In Vitro and In Vivo Feedstuff Digestibility for Snook, Centropomus undecimalis, Juveniles

Lemus, Iratzio; Maldonado, Carlos; Cuzon, Gérard; Sánchez, Alfonso; Gaxiola, Gabriela; Álvarez, Alfonso Rey; Guerrero, Martha

doi:10.1111/jwas.12429

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Six diets were prepared by combining a test ingredient (30%) with the reference diet (70%), and acid‐insoluble ash (AIA) was used as a marker (Table 2; Lemus et al. 2018; Parra‐Flores et al. 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo digestibility of potential feed ingredients for juvenile Yellowtail Snapper

Barreto,

Arenas,

Álvarez‐González

et al. 2024

N American J Aquac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe carnivorous Yellowtail Snapper Ocyurus chrysurus has the potential for production in aquaculture. However, there is a lack of studies investigating the digestibility of ingredients needed to formulate balanced diets for this species.MethodsThe in vitro protein digestibility of fish meal (FM), poultry by‐product meal (PBM), poultry meal (PM), protiblend, canola meal (CM), soybean meal, and wheat gluten was evaluated using the pH‐stat technique. The in vivo digestibility was determined by formulating test diets with a 70:30 ratio of the reference diet and the test ingredients.ResultIn terms of in vitro digestibility, FM, PBM, and PM exhibited the highest degree of hydrolysis (DH). Conversely, PBM displayed the lowest apparent digestibility coefficient of protein (ADCprotein) in the in vivo digestibility test. Meanwhile, FM, PM, and CM demonstrated higher values of protein digestibility. Beta regression between ADCprotein and the DH and ash content of the ingredients resulted in a high correlation (R2 = 0.94).ConclusionThe results of the present study indicate that Yellowtail Snapper efficiently digested and absorbed FM, PM, and CM ingredients, which contain a lower content of ash.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2014; Lemus et al. 2018). Therefore, the comprehensive evaluation of potential ingredient substitutes for FM is imperative to foster the sustainable development of aquaculture.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo digestibility of potential feed ingredients for juvenile Yellowtail Snapper

Barreto,

Arenas,

Álvarez‐González

et al. 2024

N American J Aquac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is sure enough that soybean is the second protein ingredient studied most by in-vitro digestion, given its global recognition as high protein feed material. By using an in-vitro digestion model, several studies have evaluated the effect of inhibitors and phytic acid on the digestibility of soybean to be utilized as a fish meal substitute [86][87][88]. Substitution of fish meal with soybean formulated as a fish feed had been studied on several different levels ranging from none to total replacement [83,84].…”

Section: Current In-vitro Digestion Studies On Fishmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… nd. 37 15 11 protein ingredients DH, FAA APD Centropomus undecimalis Two stage pH stat [ 87 ] 8 - 25 60 10 protein ingredients DH, invivo Acipenser baeri One step intestine stage, [ 168 ] 3.4&7.8 256 & 1460 28 90 acid Poultry by product on several different grade Pepsin assay FAA APD Lates calcarifer Two stage membrane reactor, with commercial pepsin and fish crude intestinal extract [ 169 ] 9 2.5 25 90 4 microalgae SDS page, FAA Senegalese sole One stage intestinal digestion [ 170 ] 2 & 7 nd 37 120 & 120 Three commercial diet In vivo assessment Residual protein Minerals (P, Fe, Zn) P.mesopotamicus Two step digestion with final product dialysis separation. Added bile extract [ 16 ] 3.5 & 8 - - 15&45 16 protein ingredients DH, FAA Amphilophus trimaculatus Intestinal...…”

Section: Application Of In-vitro Digestion Model I...mentioning

confidence: 99%

In-vitro digestion models: a critical review for human and fish and a protocol for in-vitro digestion in fish

