Certification - The Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta

Certification - The Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta

Certification - The Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta


You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.


NILE TILAPIA, Oreochromis niloticus<br />

FED PINEAPPLE (Ananas comosus) PEEL MEAL-BASED<br />

DIETS<br />

BY<br />


MATRIC NO: 2006/0818<br />









JUNE, 2011<br />



I certify that this project work was carried out by OLALEYE WAHEED INAOLAJI under<br />

my supervision in the Department <strong>of</strong> Aquaculture and Fishery management, <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>Agriculture</strong>, <strong>Abeokuta</strong>, Ogun State.<br />

_________________________<br />

Dr. S.O Obasa<br />

Supervisor<br />

___________________<br />

Date<br />

__________________________<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>. Y. Akegbejo-Samsons<br />

H.O.D Department <strong>of</strong> Aquaculture<br />

& Fishery Management<br />

_____________________<br />

Date<br />



This Project Work is dedicated to the Almighty Allah who saw mw through this<br />

Course <strong>of</strong> Study. And also to my Mentors, who serve as my Succour where there seems to be<br />

nobody; My late Father MR. OLALEYE ABDUL-RAHEEM BOLAJI (May his soul rest<br />


MR. BOLAJI LUKMAN, MRS OLALEYE NAFISAT and the entire Family <strong>of</strong><br />




All Praises, Adoration and Glorification are for ALLAH alone, the Most Beneficent<br />

and the Most Merciful. <strong>The</strong> Bestower <strong>of</strong> Knowledge for His Mercy and Provision. May His<br />

blessing continue to shower on the Soul <strong>of</strong> the UNLETTERED PROPHET who was raised as<br />

mercy for the entire Human Race and Jins, PROPHET MUHAMMAD (SAW) his foot step<br />

till Angel Israfeel blows the trumphet. To an invaluable extend I express my pr<strong>of</strong>ound<br />

gratitude to my able Supervisor Dr. S.O. Obasa for his assistance and constructive criticisms<br />

on this work, may God be with him and his wards.<br />

Finally, my gratitude extends to our H.O.D Pr<strong>of</strong>. Y. Akegbejo-Samson, all members <strong>of</strong> the<br />

great Department <strong>of</strong> Aquaculture and Fisheries management; Dr. Wifred Olusegun Alexandra<br />

Alegbeleye, Mr. Waheed Oyebanjo Abdul, Dr Francis Idowu , Adeosun (<strong>The</strong> Boy), Dr (Mrs)<br />

Olubunmi Temilade Agbebi, baba Udolisa, Dr (Mrs) N<strong>of</strong>isat Bolatito Ikenweiwe, Mr.<br />

Dominic Odulate, Dr. Yemi Akegbejo-Samsons, Pr<strong>of</strong>. Nnamani Ezeri, Pr<strong>of</strong>. S.O. Otubusin,<br />

Mr. Adeolu Akinyemi, Mr. ‘Lere Johnson Oyewunmi, Mr. Ikililu, Mr John, Mr Adeoye<br />

Adedeji Mums and Aunts in the departmental <strong>of</strong>fice. My Colleague Brothers and Sisters in<br />

the Department; Mr Asiwaju Abdul-Rahmon, Mr Daniyan Adeolu, Mr Adeoti Oluwatosin,<br />

Mr Sangosina Moshood, friends and well wishers.<br />

Thank you and God bless.<br />



A feeding trial was conducted to investigate the effect <strong>of</strong> Fermented Pineapple (Ananas<br />

comosus) Peel Meal (FPPM) on Growth Performance and Digestibility <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis<br />

niloticus. One hundred and twenty fingerlings <strong>of</strong> Tilapia (Oreochromisniloticus) with average<br />

weight <strong>of</strong> 13.94 ± 1.96 (Mean ± S.D) per plastic bowl (33L) in the wet laboratory. Four (4)<br />

iso-nitrogenous diets containing 35% crude protein in which maize was replaced by FPPM at<br />

0% (TD1), 25% (TD2), 50% (TD3) and 75% (TD4) levels were formulated. <strong>The</strong> fingerlings<br />

were fed at 5% body weight per day for 56 days. It was observed at the end <strong>of</strong> the experiment<br />

that FPPM was most suitable as an energy supplement when incorporated at 75%<br />

replacement. <strong>The</strong> Weight Gain, Specific Growth Rate (SGR), Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR)<br />

and Protein Production Value (PPV) values <strong>of</strong> 35.60g, 2.25% day, 2.58 and 0.56 respectively<br />

were highest in fish fed diet TD4.. <strong>The</strong> final weights <strong>of</strong> the fish showed no significant<br />

difference (P>0.05) between fish fed the various diets.<br />

<strong>The</strong>re was significant no difference (P>0.05) in FCR among the dietary treatments. TD1 is<br />

significantly different (P˂0.05) from TD4. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant difference (P>0.05) in<br />

PPV among the treatments.<br />

Based on the results, it could be recommended that in practices, 75% inclusion <strong>of</strong> FPPM in<br />

diet is optimal for O. niloticus fingerlings without necessarily compromising growth rate or<br />

causing deleterious effects on the Digestibility Parameters.<br />



Front Page<br />

i<br />

<strong>Certification</strong><br />

ii<br />

Dedication<br />

iii<br />

Acknowledgement<br />

iv<br />

Abstract<br />

v<br />

Table <strong>of</strong> content<br />

vi<br />

List <strong>of</strong> table<br />

vii<br />


1.0 Introduction 1<br />

1.1 Objectives <strong>of</strong> the study 3<br />


2.0 Review <strong>of</strong> Literatures 4<br />

2.1 Life History and Biology <strong>of</strong> Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) 4<br />

2.1.1 Food and Feeding Habit 4<br />

2.1.2 Physical Characteristics 6<br />

2.2 Nutrient Composition <strong>of</strong> Nile Tilapia 6<br />

2.2.1 Carbohydrates Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 6<br />

2.2.2 Lipid and Fatty Acids Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 7<br />

2.2.3 Protein and Amino Acids Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 7<br />

2.2.5 Vitamins Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 8<br />

2.2.6 Minerals Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 8<br />

2.2.7 Energy Requirement <strong>of</strong> Fish 9<br />

2.3 Pineapple Plant (Ananas commosus) 10<br />

2.3.1 Etymology 10<br />

2.3.2 Nutrition Purpose 11<br />

2.3.3 Uses and Composition <strong>of</strong> Pineapple Plants (Ananas comosus) 14<br />

2.3.4 Processing 14<br />

2.3.5 Utilization <strong>of</strong> Pineapple Waste 15<br />

2.3.6 <strong>The</strong>rapeutic Application 16<br />



3.0 Materials and Methods 17<br />

3.1.1 Materials 17<br />

3.1.2 Methods 17<br />

3.1.3 Experimental System 18<br />

3.1.4 Experimental Fish 18<br />

3.1.5 Experimental Diets 18<br />

3.1.6 Experimental Procedure 20<br />

3.1.7 Growth Performance 20<br />

3.1.8 Digestibility Parameter 21<br />

3.1.9 Analytical Procedure 22<br />

3.2.0 Proximate Analysis <strong>of</strong> Mango Peel Meal 22<br />

3.2.1 Water Quality Parameters 23<br />

3.2.2 Statistical Analysis <strong>of</strong> Experimental Data 23<br />


4.0 Results 24<br />

4.1 Proximate Composition Of <strong>The</strong> Experimental Diets 24<br />

4.2 Carcass Composition 24<br />

4.3 Water Quality Parameters 24<br />

4.4 Growth Performance 27<br />

4.5 Digestibility 31<br />


5.0 Discussion 32<br />

References 35<br />



Table 1: Nutritional value per 100 g <strong>of</strong> Pineapple Plant (Ananas comosus) 13<br />

Table 2: <strong>The</strong> pH <strong>of</strong> the Fermented Pineapple Peels Flour 17<br />

Table 3: Proximate composition <strong>of</strong> feed ingredients 19<br />

Table 4:Percentage composition <strong>of</strong> the experimental diets 19<br />

Table 5: Proximate Composition <strong>of</strong> Experimental Diets 25<br />

Table 6: Proximate composition <strong>of</strong> experimental fish carcass 26<br />

Table 7: Mean weekly values <strong>of</strong> physico-chemical parameters during the<br />

experimental period 26<br />

Table 8: Mean Weekly Growth Trend <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis Niloticus Fingerlings Fed Various Level <strong>of</strong><br />

Pineapple Peel Meal Based Diets 28<br />

Table 9: Growth Response and Nutrient Utilization <strong>of</strong> Male O. niloticus Fingerlings fed<br />

various Level <strong>of</strong> Fermented Pineapple Peel Meal based Diets 29<br />




Fish has continued to be the source <strong>of</strong> hope toward solving global problem <strong>of</strong> malnutrition due to its<br />

richness in nutritive values above other animal sources <strong>of</strong> protein (Delgado et al., 2003; Fasakin,<br />

2007). <strong>The</strong> expansion and intensification <strong>of</strong> aquaculture production has been recommended towards<br />

ensuring increase in food fish production in order to meet up with the global demand since capture<br />

fisheries have continued to be on the decline over decades (New, 1987; Delgado et al., 2003). Over<br />

the past decades aquaculture has grown in leaps and bounds in response to an increasing demand for<br />

fish as a source <strong>of</strong> protein globally (Akinrotimi et al., 2007a). This is because production from capture<br />

fisheries has reached its maximum potential possible, as the catch is dwindling with each passing day<br />

(Gabriel et al., 2007). According to FAO (2006), fish supplies from capture fisheries will therefore,<br />

not be able to meet the growing global demand for aquatic food.<br />

Hence, there is the need for a viable alternative fish production system that can sufficiently meet this<br />

demand, and aquaculture fits exactly into this role. As aquaculture production becomes more and more<br />

intensive in Nigeria, fish feed will be a significant factor in increasing the productivity and<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>itability <strong>of</strong> aquaculture (Akinrotimi et.al., (2007b). Jamiu and Ayinla (2003) opined that feed<br />

management determines the viability <strong>of</strong> aquaculture as it accounts for at least 60 percent <strong>of</strong> the cost <strong>of</strong><br />

fish production. <strong>The</strong> need to intensify the culture <strong>of</strong> the fish, so as to meet the ever increasing demand<br />

for fish has made it essential to develop suitable diets either in supplementary forms for ponds or as<br />

complete feed in tanks (Olukunle, 2006). For the purpose <strong>of</strong> nutritional and economic benefits,<br />

previous researchers have made attempts at increasing the use <strong>of</strong> nonconventional plant and animal<br />

materials to replace conventional feed ingredients like maize and fish meal in fish feed ration (Falaye,<br />

1988; Fagbenro, 1992; Olatunde, 1996, Baruah et al., 2003; Eyo,2004). According to Olurin et al.<br />

(2006), maize is the major source <strong>of</strong> metabolisable energy in most compounded diets for Tilapia<br />

species. This is because it is readily available and digestible.<br />

However, the increasing prohibitive cost <strong>of</strong> this commodity has necessitated the need to search for an<br />

alternative source <strong>of</strong> energy. Recently, FAO (2006), reported shortages in the production <strong>of</strong> cereals, a<br />

serious issue in many countries including Nigeria. <strong>The</strong> use <strong>of</strong> cereal products, especially maize in fish<br />


feeds is becoming increasingly unjustified in economic terms (Tewe, 2004), because <strong>of</strong> the ever<br />

increasing cost. <strong>The</strong>re is therefore, the need to exploit cheaper energy sources to replace expensive<br />

cereals in fish feed formulation. To relieve the food feed competition between man and animal and for<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>it maximization, fermented pineapple meal is very appropriate for this purpose.<br />

