National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS)
 |
PRINT ISSN : 2319-7692 Online ISSN : 2319-7706 Issues : 12 per year Publisher : Excellent Publishers Email : editorijcmas@gmail.com / submit@ijcmas.com Editor-in-chief: Dr.M.Prakash Index Copernicus ICV 2018: 95.39 NAAS RATING 2020: 5.38 |
A comparative study was conducted on different types of gillnets operated in a medium type Saroda reservoir along the Uttari river in Kabeerdham district. Gillnets mesh size operated in the reservoir varied from 20 mm to 210 mm. CPUE varied from 3.70 kg to 5.70 kg for total catch, 1.90 kg to 5.40 kg for main catch and 0.02 kg to 1.80 kg for bycatch. Hanging coefficient of gillnets operated in this reservoir was 0.7. The bycatch from gillnets was 48.648, 5.263, 2.277and 0.534 % for various types of gillnets N1, N2, N3 and N4 respectively. Undersized Catla catla was the major constituent 20.270% of bycatch from the gillnet N1 and minor constituent 0.213% from gillnet N4. The bycatch of Labeo rohita 12.126, 0.877, 0.474 and 0.106 %, Cirrhinus mrigala 6.756, 1.754, 0.189 and 0.106 % and undersized Ctenopharyngodon idella 0.054, 0.877, 0.474 and 0.106 % was respectively contributed by gillnet N1, N2, N3 and N4. The bycatch of Cyprinus carpio 0.054% and 0.189%, Hypophthalmichthys molitxix 1.351% and 0.474% was respectively contributed by gillnets only N1 and N3. One-way ANOVA was carried out and significant difference was found in bycatch of different gillnets. Gillnet N1 with very small mesh size had more bycatch in comparison to main catch. Hence, it may be concluded that bycatch is inversely proportional to mesh size of gillnets. Therefore, it is recommended that smaller mesh size gillnets shall not be permitted in the reservoir.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
