Reference Delivery
Nile tilapia cage culture feeding — Egypt
Illustrative scenario: switching a Nile Delta tilapia cage farm from hand-broadcast sinking pellets to boat-mounted automated feeders with floating extruded feed, unified across a 96-cage cluster to standardise ration control and cut feed waste.
- Egypt
- Country
- Aquaculture (Nile tilapia)
- Category
- 4,000 t/year · 96 cages · floating extruded feed
- Scale
- 3
- Reference outcomes
Load requirements
Design loads used to size housing, utilities and equipment.
Feed ladder
2 · 3 · 4 · 6 mm floating extruded, 28–32% CP
Daily feed
18 t/day peak (June–September)
Water temp range
22–31 °C seasonal
DO management
≥4 mg/L, aeration on cages 12–24
Feeding events
4/day at 3–5% body weight (growth-adjusted)
Feed conversion target
≤1.45 cycle-average
System design choices
Why each subsystem was specified the way it was.
| Area | Choice | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Feed form | Floating extruded pellets | Visual feed-response feedback drops overfeed; sinking pellets waste 15–25% in current. |
| Delivery | 6 pneumatic feeder boats, cage-mapped programmes | One boat covers 16 cages/hour vs manual crew at 6 — labour −60% and dose consistency +40%. |
| Ration control | Feed table driven by weekly sampling + water temp | Tilapia intake collapses <20 °C; automated ration cut prevents winter overfeed and disease. |
| Aeration | Paddlewheel aerators on downstream cages | Feed-driven BOD peaks in downstream cages first; targeted aeration prevents summer DO crashes. |
| Traceability | Per-cage lot code from feed bag to harvest | Retailer traceability and antibiotic-free programme require full ration and lot audit trail. |
Results
Representative KPIs achieved on projects of this scope.
FCR (cycle avg)
1.42
Harvest weight
620 g at 7 months
Uniformity (CV)
7.1%
Feed cost / kg fish
$0.83 (was $0.96)
Survival
89.4%
Representative outcomes
- Typical scope: 6 pneumatic feeder boats, 96 cages @ 1000 m³
- Typical outcome: FCR 1.58 → 1.42
- Typical outcome: harvest weight uniformity CV 11 → 7%
Note: This case study is an anonymized reference scenario. Specific client identities, contract values and commercial terms are withheld under NDA. Figures reflect typical outcomes for projects of this scope and are not a guarantee for your project.
