Analisis Resiko Usaha Pembesaran Lele Sangkuriang Probiotik Dan Non Probiotik (Study Kasus Usaha Lele Bapak Wahyu) Di Desa Karang Binangun II BMR OKU Timur

Munsiarum, Wiwiek Tri Setyarini
{"title":"Analisis Resiko Usaha Pembesaran Lele Sangkuriang Probiotik Dan Non Probiotik (Study Kasus Usaha Lele Bapak Wahyu) Di Desa Karang Binangun II BMR OKU Timur","authors":"Munsiarum, Wiwiek Tri Setyarini","doi":"10.53488/jba.v8i01.135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The catfish farming business is a fairly developed business in the fisheries sector of East OKU district. Enlargement of catfish on limited land with high stocking density and poor feed management will worsen pond water conditions due to accumulation of organic matter that is toxic to catfish which causes stress and causes various diseases. Currently, probiotics are being used in fisheries for disease prevention efforts. The probiotic application itself gave birth to different attitudes and opinions for sangkuriang catfish rearing actors in Karang Binangun II Village, a stronghold that responded positively to revealing that real results had been obtained, in fact reducing production costs and boosting productivity. Meanwhile, from the camps that disagree, arguing is only wasteful and detrimental. \nThe average cost incurred for probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement per 100 m² in one production cycle is Rp. 16,017,705 with an average total receipt of Rp. 21,098,500 so that the average income of probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is Rp. 5,080,795. while the average cost incurred on non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement per 100 m² in one production cycle is Rp. 16,228,200 with an average total revenue received of Rp. 19,239,500 so that the average income for raising sangkuriang catfish non probiotics is Rp. 3,011,300. \nThe cost risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.0063 while nonprobiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.0277, this is due to the large production costs that must be incurred by non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing farmers, such as fertilization costs, liming costs , the cost of immunostimulants, and the cost of feed. \nFor the production risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing with a coefficient of variance of 0.0048, while the non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing with a variance coefficient of 0.0729 The results of the analysis show that the production risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing is smaller than that of nonprobiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing. this is due to the large production obtained on the enlargement of probiotic sangkuriang catfish. \nOn the income risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.14 while on non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.31. The results of the analysis show that the income risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is smaller than non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement, this is due to the low production cost of probiotic sangkuriang catfish with high production yields so that the income obtained on probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is high.","PeriodicalId":164157,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Bakti Agribisnis","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Bakti Agribisnis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53488/jba.v8i01.135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The catfish farming business is a fairly developed business in the fisheries sector of East OKU district. Enlargement of catfish on limited land with high stocking density and poor feed management will worsen pond water conditions due to accumulation of organic matter that is toxic to catfish which causes stress and causes various diseases. Currently, probiotics are being used in fisheries for disease prevention efforts. The probiotic application itself gave birth to different attitudes and opinions for sangkuriang catfish rearing actors in Karang Binangun II Village, a stronghold that responded positively to revealing that real results had been obtained, in fact reducing production costs and boosting productivity. Meanwhile, from the camps that disagree, arguing is only wasteful and detrimental. The average cost incurred for probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement per 100 m² in one production cycle is Rp. 16,017,705 with an average total receipt of Rp. 21,098,500 so that the average income of probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is Rp. 5,080,795. while the average cost incurred on non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement per 100 m² in one production cycle is Rp. 16,228,200 with an average total revenue received of Rp. 19,239,500 so that the average income for raising sangkuriang catfish non probiotics is Rp. 3,011,300. The cost risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.0063 while nonprobiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.0277, this is due to the large production costs that must be incurred by non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing farmers, such as fertilization costs, liming costs , the cost of immunostimulants, and the cost of feed. For the production risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing with a coefficient of variance of 0.0048, while the non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing with a variance coefficient of 0.0729 The results of the analysis show that the production risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing is smaller than that of nonprobiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing. this is due to the large production obtained on the enlargement of probiotic sangkuriang catfish. On the income risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.14 while on non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish rearing the coefficient of variance is 0.31. The results of the analysis show that the income risk of probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is smaller than non-probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement, this is due to the low production cost of probiotic sangkuriang catfish with high production yields so that the income obtained on probiotic sangkuriang catfish enlargement is high.
分析奥库东礁Binangun II
鲶鱼养殖业务是东奥库区渔业部门相当发达的业务。在高放养密度和不良饲料管理的有限土地上扩大鲶鱼会使池塘水条件恶化,因为对鲶鱼有毒的有机物积累会造成压力并引起各种疾病。目前,益生菌被用于渔业疾病预防工作。益生菌的应用本身就给卡朗宾君二村的sangkuriang鲶鱼养殖者带来了不同的态度和意见,这个据点对透露实际效果做出了积极的反应,实际上降低了生产成本,提高了生产力。与此同时,在持不同意见的阵营中,争论只是浪费和有害的。在一个生产周期内,每100 m²扩大益生菌鲶鱼的平均成本为16,017,705 Rp,平均总收益为21,098,500 Rp,因此扩大益生菌鲶鱼的平均收入为5,080,795 Rp。而在一个生产周期内,每100平方米扩大非益生菌sangkuriang鲶鱼的平均成本为16,228,200卢比,平均总收入为19,239,500卢比,因此养殖非益生菌sangkuriang鲶鱼的平均收入为3,011,300卢比。益生菌桑库亮鲶鱼养殖的成本风险方差系数为0.0063,而非益生菌桑库亮鲶鱼养殖的方差系数为0.0277,这是由于非益生菌桑库亮鲶鱼养殖养殖户必须承担较大的生产成本,如施肥成本、催肥成本、免疫刺激剂成本、饲料成本等。对于益生菌桑久良鲶鱼养殖的生产风险方差系数为0.0048,而非益生菌桑久良鲶鱼养殖的生产风险方差系数为0.0729,分析结果表明,益生菌桑久良鲶鱼养殖的生产风险小于非益生菌桑久良鲶鱼养殖。这是由于扩大益生菌桑库良鲶鱼获得了大量产量。益生菌养殖桑久良鲶鱼的收入风险方差系数为0.14,非益生菌养殖桑久良鲶鱼的收入风险方差系数为0.31。分析结果表明,益生菌放大鲶鱼的收入风险小于非益生菌放大鲶鱼,这是由于益生菌放大鲶鱼的生产成本低,产量高,因此益生菌放大鲶鱼获得的收入较高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信