However, problem <strong>of</strong> high cost <strong>of</strong> feeding in aquaculture is further exacerbated due to the scarce and<br />

expensive nature <strong>of</strong> ingredients used in the formulation <strong>of</strong> fish rations. Towards solving the problem <strong>of</strong><br />

scarce and expensive feed ingredients, a number <strong>of</strong> unconventional feedstuffs have been investigated<br />

most <strong>of</strong> which are alternative protein sources as a result <strong>of</strong> the expensive nature <strong>of</strong> protein components<br />

in fish feed. However, it is equally important that more researches are focused on finding alternative<br />

suitable energy sources to maize in fish diet. Maize has been a traditional energy source in formulated<br />

feeds but, rising costs and accompanying scarcity is making it increasingly uneconomical to feed the<br />

grain to livestock’s including fish. <strong>The</strong>refore, there is need for the recruitment <strong>of</strong> other suitable<br />

ingredients that can be used as energy sources that are protein saving in the replacement <strong>of</strong> maize<br />

towards ensuring pr<strong>of</strong>itable fish farming. <strong>The</strong> need to solve the problems <strong>of</strong> feeding in aquaculture has<br />

been demonstrated through various researches in the utilization <strong>of</strong> vegetable sources and agricultural<br />

wastes such as plantain peel meal (Falaye and Oloruntuyi, 1998), poultry <strong>of</strong>fal (Fasakin, 2008),<br />

fermented shrimp head waste meal (Nwanna, 2003), maggot meal (Faturoti et al., 1995; Fasakin et al.,<br />

2004) and water hyacinth meal (Sotolu, 2008) have been emphasized in the formulation <strong>of</strong> least cost<br />

fish feed towards ensuring pr<strong>of</strong>itable fish business. Parkia biglobosa pulp is an observed predominant<br />

waste from the processing <strong>of</strong> locust bean in Northern Nigeria. <strong>The</strong> abundance <strong>of</strong> Parkia biglobosa<br />

pulp (PP) as alternative protein saving energy source would therefore, constitute a huge benefit for the<br />

sustainability <strong>of</strong> the aquaculture industry if properly harnessed.<br />

This study was, therefore, aimed at evaluating the effect <strong>of</strong> increasing the substitution <strong>of</strong> maize with<br />

fermented pineapple meal on growth performance factors in Oreochromisniloticus<br />


1.1 Objectives <strong>of</strong> the study<br />

To assess if alternative-based diet ingredient is capable <strong>of</strong> acting as a partial or complete substitute for<br />

conventional expensive and competitive feed ingredients without compromising fish growth and<br />

health, it requires effort in research. <strong>The</strong>refore, this study is designed:<br />

1. To assess the effect <strong>of</strong> varying replacement levels <strong>of</strong> maize with Fermented Pineapple Peels in<br />

the diets on the Growth Response <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings,<br />

2. To assess the effect <strong>of</strong> varying replacement levels <strong>of</strong> maize by Fermented Pineapple Peels in<br />

diets on the Digestibility <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings with an overall objective <strong>of</strong>;<br />




2.1 Life History and Biology <strong>of</strong> Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)<br />

Tilapia is the generic name <strong>of</strong> a group <strong>of</strong> cichlids endemic to Africa. <strong>The</strong> group consists <strong>of</strong> three<br />

aquaculturally important genera: Oreochromis, Sarotherodon and Tilapia. Several characteristics<br />

distinguish these three genera, but possibly the most critical relates to reproductive behavior. All<br />

tilapia species are nest builders; fertilized eggs are guarded in the nest by a brood parent. Species <strong>of</strong><br />

both Sarotherodon and Oreochromis are mouth brooders; eggs are fertilized in the nest but parents<br />

immediately pick up the eggs in their mouths and hold them through incubation and for several days<br />

after hatching. In Oreochromis species only females practice mouth brooding, while in Sarotherodon<br />

species either the male or both male and female are mouth brooders.<br />

During the last half century fish farmers throughout the tropical and semi-tropical world have begun<br />

farming tilapia. Today, all commercially important tilapia outside <strong>of</strong> Africa belong to the genus<br />

Oreochromis, and more than 90 percent <strong>of</strong> all commercially farmed tilapia outside <strong>of</strong> Africa are Nile<br />

tilapia. Less commonly farmed species are Blue tilapia (O. aureus), Mozambique tilapia (O.<br />

Mossambicus) and the Zanzibar tilapia (O. urolepishornorum).<br />

<strong>The</strong> scientific names <strong>of</strong> tilapia species have been revised a lot in the last 30 years, creating some<br />

confusion. <strong>The</strong> scientific name <strong>of</strong> the Nile tilapia has been given as Tilapia nilotica, Sarotherodon<br />

niloticus, and currently as Oreochromis niloticus.<br />


In the wild, tilapias are generally omnivores, feeding on plankton (phytoplankton, zooplankton),<br />

benthic organisms, detritus, small fish, and aquatic plants. In captivity, tilapia readily accept artificial<br />

diets such as powder mash, crumbled pellets and pelleted feeds, if sized appropriately to fit into their<br />


mouth. This means that the fry and fingerling stages need plankton, mash, or crumble feed, rather than<br />

a pellet.<br />

Chicken manure is <strong>of</strong>ten an important component <strong>of</strong> food production for fry and fingerlings. Manure<br />

stimulates phytoplankton production, and also bacteria production on the bottom <strong>of</strong> the pond (detritus).<br />

<strong>The</strong> phytoplankton is food for zooplankton. <strong>The</strong>se processes are interlinked, since phytoplankton is a<br />

major source <strong>of</strong> detritus for bacteria production. Also phytoplankton, through photosynthesis, is the<br />

chief producer <strong>of</strong> dissolved oxygen in the pond, which is used by all organisms including fish.<br />

A combination <strong>of</strong> rice pollard (50%) and fish meal (50%) is commonly used as fry and fingerling feed.<br />

Other examples <strong>of</strong> feeds include copra meal, wheat bran, wheat pollard, rice bran and meat meal.<br />

<strong>The</strong>se feeds can be ground, sieved, and mixed in various combinations giving a crude protein level <strong>of</strong><br />

40–50%, depending on availability in the area. Food requirement is expressed as a percentage <strong>of</strong> the<br />

fish body weight per day: for example, feeding at a rate <strong>of</strong> 40% <strong>of</strong> body weight per day for fry and<br />

reducing to 20% per day for fingerlings.<br />


Tilapia are shaped much like sunfish or crappie but can be easily identified by an interrupted lateral<br />

line characteristic <strong>of</strong> the Cichlid family <strong>of</strong> fishes. <strong>The</strong>y are laterally compressed and deep-bodied with<br />

long dorsal fins. <strong>The</strong> forward portion <strong>of</strong> the dorsal fin is heavily spined. Spines are also found in the<br />

pelvis and anal fins. <strong>The</strong>re are usually wide vertical bars down the sides <strong>of</strong> fry, fingerlings, and<br />

sometimes adults. Tilapia culture in Nigeria consists <strong>of</strong> a broad spectrum <strong>of</strong> systems/practices<br />

operating through a continuum ranging from backyard household ponds to small-scale industrial<br />

systems. It contributes to food security, poverty alleviation, employment, trade and income generation<br />

(Omotosho & Fagbenro, 2005). According to Fagbenro, (1998), the establishment <strong>of</strong> earthen pond<br />


systems in Nigeria coastal aquaculture upsets the ecological balance and causes deforestation and<br />

destruction <strong>of</strong> the mangrove vegetation, hence water-based aquaculture systems. Cage culture <strong>of</strong><br />

tilapias has <strong>of</strong>ten been developed and adapted by trial and error in Nigerian freshwater since the<br />

1970’s (Fagbenro,1987) and over time led to a drop in economic performance (Omotosho & Fagbenro,<br />

2005). Despite tilapia culture merits <strong>of</strong> being an entry point for planning natural resource usage and<br />

contribution to environmental enhancements, it faces a lot <strong>of</strong> risks.<br />


<strong>The</strong> qualitative nutritional requirement <strong>of</strong> fish provide relevant information on the nutrient needs <strong>of</strong><br />

fish species in order to supply adequate amount <strong>of</strong> these nutrients in formulated diet for optimum fish<br />

performance (Falaye, 1992). With the exception <strong>of</strong> water and energy, the dietary nutrient requirements<br />

<strong>of</strong> all aquaculture species can be considered under five different nutrient groups; proteins, lipids,<br />

carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals. <strong>The</strong> science <strong>of</strong> aquaculture nutrition and feeding is concerned<br />

with the supply <strong>of</strong> these dietary nutrients to fish or shrimp either directly in the form <strong>of</strong> an exogenous<br />

‘artificial’ diet or indirectly through the increased production <strong>of</strong> natural live food organisms within the<br />

water body in which the fish or shrimp are cultured (FAO, 1987).<br />


Carbohydrates represent a broad group <strong>of</strong> substances which include the sugars, starches, gums and<br />

celluloses. <strong>The</strong> common attributes <strong>of</strong> carbohydrates are that they contain only the elements carbon,<br />

hydrogen and oxygen, and that their combustion will yield carbon dioxide plus one or more molecules<br />

<strong>of</strong> water. Carbohydrates make up three-fourths <strong>of</strong> the biomass <strong>of</strong> plants but are present only in small<br />

quantities in the animal body as glycogen, sugars and their derivatives.<br />

No dietary requirement for carbohydrates has been demonstrated in fish. However, carbohydrates<br />

present a cheap energy source that would “spare” the catabolism <strong>of</strong> other components such as protein<br />

and lipids to energy. Warm water fish can use much greater amounts <strong>of</strong> dietary carbohydrate than cold<br />

water and marine species (NRC, 1993). <strong>The</strong> utilization <strong>of</strong> carbohydrate by Tilapia appears to differ<br />

depending on the complexity <strong>of</strong> them carbohydrate. Starch or dextrin (partially hydrolysed starch) is<br />

used more efficiently by Tilapia than are sugars such as glucose or sucrose (Edwing and Meng, 1996).<br />

It has generally been thought that Tilapia and certain other fish resemble diabetic animals by having<br />


insufficient insulin for maximum carbohydrate utilization (Dupree and Hunter, 1984). However, recent<br />

information has shown that insulin levels in fish are about the same as those found in mammals, which<br />

indicates that fish are not diabetic. Glucose is highly digestible by fish, but a large portion <strong>of</strong> the<br />

absorbed glucose is excreted (Edwin and Meng, 1996). Although Tilapia use carbohydrate effectively,<br />

there is no dietary requirement for carbohydrate. Carbohydrates are important dietary components as<br />

an inexpensive energy source as precursors for various metabolic intermediates such as non-essential<br />

amino acids and fatty acids (Dupree and Hunter, 1984) and as an aid in pelleting practical Tilapia<br />

feeds, and in reducing the amount <strong>of</strong> protein used for energy thereby sparing protein for growth<br />

(Dupree and Hunter, 1984).<br />


Dietary lipids are important sources <strong>of</strong> energy and fatty acids that are essential for normal growth and<br />

survival <strong>of</strong> fish. Although fish have a low energy demand, and is thus susceptible to deposition <strong>of</strong><br />

excessive lipid (Earle, 1995). Lipids do have a role as carriers for fat-soluble vitamins and sterols.<br />

