marine fish larvae microdiets – beyond nutritionaquatic organisms (hydrolysate or extract) used as...

Marine fish larvae

microdiets – Beyond nutrition

Sagiv Kolkovski, John Curnow and Justin King

Aquaculture and Aquatic HealthAquaculture and Aquatic Health

The ProblemThe Problem

Marine fish larvae fed microdiets have

not, at this stage, matched the growth g g

and survival performances demonstrated

by larvae fed live feedsby larvae fed live feedsThe Problem

Marine fish larvae fed microdiets have

not, at this stage, matched the growth and

survival performances demonstrated by

larvae fed live feeds

From Larvi 2001Aquaculture and Aquatic Health

Effect of various feeding protocols on Barramundi larvae25

20

m

10

15

Leng

th, m

m

5

L

02 6 10 14 18 22 26 28

Days post hatchDiet (Gemma micro) onlyGDiet (Gemma micro) day 2, rotifers days 2-4)

Diet (Gemma micro) day 4, rotifers days 2-8)Diet (Gemma micro) day 9. Rotifers days 2-13

Diet (Gemma micro) day 6, rotifers days 2-13, Artemia days 12-20

GG3G7G12G12A

Diet (Proton) day 6, rotifers days 2-13, Artemia days 12-20G12AP12A

Aquaculture and Aquatic Health

Fi h i W i t l Fi di A th

Weaning protocols of difference fish larvae species

Fish species Weaning protocol Findings AuthorsPikeperch Sander lucioperca(freshwater)

Weaning at hatch, 12 or 19 days post hatch (dph)

Best growth, survival and lowest deformities but high cannibalism at post-hatch weaning.

Kestemont et al. 2007

Solea senegalese Weaning protocols Artemia –fed larvae grew threefold less then fish fed an inert diet. Sudden weaning and co-feeding resulted in larger fish than late weaning.

Engrola et al. 2007

S b Di t h l b W i i d 15 20 d 25 L t th d i l t h d S t l 2007Sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax Weaning period, 15, 20 and 25 dph

Lowest growth and survival rates when weaned at 15 dph. Highest at 25 dph

Suzer et al. 2007

Atlantic cod Weaning protocols, 0%, 50% and 100% Artemia replacement with MD

Highest survival and growth achieved in treatments with Artemia (100% and 50%)

Fletcher et al. 2007

Atlantic cod Larvae rearing protocols (review)

Weaning achieved at 22 with reduced growth. Higher growth achieved with late weaning (30

Rosenlund and Halldorsson, 2007(review) Higher growth achieved with late weaning (30

dph)Halldorsson, 2007

Fat snook Centropomus parallelus Weaning period Successfully weaned at 35 dph but higher growth achieved at 40 dph weaning

Alves et al. 2005

Common sole Solea sloea Weaning diets comparison Weaning at 30 DAH, one diet achieved comparable survival to Artemia treatment and better growth

Palazzi et al. 2006

Tongue sole Cynoglossus semilaevis Weaning protocols Co-feeding regimes preformed similar or better then Artemia regime

Chang et al. 2006

Dourado Salminus brasiliensis Weaning time Early weaning (3, 5 dph) resulted in lower survival although length and weight was not affected

Vega-Orellana

Pacu Piaractus mesopotamicus Weaning protocols Artemia –fed larvae showed the higest growth compared to diet fed larvae

Tesser et al. 2005compared to diet-fed larvae.

Sturgeon Acipenser sturio Weaning periods Long weaning (21 days) resulted in better growth and survival then short weaning (3 days)

Williot et al. 2005

Barramundi Lates calcarifer Weaning protocols Complete replacement of Artemia was achieved. However better survival achieved when small amount of Artemia was added.

Curnow et al 2006a, b

Dover sole S l l Diet type and weaning time Early weaning (42 dph) resulted at higher Rueda Jasso et alDover sole Solea solea Diet type and weaning time Early weaning (42 dph) resulted at higher survival. Late weaning resulted at higher growth.

