and are shown in Figure 4. The
productivity in case of T₁ (cow dung) for 1st,
2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 46, 65, 49 and 15
unit/l, respectively; in case of T₂ (chicken
manure) for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 105,
82, 66 and 25 unit/l, respectively; in case of T₃
(control) for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 15,
20, 11 and 6 unit/l, respectively.

Diversity of Phytoplankton

All divisions of phytoplankton were identified
[19, 20] and four divisions of plankton were
found; namely, Chlorophytes, Cyanobacterias,
Bacillariophyta and Euglenophyta are the most
common freshwater algae.

Abundance and Diversity of Phytoplankton

The abundance of different groups of
phytoplankton was studied during the culture
period. The abundance of phytoplankton varied
from 105 unit/l to 6 unit/l (Table 2). The
phytoplankton showed a weekly variation both
qualitatively and quantitatively. The highest
abundance was 105 unit/l, found in T₂ and it was
found with seven different varieties of phytoplankton. The highest phytoplankton variation was found in T₁ and eight varieties were found. At the first of the culture period the

production of phytoplankton per litre was high but at the end of the culture period the production per litre was decreased as well as the number of species per litre was also decreased.

<table><thead><tr><th>Division</th><th>Genus</th><th>Species</th><th>Availability</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="8">Chlorophytes</td><td>Schroederia</td><td>Schroederia sp.</td><td>+++</td></tr><tr><td>Doctylococcus</td><td>Doctylococcus sp.</td><td>+++</td></tr><tr><td>Hormidium</td><td>Hormidium sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Ankistrodesmus</td><td>Ankistrodesmus falcatus</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Zygnema</td><td>Zygnema sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Gonatozygon</td><td>Gonatozygon sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Chlorella</td><td>Chlorella vulgaris</td><td>+++++</td></tr><tr><td>Oscillatoria</td><td>Oscillatoria sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="4">Cyanobacterias</td><td>Nodularia</td><td>Nodularia sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Chroococcus</td><td>Chroococcus dispersus</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Anabaena</td><td>Anabaena circinalis</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Thalassiosira</td><td>Thalassiosira decipens</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">Bacillariophyta</td><td>Nitzschia</td><td>Nitzschia paradoxa</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Asterionella</td><td>Asterionella sp.</td><td>++++</td></tr><tr><td>Euglenophyta</td><td>Euglena</td><td>Euglena gracilis</td><td>++++</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1: Average Water Temperature.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2: Average Water pH in Different Treatment.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 3: Average Dissolved Oxygen in Different Treatment.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 4: Productivity of Phytoplankton in Different Weeks with Different Organic Fertilizer.</figcaption></figure>

<table><caption>Table 2: Phytoplankton Abundance and Diversity in Culture Period.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Treatment</th><th colspan="4">Abundance (unit/l)</th><th colspan="4">Diversity of species</th></tr><tr><th>12.11.13</th><th>19.11.13</th><th>26.11.13</th><th>03.12.13</th><th>12.11.13</th><th>19.11.13</th><th>26.11.13</th><th>03.12.13</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>T<sub>1</sub></td><td>46</td><td>65</td><td>49</td><td>15</td><td>8</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>T<sub>2</sub></td><td>105</td><td>82</td><td>66</td><td>25</td><td>7</td><td>6</td><td>3</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>T<sub>3</sub></td><td>15</td><td>20</td><td>11</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td>2</td></tr></tbody></table>

### Abundance of Different Groups of Phytoplankton (Individual/litre)

Treatment 1

<table><caption>Table 3: Abundance of Different Groups of Phytoplankton (Individual/l).</caption><thead><tr><th>Group</th><th>12.11.13</th><th>19.11.13</th><th>26.11.13</th><th>03.12.13</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Cyanophyta</td><td>10</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Chlorophyta</td><td>15</td><td>32</td><td>26</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Bacillariophyta</td><td>8</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Euglenophyta</td><td>6</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Unidentified</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr></tbody></table>

Treatment 2

<table><caption>Table 4: Abundance of Different Groups of Phytoplankton (Individual/l).</caption><thead><tr><th>Group</th><th>12.11.13</th><th>19.11.13</th><th>26.11.13</th><th>03.12.13</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Cyanophyta</td><td>24</td><td>13</td><td>21</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Chlorophyta</td><td>27</td><td>26</td><td>19</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Bacillariophyta</td><td>9</td><td>4</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Euglenophyta</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Unidentified</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr></tbody></table>