Lipids are important in the structure <strong>of</strong> biological membranes at both the cellular and sub cellular<br />

levels. <strong>The</strong>y are components <strong>of</strong> hormones and precursors for synthesis <strong>of</strong> various functional<br />

metabolites such as prostaglandins, and are also important in the flavor and textural properties <strong>of</strong> the<br />

feed consumed by fish (NRC, 1983). <strong>The</strong> use <strong>of</strong> lipids (fats and oils) in Tilapia feeds is desirable<br />

because lipids are highly digestible sources <strong>of</strong> concentrated energy containing about 2.25 times as<br />

much energy as does an equivalent amount <strong>of</strong> carbohydrate (Eyo, 2002). <strong>The</strong> type and amount <strong>of</strong> lipid<br />

used in Tilapia diets are based on essential fatty acid requirements, economic constraints <strong>of</strong> feed<br />

manufacture and quality <strong>of</strong> fish flesh desired (Eyo, 2002). Fish in general require fatty acids <strong>of</strong> longer<br />

chain length and a higher degree <strong>of</strong> unsaturation than mammals. Tilapia appear to have the ability to<br />

synthesize most <strong>of</strong> their fatty acids. Nutritionally, there may be no “best” level <strong>of</strong> dietary lipid except<br />

that needed to provide essential fatty acids.<br />


Proteins are large, complex molecules made up <strong>of</strong> various amino acids that are essential components<br />

in the structure and functioning <strong>of</strong> all living organisms (NRC, 1983). Protein comprises about 15-20%<br />

<strong>of</strong> the dry weight <strong>of</strong> fish muscle (Eyo, 2002). <strong>The</strong> first need regarding protein requirements <strong>of</strong> fish is<br />

to supply the indispensable amino acid requirement <strong>of</strong> the animal, and secondly to supply dispensable<br />

amino acids or sufficient amino nitrogen to enable their synthesis (Macartney, 1996). In term <strong>of</strong><br />


nutrients required by fish for optimum growth performance and yield, protein is the most expensive<br />

single nutrient in fish diets preparation. Over 200 amino acids occur in nature among which are the<br />

dispensable amino acids which can be synthesized by Tilapia. Thus must be incorporated in the diet<br />

e.g. arginine, histidine, threonine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, valine and phenyaanaline. If they are in<br />

the diet, energy is saved in their synthesis and some dispensable amino acids can partially replace an<br />

indispensable amino acid e.g. cystine can replace about 60% <strong>of</strong> the methionine and tyrosine can<br />

replace about 50% <strong>of</strong> the phenylalanine (Edwin and Meng, 1996).<br />


Vitamins are a heterogeneous group <strong>of</strong> organic compounds essential for the growth and maintenance<br />

<strong>of</strong> animal life. <strong>The</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> vitamins are not synthesized by the animal body or at a rate sufficient<br />

to meet the animal’s needs. <strong>The</strong>y are distinct from the major food nutrients (proteins, lipids, and<br />

carbohydrates) in that they are not chemically related to one another, are present in very small<br />

quantities within animal and plant foodstuffs, and are required by the animal body in trace amounts.<br />

Approximately 15 vitamins have been isolated from biological materials; their essentiality depending<br />

on the animal species, the growth rate <strong>of</strong> the animal, feed composition, and the bacterial synthesizing<br />

capacity <strong>of</strong> the gastro-intestinal tract <strong>of</strong> the animal. In general, all animals display distinct<br />

morphological and physiological deficiency signs when individual vitamins are absent from the diet.<br />

Craig and Helfrich (2002) reported that vitamin C is the most important since it is a powerful<br />

antioxidant and helps in the immune system <strong>of</strong> fish. <strong>The</strong> fat soluble vitamins A, D, E and K perform<br />

useful function in fish body. Vitamin A (retinol) is important in vision; vitamin D (cholecalciferols)<br />

ensures bone integrity; vitamin E (tocopherol) is antioxidant and vitamin K (such as menadlone) help<br />

in blood clotting and skin integrity (Craig and Helfrich, 2002).<br />

Deficiency <strong>of</strong> almost any vitamin can result in increased susceptibility to disease and retard growth<br />

(Robert, 1978). Tilapia feeds are generally supplemented with a vitamin premix that contains all<br />

essential vitamins in sufficient quantities to meet the requirement and to compensate for losses due to<br />

feed processing and storage. Vitamins present in feedstuffs are usually not considered during feed<br />

formulation because their availability is not known, but they certainly contribute to the vitamin<br />

nutrition Tilapia (Edwin Meng, 1996).<br />



Minerals are inorganic elements required by fish for tissue formation and various functions in<br />

metabolism and regulation (NRC, 1977). Of all the minerals required by fish, phosphorus is one <strong>of</strong> the<br />

most important because it is essential in growth, bone mineralisation and lipid and carbohydrate<br />

metabolism. It is needed in the diet due to low content in natural water.<br />

Furthermore, the pollution <strong>of</strong> water by excess phosphorus excreted appeared highly critical, as this<br />

may lead to eutrophication. Tilapia also require minerals for osmotic balance between body fluids and<br />

their environment, some <strong>of</strong> which can be absorbed from the water. Minerals can be classified as macro<br />

or micro minerals depending on the amount required in the diet. Macro minerals (e.g. calcium,<br />

phosphorus, magnesium, iron, iodine, potassium) are required in relatively large quantities while<br />

micro minerals (e.g. copper, cobalt, manganese, fluorine, zinc) are required in trace quantities. Mineral<br />

nutrition studies in fish are complicated by dissolved minerals found in the water. For example, a<br />

dietary calcium requirement can only be demonstrated in fish reared in calcium-free water. In water<br />

containing sufficient calcium, Tilapia can meet their calcium requirement by absorption <strong>of</strong> calcium<br />

from the water. Although mineral studies with fish are difficult to conduct, deficiency signs and<br />

quantitative requirements for macro and micro minerals have been determined for Tilapia (Edwin and<br />

Meng, 1996)<br />


Energy is defined as the capacity to do work, and is derived by animals through the catabolism <strong>of</strong><br />

dietary carbohydrates, lipid and protein within the body. Although many forms <strong>of</strong> energy exist in<br />

nature (i.e. radiant, chemical, mechanical, heat, and electrical energy), all have the capacity to do<br />

chemical, electrical and mechanical work. Energy is therefore essential for the maintenance <strong>of</strong> life<br />

processes such as cellular metabolism, growth, reproduction, and physical activity. In particular, life<br />

on earth is dependent on radiant solar energy and its subsequent fixation and conversion by green<br />

plants during photosynthesis into stored chemical energy (i.e. carbohydrates) for use as an energy<br />

source by plants themselves or for animals that consume them through respiration. Major food<br />

nutrients (i.e. carbohydrates, proteins and lipids) are required by animals not only as essential<br />

materials for the construction <strong>of</strong> living tissues, but also as sources <strong>of</strong> stored chemical energy to fuel<br />

these processes as work. <strong>The</strong> ability <strong>of</strong> a food to supply energy is therefore <strong>of</strong> great importance in<br />

determining its nutritional value to animals. Fish eat to satisfy their energy requirement, thus protein<br />

and energy in the diet should be balanced (Macartney, 1996). Although fish use energy efficiently as<br />


an energy source, excessive dietary intake may restrict protein consumption and subsequent growth<br />

(NRC, 1977).<br />

2.3 PINEAPPLE PLANT (Ananas commosus)<br />

Pineapple (Ananas cosmosus) is a tropical fruit which grows in countries which are situated in the<br />

tropical and sub-tropical regions. It is native to Central and South America.<br />

Pineapple belongs to the Bromeliaceae family and grows on the ground. It can grow up to 1m in height<br />

and 1.5m wide. Other bromeliads live on trees (epiphytes). <strong>The</strong>re are many cultivars <strong>of</strong> Ananas, but<br />

the predominant one is 'Smooth Cayenne' (Samson, 1986). Total pineapple production worldwide is<br />

around 16 to 18 million tons (Carvalho et al., 2008; Fernandes et al., 2008). <strong>The</strong>re are several<br />

countries (e.g. Thailand, Brazil, India, Phillipines and China) which contribute to the total production.<br />

Pineapple is an important food which can be eaten fresh or eaten in a processed form. It is composed<br />

<strong>of</strong> nutrients which are good for human health. This is due to researches carried out on the relationship<br />

between nutrients in pineapple and human health. Processing pineapple in industries can leave a lot <strong>of</strong><br />

waste which can cause serious environmental problems. Researches have been carried out recently to<br />

counteract this problem.<br />

2.3.1 ETYMOLOGY<br />

<strong>The</strong> word pineapple in English was first recorded in 1398, when it was originally used to describe the<br />

reproductive organs <strong>of</strong> conifer trees (now termed pine cones). <strong>The</strong> term pine cone for the reproductive<br />

organ <strong>of</strong> conifer trees was first recorded in 1694. When European explorers discovered this tropical<br />

fruit, they called them pineapples (term first recorded in that sense in 1664 because <strong>of</strong> their<br />

resemblance to what is now known as the pine cone).<br />


In the scientific binomial Ananas comosus, ananas, the original name <strong>of</strong> the fruit, comes from the Tupi<br />

(Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) word nanas, meaning "excellent fruit", [6] as recorded by André <strong>The</strong>vet in<br />

1555, and comosus, "tufted", refers to the stem <strong>of</strong> the fruit. Other members <strong>of</strong> the Ananasgenus are<br />

<strong>of</strong>ten called pine as well by laymen.<br />

Many languages use the Tupian term ananas. In Spanish, pineapples are called piña "pine cone" in<br />

Spain and most Hispanic American countries, or ananá (ananás in Argentina) (see the piña colada<br />

drink). <strong>The</strong>y have varying names in the languages <strong>of</strong> India: "Anaasa"in telugu, annachipazham<br />

(Tamil), anarosh (Bengali), and in Malayalam, kaithachakka. In Malay, pineapples are known as<br />

"nanas" or "nenas". In the Maldivian language <strong>of</strong> Dhivehi, pineapples are known as alanaasi. A large,<br />

sweet pineapple grown especially in Brazil is called abacaxi<br />

Botany<br />

<strong>The</strong> pineapple is a herbaceous short-lived perennial plant which grows to 1.0 to 1.5 metres (3.3 to 4.9<br />

ft) tall. <strong>The</strong> plant only produces one fruit and then dies. Commercially suckers that appear around the<br />

base are cultivated. It has 30 or more long, narrow, fleshy, trough-shaped leaves with sharp spines<br />

along the margins that are 30 to 100 centimetres (1.0 to 3.3 ft) long, surrounding a thick stem. In the<br />

first year <strong>of</strong> growth the axis lengthens and thickens, bearing numerous leaves in close spirals. After 12<br />

to 20 months the stem grows into a spike-like inflorescence up to 15 cm long with over 100 spirally<br />

arranged, trimerous flowers, each subtended by a bract. Flower colours vary, depending on variety,<br />

from lavender, through light purple to red.<br />

<strong>The</strong> ovaries develop into berries which coalesce into a large, compact, multiple accessory fruit. <strong>The</strong><br />

fruit <strong>of</strong> a pineapple is arranged in two interlocking helices, eight in one direction, thirteen in the other,<br />

each being a Fibonacci number.<br />


Pineapple carries out CAM photosynthesis, fixing carbon dioxide at night and storing it as the acid<br />

malate and then releasing it during the day, aiding photosynthesis.<br />


Pineapple is a good source <strong>of</strong> manganese (91% DV in a 1 cup serving), and also contains significant<br />

amounts <strong>of</strong> vitamin C (94% DV in a 1 cup serving) and vitamin B 1 (8% DV in a 1 cup<br />

serving).Pineapple contains a proteolytic enzyme bromelain, which breaks down protein. Pineapple<br />

juice can thus be used as a marinade and tenderizer for meat. <strong>The</strong> enzymes in raw pineapples can<br />

interfere with the preparation <strong>of</strong> some foods, such as jelly or other gelatin-based desserts, but it breaks<br />

down during cooking and the canning process. Though some have claimed pineapple should not be<br />

consumed by people with Ehlers Danlos Syndrome or kidney or liver disease, the quantity <strong>of</strong><br />

bromelain in the fruit is probably not medically significant, being mostly in the inedible stalk.<br />

