Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology   2015, Vol. 33 Issue(6): 1436-1450     PDF       
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00343-015-4381-6
Shanghai University
0

Article Information

Liudmila I. LITVINENKO, Aleksandr I. LITVINENKO, Elena G. BOIKO, Kirill KUTSANOV
Artemia cyst production in Russia
Chinese Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 2015, 33(6): 1436-1450
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00343-015-4381-6

Article History

Received Dec. 15, 2014
accepted in principle Apr. 5, 2015;
accepted for publication Jul. 15, 2015
Artemia cyst production in Russia
Liudmila I. LITVINENKO1,2 , Aleksandr I. LITVINENKO1,2, Elena G. BOIKO1,2, Kirill KUTSANOV1       
1 Federal State Unitary Enterprise 《State Research and Production Centre of Fishery》, Gosrybcenter, Tyumen, Russia;
2 State Agrarian University of Northern Urals, Tyumen, Russia
ABSTRACT:In Western Siberia (Russia) there are about 100 Artemia lakes with total area over 1 600 km2. Geographically these lakes are located between 51°-56°N and 61°-82°E. In general these lakes are shallow (depth less than 1.5 m), small or medium size (0.1 to 10 km2);they are chloride;their total salinity is from 40 to 250 g/L. The harvesting of cysts per year is only in 20-40 lakes. In Russia 550 tons of dry Artemia cysts (14%-18% of the world production) were harvested annually. This includes about 350 tons in the Altai region and 200 tons in other regions. During our regular 20-year study period the cyst harvest was: 95 tons in Kurgan;65 tons in Omsk, 20 tons in Novosibirsk, 20 tons in Tyumen. Ways of increasing cyst harvest in Russia are considered in this article. During the last 30 years the harvest of cysts in Russia has increased from 7-20 to 500-600 tons. A significant influence of dryness of the year was found on productivity in selected lakes, but taken for all the lakes together, the relationship was not significant. The optimal salinity for productivity of cysts in the lakes was determined. Analysis of productivity of the lakes and the harvesting results showed that the stocks of cysts are underutilized by approximately 1.7 times.
Keywords: Artemia     brine shrimp cyst production     Russian saline lakes     population dynamics     aquaculture industry    
1 INTRODUCTION

Artemia is a unique organism as it lives in extreme conditions where other organisms(except for some halophilic bacteria and algae)cannot survive. The study of Artemia is also very important because Artemia cysts are the best and most convenient live feed for fi sh larvae and crustaceans. Development of aquaculture largely depends on the continuing availability of world cysts stocks. In recent years much research has been done to evaluate how many stocks of cysts there are in the world and how many cysts are needed to satisfy world dem and by aquaculture(Van Stappen and Sorgeloos, 1993; Lavens and Sorgeloos, 2000; Dhont and Sorgeloos, 2002 and others). As world aquaculture is rapidly increasing, it is desirable to monitor the stocks of cysts to avoid any shortfall.

The aim of our research has been to elucidate the position of Russia in holding world cysts stocks and to identify ways to increase them. The following tasks were set to achieve this goal:

1)to determine the stocks of Artemia cysts in Russian lakes and to identify the factors determining them;

2)to find out what is the role of Russia in supplying the world market of Artemia cysts;

3)to offer alternative sources of cysts and the ways of increasing Artemia cyst production.

2 MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 1995–2004 an expedition was conducted to detect Artemia -containing lakes in the territory from the Urals to the Western Sayan. There were only 1–2 expeditions in 2002 and 2004 to the lakes of Altai, Tuva and Khakassia. In 2000–2003 all-year-round sampling with a frequency of twice per month was conducted in lakes Bolshoye and Maloye Medvezhye, Nevidimoe, Sorochye and Ebeyty. In the other lakes samples were gathered from 1 to 5 times per season(Table 1). Since 2000 in according to State program on monitoring of stocks of Artemia cysts was conducted, and the volume of their possible catch in fi ve regions of Russia: Kurgan, Tyumen, Omsk, Novosibirsk and Chelyabinsk were determined. Each year about 40 lakes were examined.

Table 1 Geographical location of Artemia lakes of Western Siberia and their morphometric characteristics

Stocks of Artemia cysts and their potential harvest were determined in accordance with approved methodology(Litvinenko at al., 2002b).

Samples of zooplankton and benthos(from 3 to 15)were selected in each lake in accordance with the size of the lake. Determination of temperature, oxygen, transparency and salinity was included in fi eld studies. Zooplankton samples were taken by Apshteyn’s plankton net(mesh size 140 μm)in a volume of 50 L. Benthic samples were obtained using Petersen’s bottom sampler with a capture area 0.01 m 2 . A bag made from nylon bolting cloth(mesh size 160 μm)was used for processing the sediment samples.

For population composition analysis Artemia samples were divided into the following age groups: cysts, (meta)nauplii, juveniles, pre-adults and adults. The number of individuals was counted in Bogorov’s chamber under a binocular microscope. Adult females were classifi ed in two groups: reproductive or nonreproductive. For cysts and nauplii three subsamples were counted of volume of 5–10 mL were taken. If Artemia density was generally low, the juveniles, preadults and adults were counted for the entire sample. Thirty individuals per sample were observed for determination the brood size. If the sample contained less than 30 individuals the brood size was counted for all females. The bottom samples were suspended in 500 mL of water, and the number of benthic Artemia cysts was counted under the binocular microscope in Bogorov’s chamber in three 10 mL subsamples.

