4.5 Article

Comparison of continuous and batch feeding systems on maturation, biochemical composition and immune variables of the oyster Crassostrea corteziensis (Hertlein 1951)

期刊

AQUACULTURE RESEARCH
卷 40, 期 4, 页码 464-472

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2109.2008.02117.x

关键词

biochemical composition; broodstock conditioning; digestive enzymes; fatty acid composition; feeding system; haemocyte; HUFA; mollusk; reproduction; respiratory burst; stress

资金

  1. SAGARPA-CONACYT [2003-02-035]
  2. SEP-CONACYT [2006-24333]
  3. CONACYT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two feeding systems for maturing oysters were compared, one a continuous feeding system and the other a batch system in which the whole microalgal ration was supplied once daily. The maturation diet consisted in Isochrysis galbana (T-ISO) complemented with an enriched lipid emulsion. Survival and growth did not differ between the feeding systems after 3 weeks of conditioning. Maturation, biochemical composition, fatty acids in membranes and reserves, digestive enzymes activities and immune parameters in Crassostrea corteziensis were analysed. Only oysters fed using the once-daily system had vitellogenic oocytes, whereas the gonad of oysters fed using a continuous-drip system remained immature. Total and differential haemocyte counts were similar between both the systems, but respiratory burst was significantly higher in oysters fed using the once-daily system. Amylase, lipase and trypsin activities in oyster's digestive gland were similar between both the feeding systems. Total lipids, however, differed significantly in oyster tissue in relation to feeding system, with highest level in those fed using the once-daily system, but fatty acid composition in reserves and membrane were similar. No differences were found for biochemical parameters in haemolymph. These results suggest that feeding oysters using a batch, once-daily system allows more rapid initial gonad maturation without affecting general physiological condition and growth.

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