Comparative Study of growth, Cocoon production and Hatching success of Lampito mauritii and Periyonix excavatus cultured in different water Hyacinth Media.

M. Deivanayaki

PG and Research Department of Zoology, Government College for Women (Autonomous), Kumbakonam-612001, Tamilnadu, India.

*Corresponding Author E-mail: drdeiva82@gmail.com

Abstract:

Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time and body weight changes of adult L.mauritii and P.excavatus kept in different PSR doses of water hyacinth for 30 days were determined to know their reproductive efficiency. Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time and the body weight of adult L.mauritii and P.excavatus exposed to 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses prepared from partly decomposed water hyacinth with soil for 30 days, It is important to note here that though there are changes (negative / positive) in the body weight of all earthworms exposed to water hyacinth, none died during the course of this study. The earthworms kept in soil medium though showed 100% survival value, only 12 L.mauritii and 13 P.excavatus cocoons were produced during this study period. Out of seven PSR doses and two earthworm species studied, L.mauritii kept in 100 PSR dose though produced maximum number of cocoons (402), only 374 hatched after 21 – 23 days incubation period. Hatching success and hatchling production rate were 93 % and 1.01 H/C, respectively. But L.mauritii exposed to lower doses (10 – 75 PSR) showed lesser hatching success and hatchling production rate values ranging from 80.6 to 92.0 % and 0.81 to 0.96 H/ C, respectively over 100 PSR value. L.mauritii, P.excavatus also showed a dose dependent effect with lesser cocoon production values in lower doses and higher production values in higher doses. As of the incubation time, L.mauritii cocoons required longer hatching time (20 – 23 days) than that of P.excavatus (10 – 13 days for cocoons from 10 – 30 PSR and 17 – 18 days for cocoons from 50 – 100 PSR doses).

KEY WORDS: Water hyacinth, Perionyx excavatus, Lampito mauritii, Vermiculture, Cocoon production.

INTRODUCTION:

Earthworms are generally classified as saprophages but based on their feeding habits they are classified into detrivores and geophages (Lee, 1985). There are about 3627 species of earthworms distributed all over the world (Chaudhuri, 2005) of which, 402 species are reported in India (Julka, 2001). Aristotle, the Greek Philosopher referred earthworms as the “Intestines of the earth” because of their habit of ingesting and ejecting the soil. In the sub - tropical region of Egypt and India the success of ancient civilization of Nile and Indus valley was partly due to the fertile soil created by the activity of earthworms and by the continual renewal of land in the alluvium process. The main activity of earthworm involves the ingestion of soil, mixing of different soil components and production of surface casting. Earthworms consume the soil organic matter and convert it into humus within a short span of time and increase the soil fertility (Albanell et al., 1998).

Earthworms play an important role in the process of soil formation and also in the maintenance of soil fertility. They incorporate organic matters and turn over large amounts of soil by borrowing, feeding and casting. This leads to improved soil structure (Hoogerkamp et al., 1983; Stewart and Scullion, 1988), enhanced nutrient release (Barley and Jennings, 1959) and ultimately a better plant growth (Edwards and Lofty, 1980). They also play a key role in soil biology as versatile natural bio reactors. They effectively harness the beneficial soil microflora, destroy soil pathogens and convert organic wastes into useful products (Bakthavathsalam et al., 2010a; Sudha and Bakthavathsalam, 2010). Earthworms modify soil’s physical, chemical and biological properties and it is believed that they enhance nutrient cycling by ingestion of soil and humus and by production of casts. Earthworms are well known for increasing soil fertility. In the process of burrowing, anecic earthworms accelerate litter decomposition, change pore structure, increase aeration and water infiltration, and accelerate C and N mineralization. They also change microbial community composition during gut transit and following excretion in casts and burrow walls (Parle, 1963; Pedersen and Hendriksen, 1993).

Water hyacinth:

At present, weed plants have been used as an alternative source for farmyard manure and chemical fertilizers. Eichhornia crassipes (water hyacinth), a weed plant was selected for the present study as one of the feed materials for these earthworms. Water hyacinth grows in shallow temporary ponds, wet lands and marshes, sluggish flowing waters and large lakes, reservoirs and rivers. It grows up to 0.5 meter height with dense floating mat. It can tolerate extremes of water level fluctuation and seasonal variations in flow velocity, and extremes of nutrient availability, pH, temperature and toxic substances (Gopal, 1987).

Vermiculture has received considerable attention in recent years internationally for its immense potential in recycling biodegradable wastes such as rice straw, wheat straw, sugarcane trash, ground nut husk, banana sheath, cotton stalks, turmeric leaves, coir waste, brewery sludge, vegetable wastes, tree litters and problematic weeds like Parthenium, water hyacinth, Ipomea, Cynodon and Amaranthus in popularizing organic farming (Rangasamy and Jayanthi, 2002). Certain earthworm species E.fetida, Dendrobaena venata and Lumbricus rubellus from temperate regions and L.mauritii, Eudrilus eugeniae and P.excavatus from the tropics have been identified and used for the degradation of organic wastes (Edwards, 1988).

Biology and life history of earthworms:

The biology and life history of L.mauritii (Gunasekaran, 1989; Ramalingam, 1997), E.eugeniae (Viljoen and Reinecke, 1989; Ramalingam, 1997), E.fetida (Venter and Reinecke, 1988; Reinecke et al., 1992), Drawida nepalensis (Namita and Madhuri, 2008), Metaphire houlleti (Namita and Madhuri, 2008) and P.excavatus (Hallatt et al., 1990; Reinecke et al., 1992) have been thoroughly studied using cow dung / cattle manure as substrate and precisely reported their data.