Consumers <strong>of</strong> pineapple have claimed that pineapple has benefits for some intestinal disorders, and<br />

others believe it serves as a pain reliever still others claim that it helps to induce childbirth when a<br />

baby is overdue.<br />


TABLE 1: Nutritional value per 100 g <strong>of</strong> Pineapple Plant (Ananas comosus)<br />

Energy<br />

Carbohydrates<br />

Sugars<br />

Dietary fiber<br />

Fat<br />

Protein<br />

202 kJ (48 kcal)<br />

12.63 g<br />

9.26 g<br />

1.4 g<br />

0.12 g<br />

0.54 g<br />

Thiamine (Vit. B 1 ) 0.079 mg (6%)<br />

Rib<strong>of</strong>lavin (Vit. B 2 ) 0.031 mg (2%)<br />

Niacin (Vit. B 3 ) 0.489 mg (3%)<br />

Pantothenic acid (B 5 ) 0.205 mg (4%)<br />

Vitamin B 6 0.110 mg (8%)<br />

Folate (Vit. B 9 ) 15 µg (4%)<br />

Vitamin C 36.2 mg (60%)<br />

Calcium 13 mg (1%)<br />

Iron 0.28 mg (2%)<br />

Magnesium 12 mg (3%)<br />

Phosphorus 8 mg (1%)<br />

Potassium 115 mg (2%)<br />

Zinc 0.10 mg (1%)<br />



Pineapple is largely consumed around the world as canned pineapple slices, chunk and dice, pineapple<br />

juice, fruit salads, sugar syrup, alcohol, citric acid, pineapple chips and pineapple puree. It is also<br />

exported to other countries as a fresh product. Sixty percent <strong>of</strong> fresh pineapple is edible (Samson,<br />

1986).<br />

Pineapple mainly contains water, carbohydrates, sugars, vitamins A, C and carotene, beta. It contains<br />

low amounts <strong>of</strong> protein, fat, ash and fibre. Pineapples contain antioxidants namely flavonoids, vitamin<br />

A and C. <strong>The</strong>se antioxidants reduce the oxidative damage such as that caused by free radicals and<br />

chelating metals. It also has the enzyme complex protease (bromelain). Bromelain contains<br />

peroxidase, acid phosphate, several protease inhibitors and organically bound calcium (Tochi et al.,<br />

2008).<br />

2.3.4 PROCESSING<br />

Processed pineapple is a popular product which is exported by countries which produce pineapple.<br />

Brazil is considered the main pineapple producing country in the world since 2005 (Carvalho et al.,<br />

2008). During processing, nutritional quality <strong>of</strong> pineapple can be reduced but there are recent<br />

reasearches carried out which uses new technologies which tries to retain the nutritional quality <strong>of</strong> the<br />

pineapple fruit. This is to meet the consumer demand for healthy, nutritious and "natural" products<br />

(Delizaet al., 2005).<br />

Some <strong>of</strong> the processing methods using the new technologies are as follows:<br />

1. Vacuum frying - a dehydration process that produces healthy fruit snacks (pineapple chips)<br />

which partially preserve the fruits original colour and nutritional compounds and have a high<br />

hydrophilic antioxidant capacity (Perez-Tinoco et al., 2008).<br />

2. Radiation processing - a dose <strong>of</strong> 2KGy did not affect significantly the nutritional value as well<br />

as the sensory quality <strong>of</strong> minimally processed pineapple (Hajare et al., 2006).<br />


3. <strong>The</strong>rmal processing - helps in the improvement <strong>of</strong> colour, as a quality attribute <strong>of</strong> processed<br />

pineapple puree. This is made possible by the increase in knowledge <strong>of</strong> kinetic <strong>of</strong> colour<br />

change (Chutintrasri and Noomhorm, 2007).<br />

4. Ultrasound - This is a pre-treatment for drying <strong>of</strong> pineapple. Drying <strong>of</strong> pineapple reduces postharvest<br />

loss <strong>of</strong> fruits and also a process to produce dried fruits, which can be directly consumed<br />

or become part <strong>of</strong> foodstuffs like cakes, pastries and many others. This method has affected the<br />

sugar gain <strong>of</strong> pineapples during the pre-treatment and also has affected the water effective<br />

diffusitivity <strong>of</strong> pineapples during air-drying process (Fernandes et al., 2008).<br />

5. Osmotic evaporation - this is a process whereby pineapple juice is concentrated at moderate<br />

temperatures and pressures with good nutritional and sensory qualities. This process has minor<br />

changes in the concentrated juices which makes it more preferable (Hongvaleerat et al., 2008).<br />

6. High pressure technology - This method is used in food processing where food borne microorganisms<br />

and enzymes are inactivated at low temperature, without the need for chemical<br />

preservation. This is done in fruit juice processing to preserve most <strong>of</strong> the nutritional qualities<br />

similar to a fresh product (Deliza et al., 2005).<br />


Pineapple waste is a by-product <strong>of</strong> the pineapple processing industry and it consists <strong>of</strong> residual pulp,<br />

peels and skin. <strong>The</strong>se wastes can cause environmental pollution problems if not utilized. Recently<br />

there are investigations/studies carried out on how to utilize these wastes.<br />

Pineapple peel is rich in cellulose, hemicellulose and other carbohydrates. Ensilaging <strong>of</strong> pineapple<br />

peels produces methane which can be used as a biogas. Anaerobic digestion takes place and the<br />

digested slurry may find further application as animal, poultry and fish feeds (Rani and Nand, 2004).<br />


Correia et al (2004) investigated the ability <strong>of</strong> Rhizopus oligosporous to produce enhanced levels <strong>of</strong><br />

free phenolics from pineapple residue in combination with soy flour as potential nitrogen source. From<br />

this investigation, they established a relationship between antioxidant activity, ß-glucosidase and total<br />

phenolic content in these pineapple/soy flour extracts. <strong>The</strong>y will further investigate these extracts but<br />

from this, the value <strong>of</strong> pineapple wastes can be enhanced.<br />

Bromelain is present in pineapple wastes. Hebber et al (2008) carried out a study where they use<br />

Reverse micellar extraction (RME) technique to extract and purify bromelain from pineapple wastes.<br />

<strong>The</strong>y found that CTAB/isooctane/hexanol/butanol system resulted in a fairly good extraction <strong>of</strong><br />

bromelain from pineapple core.<br />


In the tropics, pineapple is grown and used as a medicinal plant. Pineapple contains the enzyme<br />

bromelain (protease) which has several therapeutic properties including malignant cell growth,<br />

thrombus formation, inflammation, control <strong>of</strong> diarrhoea, dermatological and skin debridement (Tochi<br />

et al., 2008). According to Tochi et al, available evidence indicates bromelain is well absorbed orally<br />

with its therapeutic effects being enhanced in a dose dependent manner and if successfully<br />

incorporated in foods, it could become more acceptable as a nutraceutical product than it now is.<br />




Evaluation <strong>of</strong> fermented peels Pineapples (Ananas comosus) Peels as a substitute for Maize as a source<br />

<strong>of</strong> energy in the diets <strong>of</strong> Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)<br />

3.1.1 MATERIALS<br />

<strong>The</strong> Pineapple peels were collected at Salawu Comprehensive High school, Osiele, Ogun State and<br />

<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Agriculture</strong>, Alabata, <strong>Abeokuta</strong>, Ogun State. <strong>The</strong> peels were dried for 17 hours in order<br />

to remove the moisture content <strong>of</strong> the waste and the dried materials were milled into flour (Dough) and<br />

later sieved to remove the unreasonable materials from the milled peels.<br />

3.1.2 METHODS<br />

<strong>The</strong> classical way <strong>of</strong> starting up the fermentation procedure is to mix the flour (Pineapple Peel) and<br />

water in the ratio 1:6 i.e. (Weight per Volume) and allow it to ferment naturally at room temperature<br />

for 48 hours, after which the pH would fall to a stabilized level. <strong>The</strong> temperature <strong>of</strong> the fermented<br />

pineapples peels meal would be taken at 12 hours interval with the use <strong>of</strong> Mercury in Glass<br />

thermometer.<br />

At 12 hours intervals, the pH <strong>of</strong> the fermented pineapple meal was determined.<br />

<strong>The</strong> pH <strong>of</strong> the water solution was measured and it is exactly 7.3, and when the pineapple peels dough<br />

was mixed with the water, the pH falls drastically to 4.7 in the first day at exactly 6:30 pm.<br />

Table 2: <strong>The</strong> pH <strong>of</strong> the Fermented Pineapple Peels Flour<br />

Day pH Before pH After<br />

1 7.3 4.7<br />

2 4.7 5.1<br />

3 5.1 5.6<br />



<strong>The</strong> feeding trial was conducted in 12 Plastic Tanks (33Litres) in the HATCHERY <strong>of</strong> <strong>The</strong> <strong>Federal</strong><br />

<strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Agriculture</strong>, <strong>Abeokuta</strong>, Ogun State. <strong>The</strong> Tanks were filled to 2/3 <strong>of</strong> its volume with<br />

water supplied from the university’s water reservoir. To sustain optimal environment and to preclude<br />

primary productivity, the water was introduced in a splash for better aeration. <strong>The</strong> system was<br />

continuously flushed with fresh water through outflow pipes from the bowls.<br />


One hundred and twenty fingerlings <strong>of</strong> Tilapia (Oreochromisniloticus)with average weight <strong>of</strong> 13.94 ±<br />

1.96 (Mean ± S.D) were obtained from Durante Fish Farm, Orita-challenge, Ibadan, Oyo State.<br />

<strong>The</strong> fish were transferred to the wet laboratory and acclimatized for one week. <strong>The</strong>y were then starved<br />

for 24hours prior to being placed on experimental diets. Five randomly selected samples were<br />

sacrificed for proximate analysis before the commencement <strong>of</strong> the experiment.<br />


Four iso-nitrogeneous diets were formulated to contain 40% crude protein. Maize (10% crude protein)<br />

was replaced by fermented pineapple peel meal (11.56% crude protein) at 0% (TD1), 25% (TD2),<br />

50% (TD3), and 75% (TD4). <strong>The</strong> formulation was based on proximate composition <strong>of</strong> the ingredient<br />

showing the gross percentage composition <strong>of</strong> the experimental diets. <strong>The</strong> entire feed ingredients were<br />

obtained from different areas <strong>of</strong> the nooks and crannies <strong>of</strong> <strong>Abeokuta</strong> metropolis. Pineapple (Ananas<br />

comosus) peels were obtained from local market and sun-dried at complete 2 days until all the<br />

moisture contents were removed. All the ingredients were milled and sieved to remove chaff and<br />

ensure homogenous size pr<strong>of</strong>ile. <strong>The</strong> ingredients for each diet were mixed thoroughly in a bowl and<br />

pelletized in a manually operated pelletizer. <strong>The</strong> moist pellets were sun-dried, packaged in tagged airtight<br />

polythene bags and stored in dry place at room temperature.<br />


Table 3: Proximate composition <strong>of</strong> feed ingredients<br />

Samples % Crude % Crude fat % Crude Fibre % Ash<br />

Protein<br />

Pineapple 6.84 1.12 9.24 1.21<br />

Fishmeal 67.67 4.10 1.31 14.80<br />

Soybean Meal 45.30 18.00 5.00 4.60<br />

Groundnut cake 36.46 8.80 4.31 13.80<br />

Maize 10.81 5.20 1.40 1.40<br />

Table 4: Percentage composition <strong>of</strong> the experimental diets<br />

Ingredients TD1, 0% TD2, 25% TD3, 50% TD4, 75%<br />

Fermented Pineapple Peels 8.14 16.43 24.13<br />

Fishmeal 19.98 19.88 19.74 19.68<br />

Soybean Meal 19.98 19.88 19.74 19.68<br />

Groundnut Cake 19.98 19.88 19.74 19.68<br />

Maize 32.25 24.41 16.43 8.29<br />

Vitamin C 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50<br />

Vitamins / Minerals Premix 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00<br />

