Application of Compensatory Growth to Enhance Production in Channel Catfish Ictalurus punctatus

Abstract

Four treatment groups that received repeating cycles of fixed feed deprivation for either 0, 1, 2, or 3 d (control, treatment 1, treatment 2, and treatment 3, respectively), followed by periods of refeeding with a 36% protein commercial catfish feed once daily as long as the active phase of compensatory growth (CG) persisted, were assessed in flow‐through aquaria. No‐feed periods elicited the CG state and were immediately followed by days of ad libatum refeeding. At the end of 10 wk, average growth rate (AGR) of fish was higher (P < 0.05) than the control by 40%, 180%, and 191% for treatment 1, treatment 2, and treatment 3, respectively. The average weight of fish in treatment 3 was heavier (P < 0.05) than the average control group at the end of the study period. Mean daily feed consumption was 3.91%, 5.03%, 5.36%, and 5.98% for control, treatment 1, treatment 2, and treatment 3, respectively. Mean feed consumption per fish per day was 24%, 71.3%, and 70.7% higher than the control in treatment 1, treatment 2, and treatment 3, respectively. Restricted feeding is one of the effective methods to contain ESC‐related losses in commercial channel catfish fingerling operations. The mean cumulative survival of treatment groups registered higher (P < 0.05) survival to Edwardsiella ictaluri infection compared to the daily fed control fish. Results from this study show that compensatory growth response triggered by periodic non‐feeding days can improve growth rate, feed consumption, and improved survival to ESC infections in channel catfish fingerlings.

Improvement of Bioenergetics Model Predictions for Fish Undergoing Compensatory Growth

“…Compensatory growth continues to be of considerable interest as a method for increasing fish growth rates, improving feed conversion efficiency, decreasing waste production, and employing more convenient feeding schedules (Chatakondi and Yant 2001;Nikki et al 2004;Tian and Qin 2004). Optimal use of bioenergetics models in culture settings (Knights 1985) will probably require that models have the capacity to accurately forecast fish growth rates under feeding regimes designed to elicit and maximize CG.…”

Compensatory growth and food consumption in gibel carp, Carassius auratus gibelio, and Chinese longsnout catfish, Leiocassis longirostris, experiencing cycles of feed deprivation and re-feeding

“…Experiments on channel catfish, in which fixed periods of deprivation and re-feeding were used, have demonstrated either full or partial but not overcompensation (Kim and Lovell, 1995;Gatlin, 2000, 2001;. However, Chatakondi and Yant (2001) have reported growth over-compensation in channel catfish using a protocol similar to that used by Hayward et al (1997), in which a fixed number of days of deprivation was followed by a variable number of days of refeeding, with feeding continued for as long as the hyperphagia persisted. In the channel catfish, over-compensation was reported for deprivation periods of 1, 2 and 3 days.…”

“…Previous studies have shown that after a single period of 1 or 2 weeks of feed deprivation, the gibel carp can show full compensation when returned to a satiation ration (Qian et al, 2000;Xie et al, 2001). There is no comparable information on the longsnout catfish, although studies on the channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus (Ictaluridae), have demonstrated compensatory growth in one catfish species (Kim and Lovell, 1995;Gatlin, 2000, 2001;Chatakondi and Yant, 2001). As part of a study on the effect of feeding schedules on the growth in live weight of gibel carp and longsnout catfish, the present experiment investigated the capacities of the two species to show compensatory growth in live weight as a response to cycles of deprivation and re-feeding.…”

Could a Manipulation of Dietary Nutrient Contents Including Phosphorous Affect Compensatory Growth of Juvenile Olive Flounder Paralichthys olivaceus?

“…Hayward et al (1997) reported that hybrid sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus × L. macrochirus) subjected to repeating cycles (2 or 14 days) of no feeding and refeeding overcompensated only when the fish experienced the fixed no-feed periods of either 2, 4, 6, 10, or 14 days followed by periods of refeeding, as compared to fish fed meal worms Tenebrio molitor to satiation daily for 105 days. Additionally, channel catfish with 3-day feed deprivation only overcompensated, as compared to fish with daily satiation feeding when fish were fed a 36% protein commercial catfish feed to satiation daily or received repeating cycles of fixed feed deprivation for either 1, 2, or 3 days followed by periods of refeeding for 10 weeks (Chatakondi and Yant, 2001).…”