Treatment 3

<table><caption>Table 5: Abundance of Different Groups of Phytoplankton (Individual/l).</caption><thead><tr><th>Group</th><th>12.11.13</th><th>19.11.13</th><th>26.11.13</th><th>03.12.13</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Cyanophyta</td><td>9</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Chlorophyta</td><td>3</td><td>6</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Bacillariophyta</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Euglenophyta</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Unidentified</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr></tbody></table>

### Abundance of Different Groups

Treatment 1

At the first week the variation was not significantly different. But in the second week, the Chlorophyta was very high than in other the third week; small amount of Bacillariophyta were also seen. In the last week of culture period, only Cyanophyta were seen and other four groups were not present (Figure 5).
Treatment 2

During the culture period Chlorophyta was
dominant and Euglenophyta was in lowest
number (Figure 6).

Treatment 3

In treatment 3, Cyanophyta was dominant in all the culture period and Bacillariophyta was not present (Figure 7). In third week only Cyanophyta was recorded and other groups were not present. Chlorophyta was more or less similar in all the culture period.

Total Abundance

Total abundance of different group of phytoplankton during the culture period was dominated by Chlorophyta (52%) and then Cyanophyta (33%) which is shown in Figure 8. It was also shown that the abundance of Bacillariophyta and Euglenophyta was 8% and 7%, respectively.

Relationship Between Phytoplankton Abundance and Water Quality Parameters

Treatment 1

The abundance was high in the second week but the temperature was low in that week. After second week the production decreased gradually but the temperature was more or less same. Other parameters such as DO and pH showed no variable relationship with the production (Figure 9).

Treatment 2

Relationship between phytoplankton abundance and different water quality parameters in case of treatment 2 (Figure 10) showed no variation with the value of DO and pH. At the last of culture period, the production decreased but DO and pH remain more or less same.

Treatment 3

In case of treatment 3, the relationship
between plankton production and different
water quality are given in Figure 11. The
production was too low in treatment 3.

DISCUSSION

In nature, most of the organisms subsist on
live food consisting of plants and animals
obtained from the environment. The initial
source of food for many larval organisms is
phytoplankton. Phytoplankton forms the basis
of food chain [21]. The natural bloom of
phytoplankton is not enough to obtain
adequate phytoplankton levels for the
production of fish. Fertilizers increase the
natural fertility of culture ponds, so fertilizer is
used [1]. In the present study, phytoplankton
was cultured in aquarium with two organic
fertilizers (cow dung and chicken manure).
The present work gives some information
about productivity of phytoplankton by

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5: Phytoplankton Abundance in Culture Media Prepared with Cow Dung.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 6: Phytoplankton Abundance Found in Culture Media Prepared with Chicken Manure.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 7: Phytoplankton Abundance in Culture Media Prepared with Only Supply Water.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 8: Total Abundance of Different Group of Phytoplankton During Culture Period.</figcaption></figure>
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 9:** Relationship Between Phytoplankton Abundance and Water Quality Parameters for Treatment with Cow Dung.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 10:** Relationship Between Phytoplankton Abundance and Water Quality Parameters for Treatment with Chicken Manure.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 11:** Relationship Between Phytoplankton Abundance and Water Quality Parameters for Treatment Only with Supply Water.</figcaption></figure>
organic fertilizer, to understand the best use of organic fertilizer (which fertilizer is more suitable), and the proper management of physicochemical parameter for phytoplankton production. During the study period the abundance of phytoplankton found in T₁, T₂ and in T₃ was 25–65, 25–105 and 6–20 individual/l, respectively. We found that the abundance of phytoplankton is high in case of T₂, moderately high in case of T₁, and lowest abundance was found in T₃. Organic fertilizer affects the production of phytoplankton and provides some necessary nutrients needed for phytoplankton growth. According to Ponce-Palafox *et al.* [3], phytoplankton concentration was also higher in ponds fertilized with sheep and pig manure than chemical fertilizer. Among the organic fertilizer chicken manure would be very effective for plankton production than cow dung. That is why the production was higher in that case. The productivity in case of T₁ for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 46, 65, 49 and 15 individual/l, respectively; in case of T₂ for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 105, 82, 66 and 25 individual/l, respectively; in case of T₃ for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th week was 15, 20, 11 and 6 individual/l, respectively. For T₂ the productivity of phytoplankton was high in the first week. Two reasons behind this. The effect of fertilizer and physicochemical parameters were good in the first week. The productivity reduced gradually after the first week. But in T₁ the production was higher in 2nd week; reason may be the concentration of DO. In that week DO was higher in T₁ so production was also higher. The plankton sample was to be put on the aquarium in 5 November, 2013 and the first counting was done on 12 November, 2013. But after that week most probably the effect of fertilization was reduced. So the plankton production was also reduced. The result of present study is more or less similar with the study of Mia *et al.* [22, 23]. During the study period 15 species of phytoplankton under four groups was identified. These were Cyanophyta (4), Chlorophyta (7), Bacillariophyta (3) and Euglenophyta (1). The observed species were *Hormidium* sp., *Doctylococcus* sp., *Schroederia* sp., *Ankistrodesmus* *falcatus*, *Zygnema* sp., *Gonatozygon* sp., *Chlorella vulgaris*, *Oscillatoria* sp., *Chroococcus*

