Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2024
DOI: 10.3390/fishes9060195
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Partial Replacement of Fishmeal with Seafood Discards for Juvenile Penaeus japonicus: Effects on Growth, Flesh Quality, Chemical and Fatty Acid Composition

Marco Ragni,
Maria Antonietta Colonna,
Laura Di Turi
et al.

Abstract: The present study was designed to assess the influence of fishmeal replacement with increasing percentages of fresh seafood discards (0, 25, 50 and 75%) in diets for Penaeus japonicus on growth performance, physical characteristics and the chemical and fatty acid composition of shrimp flesh. Each diet was administered for 108 days, and the trial was assayed in triplicate. The final body weight and the specific growth rate were significantly higher (p < 0.05) in shrimps fed with 75% fishmeal replacement as c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 58 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The rising gap between supply and demand has prompted the search for sustainable alternatives, such as discarded fish species and fish processing by-products that have been reported to have high nutritional value by Saleh et al (2022) [ 33 ] and Khiari et al (2022) [ 34 ]. From a nutritional standpoint, fish meal produced from discards and processing by-products have been evaluated for the diets of Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ) [ 35 ], rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) [ 36 , 37 ] red drum ( Sciaenops ocellatus ) [ 38 , 39 ], olive flounder ( Paralichthys olivaceus ) [ 40 ], Nile tilapia ( Oreochromis niloticus ) [ 41 ], kuruma shrimp ( Penaeus japonicus ) [ 42 ], juvenile turbot ( Scophthalmus maximus ) [ 43 ], red seabream ( Pagrus major ) [ 44 , 45 ], juvenile longfin yellowtail ( Seriola rivoliana ) [ 46 ], river catfish ( Hemibagrus nemurus ) [ 47 ], and European seabass ( Dicentrarchus labrax ) [ 48 ], with promising results for partial and total industrial fish meal substitution. Data from the proximate composition analysis of Mediterranean fish species with relatively low economic value suggest that the nutritional profile is comparable to industrially produced fish meal; therefore, the concept of a fish meal processing chain could present a viable solution for the valorization of discards and fish by-products.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The rising gap between supply and demand has prompted the search for sustainable alternatives, such as discarded fish species and fish processing by-products that have been reported to have high nutritional value by Saleh et al (2022) [ 33 ] and Khiari et al (2022) [ 34 ]. From a nutritional standpoint, fish meal produced from discards and processing by-products have been evaluated for the diets of Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ) [ 35 ], rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) [ 36 , 37 ] red drum ( Sciaenops ocellatus ) [ 38 , 39 ], olive flounder ( Paralichthys olivaceus ) [ 40 ], Nile tilapia ( Oreochromis niloticus ) [ 41 ], kuruma shrimp ( Penaeus japonicus ) [ 42 ], juvenile turbot ( Scophthalmus maximus ) [ 43 ], red seabream ( Pagrus major ) [ 44 , 45 ], juvenile longfin yellowtail ( Seriola rivoliana ) [ 46 ], river catfish ( Hemibagrus nemurus ) [ 47 ], and European seabass ( Dicentrarchus labrax ) [ 48 ], with promising results for partial and total industrial fish meal substitution. Data from the proximate composition analysis of Mediterranean fish species with relatively low economic value suggest that the nutritional profile is comparable to industrially produced fish meal; therefore, the concept of a fish meal processing chain could present a viable solution for the valorization of discards and fish by-products.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%