4.1 Article

Effect of probiotics on white shrimp (Penaeus vannamei) growth performance and immune response

期刊

MARINE BIOLOGY RESEARCH
卷 6, 期 3, 页码 327-332

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/17451000903300893

关键词

Growth performance; immune response; Penaeus vannamei; probiotics; white shrimp

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30700620]
  2. Zhejiang Provincial Scientific Program, China [2007C12037, 2009C32018]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present research evaluated the effects of probiotics, Lactobacillus acidophilus RS058, Rhodopseudomonas palustris GH642 and Bacillus coagulans NJ105, as water additives on growth performance and immune response of the white shrimp, Penaeus vannamei. The shrimp, with average weight of 3.38 +/- 0.13 g, were stocked in each of the 12 500-litre polypropylene tanks, with three tanks treated with L. acidophilus RS058 (T-1), R. palustris GH642 (T-2) and B. coagulans NJ105 (T-3), respectively, at a final concentration of 1 x 10(7) cfu ml(-1) every day, and the remaining three tanks were without any probiotic and served as the control. The trial was carried out for 35 days and the results indicated that probiotic treatments significantly improved the final weight, daily weight gain (DWG) and relative weight gain (RWG) of the shrimp (P<0.05) as compared with those of the control. There were no significant differences (P>0.05) in final weight and RWG among the treatments. As for T-1, no significant differences were observed in DWG and SOD activity compared with T-2 and T-3. However, higher DWG (P<0.05) was observed in T-3 compared with T-2. A substantial and significant increase (P<0.05) in phenoloxidase (PO) activity was found in T-3 compared with those of the other two probiotic treatments. The activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) was significantly higher for the shrimp in T-3 than that in T-2. There were no significant differences (P<0.05) in the peroxidase (SOD) activity and antibacterial activity among the shrimp treated with different probiotics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据