For calculation of approximate total stock of Artemia cysts in autumn(wet weight(W)in tons), the following formulas were used:

W = W 1 + W 2 + W 3 + W 4,
where W 1(weight of cysts in plankton)= N 1 × V 1 × m ; W 2(weight of cysts in females brood sacs)= N 2 × V 1 × R × m ; W 3(weight of cysts in benthos)= N 3 × S × m ; W 4(weight of cysts accumulated in lake shore lines)= V 2 × P ×0.9; with N 1 : average density of planktonic cysts per m 3 ; N 2 : average density of females with cysts in brood sacs per m 3 ; N 3 : average density of benthic cysts per m 2 ; 0.9: calculated weight of wet cysts per 1 m 3 ; V 1 : volume of water reservoir, m 3 ; V 2 : volume of cyst accumulation in lake shore lines, m 3(estimated by measuring length, width and thickness of cyst accumulations); R : average brood size; P : percentage of impurities(empty cysts, dirt and other)from full cysts; S : surface area of lake, m 2 ; m : individual wet weight of cyst, t.

For calculation of approximate total stock of Artemia cysts in summer, W 2 is calculated with help of formula:

W 2 =(N 2 +N p ×0.8 +N yuv ×0.64 +N mn ×0.32 +N n ×0.064)×5× R × V 1 × m,
where N p : average density of pre-adults per m 3 ; N yuv : average density of juveniles per m 3 ; N mn : average density of metanauplii per m 3 ; N n : average density of nauplii per m 3 ; 0.8; 0.64; 0.32 and 0.064: survival preadults, juveniles, metanauplii and nauplii to adult stage accordingly; 5: average number of broods produced by each female.

Method of determining the survival rate of different age stages of Artemia and the number of broods were shown in previous work(Litvinenko et al., 2009).

P was assessed according to the method published in literature(Sorgeloos et al., 1986).

To prevent overexploitation of cysts we recommend to catch only 40%–60% of the total stock of cysts: 60%: for large lakes(area over 10 km 2), 50%: for medium-sized lakes(1–10 km 2), 40%: for small lakes(less than 1 km 2). For calculation summer generation of Artemia it consists 40% for all lakes.

A method of determining the dryness of the year with help of salinity of water in the lakes was proposed by Litvinenko et al.(2013). The basis of allocation of water-content years for each lake was taken as the ratio of salinity in the year to the long-term salinity. Years with average precipitation were attributed to salinity: average±17%; years with low precipitation were less than this fi gure, years with high precipitation more than this fi gure. Overall, for all lakes annual water content was calculated using conversion factors: 3 for wet years, years with normal water content: 2, for dry years: 1. When the fi nal ratio was ≥2.5 years were attributed to years with high(wet)precipitation; when it was ≤1.5, they were attributed to low(dry)precipitation; in other cases they characterized as years with average precipitation.

The conversion factor of wet cysts to dry cysts was 0.5.

Data were processed with use of statistical software package Statistica 6.0 and Excel 2007. Whenever relevant, data are presented as mean values(M)with st and ard deviation(SD) and coefficient of variation(C v); st and ard error of mean(m); the coefficient of linear correlation(R).

3 RESULTS 3.1 Artemia habitats in Russia and history of research

A thorough review of global Artemia resources compiled by Van Stappen(2002)indicates that there are at least 600 saline biotopes in the world suitable to support population growth of Artemia . These biotopes are located in 66 countries distributed throughout the temperate and coastal regions of the world. This list could be significantly increased: in Argentina from 9(Van Stappen, 2002)to 39(Cohen, 2012), in China from 75 to 274(Zheng and Sun, 2013), in Kazakhstan from 9 to 110(Matmuratov et al., 2004; Ubaskin, 2004; Ubaskin and Volf, 2005), in Ukraine and Crimea from 11 to 41(Shadrin et al., 2012). Our studies(Litvinenko et al., 2002a; Litvinenko et al., 2009; Van Stappen et al., 2009) and studies of other researchers(Shadrin and Anufriieva, 2012)allow the list of Artemia sites in Russia to be increased from 20 to 107(Fig. 1).

Within Russia, Artemia populations are found in lakes distributed widely throughout Western Siberia. There are about 100 lakes with a total area estimated at 1 600 km 2 and spread across the territory extending from the Urals to the Altay Mountains(Litvinenko et al., 2002, 2004, 2009, 2013; Van Stappen et al., 2009). There are also Artemia lakes in other regions such as the Black Sea and Caspian Sea regions. Additionally, Artemia are found in: Stavropol and Krasnodar territories; Kalmykia, Astrakhan and Orenburg regions; Tuva, Khakassia, Transbaikalia and the Far East. Although populations of Artemia are found in many of these lakes, most of them are not of a sufficiently large scale to be commercially viable. The majority of Artemia harvesting is concentrated in fi ve specific areas of the Russian Federation: Kurgan, Omsk, Novosibirsk, and Tyumen regions and the Altay Territory where the annual Artemia harvest averages: 95 tons, 65 tons, 20 tons, 20 tons and 350 tons of cysts in dry weight, respectively.

Research investigations of commercial scale Artemia lakes within the Russian Federation had a slow start in the 1970’s and was focused on saline lakes in the Azov, Black and Caspian Sea areas(Voronov 1973a, 1973b, 1973c, 1977; Oleinikova, 1980; Rudneva, 1991). Investigations of Artemia cysts stocks in Western Siberia, namely in the Altay region, were started a decade later in 1980’s(Solovov, Studenikina, 1990; Vesnina, 2002 and others).

