Crayfish Tank Closure Report I

Mary Catherine Rubisch, Taylor Littleton, and Paisley Guo

November 11, 2015

BSEN 5510
Team 1

In order to gain a more comprehensive idea of the interconnected cycles and relationships that
must be considered as an ecological engineer, a ten gallon tank will be designed capable of
supporting the life of a crayfish for at least one week without any additional material input. In
preparation for this, a 24 hour closure test was conducted to test the effectiveness of the current
design. Although no major issues occurred during the enclosure, steps should be taken to resolve
measurement discrepancies and better observe the cycles occurring within the tank.
Table of Contents - Update
Introduction.........3

Background......3
Methods....3
Results.............................................................................................................................................6
Discussion.......................................................................................................................................7
Conclusions..9
References..10
Appendix11
A. Complete Monitoring Data
B. Graphs

Introduction:
In order to work towards a sustainable future, it is vital to optimize biological systems and the
services they provide. This requires a more advanced approach than typical engineering
applications, as ecosystems are based off of deep interdependencies and can be unpredictable. In
order to obtain a deeper appreciation for the complex relationships that exist within an
ecosystem, this team aims to create a closed ecological microcosm capable of sustaining the life
of a crayfish for a minimum of one week (seven days). Throughout the week, the tank will be
materially closed, although energy will still be allowed to flow through.
The crayfish will be kept in a ten gallon tank topped with an enclosure designed to fit on top of
the tank to contain the crayfish. Plastic tubing fed through a rubber stopper will be used to
extract water from the system for periodic monitoring of water quality. Additional contents
placed in the tank including plants, sand, gravel, and PVC pipe were selected to provide optimal
health to the crayfish.
In order to prepare for this challenge, the team conducted a 24 hour closure test to gain a better
idea of how the system would function once closed off. Any potential openings to the
surrounding environment were sealed with putty and water quality was inspected periodically.
Background:
Red swamp crayfish were chosen for this project due to their relatively high tolerance to poor
water quality and ease of maintenance. Additionally, they are easy to find and capture in their
natural habitat near Auburn, Alabama where the experiment is being conducted. This species
plays a key role in freshwater ecosystems, as they feed on decomposed organic matter in addition
to plants, algae and the occasional fish. In order to reduce stress, gravel and other structures such
as PVC pipe were included to allow the crayfish to burrow and hide (2015, Pierce).
Methods:
In order to guarantee the successful survival of the crayfish, the team implemented the following
procedures for the 24 hour closure as described below.

Design Enclosure: After discussion with our design technician, it was decided to simplify the
design enclosure from the original proposed design. The enclosure was cut out of lexan as a basic
rectangle to fit over the lip wrapping around the inside of the tank, with a hole cut for monitoring
access and a second hole cut to allow the cord for the pump to fit. All possible points of exposure
to outside surroundings were sealed with putty (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Design Enclosure

Plastic tubing was used to collect water from the system for analysis. Water was drawn from the
tubing by evacuating the air from the tube and holding the open end at a lower height than the
height of the water within the tank. This difference in elevation created a pressure difference
great enough to draw water from the tank (Figure 2). When not drawing water through the
tubing, the tube was sealed shut with a plastic clamp (Figure 3). The tubing is threaded through a
rubber stopper in order to allow access to the tank without having to remove the entire lid
between enclosure tests.

Figure 2: The elevation difference between the water in the tank and graduated cylinder creates the
pressure difference necessary to extract water for monitoring.

Figure 3: Plastic clamp used to seal off rubber tubing.

Materials: The crayfish for the project was collected from the E. W. Shell Fisheries Center
located in Auburn, Alabama. A inch layer of sand covered by a inch layer of gravel was
used to make up the base of the aquarium. These supplies were provided to the team as leftovers
from past projects. PVC pipe was also donated by the E. W. Shell Fisheries Center. This, along
with the sand and gravel, provided plenty of shelter for the crawfish to hide or burrow in.
Additionally, the gravel also serves as a substrate to hold down plants. In order to seed the
aquarium with beneficial bacteria to keep nutrient cycles in check, water from the same pond the
crayfish was collected from was mixed with pure deionized water in a ratio of 1:1. This dilution
allows for greater control over bacterial and algal populations included with the pond water.
An AquaClear Power Filter sized for a 5-10 gallon tank was placed entirely inside the tank so as
to promote water circulation and filter contaminants without violating the closed system rule.
Elodea was selected to feed the crayfish due to its high growth rate and low growth
requirements. Based on prior research, the average crayfish can be expected to eat around 4% of
their body weight per day (2015, Young). In order to fine tune this estimate, the team measured
the weight of the crayfish and indirectly measured the weight of plant matter based on the length
before and after the closure test. Six snails were also put into the system in order to assist in
keeping algae growth low and provide an extra source of food if needed.

