Predatory behaviour of a perch, Nandus nandus (Ham.)

Predatory behaviour of Nandus nandus was studied by offering Cyprinus carpio as prey. The study was conducted with six N. namdus (8.2 ±0.2 cm and 7.60 ±0.3g) represented as P 1, P 2, P 3, P 4, P 5 and P 6. Three size categories of prey (C. carpio) such as small (2.0 ±0.1 cm and 0.23 ±0.01g), large (3.6 ±0.1 cm and 0.57 ±O.O.lg) and mixed group consisting of both small and large prey were used for 14 days of trial. Predatory behavior was classified as targeting, driving, catching, handling, resting and next attempt of catching prey. After introduction of prey into the aquarium predators followed the movement of preys by eye movements and tried to target smaller one first. The predator grasped the head of the prey by its jaws by a drive and engulfed it wholly into the mouth. The average handling time (time taken to manipulate and swallow prey from capture to ceasation of pharyngeal movement) was 42±2 sec and 47±2 sec for small and large prey respectively. N. nandus were ingested more small prey than large prey though the size classes were equally available in case of mixed prey used. Although the prey consumption was higher in number when small prey were ingested but in weight the consumption was higher when ingested large size of prey. The study indicated that N. nandus, ingested more small prey and grasped the headfirst.

Investigations on the number of trials required for statistical comparison of fishing gears

The number of fishing trials required for comparing the efficiency of fishing gears was investigated. A unique solution to this problem did not appear to exist because of the heterogeneity of the experimental material. Sequential experimentation and analysis have been found to be a practical approach to this problem. By this, the experiment can be terminated almost after 35 days fishing for catches with standard error per unit as per cent of the mean about 30% or less (after logarithmic transformation). For data with mean catches less than 1.5 kg analysis of variance approach does not appear to be meaningful.

The effect of increase in the number of fishing trips on the economic efficiency of 9.82 m and 11 m fishing trawlers along Kerala coast

Cost-benefit analysis of a 9.82 m and 11 m fishing trawlers based on the number of fishing trips is presented. The number of fishing trips per year determines the profit and loss of the trawler. With the increase in the number of fishing trips, the profit also increase for both the sizes of trawlers. The minimum quantity of prawn and fish to be landed for 0-20% profit for varying number of fishing trips are worked out. The break-even for 9.82 and 11m trawlers was observed to be 185 and 210 fishing trips respectively during 1980-81.