Di Calcium Phosphate 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50<br />

Fats & Oil 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00<br />

Mineral Salt 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30<br />

Chromic Oxide 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50<br />

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00<br />



<strong>The</strong> experimental design was a completely randomized design; Male Oreochromis niloticus<br />

Fingerlings were randomly distributed into 12 plastic bowls representing Four Treatments and Three<br />

Replicated, at the rate <strong>of</strong> ten fish per bowl. All the experimental fish were fed the experimental diets<br />

twice daily at 5% <strong>of</strong> total biomass, between the hours <strong>of</strong> 07:00 – 08:00 and 16:00 – 17:00 for Ten<br />

weeks. Fish were batch weighted weekly with a sensitive electronic balance (METTLER TOLEDO,<br />

PB602). Mortality was monitored daily. Prior to stocking and at the end <strong>of</strong> the feeding trial, 3 fish<br />

were selected and sacrificed for gross proximate analysis.<br />


<strong>The</strong> following growth performances were measured:<br />

Percentage Weight Gain, PWG (%) = (Final Mean Body Weight – Initial Mean Body Weight) × 100<br />

Specific Growth Rate, SGR (percent per day). This is the relationship <strong>of</strong> difference in the weight <strong>of</strong><br />

fish within the experimental period.<br />

SGR = In (W₂ – W₁) × 100/ T₂ - T<br />

Where: W = weight <strong>of</strong> fish at T day,<br />

W = weight <strong>of</strong> fish at T day<br />

Feed Conversion Ratio, FCR. This is obtained by dividing the total weight <strong>of</strong> the food administered<br />

by the total increase in weight gained by the fish over a period <strong>of</strong> time.<br />

FCR = Dry Weight <strong>of</strong> the feed administered/ Increase in wet weight <strong>of</strong> fish<br />

Protein Efficiency Ratio, PER = Fish Weight Gain/Protein Gain<br />



Collection <strong>of</strong> Faecal Materials<br />

<strong>The</strong> faacal material <strong>of</strong> the experimental fish was collected daily with the aid <strong>of</strong> a hosepipe which was<br />

used to siphon the freshly released faecal material from the plastic containers into a medium size bowl.<br />

the faecal material was allowed to settle, the water containing the faecal material in the bowl decanted<br />

and poured into a filter placed on a clean surfaced to sieve out the faecal material. the collected faecal<br />

material was then sun dried and kept in a container. <strong>The</strong> same process was repeated for all treatment<br />

Determination <strong>of</strong> chromic oxide<br />

Chromic oxide was used as inert marker in the fish feed.the method <strong>of</strong> chromic oxide(Cr 2 O 3 )<br />

estimation involves the acid digestion <strong>of</strong> the sample which oxidises the organic in the sample which<br />

Oxidises the organic in the sample using a concentrated nitric acid (HNO 3 ), followed by the oxidation<br />

<strong>of</strong> insoluble (green) chromiumn III in chromic oxide to insoluble chromium VI (yellow colour) with<br />

concentrated perchloric acid. <strong>The</strong> aliquot is then transferred in to a (Biotech Novaspec II).<br />

Spectrophometer cuvette and the optical absorbance is taken at 350nm (Wave Length) with distilled<br />

water as a black, as described by Furukawa and Tsukahara (1966).<br />

Calculation:<br />

Weight <strong>of</strong> Sample = (Weight <strong>of</strong> foil + Sample) - Weight <strong>of</strong> foil = A (mg) = Y<br />

Optical Density<br />

Weight <strong>of</strong> Chromic Oxide in Sample (mg) Y – 0.002/0.2089 = X<br />

% Chromic oxide in the Sample X/A x 100<br />

0.2089<br />

Apparent Digestibility<br />


Percentage Apparent Digestibility (D) <strong>of</strong> a nutrient is expressed by equation below<br />

% Digestibility = Amount <strong>of</strong> Nutrient Fed – Amount <strong>of</strong> Nutrient in Faeces<br />

Amount <strong>of</strong> Nutrient Fed<br />


Proximate analysis was carried out on the mango peel, experimental fish and diets before the trial and<br />

after according to A.O.A.C. (1990). A sample <strong>of</strong> 5 fishes <strong>of</strong> the initial stock as well as 3 samples <strong>of</strong><br />

life fish from each plastic bowl was removed and sacrificed at the end <strong>of</strong> the experiment for carcass<br />

analysis. Water temperature and pH was monitored throughout the feeding period using Mackreth<br />

(1963) and Boyd (1981) method.<br />


Moisture Content<br />

<strong>The</strong> moisture content was determined by drying to constant weight in an oven at 80-85˚C for 10 hours.<br />

Crude Protein<br />

Crude protein or total nitrogen was determined by kjeldahl method, the total nitrogen obtained was<br />

converted to crude protein by multiplying with a conversion factor, 6.25 (AOAC, 1990).<br />

Crude Fibre<br />

This was determined as the materials that were left after acid / alkali digestion.<br />

Crude Lipid<br />

Crude lipid was determined by the soxhlet method, ether extract was used as the refluxing solvent for<br />

6 hours (AOAC, 1990).<br />


Non-Fat Extract, NFE<br />

NFE was determined by subtracting the sum <strong>of</strong> moisture, ash, crude protein, ether extract and crude<br />

fibre (all expressed as g/kg) from 1000.<br />

NFE = 1000 – (moisture + ash + crude protein+ ether extract+ crude fibre) (g/kg)<br />

Ash Content<br />

Ash was determined by burning weighted samples inside porcelain crucibles in muffle furnace at<br />

450˚C for 12 hours (overnight). <strong>The</strong> residue was weighted and determined as ash content.<br />


Water quality parameters were monitored at regular interval. Water temperature, dissolved oxygen and<br />

pH were determined using 4-in 1-Measuring Meter (MODEL JPB-607 Portable DO 2 Analyzer).<br />


<strong>The</strong> data describing Growth Performance and Digestibility were analysed statistically using one-way<br />

analysis <strong>of</strong> variance (ANOVA) and the differences among means were tested for significance (P˂0.05)<br />

(Duncan, 1955) using SPSS 16.0 Statistical Package<br />



4.0 RESULTS<br />


<strong>The</strong> proximate composition <strong>of</strong> the diets fed to Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings are presented in table 4.0. the<br />

protein content varied from approximately 40.69% in TD3 to 41.59% in TD5. Crude Fibre is 3.39% in TD2 to<br />

3.51% in TD1. Fat content is 4.78% in TD1 to 5.66% in TD4. Moisture contents ranges. Ash content ranges<br />

between 11.37% in TD2 to 11.81% in TD5<br />


<strong>The</strong> proximate analysis <strong>of</strong> the carcass <strong>of</strong> the initial fish and those fed with the different diets at the start and end<br />

<strong>of</strong> the experiment is represented in table 5. <strong>The</strong> moisture content ranged from 7.24% in TD3 to 8.41% in TD4.<br />

<strong>The</strong> crude protein ranged from 51.75% in TD2 to 59.39% in TD4. Also, the fat ranges from 7.72% in TD3 to<br />

8.15% in TD2. <strong>The</strong> ash content also ranges from 11.56% in TD1 to 12.59% in TD4. <strong>The</strong> crude fibre also ranges<br />

between 0.89% in TD1 to 1.23% in TD2<br />


Water quality parameters in the bowls during the experimental period are presented in Table 6. <strong>The</strong><br />

values observed were within the tolerant range <strong>of</strong> O. niloticus. <strong>The</strong> pH was between 7.18 to 70.25,<br />

Dissolved Oxygen 6.7 – 7.6 Mg/Litre and Temperature is between 28.30 – 29.20 ˚C.<br />


Table 5: Proximate Composition <strong>of</strong> Experimental Diets<br />

Parameters TD1, 0% TD2, 25% TD3, 50% TD4, 75%<br />

Moisture (%) 8.76 8.63 9.12 8.67<br />

Lipid (%) 4.78 4.96 5.47 5.66<br />

Ash (%) 11.49 11.37 11.74 11.44<br />

Crude Fibre (%) 3.51 3.46 3.39 3.41<br />

Crude Protein<br />

(%)<br />

34.87 35.26 34.69 35.37<br />

NFE (%) 36.59 36.32 35.59 35.45<br />

NFE - Nitrogen Free Extract.<br />


Table 6: Proximate composition <strong>of</strong> experimental fish carcass<br />

Parameters Initial TD1, 0% TD2, 25% TD3, 50% TD4, 75%<br />

Moisture (%) 90.97 8.34 7.82 7.24 8.41<br />

Lipid (%) 4.59 53.48 51.75 57.88 59.39<br />

Ash (%) 5.59 7.88 8.15 7.72 7.58<br />

Crude Fibre (%) 11.81 11.56 11.78 11.61 12.59<br />

Crude Protein (%) 3.49 0.89 1.23 1.16 0.98<br />

NFE (%) 3.49 17.58 19.27 14.89 11.05<br />

Table 7: Mean weekly values <strong>of</strong> physico-chemical parameters during the experimental period<br />

Week Ph Dissolve Oxygen (Mg/L) Temperature °C<br />

0 7.24 7.20 29.1<br />

1 7.20 7.50 28.5<br />

2 7.19 7.00 28.9<br />

3 7.23 7.40 29.0<br />

4 7.18 7.20 28.7<br />

5 7.21 6.80 28.3<br />

6 7.20 6.70 28.6<br />

7 7.25 7.20 29.2<br />

8 7.23 7.60 28.8<br />



<strong>The</strong> growth performance <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings fed the experimental diets in terms <strong>of</strong><br />

Weight Gain, Percentage Weight Gain (PWG), Specific Growth Rate (SGR), Feed Conversion Ratio<br />

(FCR), Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER), and Survival Rate is presented in Table 9. <strong>The</strong> best growth<br />

was recorded for group <strong>of</strong> fish fed TD4. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant difference (P>0.5) between all the<br />

initial weight <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings. <strong>The</strong> initial weight <strong>of</strong> fish showed significant<br />

difference (P0.05) between the fish fed diets<br />

TD3 and fish fed diet TD1, TD2, TD4. <strong>The</strong> final mean body weight ranges between 44.27g in TD1<br />

and 50.23g in TD4.<br />

<strong>The</strong> decrease with increase in replacement level <strong>of</strong> pineapple peel meal in the diets was also observed<br />

in Specific Growth Rate in some instance, SGR. SGR ranged between 2.05%/ day in fish fed TD3 and<br />

2.25%/ day in fish fed TD4.<br />

<strong>The</strong> results <strong>of</strong> the nutrient utilization <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings expressed as food<br />

conversion ratio, FCR and protein efficiency ratio, PER are presented in table 8. FCR ranged between<br />

2.43 in TD1 to 2.77 in TD3. <strong>The</strong>re was an increase with increase in level <strong>of</strong> replacement <strong>of</strong> pineapple<br />

peel meal in the diets but in TD4 the FCR actually dropped to 2.58g but no Significant Difference<br />

occurred compare to other inclusion level. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant difference (P>0.05) in the protein<br />

efficiency ratio, PER among the treatments. Protein efficiency ratio ranges between 1.03 in TD3 and<br />

1.22 in TD1. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant different (P>0.05) in the AGR, which ranges between 0.54 in<br />

TD3 and 0.64 in TD4. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant different (P>0.05) in the survival rate<br />

<strong>The</strong> Digestibility <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings fed the experimental diets in terms <strong>of</strong> Protein<br />

Productive Value (PPV) as presented in Table 8. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant difference (P>0.5)<br />


Table 8: Mean Weekly Growth Trend <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis Niloticus Fingerlings Fed Various Level <strong>of</strong><br />