Cocoon and hatchling production, and hatching success of L.mauritii after exposure to farm yard manure, neem seed and neem cake (Bakthavathsalam, 2003b), paddy chaff and weed plants material (Bakthavathsalam and Geetha, 2004a) and cow dung, press mud, paddy chaff powder and paddy chaff ash (Bakthavathsalam and Ramakrishnan, 2004), growth and cocoon production of E.fetida after exposure to waste (faeces + urine) of cow, buffalo, horse, donkey, sheep, goat and camel (Garg et al., 2005a), growth, survival and hatchlings production of P.excavatus after exposure to sugarcane trash and cow dung (Ramalingam and Thilagar, 2000), growth, cocoon production and incubation period, and hatching success of Octodrilus complanatus after exposure to cow manure (Monroy et al., 2007), cocoon and hatchling production, incubation time, hatching success of E.eugeniae after exposure to green gram plant waste (Jayaseelan and Bakthavathsalam, 2009a) and paddy straw waste (Subramaniyan and Bakthavathsalam, 2009), rate of cocoon, hatchling and vermicast production, incubation time and biomass production of E.eugeniae after exposure to coir waste, Eichhornia crassipes, cow dung and poultry excreta mixture (Bakthavathsalam et al., 2010c) and coir waste, water lily, goat droppings and poultry excreta mixture (Bakthavathsalam et al., 2010d) growth, cocoon production, incubation period, and hatching success of E.fetida after exposure to green gram waste (Sathya and Deivanayaki, 2015a), growth and cocoon production of L.mauritii after exposure to rice bran media (Sathya and Deivanayaki, 2015b), growth and cocoon production of E.fetida after exposure to sheep droppings media (Deivanayaki and Nanthini, 2016) growth and cocoon production of E.eugeniae after exposed to Adhatoda vasica leaves media (Thirumagal and Deivanayaki, 2017) and growth and cocoon production of E.fetida after exposed nelumbo nucifera media (Kanaga and Deivanayaki, 2017) were studied to understand the reproductive potentials of test species and the quality of organic materials used.

OBJECTIVE OF THE CURRENT STUDY:

Effect of different water hyacinth PSR media on the production of cocoon, hatching success and growth of L.mauritii and P.excavatus.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Constructionof cement t anks:

Brick work cement tanks were constructed under a tiled animal house at Govt Arts College (Autonomous), Kumbakonam, for this vermiculture and vermicomposting study.

Large cement tanks:

Six rectangular brick tanks were constructed using cement and sand (1:5 ratio). The size is 180 x 75 x 90cm. These tanks were used for the partial decomposition of Water hyacinth selected for this study.

Small cement tanks:

Similarly, 4 brick tanks of size, 8 x 52 x 36cm were also constructed for keeping the stock adult earthworms.

Procurement of earthworms:

The specimens of anecic adult live earthworm, L.mauritii with a body size of 10 to 14 cm in length and 700 to 900 mg in weight were collected from a cow dung pit at Chettimandabam, Kumbakonm. Adult specimens of another epigeic earthworm, P.excavatus having a body size of 10 to 12 cm in length and 600 to 800 mg in weight were purchased from the vermiculture unit of Periyar Maniyammai University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu.

Maintenance of adult earthworms:

The above specimens were kept separately in tanks with substrate medium containing 50 % cow dung and 50 % soil. They were maintained at room temperature 28±5°C ( medium temperature 25±2°C) for the entire study period as suggested by Martin (1982). The tanks were covered with cotton clothes to protect these earthworms from their predators. Sufficient water was added in these tanks to ensure optimum growth and to maintain a safe moisture condition (60-70 %).

Collection of organic materials:

Water hyacinth:

About 1000 kg of fresh water hyacinth were collected from the Chettimandabam pond located at the junction of Kumbakonam bypass and Mayiladudurai – Kumbakonam NH road. The plants were cut into smaller pieces (size : < 7 cm) for easy decomposition.

Collection of soil:

Air dried alluvium soil collected from the Cauvery riverbank adjacent to Govt. Arts College (Autonomous), Kumbakonam, was manually powdered using stone mortar. It was kept in polythene bags after passing through a iron sieve (size:1mm x 1mm) to obtain soil media with particle size less than 1mm as suggested by Reinecke and Venter (1985).

Partial decomposition of water hyacinth:

The first, second and third tanks were filled with cut pieces of water hyacinth. After adding sufficient water, these tanks were covered with polythene sheets to avoid water evaporation and a possible release of foul smell during decomposition. Water was regularly added in these tanks after removing the polythene sheets for proper decomposition. Once in six days, the decomposing materials were thoroughly mixed using a spade to ensure uniform decomposition. Ideal semi decomposed water hyacinth can be available only after 90 days of decomposition. About 150 kg of dry (0 % moisture) semi decomposed water hyacinth can be obtained during this process.

Separation of core particles:

The partly decomposed water hyacinth collected were separately powdered using thick wooden rod and sieved through a iron net (size:1mm x 1mm) to obtain medium with particle size less then 1mm as suggested by Reinecke and Venter (1985).They were stored separately in polythene bags for vermiculture .

Procurement of earthen pots:

Three hundred earthen pots (size: 25 cm diameter and 24 cm height) were purchased from Ammachatram, Kumbakonam, to carry out the vermiculture and plant cultivation study.

