4.0 Article

Performance, hematology, and immunology of pacu in response to dietary supplementation with fructooligosaccharides

期刊

PESQUISA AGROPECUARIA BRASILEIRA
卷 56, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

EMPRESA BRASIL PESQ AGROPEC
DOI: 10.1590/S1678-3921.pab2021.v56.02460

关键词

Piaractus mesopotamicus; feed additives; fish nutrition; prebiotics

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq) [426713/2016-8]
  2. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (Capes) [001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study showed that dietary supplementation with fructooligosaccharides (FOS) had positive effects on the growth performance and blood health of pacu juveniles, especially with the addition of 2.0 g kg(-1) FOS in the feed, leading to increased weight gain and specific growth rate. Additionally, the number of defense cells in the prebiotic treatment groups also increased.
The objective of this work was to evaluate the effects of dietary supplementation with fructooligosaccharides (FOS) on the performance, hematology, and immunology of pacu (Piaractus mesopotamicus) juveniles. A total of 0 (control), 2.0, and 4.0 g kg(-1) of the probiotic were added to the fish diets. Fish (49.3 +/- 4.3 g) were allotted into 12 tanks of 60 L, in a completely randomized design (n=4). After 60 days, final weight, weight gain, specific growth rate, and feed conversion ratio were improved in the fish fed with the prebiotic, although feed intake was not affected by the treatments. The number of red blood cells was higher only in fish fed with 2.0 g kg(-1) FOS. The opposite was observed for the hematimetric indices mean corpuscular volume and mean corpuscular hemoglobin, which decreased in fish fed with 2.0 g kg(-1) FOS. The number of defense cells, such as leukocytes and thrombocytes, also increased in the prebiotic treatments. The evaluated immunological parameters were not influenced by prebiotic supplementation. Dietary FOS supplementation improved pacu growth and health.

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

4.0
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