Rueda-Jasso et al. 2005


Factors affecting food particle utilisation

Physical factorssizeshapemovementingredients and bindersmoisture

Window of opportunity

moisture

Chemical factorsL hi (‘ ll’)

Digestive systemdi iLeaching (‘smell’)

Ingredients (‘taste’) Acceptance or rejectiondigestive enzymesperistaltic movementsdigestive tract developmentacid secretion, bile salts,


Effect of krill hydrolysate on Yellowtail kingfish seriola lalandi larvae growth and survival

8000 00mg

6000.00

7000.00

8000.00

wet

wei

ght,

m ab

c

4000.00

5000.00

umbe

r x fi

nal w c

d

1000 00

2000.00

3000.00

s, fin

al fi

sh n

u

0.00

1000.00

Control Coated control Krill incorporated Krill coated

Bio

mas

lk k dKolkovski, Curnow, and King, 2006 Liquid krill hydrolysate was mixed with ethanol and sprayed over the microdiet


Aquatic organisms (hydrolysate or extract) used as feed attractantsOrganism Tested on Reference

Balanus nauplii Herring Clupea harengus Dempsey 1978Balanus nauplii Herring Clupea harengus Dempsey, 1978

Tubifex blood worm Tilapia Iwai, 1980

Short necked clam Tapes japonica Japanees eel Anguilla japonica Hashimoto et al., 1968

Cod Gadus morhua Hermit crab Petrochirus diogenes Hazlett, 1971

Cod Gadus morhua Glass ell Anguilla anguilla Kamstra and Heinsbroek, 1991

Abalone Spiny lobster Panulirus interruptus Zimmer-Faust et al., 1984

Dungeness crab Cancer magister Little neck clam Protethace staminea Pearson et al., 1979

Pink shrimp Penaeus duorarum Spiny lobster Panulirus argus Reeder and Ache, 1980p p y g ,

Marine polychaete Perinereis brevicirrus

Red sea Bream Chrysophrys major Fuke et al., 1981

Shrimps Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss and Atlantic salmon Salmo salar

Mearns et al., 1987

Krill Euphausia pacifica Yellow perch Perca flavescens, Walleye Stizostedion vitreum, Lake whitfish Coregonus clupeaformis,

Kolkovski et al., 2000, Kolkovski, 2001

Krill Euphausia pacifica Barramndi, Lates calcarifer Curnow et al., 2006

Krill Euphausia pacifica American lobster Homarus americanus Floreto et al., 2001

Krill Euphausia pacifica Black tiger shrimp P. Monodon Smith et al., 2005

Mussel Mytilus edulis Gilthead sea beam Sparus aurata Tandler et al., 1982

Fish (non specific) Black tiger shrimp P. Monodon Smith et al., 2005( p ) g p

Largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides De Oliveira and Cyrino, 2004


Commercial / experiment microdiets effects on growth and survival of yellowtail kingfish larvae

ab

cWeaning period: 20 dph – 37 dph

aKolkovski et al. 2009

cb

43%14.5%16.7% survival


Amino acid leaching after 8 min immersion in sea water

80

90

Gemma 150

Gemma 300

60

70

/ml

Gemma 0.3

Proton 2

Proton 3

Proton 4

30

40

50

Leac

hing

, nm

ol/

NRD 4/6

exp 150

exp 300

10

20

30

0

Amino AcidsKolkovski et al. 2009


Amino Acids and other metabolites used as feed attractants in marine organismsRainbow trout Salmo gairdineri Mixture of L-amino acids Adron and Mackie, 1978

Atlantic salmon Salmo salar Glycine Hughes, 1990

Sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax Mixture of L-amino acids Mackie and Mitchell, 1982

Pig fish Orthopristis chrysopterus Glycine, Betaine Carr et al. 1977, 1978

Red sea bream Chrysophrys major Glycine, BetaineGlycine, Alanine, LysineValine Glutamic acid and Arginine

Goh and Tamura, 1980Fuke et al., 1981Ina and Matsui 1980Valine, Glutamic acid and Arginine Ina and Matsui, 1980

Gilthead sea breamSparus aurata

Glycine, Betaine, Alanine, Arginine Kolkovski et al., 1997

Turbot Scophthalmus maximus Inosine and IMP Mackie and Adron, 1978

Dover sole Solea solea Glycine, Betaine Mackie et al., 1980Glycine, Inosine, Betaine Metaillet et al., 1983

Puffer Fugu pardalis Glycine, Betaine Ohsugi et al., 1978

Japanese eel Anguilla japonica Glycine, Arginine, Alanine, Proline Yoshii et al., 1979

Cod Gadus morhua Arginine Doving et al., 1994

Herring Clupea herangus Glycine, Proline Damsey, 1984

Glass eel Anguilla anguilla Glycine, Arginine, Alanine, ProlineAlanine, Glycine, Histidine , Proline

Mackie and Mitchell, 1983Kamstra and Heinsbroek, 1991

Lobster Homarus Americanus Glutamate, Betaine, Taurine, Ammonium chloride Corotto et al., 1992