Preparation and maintenance of vermiculture media:

Six sets of seven doses, 100, 75, 50, 40, 30, 20 and10 percent substrate ratios (PSR) were prepared from partly decomposed water hyacinth, using dry soil with volume by volume basis. Four litres of each substrate (each PSR dose) were taken in an earthen pot and sufficient water was added into it to ensure optimum moisture condition (60 – 70 %) as suggested by Martin (1982). To assess the rate of cocoon production in the above media, 12 adult earthworms of either L.mauritii or P.excavatus were introduced into each pot. Six sets of control (soil alone as substrate) experiment with 12 adult earthworms (L.mauritii or P.excavatus) were also maintained simultaneously along with these media. In order to provide optimum moisture condition to the experimental earthworms the media were regularly added with water. All these pots were covered with cotton clothes to protect the earthworms from their predators (frog, ant, rat, centipedes, millipedes and termites).

Collection of cocoons:

Cocoons produced by earthworms in water hyacinth media were collected once in six days and recorded for a period of 30 days. The body weight and survival of earthworms were also measured / observed along with cocoon collection. Rate of cocoon production per day was calculated.

Maintenance of cocoons:

The cocoons collected from different PSR media were placed in separate plastic cups having the same PSR media. The cocoons kept in the plastic cups were covered with cotton clothes. Sufficient water was added in the plastic cups to maintain the optimum moisture condition (60 -70 %) for normal development of embryos in the cocoons .The hatching time of cocoon was recorded individually.

Percent Weight Change (PWC)

Final body weight - Initial body weight

PWC = ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– × 100

Initial body weight

Growth Rate (GR)

Final body weight (mg) - Initial body weight (mg)

GR (mg/day) = ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Growth period (days)

Cocoon Production Rate (CPR)

Total cocoons produced ÷ No. of worms used

CPR (C/W/D = ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Period of cocoon collection (days)

Hatchling Production Rate (HPR)

Total hatchlings emerged from the cocoons

HPR (H/C) = ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Total cocoons incubated

Percent Hatching Success (PHS)

No. of hatched cocoons

PHS = ––––––––––––––––––---–– × 100 (or)

Total cocoons incubated

Total cocoons incubated – Un hatched cocoons

PHS = –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– × 100

Total cocoons incubated

Results:

Reproductive study of adult earthworms:

Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time and the body weight of adult L.mauritii and P.excavatus exposed to 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses prepared from partly decomposed water hyacinth with soil for 30 days, respectively are given in Tables 1 and 2. After 30 days of exposure, the former earthworm kept in 0, 10, 20 and 40 PSR doses reduced their body weight to the tune of 10.8, 4.4, 7.6 and 4.2 % over their initial values, respectively. Similarly, the latter species also reduced their body weight to the tune of 12.0, 11.5, 6.5 and 7.6 %, respectively in 0, 10, 20 and 30 PSR doses. On the contrary, the body weight observed in 30, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses (L.mauritii), and in 40, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses (P.excavatus) showed slight improvement over their initial value (3.0, 7.5, 4.6 and 7.2 %, and 5.4, 9.2, 15.1 and 11.5 %, respectively). It is important to note here that though there are changes (negative / positive) in the body weight of all earthworms exposed to water hyacinth, none died during the course of this study.

Table 1. Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time and the body weight (gm) change of adult L.mauritii kept in different per cent substrate ratio (PSR) doses of partly decomposed water hyacinth for 30 days

Period		0 PSR		10 PSR		20PSR		30 PSR
Initial		– (0) 65		– (0) 67		– (0) 65		– (0) 66
After 6 day		0 (0) 66		0 (0) 67		0 (0) 65		0 (0) 66
After12day		0.5± 0.3 (3) 68		1.1± 0.5 (7) 69		1.5± 0.6 (9) 67		2.1± 1.3 (13) 68
After18 day		0.8± 0.2 (5) 67		3.6± 0.9 (21) 69		4.1± 0.9 (25) 69		6.6± 2.9 (40) 75
After 24 day		0.2± 0.1 (1) 52		3.5± 1.1 (21) 66		4.3± 0.7 (26) 66		5.1± 0.9 (31) 73
After 30 day		0.5± 0.1 (3) 58		2.1± 1.3 (13) 64		3.5± 0.5 (21) 60		5.1± 1.4 (31) 68
TC	PWC	(12 )	– 10.8	(62 )	– 4.4	(81)	– 7.6	(115)	+3.0
C/W/D		0.006		0.028		0.037		0.052
TH		8		50		76		97
HC UC	UC	8	4	50	12	72	9	93	22
PHS		66.7		80.6		88.9		80.9
IT (days)		10 – 13		20 – 23		20 – 23		20 – 23
H/C		0.67		0.81		0.94		0.84

Period		40 PSR		50 PSR		75 PSR		100 PSR
Initial		– (0) 71		– (0) 66		– (0) 65		– (0) 69
After 6 day		0 (0) 74		0 (0) 67		0 (0) 62		0 (0) 68
After12day		2.5± 0.9 (15) 73		3.8± 1.3 (23) 68		4.1± 1.3 (25) 67		4.6± 1.3 (28) 80
After18 day		7.3± 1.4 (44) 76		8.0± 2.1 (48) 72		10.0± 2.9 (60) 77		11.0± 2.7 (66) 72
After 24 day		10.0± 1.5 (60) 80		17.3± 2.2 (104) 70		19.3± 3.7 (116) 67		20.0± 3.4 (121) 73
After 30 day		15.3± 2.2 (92) 68		25.8± 5.2 (155) 71		29.0± 4.0 (174) 68		31.1± 3.5 (187) 74
TC	PWC	(211)	– 4.2	(330)	+ 7.5	(375)	+ 4.6	(402)	+ 7.2
C/W/D		0.097		0.152		0.173		0.186
TH		188		305		361		408
HC UC	UC	186	25	299	31	345	30	374	28
PHS		88.2		90.6		92.0		93.0
IT (days)		21 – 23		21 – 23		21 – 23		21 – 23
H/C		0.89		0.92		0.96		1.01

values in front of brackets are Mean S.D. of cocoons collected from 6 pots; Values in brackets are total cocoons collected from 72 earthworms kept in 6 pots; Values in bold letters are total body weight of 72 earthworms; TC = Total Cocoons; PWC = Percent Weight Change; C/W/D = Cocoon/Worm/Day; TH = Total Hatchlings; HC = Hatched Cocoons; UC = Unhatched Cocoons; PHS = Percent Hatching Success; IT= Incubation Time; H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon.