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digestive systems in human, animals, and fish are biological reactors and membranes to digest food and extract nutrients. Therefore, static and dynamic models of in-vitro digestion systems are developed to study e.g. novel food and feed before in-vivo studies. Such models are well developed for human, but not to the same extent for animals and fish. On the other hand, recent advances in aquaculture nutrition have created several potential fish meal replacements, and the assessment of their nutrient digestibility is critical in the application as a fish meal replacement. Using an in-vitro method, the assessment of an ingredient digestibility could be faster and less expensive compared to using an in-vivo experiment. An in-vitro method has been widely used to assess food nutrient digestibility for humans; however, its application for fish is still in the early stages. Both the human and fish as monogastric vertebrates share similar gastrointestinal systems; thus, the concept from the application for humans could be applied for fish. This review aims to improve the in-vitro digestion protocol for fish by adapting the concept from then study for humans, summarizing the current available in-vitro digestion model developed for human and fish in-vitro digestion study, identifying challenges specifically for fish required to be tackled and suggesting an engineering approach to adapt the human in-vitro gastrointestinal model to fish. Protocols to conduct in-vitro digestion study for fish are then proposed.

show abstract

“…Regarding the nutritional requirements, previous reports have revealed that common snook has a protein requirement in the diet of 500 g kg −1 (Concha‐Frías et al, 2018; Gracia‐López et al, 2003; Tucker, 1987). Additionally, in a recent study, Lemus et al (2018) proposed a selection of marine and terrestrial ingredients as an alternative source to fishmeal protein for common snook feeds. To date, no studies have been performed on the ability of common snooks to utilize lipids as energy sources.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physiological and metabolic protein‐sparing effects of dietary lipids on common snookCentropomus undecimalis(Bloch, 1792) juveniles

Arenas

Álvarez‐González

Barreto³

et al. 2021

Aquacult Nutr

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carnivorous common snook (Centropomus undecimalis) has potential for aquaculture, but its protein requirement in diet is 500 g kg−1 and the energetic role of lipids in this species has not been explored. Thus, this study investigated the ability of juvenile common snook (8.7 ± 1.2 g) to use dietary lipids as an energy source. The fish were fed four practical diets with two protein levels (400 and 500 g kg−1) associated with two lipid levels (60 and 120 g kg−1) for 12 weeks. Growth performance significantly improved with increasing dietary lipid levels, but no significant difference was observed at the protein level. Fish fed the 400:60 (protein: lipid level) diet exhibited significantly higher feed conversion ratios than those fed 400:120, 500:60 and 500:120 diets, but fish fed the 400:120 diet had significantly higher protein efficiency ratios. Juvenile common snook showed the ability to modulate digestive protease and lipase secretion when dietary protein or lipid levels were modified. The activity of alanine aminotransferase decreased as the dietary lipid level increased (p < .05), while fructose‐1 and 6‐bisphosphatase activities were not significantly affected by dietary protein or lipid levels. Glucose‐6‐phosphate dehydrogenase, 6‐phosphogluconate dehydrogenase and pyruvate kinase activities increased as dietary protein and lipid levels increased (p < .05). The results of this study indicate that an increase in dietary lipid level has a protein‐sparing effect and that the diet containing 400 g kg−1 protein with 120 g kg−1 lipid is suitable for growth and effective protein utilization in common snook.

show abstract

In Vitro and In Vivo Feedstuff Digestibility for Snook, Centropomus undecimalis, Juveniles

Abstract: The degree of hydrolysis (DH) of the ingredients was evaluated for

Cited by 9 publications

References 34 publications

Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo digestibility of potential feed ingredients for juvenile Yellowtail Snapper

Evaluation of in vitro and in vivo digestibility of potential feed ingredients for juvenile Yellowtail Snapper

In-vitro digestion models: a critical review for human and fish and a protocol for in-vitro digestion in fish

Physiological and metabolic protein‐sparing effects of dietary lipids on common snookCentropomus undecimalis(Bloch, 1792) juveniles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About