Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T03:55:32.978Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploiting Conditioned Responses in Fish Farming*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2011

P. J. Landless
Affiliation:
Dunstaffnage Marine Research Laboratory, Oban.
Get access

Synopsis

Two behavioural responses were considered. In the first, rainbow trout were trained to press a trigger to obtain food, and in the second they were conditioned to respond to a sound signal in anticipation of food delivery. The trigger pressing, demand feeding, response was quickly learned and the pattern of feeding analysed. There was a dusk peak of feeding as well as appreciable nocturnal trigger pressing. Feeds were highly aggregated into bouts, more so in the case of groups of trout than with individuals. This suggests two behavioural mechanisms, one operating within individuals and a second social effect. The preferred time between trigger presses was 8–16 min. Total daily food intake could be controlled by adjusting the reward level per trigger press so that demand feeding was not necessarily ad lib feeding. Rainbow trout would respond to a sound signal of 100 Hz played for 30 seconds prior to a food delivery by showing a feeding type of behaviour in response to the sound only. Experiments are planned to try and use this sort of response to recall fish from a relatively free-swimming environment to a central point for feeding and eventual recapture.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abbott, R. R., 1972. Induced aggregation of pond-reared rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri) through acoustic conditioning. Trans. Am. Fish Soc, 101, 3543.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adron, J. 1972. A design for automatic and demand feeders for experimental fish. J. Cons. Perm. Int. Explor. Mer., 34, 300305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoar, W. S., 1942. Diurnal variation in feeding activity of young salmon and trout. J. Fish Res. Bd Can., 6, 9099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landless, P. J., 1976. Demand feeding behaviour of rainbow trout. Aquaculture, 7, 1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olla, B. L. and Samet, C., 1974. Fish to fish attraction and the facilitation of feeding behaviour as mediated by visual stimuli in striped mullet Mugil cephalus. J. Fish. Res. Bd Can., 31,16211630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozin, P. and Mayer, J., 1961. Regulation of the food intake of the goldfish. Am. J. Psychol., 201,968974.Google ScholarPubMed
Wiepkema, P. R., 1971. Positive feedbacks at work during feeding. Behaviour, 39, 266273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, A. H., Tytler, P., Holliday, F. G. T. and MacFarlane, A., 1972. A small sonic tag for measurement of locomotor behaviour in fish. J. Fish. Biol., 4, 5765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar