Supplementing Soybean Meal With Camelina (Camelina sativa) In Tilapia Diets And Optimizing Commercial Tilapia Diets For Use In Intensive Systems In The Western Region Of The United States
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The feed production cost in tilapia diets is driven by the prices of its ingredients such as fishmeal (FM) and soybean meal (SBM). Fishmeal and soymeal combined with other ingredients provides fish with the nutrients required for growth and sustaining life. Soybean meal is used as an alternative to fishmeal, but prices for this traditional ingredient have increased significantly in recent years as a result of high market demand from other industries. Consequently, there has been an increase interest by tilapia nutritionists and feed manufacturers to find less expensive, alternative feedstuffs for use in tilapia diets. Camelina (Camelina sativa) is an oil seed crop grown in higher latitudes especially along the US - Canada border, northern China and northern Europe. Camelina after removal of most of the edible oil has been proposed as a fish feed ingredient. A sixty-day feeding trial was conducted and diets were formulated to contain various levels of camelina inclusion (0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25%) for the “camelina meal” while the “camelina oil” was formulated to contain one level (4.7%) of oil and was divided as “raw” and 4.7 “wash”. The results indicated that that fishes fed diets containing camelina ingredients had growth performance and feed utilization results that were similar to fish fed the commercial diet (P>0.05). There were significant differences (P<0.05) for body organ indices and body composition. The 15% camelina meal diet was the lowest cost experimental diet per kilogram gain and therefore, this alternative ingredient might be a potential replacement for soymeal in a more cost effective feed formulation. The fatty acid composition of tilapia fillets was also analyzed at the end of the feeding trial. The inclusion of camelina meal and oil in tilapia diets resulted in significant increases in the Omega-3/Omega-6 ratio in fillets when compared to the control. The 15% camelina meal provided the best results of the experimental diets yielding significantly higher polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) and lower saturated fatty aid (SFA) than the control diet. On a commercial scale, tilapia commercial feeds differ in both formulated nutrient levels and ingredient composition. In intensive system culture, natural food is limited making it important that all nutrients are supplied through a complete pelleted diet. An advantage to feeding a pelleted diet is that the pellet-type feed enables the farmers, feed formulators and manufactures to design a diet that provides an optimal nutritional mix for tilapia. Precise levels in the protein and lipid percentages of tilapia diets can reduce feed costs and also reduce the amount of underutilized protein and lipids stored as fat in tilapia. Feed comprises of over 60% of the variable cost in the intensive aquaculture operation; if feed prices were to increase, it would be a substantial amount for tilapia producers to absorb. Therefore an improved diet formulation designed for tilapia can increase profitability. Results indicated that the experimental diets (28% Crude Protein (CP)-Amino Acid (AA), 28% CP and 40% CP) performed similar to the control diet (32% CP) as it relates to fish growth. The experiment conducted on a commercial scale at an operating farm found that feeding tilapia the lowest protein level diets (28% CP) resulted in higher biomass gain per raceway, biomass gain per fish and significantly higher protein efficiency ratio (PER) when compared to the control diet (32% CP). The 28% CP diet also had the second best FCR value and most importantly higher returns based on its FCR when compared to the control diet (32% CP).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».