4.5 Article

Dietary pyridoxine requirement of juvenile Jian carp (Cyprinus carpio var. Jian)

Journal

AQUACULTURE NUTRITION
Volume 15, Issue 4, Pages 402-408

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2095.2008.00604.x

Keywords

Cyprinus carpio var. Jian; digestive enzymes activities; Jian carp; pyridoxine requirement

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In a 80-day feeding trial, a total of 1050 juvenile Jian carp (Cyprinus carpio var. Jian) with in average initial weight of 10.71 +/- 0.05 g were fed semi-purified diets containing seven graded levels of pyridoxine (0.20, 1.71, 3.23 4.96, 6.31, 8.58 and 12.39 mg pyridoxine kg(-1) diet). Results indicated that with increasing dietary pyridoxine levels Lip to 4.96 mg kg(-1) diet, percent weight gain (PWG) and specific growth rate (SGR) were improved, and no differences were found with further increase of pyridoxine levels. Feed intake also followed the similar pattern to that observed with PWG and SGR when dietary pyridoxine levels were <= 6.32 mg kg(-1) diet. But feed efficiency and protein efficiency ratio were not affected by pyridoxine levels. Crude protein of carcass, productive protein value and plasma ammonia concentration were improved with increasing dietary pyridoxine levels Lip to 4.96 mg kg(-1) diet. Amylase activities in the intestine were improved with increasing dietary pyridoxine levels Lip to 4.96 mg kg(-1) diet, but protease and lipase activities in the intestine were not affected by pyridoxine levels. Na+, K+-ATPase and Gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase activities in proximal intestine, mid intestine (M1) and distal intestine (DI) were lowest when fed the diet containing 1.71 mg pyridoxine kg(-1) diet. The alkaline phosphatase activities in MI and DI followed the same pattern. The dietary pyridoxine requirement of juvenile Jian carp based on PWG estimated by broken line model was 6.07 mg pyridoxine kg(-1) diet.

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