Western Atlantic ghost crab Ocypode quadrata

Butanoic acid, Carboxylic acid, Trehalose, carbohydrates, Homarine, Asparagine

Trott and Robertson, 1984

Freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii

Taurine, Glycine, Trimethylamine, Betaine Harpaz et al., 1987

Abalone Haliotis discus Mixture of L-amino acid and lecithin Harada et al 1987Abalone Haliotis discus Mixture of L-amino acid and lecithin Harada et al., 1987

Gibel carp Carassius auratus gibelio Glycine, Lysine, Methionine, Phenylalanine, Betaine Xue and Cui, 2001


4,0

Degree of hydrolysis (DH) of tested microdiets

3,0

,

a

2 0

3,0

roly

sis,

%

b

c

a

1 0

2,0

egre

e of

hyd

cc

0 0

1,0

De

0,0GM 150 GM 300 Proton 2/3 NRD 4/6 Exp Diet

Diets

DH was determined using pH-STAT technique utilizing yellowtail g p q g ykingfish digestive enzymes Lazo et al. 2009


Changes in degree of ingredients hydrolysis (DH) in California halibut Paralichthys californicus larvae

a2.5

9 DAH 15 DAH 26 DAH

halibut Paralichthys californicus larvae

ab

ab

ab

b

a

aa

2.039 DAH 51 DAH

aa

a

bc

aba a

a

a

a

a

bc

c

aba

a

c

abc

ab

1.0

1.5

DH

(%)

b

b

ab ab

b

c

bb

ab

bb bc

b

a

bc

b

b

b

a

bc0.5

1.0

bcc

0.0Casein Fish meal 1 Fish meal 2 Krill meal Squid meal Rotifers Artemia Soy meal Wheat gluten

INGREDIENTSINGREDIENTSLazo, 2008, Adapted from Martinez-Montaño et al., 2006


MarumerizingMicrobound

Microencapsulated


MarumerizationRounded or spherical granules of extrudatesp g


Sinking rates

70%

80%

90%

100%

yond

100

cm

30%

40%

50%

60%

f MD

to s

ink

bey

Wet MEM

Dry MEM

0%

10%

20%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

% o

f

Sinking Time, min.

y

MB

e D

iet R

etur

n (%

)

60

80

100

Proton 2

MicroGemma 150

MicroGemma 300

Kinko 0

Kolkovski et al. 2009

Accu

mul

ativ

e

20

40

60

Proton 4

Proton 3

Gemma 0.3

Kinko 1

Grow Best L3

Time, min2 4 6 8 10 12 14 NRD 4/6

NRD 5/8 Diet sizeJackson et al., 2005


Leaching rates40

45

50Leaching rates of microdiet manufactured by microbound or maromerization

20

25

30

35

40

achi

ng, %

DW

5 min

0

5

10

15Lea 5 min

15 min

30 minAmino acid leaching profile from microbound or microencupsolated microdiets

Arg Lys GluHis Pro SerGlyTyr Ala Cys LeuVal Ile200-300 200-300 200-300 300-500 300-500 300-500 500-700 500-700 500-700

MB MEM dry

MEM wet

MB MEM dry

MEM wet

MB MEM dry

MEM wet

Microdiet type and particle size, μm

K lk ki t l 200980

100

120

g yAsp Thr

yyMet

y

Kolkovski et al., 2009.

% L

each

ing

40

60

80

%

0

20

Yufera et al., 2002.

MB – microbound diet MC – microencapsulated diet

Hydropathy index

-6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6Hydrophilic Hydrophobic


Microdiet Feeding Systems requirements

Very small amount of microdiet y

Very short feeding intervals

Changeable intervals during the day (higher feeding intervals

in the morning etc.)

Even distribution with no clumps

Larger distribution

Accommodate different particle sizes


Feeding system

Very few systems designed specifically for microdiet !

“Spider”Delivery system

Raunes hatchery NorwayRaunes hatchery, Norway


Mode of Larval Feeding

‘Gulpers’Fish larvae

‘Nibblers’Rock lobsterRock lobsterPhyllosoma

‘Suckers’OctopusOctopus

paralarvae


The ‘Holistic’ ApproachIntegrative approach is needed to be taken in the development g pp pof microdiets for fish larvae

Physiology of digestive system

I di

Nutritionlipids

proteinsIngredients proteins vitamins

TechnologyDiet manufacturing methods

Physical & chemical propertiesFeeding system

Weaning protocolsWeaning protocols

BetterIngestion, Digestion, Assimilation


marine fish larvae microdiets – beyond nutritionaquatic organisms (hydrolysate or extract) used as...

Documents