Effects of three positively buoyant dietary supplements on the buoyancy of feces, growth and intestinal health of Tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus×O. aureus

Cork and guar gum supplementation enhanced the buoyancy of faeces, and protease supplementation alleviated the negative effects of dietary cork on growth and intestinal health of tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus × O. aureus

“…Therefore, the negative effects of dietary cork on growth are closely related to the supplemental level, and the high supplementation decreases the growth and nutrient digestibility due to its indigestibility. The similar result was also reported in the previous study by Yang et al ().…”

“…These fish were fed their original diets for three days to acclimate the environment, and then deprived of diet for 48 hr. After 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hr of feeding (to satiation), three fish per treatment were dissected and the location of chyme was recorded to calculate intestine evacuation ratio (%) by using Yang's method (Yang et al, ) as follows: Intestine evacuation ratio (%) = 100 × the length of empty part before the chyme in intestine (cm)/total length of intestine (cm). …”

“…Unger and Brinker () found that the liver of rainbow trout suffered serious damage when the fish were fed cork‐supplemented diet (20 g/kg, 0.5–1.0 mm). In the previous study on tilapia ( Oreochromis niloticus × O. aureus ), the fish fed diets containing ≥30 g/kg cork showed a decreased growth and impaired intestine (Yang et al, ). The conflict between floating faeces and normal growth caused by dietary cork seems inevitable.…”

“…The buoyant materials should be indigestible, should be non‐toxic and should have a low density. At present, expanded glass granules, expanded volcanic glass, borosilicate glass and cork granules have been used in fish feed to produce floating faeces, and cork is considered as the best candidate (Unger & Brinker, ; Yang et al, ). Cork is the bark of cork oak with a low density and good elasticity, and it is impermeable to gases and liquids (Gil, ; Silva et al, ).…”

Effects of the dietary inclusion of a probiotic or prebiotic on florfenicol pharmacokinetic profile in broiler chicken

“…So, in italic, 1–16 μg/ml can be an efficient way to treat different bacterial pathogens. Cmax/MIC, AUC/MIC, or the time above the MIC ( T > MIC) may be the major evaluation parameter for enhancing the effectiveness of florfenicol (Illambas et al, ; Salmon & Watts, ; Yang et al, ). This present study indicated that the time of the mean plasma level required for the level of 1 μg/ml was nearly 8 hr in the florfenicol control group and was reduced to 10 hr by adding prebiotic or probiotic pretreatment, resulting in adequate maintenance time for in vivo florfenicol concentration.…”