disperse, *Oscillatoria* sp., *Chroococcus disperses*, *Nodularia* sp., *Anabaena circinalis*, *Thalassiosira decipens*, *Nitzschia paradoxa*, *Asterionella* sp., and *Euglena gracilis*. As this experiment was conducted during November to December the plankton sample for culture from pond was collected at this time. The phytoplankton abundance in pond varied with different months and in different season, place and water body [24, 25]. So distinct types of plankton were cultured that were present in the pond water. This is similar to species composition of Khulna University pond given by Saha [26]. Study of Noakhali district, Bangladesh [24], Jashore district, Bangladesh [25], lower Meghna River [27], tropical mangrove estuary [11], Malaysian estuary [28], Merlimau, Malacca [29], Sarawak, Malaysia [10], showed some relevant result regarding species distribution and abundance; some species are relevant with this present study and several species are comparatively alien for the present study. During that time the fluctuation of phytoplankton population in different treatment varied with time. The total number of phytoplankton was dominated by Chlorophyta about 52%. Similar result was also given by Saha [26]. In treatment 1, 2 and 3 the abundance of Chlorophyta was high in 2nd and 3rd week. The reason may be the reproduction cycle of different group of phytoplankton. All the groups do not multiply at the same rate. Some multiply rapidly and some multiply slowly. The life of different phytoplankton may be the reason because phytoplankton survives few hours to several week. The fluctuation was the impact of different physicochemical parameters on plankton population. Different water quality parameters affected the abundance of phytoplankton in various ways. There was a relationship between phytoplankton abundance with different water quality parameters. Temperature affected the abundance of phytoplankton. The abundance varied with the variation of temperature. During our study period temperature varied from 19.1 °C to 24.9 °C. The temperature was within optimal ranges (18.3 °C–37.8 °C) for the production of plankton in tropical ponds [30, 31]. In treatment 1, at the first week of culture period, phytoplankton shows positive relationship
with the temperature. In the 2nd week the temperature decreased but the production increased. At the last of the culture period temperature was more or less same but the production decreased. It was same for treatment 2 and treatment 3 which is shown in Figures 24, 25 and 26. Phytoplankton shows irregular relationship with temperature. The reason could be the effect of organic fertilizer. At the last the organic fertilization effect could be reduced and the production also reduced. So, phytoplankton showed negative relationship in the present study. The pH in the aquarium water varied from 8.03 to 8.7. The water remains slightly alkaline. The present study showed no relationship between pH and phytoplankton production. But Hossain and Chowdhury [32], and Islam and Saha [33] found positive relationship between pH and primary production. The recorded DO varied from 4.8 mg/l to 6.7 mg/l. The productivity increased with increasing DO in case of all treatments. Miah et al. [34] showed positive correlation of DO with phytoplankton abundance in ponds of Agricultural University campus, Mymenshing. Several water quality studies [35-38] were performed by researches and their outcomes were relevant with this present study. In last of the work, DO increased but productivity of plankton decreased gradually. The reason could be the organic fertilization effect. At the last organic fertilizer may not work properly so the production decreased.

