Hello,

I may answer your first question.

The nauplii size may differ in different strains, so you should consider.

Heavy metal pollution is a good idea.

Fatty acids and amino acids profile may strongly differ in different batches.

Hatching time and rate may differ in different batches.

Good luck

Hi,

   In response to the second question, dormant cysts are thought to remain alive for several years but I do not know the actual time. I would guess that after a prolonged period there may be some decomposition of cysts by bacteria but they are very resistant to destruction. Again, I don't recall seeing any experiments where this was specifically investigated.

   Tom

Dear Liudmila,

The fatty acid composition in cysts depend on the nutrition and feeding of the adult females, varying with difference in feed kind. It could help only if you have round year nutritional analysis of Artemia adults and cysts.

Amino acids are usually genetically coded, this parameter also could help if you have full analysis of amino acids for different biotopes. 

Contamination with heavy metals could be used as an indicator only if you have round year analysis of the water for different lakes.

But cyst size, nauplii size and molecular techniques are more reliable techniques that can be used to identify the cyst source and type. We need annual monitoring of the main biotopes of Artemia both to study the changes in the biotope and also effects of the environmental changes on the Artemia and their cyst.  

Dormant cysts if stay embedded within the salt layers at the bottom of the lake could stay safe for as long as 100 year (of course not all of them), but if they are left on the muddy bottom of the lake could loose their viability. I am sure bacteria could decompose the dormant cysts with time. Therefore the older cysts remaining in the lake from previous years are not as good as newly produced cysts with lower hatchability. 

Greetings and best wishes,

Naser

Dear Liudmila

I am agree with Naser Agh answers.

Only let me complete cysts information. If cysts have a lot time at bottom of lake maybe they can loose their viability and have very low hatching percentage or they need more time to hatch. 

Dear friends!

Thank you very much for your valuable advice!

I will definitely use it.

Dear Naser! I have a question to you personally. I am currently in the cultivation of Artemia in natural water bodies (lakes). I know what you were doing it. Did you receive the positive result of this growing? Are there any publications you have on this issue?

Dear Liudmila, I have been engaged with Artemia production in earthen ponds since many years and of course it works. Good production is achieved if the culture conditions are optimal when plenty of saline water and algae are available. We are culturing Artemia in earthen ponds of 1 h up to large earthen ponds of 25 h. I am planning to do it in a dried portion of Urmia Lake as large as 8000 h as a measure to revive Artemia populations in the lake, but not started yet. if the salinity in your lakes can support good growth of Artemia, you should find our ways to improve its algae population in order to yield higher production of cysts. I have not published papers on this issue so far, but I can cooperate with you.

Liudmila and Naser

First I apologize to introduce myself in your ask- answer session, but I want to tell you our research experience in that topic. Work in natural habitat with Artemia needs:  

a) The water reservoir need a natural Artemia strains living there because is more easily work with them, because this population was adapted to those natural conditions. If you need to inoculate an Artemia strain is more difficult but not imposible. You only need to make some experiments with your Artemia wich want inoculate, principaly with salinity concentration.

b) You need that water reservoir have a microalgae natural population, who serve as food to Artemia and only need to fertilize water or need a laboratory that produce an specific microalgae (green, diatoms or red) as food for Artemia. 

Just like Dr Castro, I do apologize for interfering. My first point, Liudmila, is that unless cysts are claimed to come from Svastikovo Lake (in that case, you gave yourself the answer in one of your papers), it appears that to solve the problem of origin  either you use classical morphometric analysis, or follow your own suggestion and see what mitochondrial DNA analysis can tell you (since your populations are all parthenogenetis, it would actually seem the best way to go).

As to growing Artemia in natural water bodies, Dr. Castro justly points out that the first point is the existence of a natural population, since the introdusction of an alien (even if from some other lake of the same region, the fact that it is not established in a given water body means that you would be introducing an alien species, which should be frwned upon by any biologist or ecologist.

The fact that to get a worthwile production means fertilizing that same water body is also something which should be reconsidered, although I am sure that this point did not escape your attention.

cheers and keep up the good work

Dear friends! Thanks again for answering my questions.

Dr Agh, your experience of growing in ponds and in parts of lake Urmia will be very useful.

Dr Castro, we are planning to introduce nauplii of parthenogenetic Artemia. But there is a thought to try to introduce a different species. Thanks for reminding me about the phytoplankton. In our shallow lakes (depth 0.5 m) is always a lot of undecomposed organic matter. I thought to do in this case phytoplankton is not required.

Dr Voltolina, In Siberia there are about 100 lakes with parthenogenetic Artemia and only a few lakes with bisexual Artemia on the Eastern border of Siberia. We're going to grow Artemia in lakes where there is its own parthenogenetic populations. As for my first question: we tried to distinguish between these parthenogenetic population on cysts both morphometrically and genetically, but so far it fails.

Thank you Liudmila. i guess that a high amount of organic particulates might well support a growing Artemia population, as long as supply is continuous or almost so. As to identification, i suggested that you might reconsider your own suggestion (The biodiversity of shrimp genus Artemia from Russian lakes: morphometric,cytogenetics and DNA-analysis) and try  mitochondrial DNA,

Thank you again and best of lucks, Domenico

Dear Domenico! Thanks again! My colleague (co-author of the article) Boyko Elena has engaged  genetic analysis, which also includes the study of mitochondrial DNA

Dear Liudmila,

I'm agree with Dr. Naser Agh. I also suggest you one of my colleagues whose name is Dr. Mahmoud Hafezieh with bellow email:

 [email protected]

He is a specialist in this field and you can directly ask him your questions.

 About first question: I agree that only DNA analysis must be identified your cysts.

About second question: In nature it could be possible that cysts can be loose their viability if they are not cleaned and eliminated the bacteria sourrounding them. I do not know how much time take this process. But we saw that cyst that were not collected at time maybe they do not decomposed but they loose viability (Mexico salt ponds). 

In the right anoxic conditions I think cysts can remain viable for decades. They certainly can be kept viable in the lab for decades, and very old cysts can be recovered from cores for paleolimnology studies. I've seen Bowen talk about using isotopes in cysts to monitor changes over centuries, I think this might be the right paper:

Nielson, K. E. and G. J. Bowen. 2010. Hydrogen and oxygen in brine shrimp chitin reflect environmental water and dietary isotopic composition. Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta 74:1812-1822.