1979
DOI: 10.1016/0044-8486(79)90124-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The influence of energy level on the feed intake, growth, food conversion and body composition of Sparus aurata

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

8
25
0
2

Year Published

1982
1982
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
8
25
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, this effect was not so clear for the 80% satiation group, where the lower energy intake might have exerted a reduction in lipid or glycogen deposition in the liver, causing a lower HSI. The increase in dietary lipid level from 16 to 32% did not promote any increase in lipid deposition, which is consistent with the study of other authors (Marais and Kissil 1979;Velázquez et al 2006). Even the different feeding regime did not lead to any differences in proximate composition, which is not in agreement with what was found by Company et al (1999) on the same species.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Interestingly, this effect was not so clear for the 80% satiation group, where the lower energy intake might have exerted a reduction in lipid or glycogen deposition in the liver, causing a lower HSI. The increase in dietary lipid level from 16 to 32% did not promote any increase in lipid deposition, which is consistent with the study of other authors (Marais and Kissil 1979;Velázquez et al 2006). Even the different feeding regime did not lead to any differences in proximate composition, which is not in agreement with what was found by Company et al (1999) on the same species.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…The observed reduction in feed intake could be explained by differences in available dietary energy if they existed. Fish are thought to eat to satisfy an energy requirement ( Marais & Kissil 1979; Jobling & Wandsvik 1983; Kaushik & Luquet 1984); therefore, diets providing more energy would be consumed less. However, as the experimental diets were isoenergetic based on digestible energy content, they should have been eaten in almost equal amounts, unless there was another problem, such as diet palatability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Feed contents in the stomach and intestine were collected at regular intervals (0, 1, 3, 8, 13, 24, and 48 h) after feeding. Gastric contents of the rockfish fed the HC, HL, and HP diets at the different feeding frequencies increased after feeding then gradually decreased and reached prefeeding levels within 24 h. This result indicates that the time of appetite return after satiation feeding in juvenile rockfish may be about 24 h. Fish size and feed should be considered because gastric evacuation rate seemed to be closely related to fish size and feed (Singh-Renton and Bromley 1996;Andersen 1998), feed quality (Rosch 1987), dietary energy level (Marais and Kissil 1979), temperature (Singh-Renton and Bromley 1996), stocking density (Gershanovich and Taufik 1992), and feeding frequency (Riche et al 2004). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 77%