Table 2. Rate of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success, incubation time and the body weight (gm) change of adult P.excavatus kept in different PSR doses of partly

Period		0 PSR		10 PSR		20 PSR		30 PSR
Initial		– (0) 75		– (0) 79		– (0) 76		– (0) 78
After 6 day		0 (0) 77		0 (0) 80		0 (0) 76		0 (0) 78
After 12day		0.7± 0.3 (4) 77		1.1± 0.5 (7) 80		1.6± 0.8 (10) 78		2.0± 0.8 (12) 78
After 18 day		1.1± 0.5 (7) 76		2.3± 0.9 (14) 79		3.3± 0.9 (20) 76		4.6± 3.1 (28) 77
After 24day		0.3± 0.1 (2) 72		2.0± 1.0 (12) 76		2.6± 1.1 (16) 74		5.0± 0.9 (30) 77
After 30 day		0 (0) 66		0 (0) 70		0 (0) 71		1.00.8 (6) 72
TC	PWC	(13)	– 12.0	(33)	– 11.3	(46)	– 6.5	(76)	– 7.6
C/W/D		0.006		0.015		0.021		0.035
TH		13		33		46		76
HC	UC	13	0	33	0	46	0	76	0
PHS		100.0		100.0		100.0		100.0
IT (days)		10 – 11		10 – 13		10 – 13		10 – 13
H/C		1.00		1.00		1.00		1.00

Period		40 PSR		50 PSR		75 PSR		100 PSR
Initial		– (0) 73		– (0) 76		– (0) 73		– (0) 78
After 6 day		0 (0) 73		0 (0) 77		0 (0) 73		0 (0) 79
After12day		2.0± 0.6 (12) 79		3.0± 1.0 (18) 80		3.5± 0.9 (21) 77		3.8± 1.1 (23) 82
After18 day		4.5± 1.5 (27) 78		6.3± 1.4 (38) 82		6.6± 1.2 (40) 80		8.5± 1.8 (51) 85
After 24 day		6.0± 0.5 (36) 79		5.8± 1.5 (35) 85		7.0± 1.9 (42) 83		8.5± 0.1 (51) 88
After 30 day		2.5± 0.9 (15) 77		3.6± 1.1 (22) 83		4.61.7 (27) 84		5.6± 2.1 (34) 87
TC	PWC	(90)	+ 5.4	(113)	+ 9.2	(130)	+ 15.1	(159)	+ 11.5
C/W/D		0.041		0.052		0.060		0.073
TH		90		111		130		159
HC UC	UC	90	0	111	2	130	0	159	0
PHS		100.0		98.2		100.0		100.0
IT (days)		17 – 18		17 – 18		17 – 18		17 – 18
H/C		1.00		0.98		1.00		1.00

Values in front of brackets are Mean S.D. of cocoons collected from 6 pots; Values in brackets are total cocoons collected from 72 earthworms kept in 6 pots; Values in bold letters are total body weight of 72 earthworms; TC= Total Cocoons; PWC= Percent Weight Change; C/W/D= Cocoon/Worm/Day; TH = Total Hatchlings; HC = Hatched Cocoons; UC = Unhatched Cocoons; PHS = Percent Hatching Success; IT= Incubation Time; H/C = Hatchling/Cocoon.

The earthworms kept in soil medium though showed 100% survival value, only 12 L.mauritii and 13 P.excavatus cocoons were produced during this study period. Out of seven PSR doses and two earthworm species studied, L.mauritii kept in 100 PSR dose though produced maximum number of cocoons (402), only 374 hatched after 21 – 23 days incubation period. Hatching success and hatchling production rate were 93 % and 1.01 H/C, respectively. But L.mauritii exposed to lower doses (10 – 75 PSR) showed lesser hatching success and hatchling production rate values ranging from 80.6 to 92.0 % and 0.81 to 0.96 H/ C, respectively over 100 PSR value.

The cocoons produced by L.mauritii usually released only one hatchling from a single cocoon. However, some cocoons produced by this earthworm in 20, 30, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses of water hyacinth rarely produced two hatchlings from a single cocoon resulting in an increase in the hatchling production rate as observed in the said doses. On the contrary, all cocoons of P.excavatus irrespective of its media doses hatched. Thus, hatching success and hatchling production rate was 100 % and 1 H / C, respectively. However, this scenario does not include those cocoons produced in 50 PSR dose. Like L.mauritii, P.excavatus also showed a dose dependent effect with lesser cocoon production values in lower doses and higher production values in higher doses. The incubation time of P.excavatus also showed a variation among the PSR doses with a shorter period (10 – 13 days) in lower doses (10 – 30 PSR) and a longer period (17 – 18 days) in higher doses (50 – 100 PSR). The number of cocoons (62, 81, 115, 211, 330, 375 and 402) and hatchlings (50, 76, 97, 188, 305, 361 and 408) produced by L.mauritii in 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 75 and 100 PSR doses, respectively was relatively high when compared to the number of cocoons (33,46,76,90,113,130 and 159, respectively) and hatchlings (33, 46, 76, 90, 111, 130 and 159, respectively) released by P.excavatus. As of the incubation time, L.mauritii cocoons required longer hatching time (20 – 23 days) than that of P.excavatus (10 – 13 days for cocoons from 10 – 30 PSR and 17 – 18 days for cocoons from 50 – 100 PSR doses).

