Taste preferences, orosensory food testing, and sound production during feeding by the pearl gourami Trichopodus leerii (Osphronemidae)

Taste Preferences and Orosensory Feed Testing Behavior in Barramundi Lates calcarifer (Latidae, Perciformes)

“…In more than three dozen species studied in previous research, taste preferences have been assessed mainly in fish that inhabit water bodies in the temperate (boreal) climate zone [13]. For tropical fish, such data are known only for a few freshwater species, including marble goby, Oxyeleotris marmoratus; pearl gourami, Trichopodus leerii, and three spot gourami, T. trichopterus; Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus; and North African catfish, Clarias gariepinus [23][24][25][26][27][28]. For marine tropical fish, taste preferences have been studied for grouper Epinephelus fuscoguttatus and the hybrid grouper E. fuscoguttatus × E. lanceolatus [29,30].…”

Taste preferences and feeding behaviour in the facultative herbivorous fish, Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus

“…Highly palatable norvaline and valine are distasteful for C. idella and T. leerii and have indifferent taste for R. rutilus . Glycine which has highly attractive taste for C. idella and P. reticulata is an indifferent taste substance for O. niloticus and for R. rutilus and T. leerii as well (Kasumyan, 2019; Kasumyan & Døving, 2003; Vinogradskaya et al ., 2017). Species specificity of fish taste preferences is evident in other type of substances as well (see Sections 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4).…”

“…If the grasped pellet was eventually swallowed, then this was preceded by a significantly smaller number of repeated grasp‐rejection‐grasp cycles (≤1.4 times), but the duration of oral testing of the pellet was much longer than in the trials that ended with the final refusal to swallow (≤ 2.5 times). Other fish behave the same way, but for some of them the difference between these two behavioural stereotypes is even stronger than in tilapia (Kasumyan & Prokopova, 2001; Vinogradskaya et al ., 2017). For example, G. aculeatus grasps a pellet three to four times more often and keeps it in the mouth seven to eight times longer before swallowing than before rejection (Kasumyan & Mikhailova, 2014).…”

“…According to a common rule, sucrose has attractive taste for herbivorous animals, in contrast to those that eat animal food (Harborne, 1993). The herbivorous fishes studied, the number of which is small, followed this rulesucrose is palatable for obligate herbivore C. idella (Kasumyan & Morsi, 1997) and for facultative herbivores T. leerii (Vinogradskaya et al, 2017), R. rutilus and P. reticulata (Kasumyan & Nikolaeva, 2002). In contrast, for carnivorous fish sucrose is an indifferent taste substance and does not effect on consumption of pellets (Kasumyan & Døving, 2003), even if the concentration is increased several times, up to 0.7 M, as it was found in Siberian sturgeon Acipenser baerii (Brandt 1869) (Kasumyan & Døving, 2003).…”

“…Herbivorous fishes are perhaps the only exception because it is possible to predict their food preferences with certainty, namely their relation to the taste of sucrose. Thus, sucrose is palatable for obligate herbivorous fishes like grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella (Valenciennes 1844) and for facultative herbivores such as roach Rutilus rutilus L., guppy Poecilia reticulata (Peters 1859) and pearl gourami Trichopodus leerii (Sauvage 1884), but is an indifferent taste substance for carnivorous fish (Kasumyan & Døving, 2003; Kasumyan & Morsi, 1997; Kasumyan & Nikolaeva, 2002; Vinogradskaya et al ., 2017). Using the herbivorous fish Coptodon zillii (Gervais 1848) as a model, it was shown that the spectra of amino acids, which were used as taste stimuli, appeared to be quite different in herbivores and carnivores.…”