4.7 Article

Effects of dietary oxidized fish oil on growth performance and antioxidant defense mechanism of juvenile Rhynchocypris lagowski Dybowski

期刊

AQUACULTURE
卷 512, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2019.734368

关键词

Oxidized fish oil; Growth performance; Antioxidant defense; Mechanism; Rhynchocypris lagowski Dybowski

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30671621, 31372540]
  2. Industrial Technology Research & Exploitation Project of Jilin Province [2011002-1]
  3. Foreign Trade Development Project in the northeast old industrial base of Jilin Province
  4. Key Research & Development of Jilin Science and Technology Department [20180201017NY]
  5. Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System [CARS-46]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Five isonitrogenous and isolipidic diets containing fresh fish oil and four degrees of oxidized fish oil (POV:100; 200; 300; 400) were formulated to investigate the effects of dietary oxidized fish oil on growth performance, the antioxidation function of Rhynchocypris lagowski Dybowski. After an 8-week feeding trial, fish fed oxidized oil diets obtained significantly lower weight gain and specific growth rate due to their lower feed efficiency and protein efficiency. With the increasing of fish oil oxidation level, MDA level of the liver significantly increased, the antioxidant enzymes (T-SOD, CAT, GSH-PX) activities and GSH content of the liver were significantly decreased, and CAT, CuZn-SOD and GSH-PX mRNA levels of the liver showed the same change trend. Further analysis showed that, Keap1 mRNA level of the liver was increased, and the Nrf2, Maf, HO-1 mRNA levels of the liver were significantly decreased. However, some parameters showed a reverse trend after the 4-week feeding. In conclusion, by checking indicators of growth performance, the main antioxidant parameters, the related genes mRNA levels, the present study showed that dietary oxidized fish oil can induce oxidative damage in R. lagowski Dybowski.

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

4.7
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