DISCUSSION:

Hatching success:

The cocoons collected from P.excavatus exposed to different doses (barring few cases) of water hyacinth (Table2), showed 100% hatching success. Like this, a 100 % hatching success was also reported from the studies made by Bakthavathsalam and Ramakrishnan (2004) in L.mauritii exposed to cow dung, press mud and organic mixture, Bakthavathsalam (2007a) in L.mauritii exposed to press mud and cow dung, and Bakthavathsalam et al. (2010d) in E.eugeniae exposed to an organic mixture containing coir waste, water lily, goat droppings and poultry excreta.

On the contrary, lower rates of hatching success (<100%) were noticed in the earthworm, L.mauritii exposed to different doses (barring few cases) of water hyacinth (Tables 1). Similar lower rates of hatching success were also reported from the studies made by Loehr et al. (1985) in E.eugeniae exposed to aerobically maintained sludge (73 %), Edwards (1988) in E.fetida exposed to animal and vegetable wastes (83 %). Sheppard (1988) in E.fetida (82.2 %) and E.andrei (73.5 %) exposed to cow manure, Haimi (1990) in E.fetida (77.5 %) and E.andrei (85 %) exposed to different composts, Reinecke and Viljoen (1991) in E.fetida (89.2 %), E.andrei (90.5 %) exposed to cow gut content, Kaushal et al. (1995) in D.nepalensis exposed to soil and pine litter (92 %), Elvira et al.(1996a) in E.fetida (88.3 %) and E.andrei (88.1 %) exposed to cow manure, Edwards et al. (1998) in P.excavatus exposed to cattle solids (91 %), Dominguez et al.(2001) in E.eugeniae exposed to cattle solids (81 %), Bhattacharjee and Chaudhuri (2002) in L.mauritii (60%), P.corethrurus (85 %), P.elongata (40 %), D.modiglianii (78 %) and P.excavatus (52.5 %) exposed to pasture soil, Bakthavathsalam and Geetha (2004a) in L.mauritii exposed to paddy chaff powder (96 %) and weed plants material (80 %), Dominguez et al.(2005) in E.fetida (61.2 %) and E.andrei (56.8 %) exposed to cow manure, Monroy et al.(2007) in O.complanatus exposed to cow manure (55 %), and Sudhar (2007a) in P.excavatus exposed to jowar straw + bajara straw + boyar straw + sheep manure mixture (56.0 ± 2.34 %), farmyard manure (54.84 ± 0.90 %) and kitchen waste with Magifera indica leaf litter (74.34 ± 2.38 %).

Incubation time:

The incubation time of cocoons obtained from L.mauritii exposed to water hyacinth (Table 1) showed a constant value (20 – 23 days) irrespective of doses the earthworm exposed to. and in contrast, cocoons obtained from P.excavatus exposed to water hyacinth (Table 2) showed a dose dependent effect with lesser incubation time in lower doses (10 – 30 PSR) and higher in higher doses (40 – 100 PSR). Though the incubation time observed in P.excavatus cocoons exposed to animal, vegetable and industrial waste (16 – 21 days) by Edwards (1988), cattle solids (19 days) by Edwards et al. (1998), cattle manure (19.4 ± 0.72 days) by Hallatt et al. (1992), cattle manure (17.8 days at 25^°C and 15.3 days at 25 – 37^°C) by Reinecke et al. (1992), pasture soil (12.80 ± 0.31 days) by Bhattacharjee and Chaudhuri (2002) and cow manure and oak litter (18.7 ± 1.8 days) by Namitha and Madhuri (2008) showed similar values as observed in higher doses of organic matters, the exact reason for varied incubation time was not known at present but it needs further investigation.

Similar type of embryonic development was also reported from other earthworm species using different organic matters. For example 14.93 ± 0.51 days for L.mauritii cocoon and 14.16 ± 0.48 days for D.modiglianii cocoon exposed to pasture soil by Bhattacharjee and Chaudhuri (2002), 12 – 17 days for E.eugeniae cocoon exposed to paddy straw waste by Subramaniyan and Bakthavathsalam (2009), 14 ± 2, 14 – 17, 12 – 16 and 14 – 15 days for the same cocoon, respectively exposed to cattle solids by Dominguez et al. (2001), green gram plant waste by Jayaseelan and Bakthavathsalam (2009a), coir waste + E.crassipes + cow dung + poultry excreta mixture by Bakthavathsalam et al. (2010c), and coir waste + water lily + goat droppings + poultry excreta mixture by Bakthavathsalam et al. (2010d).

It is very common that the cocoon incubation time of any earthworm species vary from one earthworm to another, from one soil temperature to another, from one moisture level to another and from one organic matter to another. But it is unusual that the cocoons collected from lower doses of water hyacinth in the present study showed lesser incubation time and vice versa from higher doses. Such type of information was not available either in these earthworm species or any other earthworm species cultured under any specific organic matter. Hence it needs further investigation to arrive at a specific conclusion.