CONCLUSION

The result of the study revealed that chicken manure is more effective than cow dung as fertilizer in water for primary productivity. The present study would be helpful as baseline information for developing monitoring, management and successful use of fertilizer in the pond for fish culture. There was lacking of technical support such as limitations in counting and identification of plankton so further study is needed for further better result.

REFERENCES

1. Boyd CE. Phytoplankton in Aquaculture Ponds. *Glob Aqua Advo*. 2009; 12: 65-6p.

2. Zheng Z. *Marine planktology*. Beijing: China Ocean Press; 1984. 1–10p.

3. Ponce-Palafox JT, Arredondo-Figueroa JL, Castillo-Vargasmachuca SG, et al. The effect of chemical and organic fertilization on phytoplankton and fish production on phytoplankton and fish production in carp (Cyprinidae) polyculture system. *Rev Bio*. 2010; 1: 44–50p.

4. Reynolds CS, Dokulil M, Padisak J. *The Trophic Spectrum Revised: The Influence of Trophic State on the Assembly of Phytoplankton Communities*. Development in Hydrobiology **150**. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2000. 147–52p.

5. Rounsefell GA, Everhart WH. *Fish science; its methods and applications*. New York: John Willy and Sons, Inc.; 1962. 444p.

6. Prasad BB, Singh RB. Composition, abundance and distribution of phytoplankton and zoobenthos in a tropical water body. *Nat Env Pol Tech*. 2003; 2: 255-8p.

7. Dhawan A, Kaur S. Pig dung as pond manure: Effect on water quality, Pond productivity and growth of carps in polyculture system. *NTAFP and NAGA Aquabyte-2*. 2002; 25(1): 1-55p.

8. Ahmed SH, Singh AK. Correlation between antibiotic factors of water and zoo planktonic communities of a tank in Patna, Bihar. *Proceedings of the National Seminar on Forty Years of Fresh Water Aquaculture in India*; 1989 Nov 7-9; Central Institution of Freshwater Aquaculture, Bhubneshwar, India. 119-21 p.

9. Boyd CE. Water quality management of pond fish culture. Amsterdam Oxford, New York: Elsevier Science Publication Co.; 1982. 318p.

10. Saifullah ASM, Kamal AHM, Idris MH, et al. Diversity of phytoplankton from mangrove estuaries of Sarawak, Malaysia. *J Biol Sci*. 2014; 14(5): 361-9p.

11. Saifullah ASM, Kamal AHM, Idris MHB, et al. Phytoplankton in tropical mangrove estuaries: role and interdependency. *Forest Sci Tech*. 2015; 9: 1-10p.

12. Jasmine S, Ahamed F, Rahman SH, et al. Effects of organic and inorganic fertilizers on the growth performance of Carps in
earthen pond through poly culture system.
*Our Nat.* 2011; 9: 16–20p.

13. Qin J, Culver DA, Yu N. Effect of organic fertilizer on heterotrophs and autotrophs; implication for water quality management. *Aquacult Res.* 1995; 26: 911–20p.

14. Margalef R. Life forms of phytoplankton as survival alternatives in an unstable environment. *Oceanologia Acta*. 1978; 1: 493–509p.

15. Javed M, Sial MB, Zafar SA, et al. Fishpond fertilization. II: Influence of broiler manure fertilization on the growth performance of major carps. *Pak J Agri Sci.* 1990; 27: 212–15p.

16. Javed M, Hassan M, Javed K, et al. Fishpond fertilization. V: Effect of artificial feed on the growth performance of major carps. *Pak J Agri Sci.* 1993; 30(1): 7–12p.

17. Affan A, Jewel AS, Haque M, et al. Seasonal cycle of phytoplankton in aquaculture ponds in Bangladesh. *Algae*. 2005; 20(1): 43–52p.

18. Khondker M, Bhuyan RA, Yeasmin J, et al. New records of phytoplankton for Bangladesh. 1. Cyanophyceae. *Bangladesh J Bot*. 2006; 35(2): 173–9p.

19. Arnold E. *Measuring phytoplankton populations and primary productivity*. London, New York, Melborne. Auckland; 1989. 89p.

20. Vuuren SJ, Taylor J, Ginkel CV, et al. *Easy identification of the most common freshwater algae*. Potchefstroom, South Africa: School of Environmental Sciences and Development: Botany, North West University (Potchefstroom Campus); 2006.

