2002
DOI: 10.1017/s1357729800053170
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ingredient apparent digestibility coefficients for the Australian short-finned eel (Anguilla australis australis, Richardson)

Abstract: Abstract

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Australian short‐finned eel elvers sourced locally were randomly selected from holding tanks and acclimatized to the experimental system for a week (Engin & Carter 2001, 2002). During acclimatization, elvers were fed the commercial eel diet twice a day.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Australian short‐finned eel elvers sourced locally were randomly selected from holding tanks and acclimatized to the experimental system for a week (Engin & Carter 2001, 2002). During acclimatization, elvers were fed the commercial eel diet twice a day.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Soybean (Degani 1987), fish silage (Gonçalves, Santos, Pereira, Baptista & Coimbra 1989), blood meal (Lee & Bai 1997), meat meal and sunflower meal (García‐Gallego, Akharbach & de la Higuera 1998) have all been tested for the partial replacement of fish meal in the diets of different eel species. Several Australian plant and animal by‐products were also investigated for their apparent nutrient digestibilities in the Australian short‐finned eel (Engin & Carter 2002). Results suggest that higher replacement of fish meal in eel diets might be possible by supplementation of essential amino acids to restore the amino acid profile of the feed to a level that matches the requirement of the target species (Davies & Morris 1997).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…If this assumption is true, then the calculated (or predicted) protein ADC or DE content of a test diet and the actual measured protein ADC or DE content of the test diet would always be the same. This assumption has been tested and validated for other species like rainbow trout, channel catfish, carp, tilapia, ayu, seabass, Australian silver perch and Australian shortfinned eel (Cho et al, 1982;Wilson and Poe, 1985;Cho and Kaushik, 1990;Watanabe et al, 1996a,b;da Silva and Oliva-Teles, 1998;Allan et al, 1999;Engin and Carter, 2002) but yet to be validated for Atlantic cod. We compared the predicted and measured values in order to test this assumption using a wide range of test feed ingredients (Tables 5 and 6).…”
Section: Test Diet Independencymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies have been conducted on the culture of the glass eel and elver stages of the shortfin eel life cycle (De Silva et al 2001a, 2001b; Ingram et al 2001; Gooley and Ingram, 2002; Engin and Carter 2002; Gunasekera et al 2002; Engin and Carter 2005, 2006; Kearney 2009, among others). By contrast, studies on culturing or fattening of the yellow stage of this species are limited.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%