Change of body weight during cocoon production:

The adult earthworms (L.mauritii and P.excavatus) exposed to lower doses (up to 40 PSR) of water hyacinth in general showed insignificant change (either meager loss or gain values) in their body weight during the course of this cocoon production study. Control earthworms (0 PSR), on the other hand, showed overall reduction in their body weight. The reduction observed in the body weight of control and experimental earthworms exposed to lower doses may be due to scarcity of carbon and nitrogen and other essential nutrients as reported by Jena et al. (2002). Invariably all earthworms continue to grow throughout their life with addition and enlargement of body segments after emerging from cocoons (Edwards and Bohlen, 1996). Ramalingam (1997) had identified 3 phases of growth in L.mauritii over a period of 360 days i) a faster growth rate during pre reproductive period (1-65 days as growing stage), ii) a moderate growth rate during reproductive period (65-240 days as adult stage) immediately after attaining sexual maturity, and iii) a very slow growth rate during post reproductive period (240-360 days as senescent stage). The weight loss instead of moderate weight gain observed in the adult earthworms kept in lower doses during reproductive phase was due to onset of cocoon production since large amount of energy needed for cocoon production and also for their copulation as reported by Graff (1981), Mba (1983), and Viljoen and Reinecke (1994).

But the same earthworms kept in higher doses showed overall gain values in their body weight during the course of this study. The weight gains observed in the higher doses of organic wastes followed the findings of Ramalingam (1997) in L.mauritii exposed to cow dung (+ 145 %), Bisht et al. (2006) in O.trytaeum exposed to litter diets of maize, grass and wheat (+ 54.9, + 45.3 and + 45.9 %, respectively), Parthasarathi (2007) in P.excavatus exposed to press mud at 65 – 67 % moisture level (+ 92 % ), Bakthavathsalam and Geetha (2004a) and Bakthavathsalam (2007a) in L.mauritii, respectively exposed to paddy chaff powder and weed plants materials (+ 35.5 and + 128.5 %, respectively), and press mud and cow dung (+ 6.75 and 7.81 %, respectively), Jayaseelan and Bakthavathsalam (2009a) in E.eugeniae exposed to green gram plant waste (+115 %), Subramaniyan and Bakthavathsalam (2009) in E.eugeniae exposed to paddy straw waste (+12.3 %), Bakthavathsalam et al. (2010c) in E.eugeniae exposed to coir waste + E.crassipes + cow dung + poultry excreta mixture (+24.5 %), and Bakthavathsalam et al.(2010d) in E.eugeniae exposed to coir waste+ water lily+ goat droppings + poultry excreta mixture (+9.19 %).

From the foregoing discussion of cocoon and hatchling production, hatching success and incubation time of L.mauritii and P.excavatus cocoons, it was inferred that the varied impacts noted in the above parameters may be due to difference in the nutritional, physical, chemical and biological characteristic of water hyacinth in different PSR media in which the earthworms exposed to or variations in the quality of feeding materials or species- specific feeding behaviour of earthworms or variations in the culture systems used or the combination of the said factors. From the current study it is clear that the use of water hyacinth as culture medium for L.mauritii produces more cocoon than P.excavatus where as hatchling success for P.excavatus is 100% (except 50 PSR) when compared to L.mauritii which has lesser hatchling success rate.

REFERENCES:

1. Lee, K.E. (1985). Earthworms: Their ecology and relationships with soils and land use. Academic Press, Sydney, Australia 411 pp.

2. Chaudhuri, P.S. (2005). Vermiculture and vermicomposting as biotechnology for conversion of organic wastes into animal protein and organic fertilizer. Asian. J. Microbiol. Biotech. Environ. Sci., 7 (3): 359 – 370.

3. Julka, J.M. (2001). Earthworm diversity and its role in agroecosystems. VII National Symposium on Soil Biology and Ecology (Abstract). Bangalore, 13 – 17.

4. Albanell, E., J. Plaixats and T. Carbero (1998). Chemical changes during vermi – composting of sheep manure mixed with cotton industrial waste. Biol. Fertil. Soils., 6 266 – 269.

5. Hoogerkamp, M., H. Rogaar and H.J.P. Eijsackers (1983). Effect of earthworms on grassland of recently reclaimed polder soils in the Netherlands. In Earthworm Ecology (ed. J.E. Satchell,) Chapman and Hall. London.85 – 105pp.

6. Stewart,V.I. and J. Scullion (1988). Earthworms, soil structure and the rehabilitation of former opencast coal mining land. In: Earthworms in Waste and Environmental Management (eds. C.A. Edwards and E.F. Neuhauser), The Hague, SPB, 263 –272 pp.

7. Barley, K.P. and A.C. Jennings (1959). Earthworms and soil fertility. III.The influence of earthworms on the availability of nitrogen. Australian. J. Agric. Res., 10: 364 – 370.

8. Edwards, C.A. and J.R. Lofty (1980). Effect of earthworm inoculation upon the root growth of direct drilled cereals. J. Appl. Ecol., 17: 533 – 543.

9. Bakthavathsalam, R., S. Uthayakumar and M. Muruganandham. (2010a). Identification of microbes present in the samples obtained from gut contents and dwelling places of Lampitto mauritii. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2A): 1080 – 1082.

10. Sudha, V. and R. Bakthavathsalam (2010). Bacterial and fungal studies in the gut contents and vermicasts of Eudrilus eugeniae fed with elephant dung and an analysis of nutrients in elephant dung. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2A): 1066 – 1070.