Monitoring: In order to establish baseline data, water quality was monitored two to three times a
week for the past few weeks leading up to the enclosure test for temperature, pH, DO, nitrite,
ammonia, and hardness (Appendix B). Indicator strips were used to ensure parameters were
within proper levels. For the duration of the enclosure test, parameters were monitored in six
hour intervals (excluding midnight) from 7 pm on Monday, November 9, until 7 pm on Tuesday,
November 10 to ensure optimal health. A photometer was used to take hardness and ammonia
readings; the rest of the parameters were monitored the same way as during baseline
measurements.
Diurnal measurements were crucial in order to examine the rate at which DO was produced and
consumed within the tank. Because the plants inside the tank produce DO through
photosynthesis, a process that is light dependent, levels peak at sunset and are at their lowest at
sunrise (Figure 4). The light source for this experiment was set on a 12 hour timer per
recommendations given by Petsmart, with 7:00 pm as the designated sunset and 7:00 am as the
sunrise.

DO

7:00 am

7:00 pm

7:00 am

Figure 4: Fluctuation of DO throughout day

Results:
The results of the closure test are summarized below in Table 1 and Table 2. In order to better
observe the effect of the time of day on water quality, Table 2 is a simplified version of data
monitored based on time of day. Appendix A contains the full set of data collected. For
associated graphs, refer to Appendix B.
Table 1: Plant Mass Consumed
Description

Length (in)

Mass (g)

Crayfish
Elodea Segment
Elodea Before Closure

N/A
3.5
53.75

10.76
.5
7.68

Elodea After Closure

51.75

7.39

Table 2: Water Quality Data

Water Quality Log for Crayfish
Date

Time

Temp
(F)

pH

DO

NO2-

NH4+

Hardness

6.58.5

>3

<4
ppm

<2
ppm

> 50 ppm

5-Oct

5:36 PM

66

7.8

8.35

0.5

120

8-Oct

5:20 PM

67

6.45

8.15

0.4

120

12-Oct

5:45 PM

66

7.8

8.65

0.5

120

20-Oct

5:24 PM

66

7.02

8.73

0.25

120

21-Oct

6:10 PM

66

6.46

855

0.4

120

22-Oct

7:19 PM

7.95

22-Oct

6:52 PM

8.03

23-Oct

7:33 AM

7.89

23-Oct

7:07 AM

7.65

26-Oct

7:12 AM

7.57

26-Oct

6:39 PM

67

7.02

7.78

27-Oct

7:07 AM

66

6.97

7.87

0.3

Notes:

PVC, snails, & additional

water added

DO probe gave
inconsistent measurements
0

120

Enclosure 1
9-Nov

6:30 PM

69

7.26

7.5

0.06

15

10-Nov

7:30 AM

70

6.45

7.7

0.17

15

10-Nov

12:00 PM

70

6.95

7.4

0.25

100

10-Nov

7:40 PM

71

6.65

7.63

N/A

0.16

10

Crayfish added; enclosure

sealed
90 mL used; strip read 120
ppm for hardness
30 mL used, strip read 100
ppm for hardness
100 mL used, strip read
100 ppm for hardness

Discussion:
The team anticipated a plant consumption of about .46 grams of Elodea. However, the crayfish
only ate .29 grams. There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy, but the team
suspects that it could be due to a high plant growth rate, human error in measurements, or the
crayfish could be about to molt. The team proposes measuring the plant weight directly before
and after the enclosure as well as conducting tests to determine the plant growth rate compared to
the crayfishs rate of consumption.
7

Prior to the enclosure, desired ranges were set for each parameter measured. They were as
follows (Huner 1994):

Temperature: 70-80 F
pH: 6.5-8.5
DO greater than 3 mg/L
Nitrite below 4 ppm
Ammonium below 2 ppm
Hardness above 50 ppm.

Nitrite was hard to measure due to a lack of resources, and was therefore excluded from the
measurements on the charts due to a lack of sufficient data. For future enclosures, the team will
take inventory of monitoring supplies to ensure this will not happen again.
The first issue encountered was the low temperature within the tank, although it did increase to
the specified range during the test. Minimizing the distance between the light and the tank could
potentially help increase the temperature as well. While the pH stayed mostly in range before the
enclosure, it dropped 0.05 below the minimum twice during the closure tests. Methods of
stabilizing the pH may need to be employed for the future. The DO successfully stayed well
above the minimum threshold. The ammonia also stayed well below the maximum limit of 2
ppm. The team encountered difficulty with hardness measurements as the photometer and the
test strips yielded severely different results. The test strips yielded closer to 100-120 ppm for
each test while the photometer read lower readings of 10-15 and one time gave a reading of 0
and <<1. It was very inconsistent even when calibrated with the blank. As a result, data from the
test strips was used to generate the graphs in Appendix B. This inconsistency needs to be
resolved before conducting future closure tests as these values have very different implications
for the crayfishs health.
Moving forward, the team wishes to also take more of a mass balance approach to monitoring
water quality in the tank as the relationships within the tank are dependent on more than just
food and healthy parameters. This balance can be summarized as the exchange between the
plants, (which absorb CO2 and ammonia, and produces O2 and organic matter) and the crayfish
(which absorbs oxygen and organic matter, and produces CO2 and ammonia). Therefore the
equilibrium in the tank can best be fine-tuned by examining the exchange of oxygen, nitrogen,
organic matter and CO2. By examining photosynthesis equation, the molar ratio between CO2
8

