Available on-line at http://www.bjbabe.ro

Banats Journal of Biotechnology

2013, IV(8),

71

GROWTH RESPONSES OF PURE BRED HETEROBRANCHUS BIDORSALIS,

CLARIAS GARIEPINUS AND THEIR INTERGENERIC CROSSES FED COMMECIAL DIET

DOI: 10.7904/2068–4738–IV(8)–71

SOLOMON S.G.*, OKOMODA V.T. OCHAI L.

Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture, University of Agriculture Makurdi, Nigeria

*Tel: +2347037275891 *e–mail: solagabriel@yahoo.co.uk

Abstract. This study seeks to compare the growth of two African catfishes and their hybrid fed with commercial diet. Fingerling of Clarias gariepinus Heterobranchus bidorsalis and hybrid H. bidorsalis x C. gariepinus (Heteroclarias) were obtained from homogeneous breeding. Fingerlings with mean weight 1.110.01 were stocked in triplicate plastic tanks for this study. The study observed that C. gariepinus had the highest Mean Final weight (7.75), Mean weight gain (6.65), Specific growth rate (2.10), Feed conversion efficiency (53.2 %) and Protein efficiency ratio (6.23) compared with H. bidorsalis and Heteroclarias which had lower growth values (p<0.05), however survival rate were the same across the species. Similarly carcass moisture and lipid content were observed to be higher in C. gariepinus compared to the others, However, Ash, fiber and NFE content of the hybrid were higher compared to pure breeds (P<0.05). Also, significantly higher carcass protein was recorded in H. bidorsalis compared to the others, while higher lipid where observed in C. gariepinus. It is concluded that at early stage of life, C. gariepinus exhibit faster growth rate.

Keywords: African catfish, coppens feed, Heteroclarias, Mean Protein gain, Mean lipid gain Introduction

The catfish species are very important to sustainability of aquaculture industry in Nigeria and Africa as a whole. Clarias sp. and Heterobranchus sp. are widely cultured owing to their high market price, fast growth rate and ability to withstand adverse pond conditions especially low oxygen content.

Clarias gariepinus occupies a unique and prominent position in commercials fisheries in Nigeria because it is tasty, hardy and tolerates poor water conditions, Heterobranchus bidorsalis potentials as a good aquaculture species has been described by Teugels since the early 90’s IDODO–UMEH,

2003,TEUGELS et al; 1990. However Heterobranchus sp. grow

larger than Clarias as it attain a size of about 14.0 kg IDODO–UMEH, 2003, while, Clarias sp grows faster, more adaptable, get to sexual maturity earlier and has higher fecundity than Heterobranchus sp.

Due to observed differences in the qualities of these catfishes, considerable effort have been made by scientist to harness the qualities of the species by cross breeding to

produce a hybrid (literarily called “Heteroclarias” for crosses between Heterobranchus female and male Clarias while “Clariobranchus” is reciprocal cross of the latter) which will combined hardy and faster growth traits MILLER 2003: KEREMAH and GREEN,

2005 of two species. While some earlier research have

revealed that hybrids of Heterobranchus and Clarias (Heteroclarias) exhibit the fast growing quality of Heterobranchus, reaching up to 1.0 kg under eight months in ponds and are resistant to diseases HOGENDOORN, 1981; AJANA and

ANYANWU 1995, some others observe lesser growth, abnormalities and often display of an unequal growth pattern HECHT, and LUBLINKHOF 1985.

Despite this observation on growth pattern of Clarias gariepinus, Heterobranchus species and Heteroclarias, farmers are divergent in their opinion as to which type set to use, in stocking their ponds as aquacultural practice expands.

The desire of every fish farmers is to produce table size fish within the shortest possible time, hence this study seek to

Banat’s University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine "Regele Mihai I al României" from Timisoara

Contact: web: http://www.bjbabe.ro, e-mail: bjb@usab–tm.ro

72

compare the growth performance of this fish species fed commercial feed of same origin.

Intensive fish production involves the input of supplementary and complete feeds which often represent a large part of production costs CHEN and TSAI, 1994.

Fish require proteins, fats, carbohydrates in addition to vitamins and minerals in appropriate proportions to enhance fast growth, optimum health and harvest FALAYE, 1988; UFODIKE et al., 2011.

Huisman (1986) reported lack of suitable food as major cause of mortality in larvae of most fish species and pointed out that food must be adequate HUISMAN 1986, not only in quantity and quality but also in particle size; commercial and subsistent fish farmers in Nigeria have rely heavily on popular brand of feed such as Vita feed, Multifeed, Adolf Calyx, Coppens, Dizengoff, Durante feed etc. to rear their fish to marketable size.

