Knowledge hub
What we know, written down.
Most of what decides whether a pond makes money is not which brand of feed you buy. It is how much you feed, at what particle size, at what stage, and how you keep the bag before it is opened. All of that is published, and most of it is not written down anywhere a farmer here can read it. So it is here, with the sources named.
Feeding
How to feed, and how much.
The two questions in order: which grade a pond is on, and how much of it goes in each day.
Which grade for which fish
Harvest weight decides the pellet. Published progression from 0–1 g to above 250 g, and where each species stops.
Feed managementRation, timing and storage
Daily ration as a share of body weight, how often to feed, and how to keep a bag so it is still feed when you open it.
Feed nutritionWhat is actually in the bag
Protein, energy, lipid and fibre — what each does, what the published requirements are, and why protein falls as fish grow.
Fish farming
Planning and running the pond.
Stocking, yield and the economics, plus a page for each species we formulate around.
Stocking density and yield
Published stocking rates and yields for carp polyculture, Pabda monoculture and tilapia, with culture periods.
Farm economicsWhat feed costs per kilo of fish
Feed is the largest recurring cost in a pond. Work out your own conversion rather than trusting a number on a bag.
The rangeSix grades, hatchery to table
Mash, 0.5–0.6 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm and 3 mm, at 32–42% protein in 10, 20 and 35 kg packs.
Industry newsWhat the numbers mean
Production figures, schemes and policy from Tripura and Assam, read from a fish farmer's side of the fence.
Species guides
Feeding niche, harvest weight and which grades apply, species by species. The three small-mouth species finish inside the 2 mm band; the carps and tilapia run to 3 mm.
Where it comes from
Sources, and why we name them.
Every figure in this section comes from published work — FAO culture documentation and feeding tables, ICAR-CIFA nutrition manuals, fisheries extension material and peer-reviewed culture studies. Where a page gives a number, the source is named on the page or in the research note we keep alongside it.
We do this because a farmer should be able to check us. A feed company that publishes a feeding rate without saying where it came from is asking to be believed rather than verified, and the two are not the same thing. It also keeps us honest: twice now a figure we had published turned out not to match its own source, and naming the source is what caught it.
- Published, not promotionalThese are the ranges the literature reports, not results we are promising you.
- CheckableSources named on the page, so you can read the original rather than take our word.
- Corrected when wrongWhere we have got a figure wrong we change it and say so, rather than quietly editing.
- No yield guaranteesPond conditions, stocking density, water quality and management move every result.