Combined Effects of Cycled Starvation and Feeding Frequency on Growth and Oxygen Consumption of Gilthead Sea Bream, Sparus aurata

Abstract

Triplicate groups of gilthead sea bream, Sparus aurata (10.4 g), were distributed among 27 tanks (12 fish per tank) and reared in flow‐through seawater. A factorial experiment (3 × 3) was designed to include a continuously fed control group and two cycled starvation groups: 1 + 3 (starved 1 d, fed 3 d), 1 + 5 (starved 1 d, fed 5 d). Each of the feeding groups was subjected to one of three feeding frequencies (2, 4, and 6 times per day) over the 60‐d experiment duration. The average final weight of fish in 1 + 3 and 1 + 5 groups were significantly lower than that of the control group. Partial compensation was observed in the starved groups subjected to any of the three feeding frequencies. Regardless of the feeding frequency, control fish consumed less feed than the starved groups. The highest body protein content was found in the control group. The rate of oxygen consumption significantly increased 30 min after the feeding and the magnitude of the effect increased with the feeding frequency. These results suggest that the present cycling starvation schedules did not invoke a full compensation in gilthead sea bream.

Effect of short‐term fasting and re‐feeding on growth, digestive enzyme activities and antioxidant defence in yellowfin seabream,Acanthopagrus latus(Houttuyn, 1782)

“…The results of this study indicate that fasting period did not induce hyperphagic response during re-feeding, which is in accordance with the results reported in gilthead seabream (Eroldoğan, Suzer, et al, 2008;Eroldoğan, Tasbozan, et al, 2008;Peres et al, 2011) and red seabream (Rueda et al, 1998). However, a plethora of studies reported hyperphagia in sparid species subjected to different fasting and re-feeding strategies such as S. aurata (Yilmaz & Eroldoğan, 2011), common dentex, Somatic indices such as condition factor and HSI are crude measures of the nutritional status and fish health. In the present study, fish exposed to F 4 R 16 and the control treatment had the highest and the lowest HSI, respectively, and the other groups showed intermediated values.…”

“…Moreover, Oh, Kim, Kwon, and Venmathi Maran () found complete compensation in blackhead seabream, Acanthopagrus schlegelii schlegelii with 1‐day fasting followed by 5 or 6 days of re‐feeding for 16 weeks, while Torfi Mozanzadeh et al () noticed this phenomenon in sobaity seabream, Sparidentex hasta deprived for 1 day followed by 2 days of re‐feeding for 60 days. On the other hand, partial CG achieved in European sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax with 5‐day fasting followed by 20 days of re‐feeding for 50 days (Adaklı & Taşbozan, ); in Persian sturgeon, Acipenser persicus with 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks of fasting followed by 20 days of re‐feeding for 4 weeks (Yarmohammadi et al, ); and in S. aurata (with initial weight 6.4, 14 and 10.4 g, respectively) with these strategies including 50% restricted feeding ratio for 2 days followed by 2 days of feeding to apparent satiation for 48 days (Eroldoğan, Suzer, Taşbozan, & Tabakoğlu, ; Eroldoğan, Tasbozan, & Tabakoglu, ), 1‐day fasting followed by 2 days of re‐feeding (Eroldoğan, Kumlu, Kiris, & Sezer, ) or 1‐day fasting followed by 5 days of re‐feeding for 60 days (Yilmaz & Eroldoğan, ). In contrast, no CG was reported in S. aurata subjected to 1 or 2 weeks fasting followed by 8 weeks of re‐feeding (Peres, Santos, & Oliva‐Teles, ) or in S. hasta submitted to 3 or 6 days fasting followed by 3 or 6 days of re‐feeding for 60 days (Torfi Mozanzadeh et al, ).…”

Compensatory growth following various time lengths of restricted feeding in rainbow trout (O ncorhynchus mykiss ) under summer conditions

“…In another previous study, no catching up in weight was seen in rainbow trout at 12°C after various lengths of feed restriction (Bhat et al., ), but the initial size of their fish was much smaller (13 g) than those in our study. Size is an important factor, considering that smaller fish appear to achieve only partial CG (Yılmaz and Eroldogan, ).…”

Growth performance and body composition in response to dietary protein and lipid levels in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus Linnaeus, 1758) subjected to normal and temporally restricted feeding regimes

“…However, feed efficiency tended to increase with the number of deprivation days (Li et al., ; Xiao et al., ). There are inconsistent CG responses with similar sizes of gilthead sea bream Sparus aurata and European sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax in experiments conducted by different researchers (Yılmaz and Eroldogan, ; Türkmen et al., ). Yılmaz and Eroldogan () observed a partial CG response in feed‐restricted groups (both starved 1 day + fed 3 days and starved 1 day + fed 5 days) of gilthead sea bream, but a full CG response was observed in European sea bass and black sea bream subjected to 1‐d starvation then 4‐d satiation in the study of Türkmen et al.…”

“…More recently, the use of this temporally restricted feeding regime, i.e. a few days of feed deprivation followed by a few days of feeding to apparent satiation, was conducted to study the CG response of fish (Chatakondi and Yant, ; Li et al., ; Reigh et al., ; Turano et al., ; Cho and Cho, ; Foss et al., ; Kankanen and Pirhonen, ; Mattila et al., ; Cho, ; Yılmaz and Eroldogan, ; Xiao et al., ). This strategy was adopted because it attempts to mimic the natural fluctuation in prey availability and trigger intrinsic CG responses (Turano et al., ).…”