In 1998 and 1999 there was a pronounced increase in scientific and commercial investigations into Artemia producing lakes due to the temporary decline in cyst production on Great Salt Lake(GSL), USA. This reduction in the cyst harvest in GSL was clearly the signature impetus for the advancement of commercial exploitation of Russian Artemia resources including all scales of lakes from large and highly productive lakes such as Bolshoye Yarovoye and Kulundinskoye in the Altai region, to many smaller producing lakes found throughout Western Siberia. Our research, namely the laboratory of commercial invertebrates of Gosrybcenter covers the period from 1995 to 2014 and is concentrated mainly in fi ve regions: Chelyabinsk, Kurgan, Tyumen, Omsk and Novosibirsk.

3.2 The harvest of Artemia cysts in Russia

Artemia production in Russia can be traced back to the mid-1970s; however, there was limited commercial production for at least two decades thereafter. In the early 1990’s, a steady increase began in cyst production and harvesting on a commercial basis. The early harvests in the 1970’s and 1980’s provided between 7 and 20 tons dry cysts, which were sufficient to meet the needs of all domestic dem and in Russia(Fig. 2). In 1980 there was a report of 40 tons of cysts harvested and by the end of the 1980’s the annual harvest reached 200 to 300 tons. Production increased to between 300 and 550 tons by the end of the 1990’s. It was during this substantial expansion period that Russian Artemia cysts began to make a pronounced appearance in the world markets; domestic production had exceeded dem and and as a consequence Artemia became an export product for Russia. From the beginning of the new millennium the Russian production of dry cysts was from 340 to 830 tons. Currently about 1 100 tons of cysts in wet weight(550 tons in dry weight)are harvested annually in Russia. The main form of Artemia cysts exported is in the dry condition, but substantial quantities of brine washed cysts are exported as well. The trend line of the production increase of Artemia cysts in Russia suggests that there will be an annual production of 700 tons of dry cysts as of 2020.

Fig. 2 Harvests of Artemia cysts (tones of dry weight) from Russia during 1970–2013

For the period 2000–2014(Table 2)explored stocks of cysts in general in Russia were within 3 324–7 511 tons and on average they were 4 373±259 tons. Harvesting was carried out mainly in 19 lakes; about 14 companies participated in harvesting. The annually permitted quota was 1 500±68 tons, while the harvest was 932±77 tons.

Table 2 Results of Artemia cysts stocks monitoring and their harvest (tons in wet)

In study region(Chelyabinsk, Kurgan, Tyumen, Omsk and Novosibirsk)cyst stocks amounted to 1 513±233 tons. The harvest was mainly conducted in 10 lakes, and about 6 companies took part in harvesting. The annually permitted quota was 386±44 tons. The harvest was 308±40 tons.

In Russia the harvest of Artemia cysts was 13.2 kg/ ha, while in the study region mentioned above it was 18.5 kg/ha. We explain these differences by better organized work for harvesting in the region of our research.

Thus, 33% commercial stocks were accounted for in the region where we conducted researches. The most productive water reservoirs in the region were the lakes Bolshoye Medvezhye, Maloye Medvezhye and Ebeyty. The share of these lakes accounts for 50%–75% of all cysts.

Table 2 shows that the stocks of cysts and results of harvesting in different years vary widely(C v =42%– 89%). Such considerable variation can be explained as differences in cysts catches during seasons of high or low harvest in the Great Salt Lake(USA) and the infl uence of environmental factors on the productivity of lakes(for example, dryness of the year).

To determine the causes of fl uctuations in stocks cysts data on dryness of the year and salinity of 18 lakes where harvesting was relatively regular were analyzed.

3.3 Precipitation and salinity infl uences on productivity of Artemia lakes

A method for using yearly precipitation statistics, correlating with sequences of data on salinity change in Russian salt lakes, and then assigning categories of precipitation levels(i.e., water-content years)was developed. Comparison of long-term data on stocks of cysts showed significant interannual fl uctuations in some individual lakes but no significant difference when all the lakes in the study area were taken together.

Thus, reserves of cysts pooled for 18 commercially harvested lakes(see Table 1)with a total area of 256 km 2 in various water-content years changed in the following way: 1 403±231 tons in high precipitation years(coefficient of variation C v =53%, n =8), 1 337±169 tons average precipitation year(C v =41%, n =7), 1 126±280 tons low precipitation year(C v =58%, n =4). Table 3 presents comparison data on cyst reserves in the hyper saline lake Bolshoye Medvezhye, a mesohaline lake—Kureynoye, and the slightly saline lakes—Siverga and Tauzatkul lake which in high precipitation period become so saline that Artemia could not survive there. These same lakes dry up in low precipitation years.

Table 3 The total biomass of cysts in the lakes (stocks) in different dryness years (tons in wet)

Table 3 shows that the productivity of lakes in different years may vary by tens and hundreds of times. Highly saturated lake Medvezhye is the most productive in the wet years, Kureynoye lake which is mesohaline is most productive during an average water-content year, and a “slightly salt lake” benefits most in a dry year.

Thus, all lakes in Western Siberia with commercial Artemia stocks are associated with probabilities of cyst production and harvesting potentials that differ according to the water-content category of the particular year. This is in contrast to the GSL where production appears to be only moderately infl uenced by annual patterns of weather, unless the salinity of the GSL drops below 90 g/L as it did in 1998–1999. This time period and salinity was associated with a reduction in the cyst production of the GSL(Lavens and Sorgeloos, 2000).