21. Das P, Sagar C, Mandal SK, et al. Important live food organisms and their role in aquaculture. *Front Aquacult.* 2012; 1: 69–86p.

22. Mia ML, Habib MAB, Hoque N, et al. A study on growth performance of *Spirulina platensis* in different concentrations of rotten apple as a carbon source. *Int J Excel Inno Dev.* 2019; 2(1): 29–40p.

23. Mia ML, MAB Habib, MM Rahman, et al. Use of liquid rice starch as a source of carbon for growth of *Spirulina platensis*. *J Fish Life Sci.* 2018; 3(2): 34–45p.

24. Akter S, Rahman MM, Faruk A, et al. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of phytoplankton in culture pond of Noakhali district, Bangladesh. *Int J Fish Aqua Stud.* 2018; 6(4): 371–5p.

25. Raju RH, Samad MA, Asif AA, et al. Variation in the plankton abundance, biomass and diversity of municipal pond and Bukvorabaor at Jashore district, Bangladesh. *Res Rev J Bioinfo*. 2018; 5(2): 1–14p.

26. Saha A. Abundance and diversity of phytoplankton in freshwater prawn (*Macrobrachium rosenbergii*) farm under different probiotic treatment. *B.Sc. (Honors) Thesis*. Khulna: Fisheries and Marine Resource Technology, Khulna University; 2012.

27. Sharif ASM, Islam MS, Hoque MN, et al. Spatial and temporal environmental effect of lower Meghna River and its estuary on phytoplankton, Bangladesh. *Int J FauBiol Stud.* 2017; 4(2): 13–22p.

28. Billah MM, Kamal AHM, Idris MHB, et al. Seasonal variation in the occurrence and abundance of mangrove macro-algae in a Malaysian estuary. *Cryptog Alg.* 2016; 37(2): 109–20p.

29. Hadi NA, Naqqiuddin MA, Zulkifli SZ, et al. Phytoplankton diversity in tiger shrimp pond in Merlimau, Malacca. *Malaysia Ecol Semi.* 2016; 11: 223–5p.

30. Begum M, Hossain MY, Wahab MA, et al. Effects of phosphorus fertilizer on water quality and biological productivity in fishpond. *J Aquacult Trop.* 2003; 18: 1–12p.

31. Jhingran VG. *Fish and Fisheries of India*, 3rd Edn. Delhi, India: Hindustan Publishing Corporation; 1991. 727p.

32. Hossain MZ, Chowdhury AH. Phytoplankton abundance in relation to physic chemical conditions of the Sundarbans estuary in Burigoalini forest station. *J Env Biol.* 2004; 2: 30–50p.

33. Islam AKMN, Saha JK. Limnological studies of the Ramna Lake, Dhaka. *Dhaka Univ Stud.* 1975; 23(2): 39–46p.

34. Miah MI, Bhuian NI, Dewan S, et al. A comparative study of the major carps in relation to physicochemical and biological factors. *Proceedings of the 3rd Nat Zool Conference*; 1981; Bangladesh. 215–23p.
35. Asif AA, Samad MA, Rahman BMS, et al. A study on management of fish fry and fingerling marketing of Jessore in Bangladesh. *Int J Bus Soc Sci Res.* 2014; 2: 127–35p.

36. Islam MA, Asif AA, Samad MA, et al. A comparative study on fish biodiversity with conservation measures of the Bhairabriver, Jessore, Bangladesh. *Asian J Med Biol Res.* 2017b; 3: 357–67p.

37. Neowajh MS, Rashid MM, Asif AA, et al. Effects of chemotherapeutics against experimentally injured stinging catfish *Heteropneustes fossilis*. *Asian J Med Biol Res.* 2017; 3(4): 476–87p.

38. Shajib MSH, Sarker B, Asif AA, et al.

Effects of stocking density on the growth rate of goldfish fry reared in hapa. *Asian J Med Biol Res.* 2017; 3: 504–15p.

**Cite this Article**

Sharmin Rikta, Md. Sherazul Islam,  
Shammi Aktar, Abdulla-Al-Asif.  
Productivity of Phytoplankton by Using  
Different Organic Fertilizers in the Glass  
Aquarium. *Research & Reviews: A Journal  
of Bioinformatics.* 2019; 6(1): 25–37p.