4.5 Article

Inclusion of rendered animal ingredients as fishmeal substitutes in practical diets for cuneate drum, Nibea miichthioides (Chu, Lo et Wu)

Journal

AQUACULTURE NUTRITION
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages 81-87

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2095.2007.00456.x

Keywords

cuneate drum; fishmeal; growth; nitrogen retention efficiency; rendered animal ingredients

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Potential of using rendered animal ingredients, poultry by-product meat (PM), meat and bone meal (MBM), feather meal (FM) and blood meal (BM) to replace fishmeal in practical diets for cuneate drum Nibea miichthioides (Chu, Lo et Wit) was examined in a net pen experiment. A total of 10 dietary treatments were compared. Nine diets were formulated to contain 363 g kg(-1) digestible protein and 14.8 MJ kg(-1) digestible energy, and a dietary treatment consisting of raw fish (RF) served as reference. In the formulated diets, the control diet contained 350 g kg(-1) herring meal. whereas in the other eight diets, the fishmeal were replaced by MBM (30% fishmeal replacement), PM (50% fishmeal replacement), a blend of PM, MBM, FM and BM (30% 50% and 80% fishmeal replacement), or a blend of PM. MBM and BM (30%, 50% and 80% fishmeal replacement), respectively. Cuneate drum fingerling (initial body weight 28 g) were fed the test diets for 8 weeks. Specific growth rate (SGR), final body weight (FBW), nitrogen retention efficiency (NRE), condition factor and contents of moisture, crude protein and crude lipid in carcass Were not significantly different between fish fed the formulated diets. Fish fed the formulated control diet exhibited lower SGR and FBW, but higher FCR, NRE, hepatosomatic index and crude lipid content in carcass and liver than those of the fish fed the RF. Results of the present stud), indicate that combination of rendered animal protein ingredients can replace most of the fishmeal in practical diets for cuneate drum.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available