Pineapple Peel Meal Based Diets<br />

Week TD1, 0% TD2, 25% TD3,50% TD4, 75%<br />

0 17.66 19.66 19.06 17.33<br />

1 12.13 13.87 15.20 14.57<br />

2 14.83 15.80 17.00 17.90<br />

3 17.87 18.23 20.13 20.20<br />

4 20.93 22.23 23.30 24.10<br />

5 24.03 27.97 28.53 28.87<br />

6 25.43 28.87 28.87 31.50<br />

7 28.70 30.90 32.90 34.80<br />

8 34.93 40.07 40.03 42.20<br />


Table 9: Growth Response and Nutrient Utilization <strong>of</strong> Male O. niloticus Fingerlings fed various<br />

Level <strong>of</strong> Fermented Pineapple Peel Meal based Diets<br />

Parameters TD1 TD2 TD3 TD4<br />

Initial Mean<br />

Body Weight (g)<br />

Final Mean<br />

Body Weight (g)<br />

12.13± 2.57 13.87 ± 2.30 15.20 ± 0.91 14.57 ± 0.66<br />

44.27 ± 7.08 46.40 ± 2.68 47.00 ± 3.08 50.2 3± 41.3<br />

Weight Gain (g) 32.13 ± 6.75 32.53 ± 4.30 31.80 ± 3.04 35.60 ± 4.79<br />

Specific growth<br />

Weight (%)<br />

Feed Intake<br />

Weight (g)<br />

Feed Conversion<br />

Ratio<br />

Average Gain<br />

Ratio (g)<br />

2.36 ± 0.41 2.2 1± 0.38 2.05 ± 0.15 2.25 ± 0.22<br />

76.30 ± 13.94 84.9 3± 6.35 87.73 ± 6.50 91.23± 6.27<br />

2.43 ± 0.53 2.63 ± 0.43 2.77 ± 0.24 2.58± 0.30<br />

0.58 ± 0.12 0.58± 0.08 0.57 ± 0.05 0.6 4± 0.08<br />

Protein 0.35±0.07 c 0.45±0.02 b 0.53±0.03 ab 0.56±0.04 a<br />

Productive<br />

Value (g)<br />

Survival rate 100±0.00 100±0.00 100±0.00 100±0.00<br />

Net Protein<br />

Utilization (%)<br />

Protein<br />

Digestibility (%)<br />

1981.67 1693.33 2585.71 2966.67<br />

70.35 82.82 73.60 83.21<br />


60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

FPP1<br />

FPP2<br />

FPP3<br />

FPP4<br />

10<br />

0<br />


Plate 1: Shows the weekly growth trend <strong>of</strong> the experimental fish fed the treatment diets for eight<br />

(8) weeks.<br />



<strong>The</strong> Digestibility <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings fed the experimental diets in terms <strong>of</strong> Protein<br />

Productive Value (PPV) as presented in Table 9. <strong>The</strong>re is an increase in the Protein Production Value<br />

with an increase in the level <strong>of</strong> Fermented Pineapple Meal. <strong>The</strong>re was no significant difference (P>0.5)<br />

between all the fish fed diets. <strong>The</strong>re is an effective level <strong>of</strong> Production <strong>of</strong> protein level during the<br />

digestion process <strong>of</strong> the fish fed diets by the fish. <strong>The</strong> Protein Production Level ranges from 0.45g in<br />

TD2 to 0.56g in TD4. Generally, the protein quality <strong>of</strong> dietary ingredients is the leading factor<br />

affecting fish performance, and Protein Digestibility is the first measure <strong>of</strong> its availability by fish.<br />

Protein Quality <strong>of</strong> dietary protein sources depends on the amino acid composition and their<br />

digestibility. Deficiency <strong>of</strong> an essential amino acid leads to poor utilization <strong>of</strong> the dietary protein and<br />

consequently reduces growth and decreases feed efficiency (Halver and Hardy, 2002).<br />



5.0 DISCUSSION<br />

<strong>The</strong> significant difference (P˂0.05) in the growth and nutrient utilization indices as pineapple peel<br />

meal increased in the diets <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus showed that growth was affected by the inclusion<br />

<strong>of</strong> pineapple peel meal used to replace maize at different inclusion levels. However, the lack <strong>of</strong><br />

significant difference between the reference diets at 75% showed that maize could be supplemented at<br />

this level <strong>of</strong> inclusion in the diets <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus without compromising growth<br />

performance. Similar patterns <strong>of</strong> growth have been reported in the mirror carp and trout fed different<br />

levels <strong>of</strong> cassava as a substitute for Maize as a source <strong>of</strong> Energy. Ufodike, E.B.C. and A.J. Matty,<br />

(1983) reported the ability <strong>of</strong> mirror carp fingerlings to accept high quantities <strong>of</strong> cassava in diet.<br />

Mirror carp fed on a diet containing 45% cassava was found to perform better than those fed on lower<br />

quantities <strong>of</strong> cassava. Ufodike, E.B.C. and A.J. Matty, (1984). Also observed optimum growth and<br />

food utilization in Rainbow Trout fed 20% dietary cassava and there was no evidence <strong>of</strong> drastic<br />

adverse effects on the tissue and liver composition <strong>of</strong> fish.<br />

<strong>The</strong> high increase in the growth rate <strong>of</strong> O. niloticus in the first few weeks <strong>of</strong> culture in the study may<br />

be due to initial starvation <strong>of</strong> the fish which made them more metabolically active. This is similar to<br />

Obasa and Faturoti (2001) observation in juvenile Heterotis niloticus, where they recorded an increase<br />

in growth <strong>of</strong> the fish as they were subjected to delay in feed distribution.<br />

Fish performance in terms <strong>of</strong> FCR, PER and SGR decreased with increase in inclusion level <strong>of</strong> mango<br />

peel meal in the diet. This could be due to unpalatable nature <strong>of</strong> the diet resulting in appetite reduction<br />

as result <strong>of</strong> increasing mango peel meal in the diets and Jackson et al (1982) opined that food wastage<br />

contributes substantially to poor food conversion ratios and growth rate.<br />

<strong>The</strong> growth pattern revealed that Oreochromis niloticus performed in diet TD4 than all other diets. It<br />

has been documented that 50% replacement <strong>of</strong> maize with cassava meal in broiler diet showed no<br />

depression in growth or unfavourable feed conversion ratio (Essers et al., 1995) and that the best<br />

growth performance was recorded in layers fed 10% cassava meal. This work indicated that O.<br />

niloticus can utilize Fermented Pineaaple Peel Meal better than other fish species. Olurin et., al. (2006)<br />

reported a replacement level <strong>of</strong> 50% cassava meal for maize without a depressing growth in Claria<br />

gariepinus. In the present study the best growth performance and nutrient utilization was recorded in<br />

fish fed 75% level <strong>of</strong> whole Pineapple peel meal. This implies that high inclusion levels <strong>of</strong> whole<br />


pineapple peel meal in the diet <strong>of</strong> O. niloticus favours enhanced growth rate. This is unlike in broiler<br />

that had the best growth performance at 25%, root meal inclusion levels respectively (Ernersto, et al.,<br />

2000).<br />

<strong>The</strong> differences in growth observed between the experimental diets are indication <strong>of</strong> the variation in<br />

the feed utilization. <strong>The</strong> reports <strong>of</strong> Carter et al. (2003) for Atlantic salmon (Salmon salar) and Ernesto<br />

et. al, (2002) are at variance (that is contrary) to the report <strong>of</strong> this study. <strong>The</strong>se workers recorded better<br />

feed conversion ratio and feed acceptability in the control diet. <strong>The</strong> acceptance <strong>of</strong> Fermented<br />

Pineapple Peel Meal by O. niloticus, indicate that replacement <strong>of</strong> maize with pineapple peel meal<br />

could be more pr<strong>of</strong>itable to fish farmer as maize is more expensive and pineapple peel meal which was<br />

regarded as a waste is <strong>of</strong> great use. Ability <strong>of</strong> an organisms to convert nutrients especially protein will<br />

positively influence its growth performance. This was justified by the best protein efficiency ratio and<br />

growth performance in 75% whole pineapple peel meal inclusion diets lower feed conversion ratio<br />

indicates better utilization <strong>of</strong> the feed by the fish. According to De Silva (2001) feed conversion ratio<br />

is between 1.2-1.8 for fish fed carefully prepared diets, and the results from the present study falls<br />

within this range. Also, Davis (2004) observed that Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) is a measure <strong>of</strong><br />

how well the protein sources in a diet could provide the essential amino acid requirement <strong>of</strong> the fish<br />

fed. Furthermore, this index has been associated with fat deposition in fish muscle. <strong>The</strong> high survival<br />

rates recorded in this study indicate that feeding O. niloticus with pineapple peel mea does not leads<br />

to mortality <strong>of</strong> the fish.<br />

<strong>The</strong> observed water quality parameters were due to constant water change <strong>of</strong> the culture system. <strong>The</strong><br />

close range in the average temperature recorded during the experimental period was probably due to<br />

the fact that all the treatments were indoors. Adekoya et al (2004) and Omotayo et al (2006)<br />

recommended dissolved oxygen, DO level <strong>of</strong> between 4-8mg/litre in the pond and DO values observed<br />

during the experimental period fall within the these values. <strong>The</strong> values <strong>of</strong> physic-chemical parameters<br />

observed in the pond were within the range recommended for Oreochromis niloticus<br />

<strong>The</strong> Digestibility <strong>of</strong> the Fermented Pineapple Peel meal fed diet by the Oreochromis niloticus was as<br />

effective as it was shown in Table 9 in form <strong>of</strong> Protein Productive Value. This is due to the<br />

fermentation procedure which has reduced the anti-nutritional factors <strong>of</strong> the Pineapple Peel Meal like<br />

Anti-Vitamin B Complex. A diet could also be poorly utilized by fish even at high consumption rate<br />

(Francis et al, 2001; Sotolu and Adejumoh, 2008) probably be due to the presence <strong>of</strong> certain<br />


antinutritional factors. <strong>The</strong> relatively and effective digestibility <strong>of</strong> the experimental diets with<br />

inclusions <strong>of</strong> Fermented Pineapple Peel Meal at TD4 level may be due to the detoxication <strong>of</strong> certain<br />

antinutritional factors such as Anti- Vitamin B Comple factors by fermentation procedures as reported<br />

by Gernmah et al., (2007). This result may also be explained by the observation <strong>of</strong> Krogdahl et al.,<br />

(2005) who reported possibility <strong>of</strong> positive effects <strong>of</strong> combining starch or energy sources in fish diets.<br />



Adekoya BB, Olunuga OA, Ayansanwo TO, and Omoyinmi GAK (2004). Manual <strong>of</strong> the second<br />

annual seminar and training workshop held at Ogun State Agricultural Development<br />

Akinrotimi, O. A., U. U. Gabriel, P. E. Anyanwu, and A. O. Anyanwu (2007b). Influence <strong>of</strong> sex,<br />

acclimation methods and period on haematology <strong>of</strong> Sarotherodon melanotheron. Res. J.<br />

Biol. Sci. 2(3):348-352.<br />

Baruah, K. Sahu N. P. and Debnath D. (2003). Dietary phytase: An ideal approach for a cost effective<br />

and low polluting aquafeed. NAGA, 27(3):15-19.<br />

Carter, C. G., Lewis T. E. and Nicholas, P. D. (2003). Comparison <strong>of</strong> cholesterol and sodium oxide as<br />

digestibility markers for lipid components in Atlantic salmon (Salmon salar) diets.<br />

