No abstract

Aquaculture supplies more than 50% of the total fish consumed by the world population. It is considered by FAO authorities that it will be the main source of fishery products by 2030. These positive data are contradicted by the fact that aquaculture relies too much on fish oil and fish meal as essential ingredients for food, which exerts significant pressure on marine ecosystems. The present study was planned to look for alternative ingredients in aquafeeds and three different ingredients were evaluated for the first time in juveniles of rainbow trout: (1) House cricket, Acheta domesticus, meal (DI) as a quality protein source; (2) a mixture of four marine microalgae species (DM), as an important source of protein and lipids; (3) protein and lipid fraction recovered from cooking water from canned tuna manufacturing processes (DP&L); and (4) a mix of the three ingredients (DMIX). All the feeds assayed were compared with a commercial feed (DC). Results showed that the formulated alternative feeds had different effects on the growth of the fish. DI and DP&L have a similar growth performance to the control, while the fish fed with DM and the DMix have a slightly lower growth (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in terms of FCR (Feed Conversion Ratio) and PER (Protein Efficiency Ratio) (p < 0.05). Fish muscle composition did not show any differences in moisture, protein, lipids and carbohydrates content. Only a significant difference was detected in ash and in saturated fatty acid (SFA) content (p < 0.05). The hepatosomatic index (HSI) was significantly reduced in DI compared to that observed for the DC (p < 0.05), whereas the viscerosomatic index (VSI) was significantly higher in DM. The nutritional value of the rainbow trout muscle at the end of the study shows that DM fed fish showed the highest PUFA/SFA ratio and the lowest atherogenic index (AI), whereas DMIX showed the lowest PUFA/SFA and the highest n-3/n-6 and AI. No differences were observed among diets in the thrombogenic index (TI) values. Any of these ingredients might be used as alternative sources of protein in feeds for fish aquaculture because no negative effects were detected on fish growth, muscle composition, fish health or final nutritional value, except in the case of microalgae, which needs more research to adjust its inclusion rate in the feed.