3.4 Effect of harvest organization and professionalism

Harvesting organization is a factor in the efficient use of the resource. We have recorded the calculated productivity of lakes and contrasted these results with the harvesting records for each lake studied in Russia but not including the Altay area(Fig. 3). The commercial harvest has been performed within the range of allowable quota volume over the 10-year period from 2003 to 2013. The results indicate that the average reserves of cysts make up 1 200 tons and the allowable harvest has a running average of 570 tons. During this same time period the harvesting success was consistently below the allowable harvest level: the harvest was 335 tons compared to the allowed 570 tons. This data implies that commercial harvesting can be increased by 1.7 times and still be within the allowable limit. The discrepancy may refl ect the difficulty of successfully harvesting cysts from Siberian lakes, especially those with extensive regions of submerged or emergent plants, complex wetl and mosaics, or simply deep and inaccessible mud.

Fig. 3 Artemia production estimates, allowable harvest levels and harvesting success statistics among Russian Artemia lakes over the period of 2004 to 2013 (not including the Altay territory)
3.5 Regulated freshwater supply and diversion into salt lakes

Owing to numerous investigations(Gaevskaya, 1916; Cole and Brown, 1967; Hentig, 1971; Hammer et al., 1975; Schmankewitsch, 1875; Post and Youssef, 1977; Persoone and Sorgeloos, 1980; Browne, 1982; Vanhaecke et al., 1984, 1987; Sorgeloos et al., 1986; MacDonald and Browne, 1989; Triantaphyllidis et al., 1995; Litvinenko et al., 2002a, 2007, 2009; Balushkina et al., 2009)it is well known that a particular salinity determines not only the existence of Artemia in natural water bodies but also its productivity. Summarizing all our experience then the infl uence of salinity on productivity can be expressed in the form of a simple scheme presented in Table 4. According to our data the most productive lakes, defi ned as lakes with biomass of cysts of over 50 kg/ha, can be observed in lakes with a salinity in the range of 70 to 230 g/L(Fig. 4).

Table 4 The infl uence of border salinity (g/L) on the livelihood of Artemia

Fig. 4 Productivity of lakes (biomass cysts, kg/ha) depending on salinity

The management of salinity in natural water bodies is an option for the promotion of Artemia resources. Natural productivity of Artemia in extremely saline water bodies(i.e., >300 g/L)can be managed if there are accessible supplies of less saline or fresh water from either artesian(sub-surface)or surface fl ows into the saline lake. In contrast saline lakes that are at the lower optima for Artemia can be enhanced through diversions of fresh water input through the use of dams or other structural means of reducing the infl ow of fresh water into the saline system. Such anthropogenic intrusions into the natural systems have been implemented with varying degrees of success among the smaller saline lakes in Siberia.

3.6 Exploitation of Artemia cysts from new sources

There are over 300 lakes and limans in Crimea of which salt lakes are situated along coastal areas and in low-lying steppe regions. According to the reports of Rudneva(2014)the hyper saline lakes of Crimea have a wide range of salinity from 1‰–2‰ to 15‰– 250‰ and cover an area of 53 000 hectares. Their depth is typically shallow with most lakes measuring just a meter in depth.

Additional scientific publications have identifi ed the presence of other potential Artemia lakes(Voronov, 1973a, 1973b, 1973c, 1975, 1977; Rudneva, 1991; Litvinchuck et al., 2007; Shadrin and Batogova, 2009; Shadrin et al., 2012; Balushkina et al., 2009). Artemia can be found in lakes such as Adzhigol(Aschigol)Chongar, ponds of the Eastern and Western Sivash, Sasyk, Siwash, Saki, Tobechikskoe, Dzharylgach, Popovski(Aji, Aji-Bicheno), Moinakskoye, Repnoe, Veysov, Bakal, Koyashskoe, Konradskoe(Terekli-Konradskoe), Marfovskoe, Oyburkskoe, Airchi, Krugloe, Galgasskoe, Kondraskoe, and Terekli. In short, there are many other lakes that may be examined and possibly exploited for the production of Artemia cysts.

The overall cyst reserves for Crimea lakes ranged from 6 to 74 tons over the time period of 1965–1972(average 32 tons)(Voronov, 1973a, 1973b, 1973c, 1975, 1977; Rudneva, 1991; http://журналкрым.рф/rekii_ozera_kryma/481-ozera-kryma.html).

According to hydrobiological data kindly presented by Dina Nieuwenhove(pers. com.), we have calculated cyst reserves in 19 lakes of Crimea with total area of around 30 thous and hectares which was estimated to provide 240 tons in 2011.

4 DISCUSSION 4.1 Global aquaculture dem and for Artemia cysts and the role of Russia in the world cyst harvest

Global aquaculture dem and for Artemia cysts according to the review by Lavens and Sorgeloos(2000)in 1997 was approximately 1 500 dry tons. More recently other sources have reported that the global dem and for Artemia cysts has almost doubled and is now in the range of 2 000 to 3 000 tons per year in dry weight(FAO, 2014). As the annual growth rate of the aquaculture is nearly 2.5%, the anticipated current dem and for cysts could increase by 12.5% and would be between 2 300 and 3 400 tons. The largest cyst harvest in the world is concentrated in the Great Salt Lake(USA). For many years the GSL produced about 90% of the world’s production and only 10% was derived from a variety of salt lakes located in northern and central China, southern Siberia, San Francisco Bay, South Vietnam, and northeastern Brazil(Lavens, Sorgeloos, 2000).

