Compensatory Growth in Juvenile Olive Flounder (Paralichthys olivaceus) in the Spring

Hwoan, Cho Sung; Kwan, Lee Jong

doi:10.5657/fas.2002.5.2.122

Cited by 1 publication

(4 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Proximate composition (%) of olive flounder at the end of the feeding trial 1 . Similarly, chemical composition of fish was not affected by feeding regimes with short-and long-term starvation and refeeding (Cho and Lee 2002;Cho 2005b;Cho et al 2006;Heide et al 2006). Blood chemistry of olive flounder at the end of the 8-wk feeding trial is presented in Table 4.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Moisture content of liver in fish in the 2WS + 6WF and (2DS + 5DF + 3DS + 4DF) × 4 treatments was significantly ( P < 0.05) higher than that of fish in the 8WF, (5DS + 9DF) × 4, (10DS + 18DF) × 2, and (4DS + 10DF + 6DS + 8DF) × 2 treatments. Similarly, chemical composition of fish was not affected by feeding regimes with short‐ and long‐term starvation and refeeding (Cho and Lee 2002; Cho 2005b; Cho et al 2006; Heide et al 2006).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Olive flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus , is one of the most commercially important marine finfish in Eastern Asia including Korea, Japan, and China. Therefore, many studies on the effective production of flounder have been conducted; dietary nutrient requirements (Lee et al 2000a, 2000b; Kim et al 2002; Lee et al 2002), alternative protein sources for fishmeal in the diet (Sato and Kikuchi 1997; Kikuchi 1999), optimum feeding frequency (Lee et al 2000b), and the feeding strategy (Cho and Lee 2002; Cho 2005b; Cho et al 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Compensatory growth of fish, which is rapid or faster than normal growth rate of fish, resulting from refeeding after undernutrition could be an applicably effective fish culture technique in the occurrence of red tide and cold‐water mass (Cho et al 2006). Compensatory growth of fish was largely influenced by several factors, such as fish size or age (Bilton and Robins 1973), feeding protocol (Jobling and Koskela 1996; Rueda et al 1998; Gaylord and Gatlin 2000), nutrient levels in the diet (Gaylord and Gatlin 2001), feeding regimes (Wang et al 2000; Cho and Lee 2002; Tian and Qin 2003, 2004; Cho 2005a, 2005b; Cho and Jo 2005; Cho et al 2006; Oh et al 2007), and so on. Also compensatory growth has been observed in most of the cold‐, warm‐, and tropical‐water finfish species (Bilton and Robins 1973; Quinton and Blake 1990; Damsgaard and Dill 1998; Rueda et al 1998; Gaylord and Gatlin 2000, 2001; Wang et al 2000; Tian and Qin 2003, 2004; Cho 2005a; Cho and Jo 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Compensatory Growth of Olive Flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus, Fed the Extruded Pellet with Different Feeding Regimes

Cho

2009

J World Aquaculture Soc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was performed to determine compensatory growth of juvenile olive flounder fed the extruded pellet (EP) with different feeding regimes. Seven treatments with triplicates of different feeding regimes were prepared; α fish was daily fed for 6 d a week throughout 8 wk (8WF); α fish was starved for 1 wk and then fed for 3 wk twice [(1WS + 3WF) × 2]; β fish was starved for 2 wk and then fed for 6 wk (2WS + 6WF); χ fish was starved for 5 d and then fed for 9 d four times [(5DS + 9DF) × 4]; δ fish was starved for 10 d and then fed for 18 d twice [(10DS + 18DF) × 2]; δ fish was starved for 2 d, fed for 5 d, starved for 3 d, and then fed for 4 d four times [(2DS + 5DF + 3DS + 4DF) × 4]; and φ fish was starved for 4 d, fed for 10 d, starved for 6 d, and then fed for 8 d twice [(4DS + 10DF + 6DS + 8DF) × 2], respectively. Total feeding day was all same, 36 d except for control group (48 d). Weight gain of flounder in the 8WF treatment was higher than that of fish in other treatments. And weight gain of flounder in the 2WS + 6WF treatment was higher than that of fish in the (5DS + 9DF) × 4 and (4DS + 10DF + 6DS + 8DF) × 2 treatments. Feed consumption of flounder in the 8WF treatment was higher than that of fish experienced feed deprivation. Feed efficiency ratio (FER), protein efficiency ratio (PER), and protein retention (PR) were not significantly different among treatments. Chemical composition of the whole body of fish with and without liver, except for moisture content of liver, was not different among treatments. T3 level of fish in the 8WF and 2WS + 6WF treatments was higher than that of fish in the (5DS + 9DF) × 4 treatment. It can be concluded that juvenile olive flounder achieved better compensatory growth at 6‐wk refeeding after 2‐wk feed deprivation compared with that of fish with different feeding regimes. And T3 level of fish seemed to partially play an important role in achieving compensatory growth.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%