Energy budget of the Japanese flounder Paralichthys olivaceus (Temminck & Schlegel) larvae fed HUFA-enriched and non-enriched Artemia nauplii

Abstract

The energy budget of the Japanese £ounder Paralichthys olivaceus (Temminck & Schlegel) larvae fed enriched (EA) and non-enriched (NEA) Artemia nauplii was determined by equating energy intake (EI) with the summation of energy channelled to faeces (F), metabolism (M), excretion (U) and growth (G). Larvae (21 days post hatching, 2.2 mg mean wet wt) were reared in six 80-L circular tanks with three replicates of 160 larvae per tank and fed EA and NEA for 20 days. EI was calculated from the energy content of consumed nauplii, M from the summation of energy for routine, feeding and active metabolisms, U from ammonia excretion and G from energy gained based on weight gain, while F was the di¡erence between EI and the total of other components. The heat increment of larvae was calculated from the di¡erence of O 2 consumption at post-prandial and routine conditions. Except for G and F, variables were correlated to the dry body weight (W) of larvae in a power function:Y 5aW b . Coe⁄cients a and b were estimated by regression after a logarithmic transformation of the raw data. Overall, growth and survival rates of the larvae fed EA were higher than those fed NEA. For a larval £ounder growing from 2 to 20 mg wet wt, the ingested energy was partitioned as follows: 22.8% to faecal loss, 38.3% to metabolism, 1.5% to urinary loss and 37.4% to growth for the EA group, whereas 35.4% to faecal loss, 28.4% to metabolism, 1.3% to urinary loss and 34.9% to growth for the NEA group. Gross conversion and assimilation e⁄ciencies were higher, but the net conversion e⁄ciency was lower in EA-fed larvae than NEA-fed larvae. This study suggests that the higher growth and survival rates of the EA-fed group compared with the NEA-fed group were attributed to their higher intake of essential fatty acids, higher metabolism and lower energy loss of faeces.

Energy budget of Marsupenaeus japonicus postlarvae fed highly unsaturated fatty acid-enriched and non-enriched Artemia nauplii

“…In fish juveniles and adults, the b values generally range from 0.47 to 0.95 26 . In the Japanese flounder larvae, b values were 0.72 and 0.41 for larvae fed EA and NEA, respectively 11 . The excretion rate of NH 4 –N in shrimps is affected by diet composition, such as protein content 38,39 and larval stage, 9 as well as temperature and salinity 28,30 .…”

“…26 In the Japanese flounder larvae, b values were 0.72 and 0.41 for larvae fed EA and NEA, respectively. 11 The excretion rate of NH 4 -N in shrimps is affected by diet composition, such as protein content 38,39 and larval stage, 9 as well as temperature and salinity. 28,30 From an energetics viewpoint, energy loss as ammonia in PL sized 5 mg in the present study (4.8 and 4.0% of the total energy intake for EA and NEA, respectively) is still comparable with that found in juvenile American lobster (3.0-4.3%) 10 fed formulated diets, but the values were lower in early stages of the same species (1.3-2.0%) 19 fed non-enriched Artemia.…”

“…The hatching and enrichment methods have been reported previously by Sumule et al. 11 and the proximate composition, size and fatty acid compositions of the nauplii are given in Table 1.…”

“…Cysts of Artemia from Great Salt Lake (Aquafauna Biomarine, Hawthorne, CA, USA) were purchased from a commercial supplier and used for the experiments. The hatching and enrichment methods have been reported previously by Sumule et al 11 and the proximate composition, size and fatty acid compositions of the nauplii are given in Table 1.…”

Measuring respiration rates in marine fish larvae: challenges and advances

“… 1 Bishop & Torres (), 2 Klumb et al (), 3 M. A. Peck (unpubl. data), 4 Almatar (), 5 Kiorboe et al (), 6 De Silva & Tytler (), 7 Houlihan et al (), 8 Holliday et al (), 9 Hettler (), 10 Moyano et al (), 11 Lasker & Theilacker (), 12 Houde & Schekter (), 13 Tucker (), 14 Theilacker (), 15 Peck & Buckley (), 16 Finn et al (), 17 Laurence (), 18 McCollum et al (), 19 Davenport & Lonning (), 20 Solberg & Tilseth (), 21 Ruzicka & Gallager (), 22 Lankin et al (), 23 Lee et al (), 24 Porter (), 25 Yamashita & Bailey (), 26 Bailey (), 27 Evans et al (2006), 28 Geist et al (), 29 De Silva et al (), 30 Pimentel et al (), 31 Nilsson et al (), 32 McLeod et al (), 33 Hoss et al (), 34 Kjelson & Johnson (), 35 Wuenchel (), 36 Torres et al (), 37 Miyashita et al (), 38 Giguere et al (), 39 Hunter & Kimbrell (), 40 Nelson & Wilkins (), 41 Oozeki & Hirano (), 42 Parra & Yufera (), 43 Quantz & Tandler (), 44 Ronnestad et al (), 45 Oikawa et al (), 46 Miyashima et al (), 47 Eldridge et al (), 48 Walsh et al (), 49 Morioka (), 50 Sumule et al (), 51 Finn et al (), 52 Laurence (), 53 Cetta & Capuzzo (), 54 Burdass (), 55 Parra et al (), 56 Day et al (), 57 McKenzie et al (), 58 Robertson (), 59 Killen et al ().…”