4.5 Article

Effect of temperature on digestibility, growth performance and nutrient utilization of corn distiller's dried grains with soluble (DDGS) in Common carp juveniles

期刊

AQUACULTURE RESEARCH
卷 51, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/are.14432

关键词

apparent digestibility coefficient; Common carp; distiller's dried grains with soluble; growth; water temperature

资金

  1. Pannonia Bio, Hungary

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this trial was to study the digestibility of corn distiller's dried grains with soluble (DDGS) in Common carp juveniles at two water temperatures 20 degrees C and 30 degrees C. DDGS digestibility was determined based on the substitution of 30% of a reference diet by test DDGS. Three hundred and sixty Common carp juveniles (average weight, 40 +/- 7 g) were distributed in thermo-regulated recirculation water system equipped with twelve 1m(3) fibreglass tanks (30 fish per tank), which were allotted to four experimental group in triplicates. Half of the experimental groups were maintained at 20 degrees C, whereas the other half were exposed to 30 degrees C. Juveniles reared under different temperature regimes were fed either of the two diets, with or without DDGS (DDGS diet or reference diet), to evaluate the interaction effect between water temperature and nutrient digestibility of corn DDGS in Common carp. Diet and water temperature interaction was effective in modulating the response of dry matter digestibility of DDGS ingredient, and digestibility was found higher in juveniles reared at 20 degrees C compared with 30 degrees C. Growth, feed efficiency and protein efficiency were higher at 20 degrees C compared with 30 degrees C. Whole body csomposition of Common carp juveniles was found unaffected due to diet and water temperature interaction. Overall, it is concluded that digestibility and growth performance of Common carp is better at 20 degrees C compared with 30 degrees C, and DDGS has high potential for inclusion in diets of Common carp.

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

4.5
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