4.7 Article

Nanopeptide C-I20 remarkably enhances growth performance and disease resistances by improving the mucosal structure, antioxidant capacity, and immunity in mandarin fish (Siniperca chuatsi)

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2023.126935

关键词

Nanopeptide; Growth performance; Disease resistant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the feeding effect of the nanopeptide C-I20, created by conjugating antimicrobial peptide gcIFN-20H and CMCS, in mandarin fish. The results showed that a diet with 150 mg/kg C-I20 improved fish growth performance, antioxidant capacity, and immunity, while reducing pathogen loads and tissue lesions.
Soybean meal, excessively used in place of fish meal (FM) in aquaculture, has a detrimental impact on fish. In this study, the nanopeptide C-I20, which was created by conjugating antimicrobial peptide gcIFN-20H and CMCS, were evaluated the feeding effect in mandarin fish (Siniperca chuatsi). Compared with the control group, 150 mg/ kg C-I20-fed fish showed the second highest growth performance with no significant changes in body composition. C-I20-fed fish showed more goblet cells and thicker mucin after feeding. The 150 mg/kg C-I20 diet boosted the antioxidant capacity, immunity, and digestive enzymes. After Aeromonas hydrophila and infection spleen and kidney necrosis virus infection, the survival rates in the 150 mg/kg C-I20 group were highest. Meanwhile, many tissues in the 150 mg/kg C-I20 group had significantly lower pathogen loads than the other groups. Treatment with 150 mg/kg C-I20 was effective in increasing antioxidant capacity and immunity. The minimum tissue lesions were observed in the 150 mg/kg C-I20 group. The goblet cell number and mucin thickness were significantly increased by C-I20 treatment after infection. The study results herein showed that a reasonable dietary concentration of C-I20 feed promoted growth performance and disease resistances in fish, suggesting a prospective nano antimicrobial peptide for the aquaculture.

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