Processed feed pea and canola meal for blue shrimp diets

More documents

Recommendations

Info

94 ( ) L.E. Cruz-Suarez et al.rAquaculture 196 2001 87–104 3. Results 3.1. Stability of the diets in seawater Average loss of a dietary dry matter following 1-h immersion was approximately 11% for the diets containing pea meals Ž Table 3 ., except for the whole-extruded pea diet Ž WEX .. This diet and the reference diets Ž 8 and 9. showed a better water stability. The extruded canola diet Ž CEX. exhibited significantly lower water stability; however crude protein loss was comparatively low. The WEX diet showed the lowest crude protein loss while the protein stability of the remaining diets was similar to that of control diet in the growth trial Ž. 7 . The effects of extrusion on increased starch gelatinization Ž Table 1. may explain the higher water stability of the diet containing whole-extruded peas. However, this extrusion effect was not observed for dehulled peas: %DML and CPL values submitted to factorial ANOVA showed significant probabilities for the rawrextruding factor Ž Ps0.064 and 0.058, respectively ., but not for the wholerdehulled one Ž Ps0.112 and 0.254, respectively .. 3.2. Feed intake, growth and surÕiÕal The growth bioassay results and ANOVA probabilities for the calculated parameters are presented in Table 4. Highly significant differences Ž P-0.001. in food intake were observed. The micronized pea meal diet WMI showed the highest consumption while both extruded pea meal diets, WEX and DEX showed the lowest intake. The raw pea Table 3 Proximate analysis and calculated energy content of the experimental diets, and dry matter loss Ž %DML. and crude protein loss Ž %CPL. after 1 h immersion in seawater 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 Diet Moisture Crude Lipid Ash Fiber N.F.E Gross %DML %CPL 1 protein 2 energy 1 WRA 7.5 30.6 9.5 8.7 1.4 42.4 4.3 11.2"0.4 b 19.9"3.0 bc 2 WEX 7.5 29.7 8.9 9.0 2.7 42.3 4.2 9.9"1.0 ab 12.6"1.1 a 3 DRA 7.6 30.5 9.6 8.6 0.9 42.8 4.4 11.3"1.0 bc 17.4"3.1 b 4 DEX 7.3 30.8 9.3 8.6 0.9 43.1 4.4 11.1"0.9 b 18.5"1.9 b 5 WMI 7.0 29.6 9.6 8.6 2.4 42.9 4.3 11.2"1.4 b 18.9"1.8 b 6 CEX 7.2 30.2 9.3 8.8 3.8 40.7 4.2 12.6"0.8 c 17.2"1.4 b 7 Control 6.8 31.2 8.9 8.5 1.5 43.2 4.4 11.1"0.5 b 18.9"0.4 b growth 8 Reference 6.6 35.8 12.8 11.0 1.5 32.3 4.5 9.6"1.0 a 17.3"0.8 b pea meal 9 Reference 6.7 29.0 11.8 9.1 1.6 41.9 4.5 9.6"0.7 a 19.1"0.6 b canola 1 % as fed. NFEsnitrogen free extract, calculated by difference. 2 Proteins5.6 kcalrg, lipids9.5 kcalrg, carbohydratess4.1 kcalrg Ž Tacon, 1987 .. 3 Different letters in same column indicate different homogeneous subsets as determined by Duncan’s multiple comparisons Ž P s0.05 .. One-way ANOVA probabilities were P s0.001 and P s0.006 for DML and CPL data, respectively.
Table 4 Growth experiment results Ž means of four replicates values"standard deviation. Treatments 1 WRA 2 WEX 3 DRA 4 DEX 5 WMI 6 CEX 7 Control Prob. 1 Mean body weight Initial Ž mg. 255"3 254"2 257"2 255"1 256"3 255"3 256"2 0.497 14 days Ž. g 0.61"0.03 abc 0.57"0.02 a 0.60"0.03 ab 0.61"0.02 abc 0.65"0.03 c 0.60"0.05 ab 0.62"0.03 bc 0.040 28 days Ž. g 1.03"0.11 a 0.95"0.03 a 0.98"0.06 a 0.99"0.07 a 1.13"0.07 b 0.94"0.05 a 1.01"0.04 a 0.012 Dry feed intake Ž. g 28 days 1.18"0.10 b 1.03"0.03 a 1.28"0.07 b 1.07"0.04 a 1.56"0.05 c 1.22"0.04 b 1.29"0.09 b -0.001 Dry feed intake, corrected for losses by leaching before ingestion Ž. g 28 days 1.05"0.01 b 0.93"0.02 a 1.13"0.06 b 0.95"0.04 a 1.38"0.04 c 1.07"0.04 b 1.14"0.08 b -0.001 Ž . Weight gain %WG 28 days 301"40 a 273"10 a 282"23 a 288"25 a 340"29 b 269"18 a 292"14 a 0.011 Feed conversion ratio 28 days 1.6"0.1 ab 1.5"0.1 a 1.8"0.2 c 1.5"0.1 a 1.8"0.2 c 1.8"0.1 c 1.7"0.05 bc -0.001 Feed conversion ratio, corrected for losses by leaching before ingestion 28 days 1.4"0.1 ab 1.3"0.07 a 1.6"0.15 c 1.3"0.07 a 1.6"0.14 c 1.6"0.04 c 1.5"0.04 bc 0.001 Protein efficiency ratio 28 days 2.0"0.2 b 2.1"0.1 b 1.7"0.2 a 2.1"0.1 b 1.8"0.1 a 1.7"0.1 a 1.8"0.05 a -0.001 Protein efficiency ratio, corrected for losses by leaching before ingestion 28 days 2.5"0.2 b 2.4"0.1 b 2.1"0.2 a 2.5"0.1 b 2.2"0.2 a 2.1"0.1 a 2.2"0.06 a 0.001 Survival Ž %. 28 days 93"10 90"8 95"6 98"5 100"0 90"0 100"0 0.061 Biomass Ž. g 28 days 9.5"1.7 ab 8.5"0.7 a 9.3"0.4 ab 9.6"1 ab 11.2"0.7 c 8.4"0.5 a 10.1"0.4 bc 0.003 1 Prob.sProbability by a one-way analysis of variance between treatments. Treatment means within the same row with different letters are significantly different Ž . Duncan’s test, P s0.05 . L.E. Cruz-Suarez et al.rAquaculture 196 ( 2001 ) 87–104 95
Page 1 and 2: Ž . Aquaculture 196 2001 87-104 ww
Page 3 and 4: 2. Material and methods ( ) L.E. Cr
Page 5 and 6: ( ) L.E. Cruz-Suarez et al.rAquacul
Page 7: ( ) L.E. Cruz-Suarez et al.rAquacul
Page 11 and 12: Table 5 Apparent dry matter, protei

Processed feed pea and canola meal for blue shrimp diets

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

Delete template?

Save as template?