Economic evaluation of prebiotics, probiotics and symbiotics in juvenile Nile tilapia

Abstract

-This study aimed to evaluate economically the inclusion of prebiotics, probiotics and symbiotics in diets of Nile tilapia (4.07 ± 0.30 g), at two stocking densities (0.6 and 1.2 kg m -3 ). A total of 288 fish were distributed over 32 tanks (40 L) in a completely randomised design, in a 2 x 4 factorial (stocking density x additives), with four replications, over six weeks. The following were evaluated: total feed consumption (FC), final biomass (FB), relative gain in biomass (RGB), apparent feed conversion (AFC), survival rate (SUR), average cost of feed per kg of live weight gain (ACF), total cost of feed (TCF), total cost of production (TCP), gross income (GI), operating profit (OP) and economic efficiency index (EEI). No effect was seen on the evaluated parameters from the interaction (p>0.05) between stocking density and inclusion of the feed additives. No influence was observed (p>0.05) on SUR from the stocking density, although this significantly influenced the parameters FB, FC, RGB, AFC, ACF, TCF, TCP, GI and OP. There was no significant influence from the inclusion of prebiotics, probiotics and symbiotics on FC, SUR and TCF, however there was an influence (p<0.05) on the parameters FB, RGB, AFC, ACF, TCP, GI and OP. The control diet at the higher density displayed the worst EEI. The best EEI was obtained by fish at the lower density which received feed with added probiotics and symbiotics. The best indices of economic and zootechnical performance obtained demonstrate the economic viability of including prebiotics, probiotics and symbiotics in the diets of Nile tilapia.

Action time and feed frequency of Lactobacillus plantarum for Nile tilapia

“…Regardless of the chosen probiotic, there are production costs, Azevedo et al (2015) observed best zootechnical performance and economic efficiency for Nile tilapia fed diet supplemented with prebiotics, probiotics, and symbiotics in the feed for Nile tilapia. Probiotic use in half (50%) of feeds offered per day, can guarantee the same result as fish fed with probiotic in all (100%) feeds.…”

Effect of dietary supplementation with a synbiotic (Lacto Forte) on growth performance, haematological and histological profiles, the innate immune response and resistance to bacterial disease inOreochromis niloticus

“…In aquaculture, MOS, fructooligosaccharides (FOS) and galactooligosaccharides (GOS) are the prebiotics most often selected to be integrated with probiotics, including E. faecalis , Pediococcus acidilactici and Bacillus licheniformis , to form synbiotics (Azimirad, Meshkini, Ahmadifard, & Hoseinifar, ; Modanloo, Soltanian, Akhlaghi, & Hoseinifar, ; Rahimnejad et al, ; Zhang et al, ). Although the mechanisms of MOS utilization by Bacillus and Enterococcus probiotic bacteria remain unclear, several studies have illustrated the positive impact of MOS on the gut microbiota and have definitively shown their roles as growth promoters in aquaculture (Azevedo et al, ; Daniels, Merrifield, Ringø, & Davies, ). The principle of synbiotics is that the prebiotics in synbiotics are metabolized to their respective sugars in the fish alimentary tract and are subsequently utilized by probiotic bacteria as sources of carbon (Goh & Klaenhammer, ).…”

Prebiótico, probiótico e simbiótico para larvas de Trichogaster leeri (Bleeker, 1852, Perciformes, Osphronemidae)

“…Alguns estudos têm demonstrado os efeitos benéficos dos prebióticos e dos probióticos para peixes, como melhora na utilização do alimento, modulação da microflora intestinal, aumento da resposta imune e antagonismo a patógenos, o que gera maior sobrevivência dos peixes (Verschuere et al, 2000;Ringo et al, 2010;Azevedo et al, 2015). Contudo, apesar do sucesso obtido pela suplementação isolada de prebióticos e probióticos, poucos estudos avaliaram sua suplementação conjunta na piscicultura, em especial na larvicultura de espécies ornamentais.…”