By having a limited exposure to the above paper & having worked on pilot scale production of Artemia cyst by modifying a derelict salt pan,I think some of the points are very clear. Artemia first instar has a size of 180 to 220 micron which is most suitable for say Mysis stage in a shrimp hatchery & freshwater prawn hatchery.Adult artemia cover has a thickness of one micron,which ranks very high as a feed candidate. It appears in case of Anostracans,the male dies off soon after copulation,which is not the case in Artemia,thereby enhancing prolonged production of cysts & even juveniles.In case of Artemia from say 60 parts per thousand salinity to 100 PPT, couples issue naupli, which can be segregtated & used as direct feed in hatcheries,which may not be the case in Anostracans.

Collecting cycts from bottom of a pond ( or after pond gets dried up) & that too of a meager level seems to be quite uneconomic proposition as compared to artemia cyst/juvenile production, where cyst collection is very easy. Another reason why artemia scores over the other is the availability of PUFA in them,which may not be found in Anostracans.

Hence Anostracans lose on artemia on many fronts & these may be the reasons why not much interest is shown in its culture.

If adult animal production could be raised per unit area,they can be dried & used in fish/shrimp feed formulation - which I think is one avenue for interest in its aquaculture.