11. Parle, J.N. (1963). Micro – organisms in the intestines of earthworms. J. Gen. Microbiol. 31: 1 – 11.

12. Pedersen, J.C. and N.B. Hendriksen (1993). Effect of passage through the intestinal tract of detritivore earthworms (Lumbricus sp.) on the number of selected Gram – negative and total bacteria. Biol.Fertil. Soils.,16: 227 – 232.

13. Gopal, B. (1987) Water hyacinth. Elesevier, New York, NY.

14. Rangasamy, A. and C. Jayanthi (2002). A Booklet of Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agriculture University, Coimbatore.

15. Edwards, C.A. (1988). Breakdown of animal, vegetable and industrial organic wastes by earthworm in: Earthworms in Waste and Environmental Management (eds.C.A. Edwards and E.F. Neuhauser), SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, Agric. Ecosys. Environ., 21 – 31pp.

16. Gunasekaran, G. (1989). Studies on the functional differentiation of the prostate gland and the role of neurosecretory cells in the brain of Megascolex mauritii (Templeton) (Annelida: Oligochaeta) Ph.D.Thesis, Annamalai University, India.

17. Ramalingam, R. (1997). Studies on the life cycle, growth and population dynamics of Lampito mauritii (Kinberg) and Eudrilus eugeniae (Kinberg) (Annelida – Oligochaeta) cultured in different organic wastes and analysis of nutrients and microbes of vermicompost. Ph. D. Thesis. Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, India.

18. Viljoen, S.A. and A.J. Reinecke (1989). Life cycle and reproduction of Eudrilus eugeniae (Oligochaeta). S. Afr. J. Zool., 24(1): 27 – 32.

19. Venter, J.M. and A.J. Reinecke (1988). The life cycle of the compost worm, Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta). S. Afr. J. Zool., 23(3): 161 – 165.

20. Reinecke, A.J. and S.A. Viljoen and R.J. Saayman (1992). The suitability of Eudrilus eugeiae, Perionyx excavatus and Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta) for vermicomposting in Southern Africa in terms of their temperature requirements. Soil. Biol. Biochem, 24: 1295–1307.

21. Namita, J. and D. Madhuri (2008). Life cycle of earthworms Drawida nepalensis, Metaphire houlleti and Perionyx excavatus under laboratory controlled conditions. Life Sci. J., 5(4): 83 – 86.

22. Hallatt, L., A.J. Reinecke and S.A.Viljoen (1990). Life cycle of the oriental compost worm Perionyx excavatus (Oligochaeta); S. Afr. J. Zool., 25: 41 – 45.

23. Bakthavathsalam, R. (2003b). Effect of neem products on cocoon production, hatching ability and hatchling growth rate of the earthworm, Lampito mauritii (Templeton). Environ. Ecol., 21 (3): 575 – 579.

24. Bakthavathsalam,R. and T. Geetha (2004a). Reproductive influence of the earthworm, Lampito mauritii cultured in different media of paddy chaff and weed plants materials. Environ. Ecol., 22 (3): 574 – 578.

25. Bakthavathsalam, R. and G. Ramakrishnan (2004). Culture of earthworm using different organic wastes of agricultural importance. Environ. Ecol., 22 (2): 386 – 391.

26. Garg, V.K., S. Chand, A. Chhillar and A. Yadav (2005a). Growth and reproduction of Eisenia fetida in various animal wastes during vermicomposting. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res., 3(2): 51 – 59.

27. Ramalingam, R. and M. Thilagar (2000). Bio – conversion of agro – waste sugarcane trash using an Indian epigeic earthworm, Perionyx excavatus (Perrier). Indian J. Environ. Ecoplan., 3(3): 447 – 452.

28. Monroy, F., M. Aira, J.A. Gago and J.Dominguez (2007). Life cycle of the earthworm Octodrilus complanatus (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae). C.R. Biologies, 330: 389 – 391.

29. Jayaseelan, A. and R. Bakthavathsalam (2009a). Culture of epigeic earthworm, Eudrilus eugeniae using green gram waste. Environ. Ecol., 27(3A): 1338 – 1344.

30. Subramaniyan, A. and R. Bakthavathsalam (2009). Utilization of paddy straw waste in the culture practices of earthworm and cultivation of radish plant. Environ. Ecol., 27(4A): 1664 – 1671.

31. Bakthavathsalam, R., S. Rajapandiyan, M. Purushothaman, M. Muruganandham and M. Deivanayaki (2010c). Utilization of coir waste mixture in the culture practices of earthworm and pot cultivation of white radish. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2B): 1211 – 1215.

32. Bakthavathsalam, R., S. Uthayakumar, M. Purushothaman, M. Deivanayaki and M.Kannan (2010d). Effect of coir waste mixture on the production of cocoon, hatchling and vermicast of Eudrilus eugeniae and the growth of white radish. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2B): 1220 – 1224.

33. Sathya, R .and Deivanayaki.M, (2015a). Reproduction influence of the earthworm, Eisenia fetida cultured in different media of green gram waste. Species, 14 (43): 29 – 39.

34. Sathya, T. and Deivanayaki, M, (2015b). Studies on the growth and cocoon production of Lampito Mauritii (king berg) cultured indifferent rice bran media. Species, 14 (45):130-137.

35. Deivanayaki, M and Nanthini. R, (2016). Effect of different sheep droppings media on the growth and cocoon production of Eisenia fetida. Research J. Science and Tech. 8(3): 142-144.

36. Thirumagal,A and Deivanayaki.M, (2017). Effect of different Adhatoda vasica leaves media on the growth and cocoon production of Eudrilus eugeniae. Research J. Science and Tech. 9(2): 288 – 292.

