Skip to main content
ARS Home » Southeast Area » Stuttgart, Arkansas » Harry K. Dupree Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Cntr » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #152698
Title: SIDE-BY-SIDE COMPARISONS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COPPER SULFATE AND SLRRIED HYDRATED LIME POND SHORELINE TREATMENTS AGAINST THE RAMS-HORN SNAIL

Author
item Mitchell, Andrew
item Snyder, Gregory

Submitted to: Book of Abstracts World Aquaculture Society
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 8/5/2003
Publication Date: 3/1/2004
Citation: Mitchell, A.J., Snyder, S.G. 2004. Side-by-side comparisons of the effectiveness of copper sulfate and slurried hydrated lime pond shoreline treatments against the rams-horn snail [abstract]. Book of Abstracts World Aquaculture Society. p. 406.

Interpretive Summary:

Technical Abstract: The rams-horn snail Planorbella trivolvis can carry at least two trematode parasites, Bolbophorus damnificus and Clinostomum complanatum, that cause serious economic losses among farm raised fish. Two pond shoreline treatments for the control of rams-horn snails, copper sulfate (589 g/10 linear meters applied in a 2-m swath) and slurried hydrated lime (11,897 g/10 linear meters applied in a 2-m swath), were compared in side-by-side treatments in 0.41 ha experimental ponds. Rams-horn snails were stocked in three cages (25 snails per cage) that were placed in the water at 10 m intervals along the shoreline of each pond. Twenty-four hours later the ponds were treated with copper sulfate (CuSO4), hydrated lime, or sham control (well water only) treatment. Three trials were run each with 2 ponds (2 replicates) per treatment. Snail survival determinations were made six days post treatment. Temperatures at the time of treatment ranged from 24 to 26°C. In side-by-side comparisons the CuSO4 produced lower snail survivals than slurried hydrated lime in 5 of the 6 treatments when compared within trials. Treatment comparisons could only be made within trials because of observed variations (high wind and overall snail survival) between trials. High wind conditions appeared to lessen the effectiveness of two CuSO4 treatments. The lower snail survivals in two of the lime treatments appear to be, at least partly, the result of a lower overall snail survival in that trial. Testing at temperatures greater than 30°C must be carried out before final conclusions can be drawn on the comparison of snail survival between the two treatments.