Energy metabolism in Oreochromis niloticus

Meyer-Burgdorff, K.-H.; Osman, Mohammed; Günther, Katharina

doi:10.1016/0044-8486(89)90469-9

Cited by 62 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar analysis revealed a V-shaped trend for the model SGR = a + bln ( RL + c). The von Bertalanffy model shows a slow increase in growth rate towards maximum when the 6.5 This result is consistent with other studies in which the growth-ration relationship was curvilinear (Brett and Groves, 1979;Jobling, 19941, but differs from the results of Meyer-Burgdorff et al ( 1989) for Nile tilapia, in which feed efficiency decreased with increasing ration. This is probably because of the narrow range of ration levels used by Meyer-Burgdorff et al (19891, which may have been above the optimum ration.…”

Section: The Model Sgr = a + B( Rl -Rl)'/*supporting

confidence: 79%

“…This is similar to grass carp fed duckweed (Cui et al, 1994). Meyer-Burgdorff et al (1989) reported that the proportion of the metabolizable energy used for growth was around 47%, close to the proportion at the 4% per day ration level in our study. However, this proportion in their study was not significantly affected by ration level.…”

Section: Loome= 60he+40resupporting

confidence: 70%

“…There was a report on the effect of ration size on growth and energy budget in Nile tilapia (Meyer-Burgdorff et al, 1989). However, only submaximum ration levels were used, and growth was not determined over a whole ration range.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Energy budget of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in relation to ration size

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Model Sgr = a + B( Rl -Rl)'/*supporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Loome= 60he+40resupporting

confidence: 70%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Energy budget of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in relation to ration size

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…n = 10/tank feed more efficiently (Meyer-Burgdorff et al 1989;Zoccarato et al 1994). A higher FCR of group fed to 100% satiation can be also explained by a higher energy requirement for feed assimilation at higher feed consumption, which is usually accompanied by reduced nutrient absorption (Meyer-Burgdorff et al 1989). PER and GPE were not statistically influenced by dietary lipid content, whereas feeding regime positively influenced protein utilization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Growth and feed utilization of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata, L.) fed to satiation and restrictively at increasing dietary energy levels

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three isoproteic (47% protein) diets were formulated to contain graded levels of crude fat (diet D16:16%, diet D24: 24% and diet D32: 32%). Each diet was fed to satiation in three and to 80% satiation in two replicate groups of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata), having an initial body weight of 72-74 g. The trial lasted 81 days. Groups fed to satiation showed higher final body weight (FBW; 238.8-252.3 g vs. 218.0-229.3 g) and daily growth index (DGI; 2.49-2.65%/day vs. 2.27-2.34%/day) than those fed to 80% satiation. Feed intake was significantly different both for feeding level and for diet composition. Fish fed to satiation had higher feed conversion rate (FCR) compared to the 80% satiation groups (1.33-1.44 vs. 1.13-1.17; P B 0.001). Within satiation groups, FCR was significantly lower in fish fed D16 compared to fish fed D32 (1.33 vs. 1.44, P B 0.05), whereas no statistical differences were found within the 80% satiation groups. The increase in dietary lipid level did not improve growth performance, feed efficiency and protein utilization but decreased gross lipid efficiency. Conversely, a reduction in ration from satiation to 80% satiation decreased DGI, thus improving FCR. Feed costs were influenced by dietary energy level and feeding ratio, the lowest energy diet at 80% satiation being the most profitable combination among the variables.

show abstract

“…Increasing feeding level improved growth of O. niloticus but reduced FCR, PER, PPV and relative amount of metabolic energy due to increase of feed passage level through the digestive tract leading to depressed digestibility of gross energy (Meyer-Burgdorff, et al 1989). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival, Growth, Feed Efficiency and Carcass Composition of Rabbitfish, Siganus Rivulatus, Fed Different Dietary Energy and Feeding Levels

El-Dakar

Hassanen

Shalaby

et al. 2010

Mediterranean Aquaculture Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A feeding trial was conducted to study the effects of dietary energy level and feeding level or daily energy density (DED) on growth, feed conversion, nutrient retention efficiencies, carcass composition, apparent nutrient digestibility and cost benefit analysis for fingerling of rabbitfish, Siganous rivulatus. Twelve net cages, each with dimensions of 1x1x0.4m were stocked with 10 fingerlings (10g/fish initial weight). The fish were fed three isonutrogenous diets (25% CP), with varying three oil supplement (0,5 and 10%), and digestible energy levels (3882, 4056 and 4360 kcal/kg diet), at of 2 and 4% body weight/day (BW/d), corresponding six daily energy densities based on calorie per 1g BW of fish per day. Fish were fed the experimental diets three times daily, six days a week for 98 days. Fish were weighed every two week intervals and feed amounts were adjusted on the basis of the new fish weight. Final body weight, gain and specific growth level (SGR) were increased with an increase in dietary energy level at 2% feeding level but no trends were evident at 4% feeding level. Feed conversion (FCR), protein efficiency ratio (PER), productive protein value (PPV%) and energy retention (ER%) were higher when fish were fed at 2% than 4% feeding level. Furthermore, increasing daily energy density resulted in an increase in SGR until level of 162.4cal/g BW of fish. However the differences in SGR above 155.2cal/g BW were not significant (P >0.05). There are a positive effect between energy density and SGR (y= 0.099x+0.5, r 2 = 0.88). Fat content of carcass increased by increasing both energy and feeding levels while protein content did not affected.

show abstract

Energy metabolism in Oreochromis niloticus

Cited by 62 publications

References 7 publications

Energy budget of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in relation to ration size

Energy budget of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) in relation to ration size

Growth and feed utilization of gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata, L.) fed to satiation and restrictively at increasing dietary energy levels

Survival, Growth, Feed Efficiency and Carcass Composition of Rabbitfish, Siganus Rivulatus, Fed Different Dietary Energy and Feeding Levels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About