37. Kanaga, M and Deivanayaki.M, (2017). Effect of different Nelumbo nucifera media on the growth and cocoon production of Eisenea fetida. Research J. Science and Tech. 9(2): 239 - 243.

38. Martin,N.A. (1982). The effect of herbicides used on asparagus on the growth rate of the earthworm, Allobophora caliginosa. Proceedings of the 35^th New Zealand Weed and Pest Control Conference, 328 – 331 pp.

39. Reinecke, A.J. and J.M.Venter (1985). The influence of moisture on the growth and reproduction of the compost worm Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta). Rev. Ecol. Biol. Sol., 22(4): 473 – 481.

40. Bakthavathsalam, R. (2007a). Reproductive influence and hatchling growth rate of earthworm, Lampito mauritii cultured in different media of press mud and cow dung. Environ. Ecol., 25 S (2): 261 – 267.

41. Loehr, R.C., E.F. Neuhauser and M.R. Malecki (1985). Factors affecting the vermistabilization process - temperature, moisture content and polyculture. Water Res., 19: 1311 – 1317.

42. Sheppard, P.S. (1988). Specific differences in cocoon and hatchling production in Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei. In: (eds. C.A. Edwards and E.F. Neuhauser), Earthworms in Waste and Environmental Management. SPB, The Hague, 83 – 92pp.

43. Haimi, J. (1990). Growth and reproduction of the compost – living earthworms Eisenia andrei and Eisena fetida. Rev.Ecol.Biol.Soil., 27: 415 – 421.

44. Reinecke, A.J. and S.A. Viljoen (1991). A comparison of the biology of Eisenia fetida and Eisenia andrei (Oligochaeta). Biol. Fertil. Soils., 295 – 300.

45. Kaushal, B.R., S. Kalia and S.P.S. Bisht (1995). Growth and cocoon production by the earthworm Drawida nepalensis (Oligachaeta : Moniligastridae) in oak and pine litter; Pedobiologia, 39 : 417 – 422.

46. Elvira, C., J. Dominguez and M.J.I. Briones (1996a). Growth and reproduction of Eisenia andrei and Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) in different organic residues; Pedobiologia, 40: 377 – 384.

47. Edwards, C.A., J. Dominguez and E.F. Neuhauser (1998). Growth and reproduction of Perionyx excavatus (perr.) (Megascolecidae) as factors in organic waste management. Biol. Fert. Soils., 27: 155 – 161.

48. Dominguez, J.,C.A. Edwards and J. Ashby (2001). The biology and population dynamics of Eudrilus eugeniae (Kinberg) (Oligochaeta) in cattle waste solids. Pedobiologia, 45: 341 – 353.

49. Bhattacharjee, G. and P.S. Chaudhuri (2002). Cocoon production, morphology, hatching pattern and fecundity in seven tropical earthworm species – a laboratory based investigation. J. Biosci., 27(3): 283 – 294.

50. Bakthavathsalam,R. and T. Geetha (2004a). Reproductive influence of the earthworm, Lampito mauritii cultured in different media of paddy chaff and weed plants materials. Environ. Ecol., 22 (3): 574 – 578.

51. Dominguez, J.,A. Velando and A.Ferreiro (2005). Are Eisenia fetida (Savigny, 1826) and Eisenia andrei (Bouche, 1972) (Oligochaeta, Lumbricidae) different biological species?. Pedobiologia, 49 : 81 – 87.

52. Suthar, S. (2007a). Influence of different food sources on growth and reproduction performance of composting epigeics: Eudrilus eugeniae, Perionyx excavatus and Perionyx sansibaricus. Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res., 5(2): 79 – 92.

53. Edwards, C.A. (1988). Breakdown of animal, vegetable and industrial organic wastes by earthworm In : Earthworms in Waste and Environmental Management (eds. C.A. Edwards and E.F. Neuhauser), SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague, Agric. Ecosys. Environ., 21 – 31pp.

54. Edwards, C.A., J. Dominguez and E.F. Neuhauser (1998). Growth and reproduction of Perionyx excavatus (perr.) (Megascolecidae) as factors in organic waste management. Biol. Fert. Soils., 27 : 155 – 161.

55. Hallatt, L., S.A. Viljoen and A.J. Reinecke (1992). Moisture requirements in the life cycle of Perionyx excavatus (Oligochaeta). Soil. Biol. Biochem., 24(12): 1333 – 1340.

56. Reinecke, A.J. and S.A. Viljoen and R.J. Saayman (1992). The suitability of Eudrilus eugeiae, Perionyx excavatus and Eisenia fetida (Oligochaeta) for vermicomposting in Southern Africa in terms of their temperature requirements. Soil. Biol. Biochem, 24: 1295–1307.

57. Jayaseelan, A. and R. Bakthavathsalam (2009a). Culture of epigeic earthworm, Eudrilus eugeniae using green gram waste. Environ. Ecol., 27(3A): 1338 – 1344.

58. Bakthavathsalam, R., S. Rajapandiyan, M. Purushothaman, M. Muruganandham and M. Deivanayaki (2010c). Utilization of coir waste mixture in the culture practices of earthworm and pot cultivation of white radish. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2B): 1211 – 1215.

59. Bakthavathsalam, R., S. Uthayakumar, M. Purushothaman, M. Deivanayaki and M.Kannan (2010d). Effect of coir waste mixture on the production of cocoon, hatchling and vermicast of Eudrilus eugeniae and the growth of white radish. Environ. Ecol., 28 (2B): 1220 – 1224.

Received on 10.02.2018 Modified on 01.04.2018

Research J. Science and Tech. 2018; 10(3):201-210.

DOI: 10.5958/2349-2988.2018.00028.1