Information from Lavens and Sorgeloos(2000)about dry cyst production in the GSL and the longterm trend of the DWR data(UT-DWR, 2014)suggests that GSL can reliably produce between 1 000 and 2 000 tons per year.

The importance of the GSL Artemia resource has diminished somewhat because other regions of the world have greatly increased their production; the percentage contribution has decreased from 90% of the supply to between 70% and 55% over the past 17 years(http://www.aquaculture.ugent.be/Research/ NATO-sfp).

Currently, in addition to the USA, Russia, Kazakhstan and China are the main suppliers in the world market of Artemia cysts.

According to official statistics in recent years Russia harvested approximately 1 100 tons of cysts in wet weight(550 tons dry). Domestic consumption of Artemia cysts in Russia is insignificant and we can say that almost all the cysts goes on the world market. Some cysts are harvested by poachers(estimated at about 300 tons wet weight) and some cysts also come from South East Asia.

Analysis of the literature(Matmuratov et al., 2002;Ubaskin, 2005; Volf, 2011; Kolomin et al., 2014) and official data(http://normativ.kz/view/93450/)on cyst stocks in Artemia lakes(including Aral) and their harvest, allows us to roughly estimate cyst harvesting in Kazakhstan at 1 000 tons per year wet weight. The harvest of Artemia cysts in Uzbekistan(Aral)in 2012 amounted to 40 tons, 20 tons of cysts wet weight in 2013(Marden et al., 2012). Such potential sources of commercial Artemia cysts as Turkmenistan(Kara- Bogaz-Gol) and Iran(Lake Urmia), due to the high salinity of the water and a sharp decline in water level at the moment have lost their value.

A substantial source of Artemia cysts is China. China is not only a producer of Artemia cysts but is also the largest consumer in the world. Reliable estimates of production are difficult to obtain due to lack of information in the official statistics of harvest and publications. According to FAO(2014), China is the primary global consumer of Artemia with an annual consumption amount of 1 500 tons dry cysts, of which approximately one-half is imported from the Russian Federation and Kazakhstan and the other half produced domestically(for example, from Bohai Bay area which has a reasonably stable annual output of around 400 tons of raw product. Only a small quantity(<50 tons of dry product annually)is imported from the United States of America. Since 2006 there has been limited domestic export from the Bohai Bay area.

According to Professor ZHANG Bo of the University of Science and Technology(Tianjin, China)(pers.com.), in China in 2012 and in 2013 there were harvested about 900 tons of cysts dry weight.

Numerous solar saltworks have been used as sources of Artemia cysts. This is especially true for the regions of East Asia and Latin America. Although these sources have relatively consistent production of Artemia cysts, the quantities produced are only just sufficient to meet the needs of the local market and therefore are not exported into the global market. In Vietnam there are decades of experience producing Artemia cysts in controlled pond systems; for example, Vietnam yielded almost 50 tons of raw cysts from an area of 1 000 hectares in 2001(FAO, 2014). In Thail and , Argentina, Brazil and other salt ponds and lakes of the world the production of cysts is about 60 tons per year(Bengtson et al., 1991).

Summarizing the aforementioned production estimates for the primary Artemia producing countries we arrive at the following fi gures for the possible production quantities:

1 000–2 000 tons in Great Salt Lake(Utah, USA);

550 tons in Russia;

500 tons in Kazakhstan;

20 tons in Uzbekistan;

900 tons in China;

20 tons in Vietnam;

60 tons(Thail and , Argentina, Brazil and other salt ponds and lakes in the world);a total of 3 050 to 4 050 tons.

Based upon these figures, the role of Russia in global market of Artemia cysts is approximately estimated as 13.5% to 18.0%. Thus, the three largest centers of Artemia cysts production can be identifi ed as Utah, combined West Siberia & Kazakhstan, and China(Fig. 5).

Fig. 5 The main sources of Artemia cysts in the world market (values are in dry tons)
4.2 Comparing the ecological and limnological conditions in three of the main sources of Artemia cysts

It is of interest to compare the ecological and limnological conditions of the saline lakes that support the Artemia population and cyst production in these locations. In Table 5 we summarize the main characteristics of key Artemia biotopes to allow a comparison of the various features of those lakes which are important for Artemia production. The annual air temperature in Ebi Lake is 8°C, about 12°C in GSL and Bohai Bay and 0–2°C in West Siberia lakes. There are some other notable differences among these lakes:

Table 5 Characteristics of the main biotopes with industrial quantities of Artemia cysts

1)There are differences in species of Artemia : in the western hemisphere A . franciscana, in the eastern hemisphere there is a collective group designated as: A . parthenogenetica(a group of unidentifi ed species with parthenogenetic mode of reproduction(Barigozzi, 1974; Bowen and Sterling, 1978; Amat, 1983; Zhang and King, 1992; Boyko et al., 2014 and others);

2)The growing season and the life cycle of Artemia vary considerably as does the number of generations produced each year. For example, this is high in Great Salt Lake and low in Bohai Bay;

3)Salinity varies across a wide spectrum in lakes of West Siberia;

4)The harvest season is short in Bohai Bay and the longest in Ebi Lake;

5)In the marketplace a higher value is attributed to the smaller cysts, and in general, the cysts of А . р arthenogenetica cysts are larger than for A . franciscana .