Generally, there has been dearth of information on evaluation of chemical composition of feed produced by commercial fish industries SHYONG et al., 1998, most fish farmers depend on existing information on feed label as given by feed manufacturing company AYUBA and IORKOHOL 2013.

There is therefore need to verify nutritional composition of feed stated by the manufacturer so as to supply adequate feed ingredient as required by the fish.

Material and methods The fingerlings of Clarias gariepinus,

Heterobranchus bidorsalis and Heteroclarias were obtained from Fisheries research farm of University of Agriculture Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria and acclimatized for two weeks at North core Fish hatchery of university.

Feeding trial was carried out using forty (40) fingerlings in triplicates for different species.

The fingerlings were fed with 0.8 mm diameter Coppens diet at 5 % of their body weight (administered twice daily morning 08:00 h and evening 16:00 h).

Water quality was monitored in each experimental tank using mercury in glass thermometer to determine temperature, pH

meter to determined pH and DO meter to determine dissolved oxygen.

Since experiment employed static system to rear fishes, waste water was completely drained and replaced twice daily.

Performance in growth and feed utilization were determined as

Weight gain calculated as; Final weight–initial weight.

Growth rate was determined by calculating the value of

Specific growth rate (SGR) was calculated as:

Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was calculated as;

Feed conversion efficiency was calculated as;

Percentage Survival:

Where Nt and N0 are the Number of

fish at the end of the experiment and the initial number of fish stocked at the start of the experiment respectively.

Proximate compositions of commercial feed and initial and final carcass of different species of fishes were determined according to AOAC AOAC, 1990.

Increase in protein and lipids as a result of feeding, were determined as follows: Protein/Lipid gain was calculated as; Final Protein/Lipid–initial Protein/Lipid% Mean

Available on-line at http://www.bjbabe.ro

Banats Journal of Biotechnology

2013, IV(8),

73

Protein gain (% MPG) and % Mean Lipid gain (% MLG) were calculated as:

(Final Prot/Lipid)–(initial Prot/Lipid)/(Initial weight)x100

Data collected were analyzed with

GenStat discovery edition 4 and Minitab 14 computer software; descriptive statistics followed by one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were determined for water quality parameters, growth parameters and proximate composition between species before and after experiment.

Least significant different (LSD) was used to separate means gotten, student T–test was used to compare proximate values of individual species before and after feeding trials.

Results Proximate composition of the

commercial feed (coppens) used in study were lesser in

Table 1. Proximate composition of Commercial feed

determined through laboratory analysis compared to manufacturer’s label.

Description Manufacturer’s label (%)

Laboratory analysis (%)

Crude protein 56.0 51.19 Crude Fat 15.0 9.52 Ash 10.9 5.02 Crude fiber 10.9 5.16

Protein (51.19 %), Fat (9.52 %), Ash (5.02 %) and fiber (5.16 %) content compared to nutrition information given by manufacturer

(56%, 15%, 10.9 % and 10.9 % respectively) water quality parameters measured during study time did not differ across treatment (Table 1 and 2).

Table 2. Physicochemical parameters of water during

the study period Species TEMP DO pH C. gariepinus 25.31±0.27 5.30±0.0 7.40±0.11 Heteroclarias 25.43±0.23 5.31±0.0 7.40±0.11 H. bidorsalis 25.46±0.25 5.43±0.0 7.40±0.11

No significant difference among the means (p< 0.05) Growth of the fishes per week, figure 1

reveals that C. gariepinus fingerling had highest maximum weight (7.76 g) followed by the H. bidorsalis (6.28)

Figure 1. Mean weekly weight of the three

species of catfish fingerlings during the study period.

and was statistically same (P<0.05) with least weight recorded for hybrid Heteroclarias (6.81) (Table 3).

Table 3. Growth performance, nutrient utilization and survivals of experimental fishes.

