Particle size preference, gut filling and evacuation rates of the rotifer Brachionus “Cayman” using polystyrene latex beads

Baer, Andreas; Langdon, Chris; Mills, Scott; Schulz, Carsten; Hamre, Kristin

doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2008.06.020

Cited by 54 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Baer et al . () used a wider range of polystyrene beads (range 1.6–20.0 μm) in selection experiments with the medium‐sized B. plicatilis ‘ Cayman’. The rotifers were able to ingest beads from 1.6 to 10.0 μm diameter.…”

Section: Bacteria As Food In Aquaculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Bacteria as food in aquaculture: do they make a difference?

Nevejan

Schryver

Wille

et al. 2016

Reviews in Aquaculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bacterioplankton is an important component of marine as well as fresh waters and accounts for a large fraction of the production of particulate matter in those ecosystems. The concept of bacteria as providers of essential nutrients in aquatic food webs has been raised most recently in relation to the utilization of bacteria as a food source in aquaculture food chains. This article represents a comprehensive review on the potential role of bacteria as a direct food source for aquaculture organisms. After studying shortly the analytical tools that can be applied to determine the uptake and assimilation of bacteria by higher trophic levels, it describes the bacterial loads that are found in closed and open aquaculture systems and elaborates on the composition of bacteria from a nutritional point of view. Next this study elaborates in more detail on the role of bacteria as food for the zooplankton groups used as live food in aquaculture hatcheries and for various groups of aquaculture target organisms, such as fish, crustaceans and especially bivalves. This includes an assessment of the specific uptake mechanisms of the different taxonomic groups of interest in relation to their efficiency to ingest bacteria. Finally, future research lines are suggested to elucidate the nutritional impact of the bacterial community in aquaculture systems and how to steer this in order to optimize the production.

show abstract

Section: Bacteria As Food In Aquaculturementioning

confidence: 99%

Bacteria as food in aquaculture: do they make a difference?

Nevejan

Schryver

Wille

et al. 2016

Reviews in Aquaculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cayman and Brachionus sp. Austria have been identified as common in hatcheries (Papakostas, Dooms, Triantafyllidis, Deloof, Kappas, Dierckens, De Wolf, Bossier, Vadstein, Kui, Sorgeloos & Abatzopoulos 2006; Dooms, Papakostas, Hoffman, Delbare, Dierkens, Triantafyllidis, De Wolf, Vadstein, Abatzopoulos, Sorgeloos & Bossier 2007; Kostopoulou & Vadstein 2007; Baer, Langdon, Mills, Schulz & Hamre 2008). The clarification of the taxonomical situation will continue in the coming years.…”

Section: Rotifersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Currently, this group is considered to be a multi-species complex of 9^15 di¡erent species and biotypes. This complex includes species formally described as Brachionus plicatilis sensu stricto, Brachionus rotundiformis, Brachionus ibericus and Brachionus manjavacas, together with a series of lineages discernible by molecular techniques (Segers 1997 Langdon, Mills, Schulz & Hamre 2008). The clari¢cation of the taxonomical situation will continue in the coming years.…”

Section: Main Species and Strains Of Rotifersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most relevant aspect is its high fecundity, which allows a population duplication time of 24^48 h (Hirayama & Kusano 1972;Hirayama, Watanabe & Kusano 1973;Yu¤ fera, Lubia Ł n & Pascual 1983;Korstad, Olsen & Vadstein 1989). Provided that the appropriate abiotic and feeding conditions are supplied, a single parthenogenetic female Table 1 Accepted species (in bold) and other biotypes belonging to Brachionus plicatilis species complex grouped according to former size-related classi¢cation (Go¤ mez et al, 2002;Baer et al, 2008) L---biotypes SM---biotypes S and SS biotypes 220^340 lm 150^220 lm 1 0 0 1 5 0 lm may generate a large o¡spring in a few days. The rearing techniques developed for rotifers take advantage of this characteristic of their reproductive biology.…”

Section: Rearing Techniques For Rotifersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Live feeds for early stages of fish rearing

Conceição

Yúfera

Makridis

et al. 2010

Aquaculture Research

370

282

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the recent progress in the production of inert diets for fish larvae, feeding of most species of interest for aquaculture still relies on live feeds during the early life stages. Independently of their nutritional value, live feeds are easily detected and captured, due to their swimming movements in the water column, and highly digestible, given their lower nutrient concentration (water content>80%). The present paper reviews the main types of live feeds used in aquaculture, their advantages and pitfalls, with a special emphasis on their nutritional value and the extent to which this can be manipulated. The most commonly used live feeds in aquaculture are rotifers (Brachionus sp.) and brine shrimp (Artemia sp.), due to the existence of standardized cost‐effective protocols for their mass production. However, both rotifers and Artemia have nutritional deficiencies for marine species, particularly in essential n‐3 highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFA, e.g., docosahexaenoic acid and eicosapentaenoic acid). Enrichment of these live feeds with HUFA‐rich lipid emulsions may lead to an excess dietary lipid and sub‐optimal dietary protein content for fish larvae. In addition, rotifers and Artemia are likely to have sub‐optimal dietary levels of some amino acids, vitamins and minerals, at least for some species. Several species of microalgae are also used in larviculture. These are used as feed for other live feeds, but mostly in the ‘green water’ technique in fish larval rearing, with putative beneficial effects on feeding behaviour, digestive function, nutritional value, water quality and microflora. Copepods and other natural zooplankton organisms have also been used as live feeds, normally with considerably better results in terms of larval survival rates, growth and quality, when compared with rotifers and Artemia. Nonetheless, technical difficulties in mass‐producing these organisms are still a constraint to their routine use. Improvements in inert microdiets will likely lead to a progressive substitution of live feeds. However, complete substitution is probably years away for most species, at least for the first days of feeding.

show abstract

“…The smaller cell size might also be more suitable for the processing in the mastax of the rotifers. It was shown by Baer et al (2008) and Rothhaupt (1990) that rotifers ingest particles selectively. Still the highest instantaneous growth rates in experiment 1 were calculated for all three Pavlova treatments (Table 2; highest value 0.14 ± 0.019 for P. viridis fresh culture) and in experiment 2 the highest growth rate was found in the frozen P. viridis group, although not significantly different from the other groups except for the freeze-dried Pavlova group (Table 2).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%