Page 62 - New additives and ingredients in the formulation of aquafeeds
Basic HTML Version
Table 11. Mean weight evolution
Weight (g)
Control
Diet A
Diet G
Tanks
1-6-11
2-7-12
5-10-15
Initial
146.84±9.40
147.03±8.47
146.68±8.29
0- 42 days
175.26±15.54
182.05±17.80
185.34±15.65
42- 91 days
210.76±28.35
a
234.60±29.65
b
237.08±22.74
b
91- 133 days
268.71±41.2
a
309.18±39.74
b
308.93±34.04
b
133-169 days
331.48±54.39
a
384.71±50.55
c
374.73±42.59
bc
Values with different letter in same row differ significantly (p<0.05)
Feed intake was the same, so the performance diet was better in the fishes
fed by diets A and B.
Regarding the biometric parameters analyzed, it can be ruled out an
accumulation of lipids in animals fed with diets A and B, as these fish
increased proportionately in weight and length (similar K factor), as it is
shown in Table 12.
Table 12. Condition factor (K) evolution
K
Control
Diet A
Diet B
Tanks
01/06/2011
02/07/2012
05/10/2015
0- 42 days
2.20±0.14
2.23±0.15
2.24±0.13
42- 91 days
2.31±0.17
a
2.39±0.19
ab
2.41±0.16
ab
91- 133 days
2.33±0.17
2.38±0.16
2.38±0.21
133-169 days
2.38±0.29
2.42±0.18
2.41±0.19
Values with different letter in same row differ significantly (p<0.05)
Photo 3. Sample of
fishes of different
diets after finishing
the test
60
Plant protein isolates and hydrolysates as alternative to the animal protein in aquaculture diets