The comparison provided in Table 4 demonstrates that as a single lake GSL remains the most important contributor to the global production of Artemia cysts.

4.3 Future prospects for Artemia production

Currently, it is estimated that the dem and of Artemia cysts is 2 300–3 400 tons and their supply is 3 050–4 050 tons. The difference between the supply of cysts and their needs indicates high reliability for this resource. However, due to continuing growth of aquaculture in the future dem and for cysts will grow bigger.

Therefore, there is still a requirement for alternative sources of Artemia . Such sources may include Artemia created artificially. Experiments on the use of artificial Artemia as feed for reared shrimp larvae have taken place successfully in Vietnam(Gervais and Zeigler, 2013) and other countries.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The role of Russia in world cyst harvesting has not yet exceeded 20%. However this harvest is relatively stable and weakly dependent on dryness of the years(in contrast to the GSL). It appears that in Russia commercial extraction of cysts could be improved in order to take advantage of allocated resources more efficiently. In addition cyst harvest in Russia is trending upwards. In our opinion to increase production it is necessary to carry out the following:

1)Implement better harvesting methods and more efficient use of the resources through better harvesting, h and ling, storage and packaging methods;

2)Explore the possibility of developing commercially viable supplies of cysts from new sources such as Crimea;

3)Develop engineering strategies and water management approaches for the enhanced quality of Artemia biotopes(i.e., implement water controls to allow management of salinity and volume).

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We are grateful for the information regarding Artemia resources in China offered by the Professor of Tianjin University of Science & Technology—Mr. ZHANG Bo. Details of Russian and Kazakhstan cyst production was aided by the INVE Aquaculture, Inc. representative in Russia & CIS Countries—Mrs. Dina Van Nieuwenhove. The head of Commercial Department “K-Nikom” LLC—Mr. Alex and er Nikiforov gave critical assistance on Russian production estimates. We are grateful to Brad Thomas Marden, manager of the research department of “Great Salt Lake Artemia Inc.”(USA)for his assistance in the data gathering and sample collection as well as for his help during the paper writing.

And we offer our special appreciation to Ms. Aysara Otarova(Nukus, Uzbekistan)for the translation of this manuscript from Russian to English. Without the assistance of these skilled colleagues, and others, our research would not have been possible.

