pdf35

Ribogospod. nauka Ukr., 2026; 1(75): 134-152
DOI: https://doi.org/10.61976/fsu2026.01.134
UDC 639.371.5:639.3.032

Received: 15.01.2026
Received in revised form: 06.03.2026
Published: 31.03.2026

An experience in growing crossbreed age-1 carp (Cyprinus carpio Linnaeus, 1758) using non-traditional technology

М. Ostapchuk, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0009-0003-6902-8132, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
А. Тuchapska, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0002-4467-5670, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
R. Konopelskyi, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0009-0005-4192-2225, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
H. Kurinenko, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0001-9365-7578, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv
I. Hrytsyniak, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. , ORCID ID 0000-0003-1419-8284, Institute of Fisheries of the National Academy of Agrarian Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv

Purpose. To characterize the conditions for growing crossbreed age-1 carp in polyculture using non-traditional technology and to carry out a comparative analysis of productive parameters in comparison with a pure line.

Methodology. The study was conducted in the conditions of a pond farm in the Lviv region. The object of the study were age-1 carps obtained from the crossing of a female Lyubin scaled intrabreed type and a male Antoniny-Zozulenets framed intrabreed type (♀LSC ×♂AZFC), and grown in polyculture with white grass carp and tench using a non-traditional technology. During cultivation, there was no autumn harvest stage, while it was carried out in the spring. Based on the results of test catches, monthly and average daily growth rates were calculated. During the growing season, constant monitoring of the temperature and oxygen regimes of the ponds was carried out, and the dynamics of the development of the natural food supply were determined. Statistical processing of primary materials was carried out using the MS Excel.

Findings. The yield of crossbreed one-year-old carp exceeded that of pure lines by 1.0% and amounted to 87.3%. The individuals of this experimental group also had a higher individual body weight by 9.3%, while the average daily gain was 3.32 g in the pure line, 3.41 g in the crossbreed group, the fish productivity index of the crossbreed group was 796.3 kg/ha, and that of the pure line of Lyubin carp prevailed by 8.8%.

Originality. For the first time in the conditions of pond aquaculture in Ukraine, a comprehensive assessment of productive and biological parameters of crossbreed age-1 carp obtained from the crossing of carps of the Lyubin and Antoniny-Zozulenets intrabreed types was carried out in comparison with the pure line of Lyubin carp grown in polyculture with tench and grass carp using a non-traditional technology.

Practical Value. The obtained research results will allow characterizing new local lines of carp of Ukrainian selection and improve the theoretical foundations for growing this object of aquaculture in polyculture using non-traditional technology.

Keywords: industrial crossbreeding, weight, survival, growth rate, age-1 fish, fish productivity, natural food supply, temperature and oxygen regimes.