Aquaculture 225:341-351.<br />

Chutintrasri B and Noomhorm A. (2007). Color degradation kinetics <strong>of</strong> pineapple puree during<br />

thermal processing. LWT. 40: 300-306.<br />

Correia R.T.P, McCue P, Magalhaes M.M.A, Macedo G.R and Shetty K. (2004). Production <strong>of</strong><br />

phenolic antioxidants by the solid-state bioconversion <strong>of</strong> pineapple waste mixed with<br />

soy flour using Rhizopus oligosporus. Process Biochemistry. 39: 2167-4902.<br />

Craig, C and Helfrich LA (2002). Understanding Fish Nutrition, Feeds and Feeding. Publ. No 420-<br />

456<br />

Davis, A.R. (2004). Correlation <strong>of</strong> plasma IGF-I concentrations and growth rate in aquacultured<br />

finfish: a tool for assessing the potential <strong>of</strong> new diets. Aquaculture 236:583 – 592.<br />

De Silva, S. S. (2001). Performance <strong>of</strong> Oreochromis niloticus fry maintained on mixed feeding<br />

schedules <strong>of</strong> different protein levels. Aquac. Fish. 16:621- 633.<br />

Delgado C.L., Wada N., Rosegrant M.W., Meijer S and Ahmed M., (2003). Outlook for fish to 2020,<br />

Meeting Global Demand. 28 pp.<br />

Deliza R, Rosenthal A, Abadio F.B.D, Silva C.H.O and Castillo C. (2005). Application <strong>of</strong> high<br />

pressure technology in the fruit juice processing: benefits perceived by consumers.<br />

Journal <strong>of</strong> Food Engineering. 67: 241-246.<br />

Dupree, HK and Hunter JV (1984). Third Report to Fish Farmers: Nutrition, Feeds and Feeding<br />

Practices. US Department <strong>of</strong> the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. Pp 141-157<br />

Earle, KE (1995). <strong>The</strong> nutritional requirements <strong>of</strong> ornamental fish. Vet. Q.17 (Suppl. 1), S53–S55.<br />


Edwin HR and Meng HL (1996). A Practical Guides to Nutrition, Feeds and Feeding <strong>of</strong> Tilapia.<br />

Blackwell Synergy Publishing Inc. www. Blackwellpublishing.comh Small Animal<br />

Veterinary Association, Gloucestershire, UK,pp. 244–251.<br />

Edwin HR and Meng HL (1996). A Practical Guides to Nutrition, Feeds and Feeding <strong>of</strong> Catfish.<br />

Blackwell Synergy Publishing Inc. www. Blackwellpublishing.com<br />

Ernesto, M., Cardosso, A. P., Cliff J. and Bradsury, J. H. (2000). Cyanogesis cassava flour and roots<br />

and urinary thiocyanate concentration in Mozambique J. Food. Comp. Analysis.<br />

Eyo AA (2002). Fish Processing Technology in the Tropics. National Institute for Freshwater<br />

Fisheries Research. New Bussa, Niger State. Pp 23-35<br />

Eyo, A. A. (2004). Fundamentals <strong>of</strong> fish nutrition and diet development an overview. Pp. 1-33. In A.<br />

A. Eyo (ed). National workshop on fish feed development and feeding practices in<br />

aquaculture NIFFRI, Newbussa 15th to 19th September, 2003. 65pp.<br />

Fagbenro, O. A. (1992). Utilization <strong>of</strong> Cocoa pud husk in low diets cost by Clarias isheriensis,<br />

(Syhenham). Aquaculture. 4:175-182.<br />

Falaye A. E. (1988). Utilization <strong>of</strong> cocoa husk in the nutrition <strong>of</strong> tilapia (Oreochcromis niloticus).<br />

Ph.D. <strong>The</strong>sis <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Ibadan, Nigeria. 260pp.<br />

Falaye, A.E. and Oloruntuyi, O.O., (1998). Nutritive potential <strong>of</strong> plantainpeel meal and replacement<br />

value for maize in diets <strong>of</strong> African Catfish (Clarias gariepinus) fingerlings. Trop. Agric.<br />

(Trinidad), 75 (4), 488-492<br />

Falaye, AE (1992). Utilisation <strong>of</strong> Agro-Industrial Wastes as Fish Feedstuffs in Nigeria. Proceeding <strong>of</strong><br />

the 10th Annual Conference <strong>of</strong> FISON, pp 47-57<br />

FAO (1987).<strong>The</strong> Nutrition and Feeding <strong>of</strong> Farmed Fish and Shrimp - a Training Manual. Food and<br />

<strong>Agriculture</strong> Organization <strong>of</strong> the United Nations. Brazil, June 1987.<br />

FAO (2006). State <strong>of</strong> world aquaculture FAO Fisheries Technical paper, No. 500. Rome, 134pp.<br />

Fasakin, E.A., (2007). Fish as food yesterday, today and forever, Inaugural Lecture series 48, <strong>The</strong><br />

<strong>Federal</strong> <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Technology, Akure, 52 pp.<br />

Fasakin, E.A., (2008). Fish as food yesterday, today and forever, Inaugural Lecture series 48, <strong>The</strong><br />

<strong>Federal</strong> <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> Technology, Akure, 52 pp.<br />

Fasakin, E.A., Balogun, A.M. and Edomwagogbon O., (2004). Aspects <strong>of</strong> chemical and biological<br />

evaluation <strong>of</strong> dried maggot meals in production diets for Clarid Catfish, Clarias<br />

gariepinus. World J. Biotech. 5, 753-762.<br />


Faturoti, E.O., Obasa S.O. and Bakare A.L. (1995). Growth and nutrient utilization <strong>of</strong> Clarias<br />

gariepinus fed life maggots in sustainable utilization <strong>of</strong> Aquatic/Wetland resources. 182<br />

pp.<br />

Fernandes F.A.N, Jr Linhares F.E and Rodrigues S. (2008). Ultrasound as pre-treatment for drying <strong>of</strong><br />

pineapple. Ultrasonic Sonochemistry. 15: 1049-1054.<br />

Francis, G., Makkar H.P.S. and Becker, K., (2001). Antinutritional factors present in plantderived<br />

alternative fish feed ingredients and their effects in fish. Aqua., 199 (3-4), 197-228.<br />

Gabriel, U. U., A. O. Akinrotimi, P. E. Anyanwu, D. O., Bekibele and D. N. Onunkwo (2007). Locally<br />

produced fish feed; potential for aquaculture in Africa. J. Agric.20(10):536-540.<br />

Gernmah, D.I., Atolagbe, M.O. and Echegwo, C.C., (2007). Nutritional composition <strong>of</strong> the African<br />

locust bean (Parkia biglobosa) fruit pulp. Nig. Food J. 25, (1), 1-3.<br />

Hajare S.N, Dhokane V.S, Shashidhar R and Saroj S et al. (2006). Radiation Processing <strong>of</strong> Minimally<br />

Processed Pineapple (Ananas cosmosus Merr.): Effect on Nutritional and Sensory<br />

Quality. Journal <strong>of</strong> Food Science. 71(6): S501.<br />

Hebbar H.U, Sumana B and Raghavarao K.S.M.S. (2008). Use <strong>of</strong> reverse micellar systems for the<br />

extraction and purification <strong>of</strong> bromelain from pineapple wastes. Bioresources<br />

Technology. 99: 4896-4902.<br />

Hongvaleerat C, Cabral L.M.C, Dornier M, Reynes M and Ningsanond S. (2008). Concentration <strong>of</strong><br />

pineapple juice by osmotic evaporation. Journal <strong>of</strong> Food Engineering. 88: 548-552.<br />

Jackson AJ, Capper BS and Matty AJ (1982). Evaluation <strong>of</strong> some plant proteins in complete diets for<br />

the the tilapia, Sarotherodon mossambicus. Aquaculture 27: 97-109<br />

Jaeger de Carvalho L.M, Miranda de Castro I and Bento da Silva C.A. (2008). A study <strong>of</strong> retention <strong>of</strong><br />

sugars in the process <strong>of</strong> clarification <strong>of</strong> pineapple juice (Ananas cosmosus, L. Merril)<br />

by micro- and ultra-filtration. Journal <strong>of</strong> Food Engineering. 87: 447-454.<br />

Jamiu, D. M., and Ayinla O. A. (2003). Potential for the development <strong>of</strong> Aquaculture in African<br />

NAGA 26 (3):9-13.<br />

Halver, J.E., Hardy, R.W., 2002. Fish nutrition, Third edition. Academic Press, New York. 824 pp.<br />

Krogdahl, A., Hemre, G.I. and Mommsen, T.P. (2005). Carbohydrates in fish nutrition: digestion and<br />

absorption in post-larval stages. Aqua., 11 (2), 103-122.<br />

Lagos State. Agricultural Media Resources and Extension Centre (AMREC), <strong>University</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Agriculture</strong><br />

<strong>Abeokuta</strong>-Ogun State and BATN Foundation, Victoria Island, Lagos. Pp 19-20.<br />


Macartney A (1996). Ornamental fish nutrition and feeding. In: Kelly, N.C.,Wills, J.M. (Eds.), Manual<br />

<strong>of</strong> Companion Animal Nutrition and Feeding.British Small Animal Veterinary<br />

Association, Gloucestershire, UK,pp. 244–251.<br />

National Research Council), N.R.C., 1977. Nutrient Requirements <strong>of</strong> Warmwater Fishes.National<br />

Academy Press,Washington, DC, USA.<br />

National Research Council), N.R.C., 1983. Nutrient Requirements <strong>of</strong> Warmwater Fishes and<br />

Shellfishes. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA revised ed.<br />

National Research Council), N.R.C., 1993. Nutrient Requirements <strong>of</strong> Fish. National Academy<br />

Press,Washington, DC, USA.<br />

Nwanna, L.C., (2003). Nutritional value and digestibility <strong>of</strong> shrimp head waste meal by Africa Catfish<br />

Clarias gariepinus. Pak. J. <strong>of</strong> Nut. 2 (6), 339-345.<br />

Obasa, S.O. and Faturoti E.O. (2001). Growth response and serum component and yield <strong>of</strong> the african<br />

bony tongue (heterotis nilticus) fed varying dietary crude protein level. ASSET<br />

Olatunde, A. A. (1996). Effect <strong>of</strong> supplementation <strong>of</strong> soyabean diet with L and D, L. methionine on<br />

the growth <strong>of</strong> mud fish Clarias anguillaris Nig. J. Biotech. 9(1):9-16.<br />

Olukunle, O. (2006). Nutritive potential <strong>of</strong> sweet potato peel meal and root replacement value for<br />

maize in diets <strong>of</strong> Africa catfish (Clarias gariepinus) advanced fry. J. Food Tech.<br />

4(4):289-293.<br />

Olurin. K. B., E. A. A. Olujo and O. A. Olukoya (2006). Growth <strong>of</strong> African catfish Clarias gariepinus<br />

fingerlings, fed different levels <strong>of</strong> cassava. W. J. Zool (1):54-56.<br />

Omotayo AM, Akegbejo-Samsons Y and Olaoye OJ (2006). Fish Production, preservation, processing<br />

and storage. Training manual <strong>of</strong> the 2006 joint training <strong>of</strong> fish farmers in Epe,<br />

Perez-Tinoco M.R, Perez A, Salgado-Cervantes M, Reynes M and Vaillant F. (2008). Effect <strong>of</strong><br />

vacuum frying on main physiochemical and nutritional quality parameters <strong>of</strong> pineapple<br />

chips. Journal <strong>of</strong> the Science <strong>of</strong> Food and <strong>Agriculture</strong>. 88(6): 945.<br />

Pineapple fruit image retrieved on 13/08/2008 from<br />

http://www.themomsbuzz.com/moms_buzz/2007/09/receipe-pineapp.html<br />

Pineapple plant image retrieved on 13/08/2008 from<br />

http://www.schmieder.co.uk/Indian%20Subcontinent/pineapple.JPG<br />

Programme, OGADEP. Olabisi Onabanjo way, Idi-Aba, <strong>Abeokuta</strong>. Publisher: <strong>The</strong> Fisheries Society <strong>of</strong><br />