References
Amat F. 1983. Zygogenetic and parthenogenetic Artemia in Cadiz sea-side salterns. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 13: 291-293.
Balushkina E V, Golubkov S M, Golubkov M S, Litvinchuk L F, Shadrin N B. 2009. Effect of abiotic and biotic factors on the structural and functional organization of the saline lake ecosystems. J. Obshchei Biologii, 70: 504-514. (in Russian)
Barigozzi C. 1974. Artemia: A survey of its significance in genetic problems. J.Evolutionary Biology, 7: 221-252.
Belovsky G E, Stephens D, Perschon C, Birdsey P, Paul D, Naftz D, Baskin R, Larson C, Mellison C, Luft J, Mosley R, Mahon H, Van Leeuwen J, Allen D V. 2011. The Great Salt Lake ecosystem (Utah, USA): long term data and a structural equation approach. Ecosphere, 2 (3), .http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/ES10-000911.
Вengtson D A, Leger P, Sorgeloos P. 1991. Use of Artemia as a food source for aquaculture. In: Browne R A, Sorgeloos P, Trotman C N A eds. Artemia Biology. CRC Press, Inc.p.255-285.
Bowen S T, Sterling G. 1978. Esterase and malate dehydrogenase isozyme polymorphisms in 15 Artemia populations. Comp. Biochem. Physiol., 61B: 593-595.
Boyko E, Litvinenko L, Litvinenko A. 2014. The biodiversity of shrimp genus Artemia from Russia lakes: morphometric, cytogenetics and DNA-analysis. J. Acta Geologica Sinica, 88 (1): 58-60.
Browne R A. 1982. The costs of reproduction in brine shrimp.J. Ecol., 63: 43-47.
Cohen R G. 2012. Review of the biogeography of Artemia Leach, 1819 (Crustacea: Anostraca) in Argentina. Int. J.Artemia Biol., 2: 9-23.
Cole G A, Brown R J. 1967. Chemistry of Artemia habitats. J.Ecol., 48: 858-861.
Dhont J, Sorgeloos P. 2002. Applications of Artemia. In:Abatzopoulos T J, Beardmore J A, Clegg J S, Sorgeloos P eds. Artemia Basic and Applied Biology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. p.251-277.
FAO. 2012. The state of world Fisheries and Aquaculture.Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Rome, Italy. 237p.
FAO. 2014. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Fisheries and Aquaculture Department. Cultured Aquatic Species Information Programme: Artemia spp (Leach, 1819). http://www.fao.org/fishery/culturedspecies/Artemia spp/en.
Gaevskaya N S. 1916. Variation in Artemia salina (L.). Tr.Osoboi Zool. Lab. Akad. Nauk., 2 (3): 1-37. (in Russian)
Gervais N F, Zeigler T R. 2013. Synthetic products replace live Artemia in shrimp larviculture. J. Global Aquacult. Adv., 16 (3): 28-30.
Hammer U T, Haynes R C, Heseltine J M, Swanson S M. 1975.The saline lakes of Saskatchewan. J. Verh. Inter. Ver.Limnol., 19: 589-598.
Kolomin Y M, Fefelov V V, Abdiyev Z H A. 2014. Distribution of commercial invertebrates in Northern Kazakhstan.Tyumen Gosrybcentr. Bull. Fish. Sci. 1, 2 (2): 34-37. (in Russian)
Kuehn D. 2002. The brine shrimp industry in Utah. In: Gwynn J W ed. Great Salt Lake: An Overview of Change. DNR Special Publication. Utah Geological Survey, Salt Lake City. Utah. USA. p.259-264.
Lavens P, Sorgeloos P. 2000. The history, present status and prospects of the availability of Artemia cysts for aquaculture. J. Aquacult., 181: 397-403.
Lenz P H. 1987. Ecological studies on Artemia: a review. In:Sorgeloos P, Bengtson D A, Decleir W, Jaspers E eds.Artemia Research and Applications. 3. Ecology, Culturing, Use in Aquaculture. Belgium Universa Press, Wetteren.
Litvinchuck L, Moscatello S, Shadrin N, Belmonte G. 2007.Zooplankton from coastal salt lakes of the Crimea(Ukraine). Rapp. Comm. Inter. Mer Méditer. Istanbul, 38:530.
Litvinchuck L, Moscatello S, Shadrin N, Belmonte G. 2007.Zooplankton from coastal salt lakes of the Crimea(Ukraine). Rapp. Comm. Inter. Mer Méditer. Istanbul, 38:530.
Litvinenko A I, Litvinenko L I, Solovov V P, Yasyuchenya T L, Wesnina L V. 2002b. Methodological guidance for the determination of total allowable catches (TACs) cysts branchiopod crustacean Artemia. Tyumen Press.SibrybNIIproekt. Russia. 25p. (in Russian)
Litvinenko L I, Kozlov A V, Kovalenko A I, Bauer D S. 2007.Salinity of water as a factor to determine the development of the brine shrimp Artemia populations in the lakes.Hydrobiologi a, 576: 95-101.
Litvinenko L I, Litvinenko A I, Boyko E G. 2009. Brine shrimp Artemia in Western Siberia Lakes. Nauka Press, Novosibirsk. Russia. 304p.
Litvinenko L I, Litvinenko A I, Boyko E G. 2009. Brine shrimp Artemia in Western Siberia Lakes. Nauka Press, Novosibirsk. Russia. 304p.
Litvinenko L I, Litvinenko A I, Solovov V P, Viser L S, Vesnina L V, Yasuchenya T L. 2002a Bio-geography and characteristics of the Siberian Artemia habitats. In:Artemia Biodiversity in the Newly Independent States:Current Global Resources and their Sustainable Exploitation. Tyumen Press, Sibrybniiproekt. Russia. p. 63-65.
MacDonald G H, Browne R A. 1990. Population dynamics of an asexual brine shrimp (Artemia) population. J. Exp.Mar. Biol. Ecol., 133: 169-188.
Marden B, Van Stappen G, Musaev A, Mirabdullayev I, Joldasova I, Sorgeloos P. 2012. Assessment of the production potential of an emerging Artemia population in the Aral Sea, Uzbekistan. J. Mar. Syst., 92: 42-52.
Marden B, Van Stappen G, Musaev A, Mirabdullayev I, Joldasova I, Sorgeloos P. 2012. Assessment of the production potential of an emerging Artemia population in the Aral Sea, Uzbekistan. J. Mar. Syst., 92: 42-52.
Matmuratov S A, Stuge T S, Lopatin O E. 2004. Distribution and development of brine shrimp in salt lakes at Pryirtysh region in Kazakhstan Republic. In: Report of NATO Advanced Research Workshop "Artemia biodiversity in the Newly Independent States: current global resources and their sustainable exploitation", Moscow, Russia 17-19 July 2002, Tyumen Press, Gosrybcentr, Russia. p.41-50. (in Russian)
Oleinikova F A. 1980. Artemia salina (L.) of the Azov-Black Sea Basin (Morphology, Reproduction, Ecology, Practical Application). Extended abstract of PhD dissertation(Biology). Kiev. 17p. (in Russian)