REFERENCES

  1. Tang, G., et al. (2020). Heritability and quantitative trait locus analyses of intermuscular bones in mirror carp (Cyprinus carpio). Aquaculture, 515, 734601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.734601
  2. Аhmed, N., & Thompson, S. (2019). The blue dimensions of aquaculture: A global synthesis. Sci. Total Environ., 652, 851–861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.163 
  3. Ruben, M. O., et al. (2025). Emerging challenges in aquaculture: Current perspectives andhuman health implications. Vet. World., 18, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.14202/vetworld.2025.15-28
  4. Hrytsyniak, I. I., Hrynzhevskyi, M. V., Tretiak, O. M., Kiva, M. S., & Mruk, A. I. (2008). Fermerske rybnytstvo. Kyiv: Herb.
  5. Balon, E. K. (1995). Origin and domestication of the wild carp, Cyprinus carpio: From Roman gourmets to the swimming flowers. Aquaculture, 129, 3–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0044-8486(94)00227-F 
  6. Balon, E. K. (2004). About the oldest domesticates among fishes December. Journal of Fish Biology, 65(s1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-1112.2004.00563.x 
  7. Horváth, L., et al. (2022). Carp Breeding in the Carpathian Basin with a Sustainable Utilization of Renewable Natural Resources. Life, 12(10), 16‒61. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12101661 
  8. Park, M., et al. (2018). Application of open water integrated multi-trophic aquaculture to intensive monoculture: A review of the current status and challenges in Korea. Aquaculture, 497, 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.07.051
  9. Wang, Huan, et al. (2025). Sustainable Polyculture of Hybrid Yellow Catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco ♀ × P. vachelli ♂) and Chinese Olive Mussel (Solenaia oleivora) Enhances Water Quality and Modulates Bacterial Community Assembly in Pond Ecosystems. Water, 17, 3208. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17223208
  10. Dinesh, Raj Pant, & Jai, Kumar (2025). Review on fish Polyculture practices: Sustainability, innovations and challenges. Environment Conservation Journal, 26(1), 257–263. https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.29052881
  11. Verdegem, M., et al. (2023). The contribution of aquaculture systems to global aquaculture production. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 54(2), 206–250. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwas.12963
  12. Boyd, C. E., et al. (2007). Indicators of resource use efficiency and environ-mental performance in fish and crustacean aquaculture. Reviews in Fisheries science, 15(4), 327–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641260701624177
  13. Hlavatchuk, V. A. (2024). Ratsionalizatsiia tekhnolohii vyroshchuvannia koropa z roslynoidnymy rybamy u polikulturi. Tavriiskyi naukovyi visnyk, 137, 489–503.
  14. Sherman, I. M., & Yevtushenko, M. Iu. (2011). Teoretychni osnovy rybnytstva. Kyiv.
  15. Kurinenko, H. A., et al. (2016). Vyroshchuvannia peliadi (Coregonus peled Gmelin) v polikulturi z koropovymy (Cyprinidae) ta osetrovymy (Acipenseridae) rybamy. Rybohospodarska nauka Ukrainy, 1(35), 43–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.15407/fsu2016.01.043
  16. Ianinovych, Y. Ie., et al. (2010). Polikultura – shliakh do intensyfikatsii stavovoho rybnytstva. Rybohospodarska nauka Ukrainy, 4, 78–83.
  17. Andriushchenko, A. I., Prokopenko, A. A., Tretiak, O. M., & Hryshchenko, N. F. (1995). Tekhnolohiia rozvedennia ta vyroshchuvannia velykorotoho bufalo u vnutrishnikh vodoimakh Ukrainy (stavkovykh rybnykh hospodarstvakh). Kyiv: Ahrarna nauka.
  18. Hickling, C. (1967). IV.—On the Biology of a herbivorous Fish, the White Amur or Grass Carp, Ctenopharyngodon idella Val. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Section B. Biology, 70. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080455X00001296
  19. Adámek, Zdeněk, et al. (2003). Food competition between 2+ tench (Tinca tinca L.), common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) and bigmouth buffalo (Ictiobus cyprinellus Val.) in pond polyculture. Journal of Applied Ichthyology, 19, 165–169. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0426.2003.00467.x
  20. Amoussou, N., et al. (2022). A Ranking Procedure of Fish Species Combinations for Polyculture Development. Finding the Best Match. Life, 12(9), 1315. https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091315
  21. Tuchapska, A. Ia., et al. (2022). Zhyvlennia tsoholitok koropo-sazanovykh hibrydiv, otrymanykh vid plidnykiv riznoho henetychnoho pokhodzhennia. Vodni bioresursy ta akvakultura, 1, 84–95. https://doi.org/10.32851/wba.2022.1.7
  22. Hrytsynyak, I. I., Kurinenko, G. A., & Gurbik, V. V. (2022). Native Types of Carp in Aquaculture of Ukraine (a Review). Hydrobiological Journal, 58(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1615/HydrobJ.v58.i1.40
  23. Krasnopolska, O. V., & Kurineko, H. A. (2022). Kharakterystyka retsyproknykh pomisei antoninsko-zozulenetskykh ta halytskykh ramchastykh koropiv na pershomu rotsi zhyttia. Vodni bioresursy ta akvakultura, 2, 128–137. https://doi.org/10.32851/wba.2022.2.8
  24. Kurinenko, G. A., & Syrovatka, D. A. (2022). Characteristics of local annuals of Galician and Lyubyn carp as a component of synthetic selection. Forecasts and prospects of scientific discoveries in agricultural sciences and food: International scientific conference, August 30–31, 2022, Riga, the Republic of Latvia: proceed. Riga, Latvia: Baltija Publishing, 122–126. https://doi.org/10.30525/978-9934-26-238-8-29
  25. Borbat, M. O., et al. (Comp.) (2003). Haluzevyi zbirnyk normatyvno-tekhnolohichnoi dokumentatsii z rozvedennia ta vyroshchuvannia promyslovo tsinnykh ryb. Kyiv.
  26. Metodyka doslidzhen u rybnytstvi: metodychnyi posibnyk dlia pidhotovky bakalavriv za spetsialnistiu 6.090201 «Vodni bioresursy ta akvakultura. (2013). Kyiv.
  27. Yevtushenko, M. Iu., & Khyzhniak, M. I. (2018). Metodolohiia naukovykh doslidzhen u rybnytstvi. Kyiv.
  28. Arsan, O. M.,  et al. (2006). Metody hidroekolohichnykh doslidzhen poverkhnevykh vod. Kyiv: Lohos.
  29. Tsarenko, P. M., Wasser, S. P., & Nevo, E. (Eds.). (2006). Algae of Ukraine: diversity, nomenclature, taxonomy, ecology and geography. Vol. 1. Cyanoprocaryota, Euglenophyta, Chrysophyta, Xanthophyta, Raphidophyta, Phaeophyta, Dinophyta, Cryptophyta, Gaucocystophyta, and Rhodophyta. Ruggell: Ganter Verlag.
  30. Tsarenko, P. M., Wasser, S. P., & Nevo, E. (Eds.). (2009). Algae of Ukraine: diversity, nomenclature, taxonomy, ecology and geography. Vol. 2. Bacillariophyta. Ruggell: Ganter Verlag.
  31. Tsarenko, P. M., Wasser, S. P., & Nevo, E. (Eds.). (2011). Algae of Ukraine: diversity, nomenclature, taxonomy, ecology and geography. Vol. 3. Chlorophyta. Ruggell: Ganter Verlag.
  32. Rudescu, L. (1960). Fauna Republicii Socialiste Romania. (Vol. II, fasc. 2). Rotatoria,1192.
  33. Bledzki, Leszek A., & Rybak, Jan Igor. (2016). Freshwater Crustacean Zooplankton of Europe Cladocera & Copepoda (Calanoida, Cyclopoida). Key to species identification. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29871-9
  34. Krazhan, S. A., & Khyzhniak, M. I. (2009). Pryrodna kormova baza staviv: naukovo-vyrobnyche vydannia. Kherson: Oldi-Plius.
Home2026№ 1/2026 (75)2026_01-134_152-Ostapchuk