Nigeria (Ogun State Chapter) 52pp.<br />


Rani D.S and Nand K. (2004). Ensilage <strong>of</strong> pineapple processing waste for methane generation. Waste<br />

management. 24: 523-528.<br />

Roberts, RJ (1978). Fish Pathology. A Bailliere Tindall Book, Publ. Cassell Ltd.<br />

Samson J.A. (1986). Tropical Fruits. USA, Longman Inc. New York.<br />

Series A 2001, 1 (2); 97-104<br />

Sotolu, A.O., (2008). Nutrient Potentials <strong>of</strong> Water Hyacinth as a Feed Supplement in Sustainable<br />

Aquaculture. Obeche, 26 (1), 45-51.<br />

Sotolu, A.O., and Adejumoh (2009). Nutrient values and utilization <strong>of</strong> rumen epithelia meal in the diet<br />

<strong>of</strong> Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822). Prod. Agric. Technol. 5 (1), 144-153.<br />

Tewe, O.O. (2004). Cassava for Livestock feed in sub-sahara Africa. F.A.O. Rome Italy. 64pp.<br />

Tochi B.N, Wang Z, Xu S-Y and Zhang W. (2008). <strong>The</strong>rapeutic Application <strong>of</strong> Pineapple Protease<br />

(Bromelain): A Review. Pakistan Journal <strong>of</strong> Nutrition. 7(4): 513-520.<br />

Ufodike, E.B.C. and A.J. Matty, 1983. Growth response and nutrient digestibility in mirror carp<br />

(Cyprinus carpio) fed different levels <strong>of</strong> cassava and rice. Aquaculture, 31: 41-50.<br />

Ufodike, E.B.C. and A.J. Matty, 1984. Nutrient digestibility and growth responses <strong>of</strong> rainbow trout<br />

(Salmo gairdneri) fed different levels <strong>of</strong> cassava and rice. Hydrobiologia, 119: 83-88.<br />

USDA National Database for Standard Reference. Chemical composition <strong>of</strong> pineapple. Retrieved on<br />

10/08/2008 from http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/cgi-bin/list_nut_edit.pl268.8.<br />



Descriptives<br />

N Mean<br />

Std.<br />

Deviation<br />

Std.<br />

Error<br />

95% Confidence Interval<br />

for Mean<br />

Minimu<br />

m<br />

Maximu<br />

m<br />

Lower<br />

Bound<br />

Upper<br />

Bound<br />

Lower<br />

Bound<br />

Upper<br />

Bound<br />

Lower<br />

Bound<br />

Upper<br />

Bound<br />

Lower<br />

Bound<br />

IWa 1.00 3 12.1333 2.57941 1.48922 5.7257 18.5409 10.00 15.00<br />

2.00 3 13.8667 2.30940 1.33333 8.1298 19.6035 11.20 15.20<br />

3.00 3 15.2000 .91652 .52915 12.9233 17.4767 14.20 16.00<br />

4.00 3 14.5667 .66583 .38442 12.9126 16.2207 13.80 15.00<br />

Total 12 13.9417 1.96073 .56601 12.6959 15.1875 10.00 16.00<br />

FWa 1.00 3 44.2667 7.08684 4.09159 26.6620 61.8714 36.10 48.80<br />

2.00 3 46.4000 2.68514 1.55027 39.7297 53.0703 43.30 48.00<br />

3.00 3 47.0000 3.08058 1.77858 39.3474 54.6526 43.70 49.80<br />

4.00 3 50.2333 4.13078 2.38491 39.9719 60.4948 47.70 55.00<br />

Total 12 46.9750 4.50073 1.29925 44.1154 49.8346 36.10 55.00<br />

WGa 1.00 3 32.1333 6.75599 3.90057 15.3505 48.9161 24.70 37.90<br />

2.00 3 32.5333 4.30620 2.48618 21.8361 43.2305 28.10 36.70<br />

3.00 3 31.8000 3.04138 1.75594 24.2448 39.3552 28.30 33.80<br />

4.00 3 35.6667 4.79305 2.76727 23.7601 47.5733 32.80 41.20<br />

Total 12 33.0333 4.48601 1.29500 30.1831 35.8836 24.70 41.20<br />

SGR<br />

a<br />

1.00 3 2.3667 .41932 .24210 1.3250 3.4083 2.10 2.85<br />

2.00 3 2.2100 .38432 .22189 1.2553 3.1647 1.90 2.64<br />

3.00 3 2.0567 .15044 .08686 1.6829 2.4304 1.90 2.20<br />

4.00 3 2.2500 .22517 .13000 1.6907 2.8093 2.12 2.51<br />

Total 12 2.2208 .29253 .08445 2.0350 2.4067 1.90 2.85<br />

FIa 1.00 3 76.3000 13.94740 8.05254 41.6527 110.9473 67.90 92.40<br />

2.00 3 84.9333 6.35164 3.66712 69.1550 100.7117 79.10 91.70<br />

3.00 3 87.7333 6.50410 3.75514 71.5763 103.8904 83.30 95.20<br />

4.00 3 91.2333 6.27402 3.62231 75.6478 106.8189 84.00 95.20<br />

Total 12 85.0500 9.53038 2.75118 78.9947 91.1053 67.90 95.20<br />

FCRa 1.00 3 2.4300 .53703 .31005 1.0959 3.7641 1.81 2.75<br />

2.00 3 2.6367 .43558 .25148 1.5546 3.7187 2.15 2.99<br />

3.00 3 2.7700 .24880 .14364 2.1520 3.3880 2.50 2.99<br />

4.00 3 2.5800 .30050 .17349 1.8335 3.3265 2.29 2.89<br />

Total 12 2.6042 .36170 .10441 2.3744 2.8340 1.81 2.99<br />

AGR 1.00 3 .5800 .12490 .07211 .2697 .8903 .44 .68<br />

a 2.00 3 .5833 .08021 .04631 .3841 .7826 .50 .66<br />

3.00 3 .5700 .05196 .03000 .4409 .6991 .51 .60<br />

4.00 3 .6400 .08660 .05000 .4249 .8551 .59 .74<br />

Total 12 .5933 .08172 .02359 .5414 .6453 .44 .74<br />

PERa 1.00 3 1.2200 .31177 .18000 .4455 1.9945 1.04 1.58<br />

2.00 3 1.1067 .19655 .11348 .6184 1.5949 .96 1.33<br />

3.00 3 1.0300 .09165 .05292 .8023 1.2577 .95 1.13<br />

4.00 3 1.1267 .12503 .07219 .8161 1.4373 1.00 1.25<br />

Total 12 1.1208 .18456 .05328 1.0036 1.2381 .95 1.58<br />

PPVa 1.00 3 .4533 .07234 .04177 .2736 .6330 .37 .50<br />

40<br />

Upper<br />


2.00 3 .3467 .02517 .01453 .2842 .4092 .32 .37<br />

3.00 3 .5333 .03786 .02186 .4393 .6274 .49 .56<br />

4.00 3 .5633 .04041 .02333 .4629 .6637 .54 .61<br />

Total 12 .4742 .09643 .02784 .4129 .5354 .32 .61<br />

SRa 1.00<br />

100.000<br />

3<br />

0<br />

.00000 .00000 100.0000 100.0000 100.00 100.00<br />

2.00<br />

100.000<br />

3<br />

0<br />

.00000 .00000 100.0000 100.0000 100.00 100.00<br />

3.00<br />

100.000<br />

3<br />

0<br />

.00000 .00000 100.0000 100.0000 100.00 100.00<br />

4.00<br />

100.000<br />

3<br />

0<br />

.00000 .00000 100.0000 100.0000 100.00 100.00<br />

Total<br />

100.000<br />

12<br />

0<br />

.00000 .00000 100.0000 100.0000 100.00 100.00<br />

ANOVA<br />

Sum <strong>of</strong><br />

Squares df Mean Square F Sig.<br />

IWa Between Groups 15.749 3 5.250 1.582 .268<br />

Within Groups 26.540 8 3.317<br />

Total 42.289 11<br />

FWa Between Groups 54.849 3 18.283 .871 .495<br />

Within Groups 167.973 8 20.997<br />

Total 222.822 11<br />

WGa Between Groups 28.547 3 9.516 .395 .760<br />

Within Groups 192.820 8 24.103<br />

Total 221.367 11<br />

SGRa Between Groups .148 3 .049 .496 .695<br />

Within Groups .794 8 .099<br />

Total .941 11<br />

FIa Between Groups 366.030 3 122.010 1.542 .277<br />

Within Groups 633.080 8 79.135<br />

Total 999.110 11<br />

FCRa Between Groups .178 3 .059 .377 .772<br />

Within Groups 1.261 8 .158<br />

Total 1.439 11<br />

AGRa Between Groups .009 3 .003 .372 .775<br />

Within Groups .064 8 .008<br />

Total .073 11<br />

PERa Between Groups .055 3 .018 .458 .719<br />

Within Groups .320 8 .040<br />

Total .375 11<br />

PPVa Between Groups .084 3 .028 12.601 .002<br />

Within Groups .018 8 .002<br />

Total .102 11<br />

SRa Between Groups .000 3 .000 . .<br />

Within Groups .000 8 .000<br />

Total .000 11<br />


IWa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 1.00 3 12.1333<br />

a) 2.00 3 13.8667<br />

4.00 3 14.5667<br />

3.00 3 15.2000<br />

Sig. .089<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

FWa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 1.00 3 44.2667<br />

a) 2.00 3 46.4000<br />

3.00 3 47.0000<br />

4.00 3 50.2333<br />

Sig. .172<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

WGa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 3.00 3 31.8000<br />

a) 1.00 3 32.1333<br />

2.00 3 32.5333<br />

4.00 3 35.6667<br />

Sig. .390<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />


SGRa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 3.00 3 2.0567<br />

a) 2.00 3 2.2100<br />

4.00 3 2.2500<br />

1.00 3 2.3667<br />

Sig. .289<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

FIa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 1.00 3 76.3000<br />

a) 2.00 3 84.9333<br />

3.00 3 87.7333<br />

4.00 3 91.2333<br />

Sig. .090<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

FCRa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 1.00 3 2.4300<br />

a) 4.00 3 2.5800<br />

2.00 3 2.6367<br />

3.00 3 2.7700<br />

Sig. .352<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />


AGRa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 3.00 3 .5700<br />

a) 1.00 3 .5800<br />

2.00 3 .5833<br />

4.00 3 .6400<br />

Sig. .394<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

PERa<br />

N<br />

Subset for<br />

alpha =<br />

.05<br />

TRT 1 1<br />

Duncan( 3.00 3 1.0300<br />

a) 2.00 3 1.1067<br />

4.00 3 1.1267<br />

1.00 3 1.2200<br />

Sig. .305<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />

Duncan(<br />

a)<br />

PPVa<br />

N Subset for alpha = .05<br />

TRT 1 2 3 1<br />

2.00 3 .3467<br />

1.00 3 .4533<br />

3.00 3 .5333 .5333<br />

4.00 3 .5633<br />

Sig. 1.000 .072 .459<br />

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.<br />

Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.000.<br />


Week TD1, 0% TD2, 25% TD3,50% TD4, 75%<br />

0 17.66 19.66 19.06 17.33<br />

1 12.13 13.87 15.20 14.57<br />

2 14.83 15.80 17.00 17.90<br />

3 17.87 18.23 20.13 20.20<br />

4 20.93 22.23 23.30 24.10<br />

5 24.03 27.97 28.53 28.87<br />

6 25.43 28.87 28.87 31.50<br />

7 28.70 30.90 32.90 34.80<br />

8 34.93 40.07 40.03 42.20<br />


Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!