Persoone G, Sorgeloos P. 1980. General aspects of the ecology and biogeography of Artemia . In : Persoone G, Sorgeloos P, Roels O, Jaspers E eds. The Brine Shrimp Artemia . 3. Ecology, Culturing, Use in Aquaculture. Belgium Universa Press, Wetteren. p.3-24.
Post F J, Youssef N N. 1977. A prokaryotic intracellular symbiont of the Great Salt Lake brine shrimp Artemia salina (L.). Can. J. Microbiol., 23: 1 232-1 236.
Post F J, Youssef N N. 1977. A prokaryotic intracellular symbiont of the Great Salt Lake brine shrimp Artemia salina (L.). Can. J. Microbiol., 23: 1 232-1 236.
Republic of Kazakhstan. 2014. Decree of the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan with ref.# 135. http://normativ.kz/view/93450/.
Rudneva I I. 1991. Artemia. Prospects for the use in the national economy. Kiev. Sciences Press. Dumka. 144p.(in Russian)
Schmankewitsch W I. 1875. Über das Verhältnis der Artemia salina Miln-Edw. zur Artemia salina mulchausenii Miln-Edw. und dem Genus Branchipus Schaff. Z. Wiss. Zool.Suppl., 25: 103-116.
Shadrin N V, Batogova E A. 2009. Artemia urmiana Günter, 1890 (Anostraca, Artemiidae) in the Crimean lakes. In : Artemia 2009. Proceedings of the International Symposium. Workshop on Biology and Distribution of Artemia, December 13-14, 2009. Urmia: Iranian Fisheries Research Organization. p.10-12..
Shadrin N, Anufriievna E, Galagovets E. 2012. Distribution and historical biogeography of Artemia Leach, 1819(Crustacea: Anostraca) in Ukraine. Int. J. Artemia Biol., 2 (2): 30-42.
Shadrin N, Anufriievna E. 2012. Review of the biogeography of Artemia Leach, 1819 (Crustacea: Anostraca) in Russia.Int. J. Artemia Biol., 2: 51-61.
Shadrin N, Anufriievna E. 2012. Review of the biogeography of Artemia Leach, 1819 (Crustacea: Anostraca) in Russia.Int. J. Artemia Biol., 2: 51-61.
Sorgeloos P, Lavens P, Leger P, Tackaert W, Versichele D. 1986. Manual for the Culture and Use of Brine Shrimp in Aquaculture. Belgium. Ghent University. 319p.Tackert W, Sorgeloos P. 1991. Salt, Artemia and shrimp. J.World Aquacult., 22 (3): 11-17.
Triantaphyllidis G V, Poulopoulou K, Abatzopoulos T I, Perez C A P, Sorgeloos P. 1995. International study on Artemia XLIX. Salinity effects on survival, maturity, growth, biometrics, reproductive and lifespan characteristics of a bisexual and a parthenogenetic population of Artemia.Hydrobiologia, 302: 215-227.
Triantaphyllidis G V, Poulopoulou K, Abatzopoulos T I, Perez C A P, Sorgeloos P. 1995. International study on Artemia XLIX. Salinity effects on survival, maturity, growth, biometrics, reproductive and lifespan characteristics of a bisexual and a parthenogenetic population of Artemia.Hydrobiologia, 302: 215-227.
Ubaskin A V, Volf L A. 2005. Artemia in Kazakhstan: the distribution and resources. J. Biol. Sci. Kazakhstan, 3 (4):13-19. (in Russian)
Ubaskin A V. 2004. The quantitative dynamics of Artemia in salt lakes of Pavlodar oblast. In: Natural Science and Ecology. Collection of Scientific Papers. Omsk. State Pedagogical University Press. 8: 57-65. (in Russian)
UT-DWR. 2014. Great Salt Lake Ecosystem Project: Historical brine shrimp harvest data. http://wildlife.utah.gov/gsl/harvest/historic_harvest_data.php.
Van Stappen G, Sorgeloos P. 1993. The cosmopolitan brine shrimp. Infofish Int., 4: 45-50.
Van Stappen G, Sorgeloos P. 1993. The cosmopolitan brine shrimp. Infofish Int., 4: 45-50.
Van Stappen G. 2002. Zoogeography. In : Abatzopoulos T J, Beardmore J A, Clegg J S, Sorgeloos P eds. Artemia : Basic and Applied Biology. V.1. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. p.171-224..
Van Stappen G., Litvinenko L I, Litvinenko A I, Boyko E G, Marden B, Sorgeloos P. 2009. A Survey of Artemia resources of southwest Siberia (Russian Federation). Rev.Fish. Sci., 17: 117-148.
Vanhaecke P, Siddali S E, Sorgeloos P. 1984. International study on Artemia. XXXII. Combined effects of temperature and salinity on the survival of Artemia of various geographical origins. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 80:259-275.
Vanhaecke P, Siddali S E, Sorgeloos P. 1984. International study on Artemia. XXXII. Combined effects of temperature and salinity on the survival of Artemia of various geographical origins. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol., 80:259-275.
Vanhaecke P, Tackaert W, Sorgeloos P. 1987. The biogeography of Artemia: an updated review. In: Sorgeloos P, Bengtson D A, Decleir W, Jaspers E eds. Artemia Research and its Applications. Belgium Universa Press, Wetteren. 1.p.129-155.
Von Hentig R. 1971. Einfl uß von Salzgehalt und Temperatur auf Entwicklung, Wachstum, Fortpfl anzung und Energiebilanz von Artemia salina. Mar. Biol., 9: 145-182.
Von Hentig R. 1971. Einfl uß von Salzgehalt und Temperatur auf Entwicklung, Wachstum, Fortpfl anzung und Energiebilanz von Artemia salina. Mar. Biol., 9: 145-182.
Voronov P M. 1973a. Seasonal abundance and biomass of Artemia and its eggs in the salt lakes of the Crimea. Tr.VNIRO., 94: 170-178. (in Russian)
Voronov P M. 1973b. Artemia salina (L.) in Reservoirs of the Crimea and its Economic Use. Extended abstract of PhD dissertation (Biology). Sevastopol. 17p. (in Russian)
Voronov P M. 1973c. Reproduction of Artemia salina in salt lakes of the Crimea. Zool. J., 52: 945-947. (in Russian)
Voronov P M. 1975. Artemia salina L. in Reservoirs of the Crimea and its Economic Use. Extended abstract of PhD dissertation (Biology). Moscow. 30p. (in Russian)
Voronov P M. 1977. Prospects and biotechnics use of Artemia in marine aquaculture. Kiev. Sciences Press, Dumka. 71p.(in Russian)
Zhang L, King C E. 1992. Genetic variation in sympatric populations of diploid and polyploidy brine shrimp(Artemia parthenogenetica). J. Genetica, 85: 211-221.
Zheng В, Sun S-C. 2013. Review of the biogeography of Artemia Leach, 1819 (Crustacea: Anostraca) in China. Int.J. Artemia Biol., 3: 20-50.