and oxygen is 1:1, and therefore DO rates or production and consumption will be considered
equal to one another, eliminating the need to measure both. DO measurements were not
consistent enough to generate rates for this closure, but further monitoring will be conducted in
order to do so. Ammonia will be tracked by examining the nitrogen cycle, which will also make
monitoring for nitrate necessary. Future monitoring to better track organic matter has already
been discussed.
Conclusion:
In summation, the first closure test was a success, although fine tuning will be necessary. Plant
growth rate and crayfish consumption rate should be monitored closely to ensure lasting
equilibrium that will sustain both organisms throughout the weeklong enclosure. In order to
better fine tune this balance, nitrogen and DO cycles will also be taken into consideration.
Nitrate will also be monitored to better track the nitrogen cycling through the tank. In order to
prepare for the next closure test, the team will need to obtain nitrate photometer tablets and
testing strips, figure out the hardness discrepancy, and suggests DO probes be recalibrated to
ensure proper function

References
Huner, J. 1994. Freshwater Crayfish Aquaculture in North America, Europe and Austrailia:
Families Astacidae, Cambaridae, and Parastacidae. Binghamton, NY: Food Products
Press.
Pierce, J. Crayfish Basics. Wet Web Media. Available at:
http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/volume_5/volume_5_3/crayfish_basics.htm. Accessed
10 September 2015.
Petsmart. 2015. Elodea Details. Petsmart. Available at http://www.petsmart.com/supplies/liveplants/elodea-zid36-15150/cat-36-catid-300070?_t=pfm%3Dsearch%26SearchTerm
%3Delodea. Accessed 1 October 2015.
Young, G. 2005. How to Care for Your Crayfish. Crayfish Guy. Available at
http://www.crayfishguy.com/generalcraycare.htm. Accessed 10 September 2015.

10

Appendices
C. Complete Monitoring Data
D. Graphs

11

Appendix A:
Table 1. Complete Water Quality Data
Water Quality Log for Crayfish
Date

Time

Temp
(F)

pH

DO

NO2-

NH4+

Hardness

6.58.5

>3

<4
ppm

<2
ppm

> 50 ppm

5-Oct

5:36 PM

66

7.8

8.35

0.5

120

8-Oct

5:20 PM

67

6.45

8.15

0.4

120

12-Oct

5:45 PM

66

7.8

8.65

0.5

120

20-Oct

5:24 PM

66

7.02

8.73

0.25

120

21-Oct

6:10 PM

66

6.46

855

0.4

120

22-Oct

7:19 PM

7.95

22-Oct

6:52 PM

8.03

23-Oct

7:33 AM

7.89

23-Oct

7:07 AM

7.65

26-Oct

7:12 AM

7.57

26-Oct

6:39 PM

67

7.02

7.78

27-Oct

7:07 AM

66

6.97

7.87

0.3

Notes:

PVC, snails, & additional

water added

DO probe gave
inconsistent measurements
0

120

Enclosure 1
9-Nov

6:30 PM

69

7.26

7.5

0.06

15

10-Nov

7:30 AM

70

6.45

7.7

0.17

15

10-Nov

12:00 PM

70

6.95

7.4

0.25

100

10-Nov

7:40 PM

71

6.65

7.63

N/A

0.16

10

Crayfish added; enclosure

sealed
90 mL used; strip read 120
ppm for hardness
30 mL used, strip read 100
ppm for hardness
100 mL used, strip read
100 ppm for hardness

12

Appendix B:

Pre-Enclosure Data
10

140

120

100

7
6

80

5
60

4
3

DO (mg/L)
NH4+ (ppm)
Temp (F)
Hardness (ppm)

40

20

1
0
6:00

pH

0
8:24

10:48

13:12

15:36

18:00

20:24

Figure 1. Water quality data measured prior to the 24-hour enclosure.

Enclosure Data
9

140

120

7
100

pH
DO (mg/L)

80

NH4+ (ppm)
Temp (F)

60

Hardness (ppm)

40

2
20

1
0
6:00

0
12:00

18:00

Figure 2. Water quality data measured at the start, end, and during the 24-hour enclosure.

13

14