TRT C. gariepinus Heteroclarias H. bidorsalis MIW(g) 1.11±0.01 1.11±0.01 1.11±0.01 MFW(g) 7.75±0.33a 6.28±0.18b 6.81±0.07b MWG(g) 6.65±0.91a 5.17±0.18b 5.17±0.18b SGR 2.10±0.16a 1.67±0.03b 1.71±0.01b FCR 0.19±0.01a 0.25±0.01a 0.24±0.02ab FCE 53.2±26.2a 39.6±19.5b 41.8±36.6b PER 6.23±0.25a 3.83±0.13b 4.18±0.32b FEED 16.10±0.91 17.94±0.83 17.62±1.50 SURVIVAL 46.7±2.20 45.0±1.47 42.5±0.00

Mean in same column followed by different superscripts differ significantly (p<0.05). Keys: MIW–Mean Initial Weight; MFW–Mean Final Weight; SGR–Specific Growth Rate; FCR–Feed Conversion Ratio; FCE–Feed Conversion Efficiency; PER–Protein Efficiency

Ratio; MWG–Mean Weight Gain.

Similarly, C. gariepinus fingerlings were observed to have higher (P<0.05) mean

Banat’s University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine "Regele Mihai I al României" from Timisoara

Contact: web: http://www.bjbabe.ro, e-mail: bjb@usab–tm.ro

74

weight gain (6.65), specific growth rate (2.10), feed conversion efficiency (53.2 %) and Protein Efficiency Ratio (6.23), however values obtain in this parameter for H. bidorsalis and Heteroclarias were similar (P<0.05).

Survival of fish as well as feed intake did not differ across species (P>0.05). Result obtained (Table 4) for proximate composition reveals H. bidorsalis to have higher value of protein for initial and final carcass (54.02 and 57.07 respectively).

Table 4. Carcass analysis of experimental fishes during feeding trial.

Before the experiment Moisture Ash Lipid Fiber Protein NFE C. gariepinus 7.01±0.01b 2.44±0.01a 6.11±0.01a 2.44±0.01a 48.9±0.01c 33.11±0.01a Heteroclarias 7.13±0.01a 2.11±0.01b 5.14±0.01c 2.14±0.01b 51.26±0.01b 32.26±0.01b H. bidorsalis 5.13±0.01c 1.52±0.01c 5.81±0.01b 1.57±0.01c 54.02±0.01a 31.96±0.02c After the feeding trial C. gariepinus 7.55±0.01a 3.11±0.01b 7.14±0.01a 2.82±0.01b 52.82±0.01c 26.59±0.01b Heteroclarias 7.3±0.01b 3.23±0.01a 6.01±0.01c 3.01±0.01a 53.32±0.01b 27.07±0.01a H. bidorsalis 6.01±0.01b 3.04±0.01c 6.21±0.01b 1.98±0.02a 57.07±0.01a 24.73±0.02c Mean Lipid Gain (%MLG) Mean Protein Gain (%MPG) C. gariepinus 1.03±0.01b (16.8%)a 3.92±0.01 (8.01)a Heteroclarias 0.87±0.01b (16.9%)a 2.06±0.01 (4.02)b H. bidorsalis 0.40±0.21b (6.8%)b 3.05±0.01 (5.65)b

Mean in the same column followed by different superscript differ significantly (p < 0.05)

However least value were recorded in initial and final carcass for moisture (5.13 and 6.01 respectively), ash (1.52 and 3.04 respectively) and NFE (31.96 and 24.73 respectively).

The highest lipid was recorded in C. gariepinus in both analysis of initial and final carcass (6.11 and 7.14 respectively).

Table 5. Comparism of variation in proximate composition of Initial and final carcass of the experimental

fishes C. gariepinus Heteroclarias H. bidorsalis Proximate

composition Initial Final P–value Initial Final P–value Initial Final P–value Moisture 7.01±0.01 7.55±0.01 0.0002*** 7.13±0.01 7.39±0.01 0.004** 5.23±0.01 6.01±0.01 0.0002*** Ash 2.44±0.01 3.11±0.01 0.0003*** 2.11±0.01 3.23±0.01 <0.0001*** 1.53±0.01 3.04±0.01 <0.0001*** Lipid 6.11±0.01 7.14±0.01 0.0003*** 5.41±0.01 6.01±0.01 <0.0001*** 5.81±0.01 6.21±0.01 0.0003*** Fiber 2.44±0.01 2.82±0.01 0.0003*** 2.41±0.01 3.01±0.01 0.0002*** 1.58±0.01 2.98±0.01 0.0001*** Protein 48.91±0.01 52.8±0.01 <0.0001*** 51.26 53.326±0.01 <0.0001*** 54.02±0.01 57.05±0.01<0.0001*** NFE 33.11±0.01 26.59±0.01 <0.0001*** 32.26±0.01 27.07±0.01 <0.0001*** 31.96±0.01 24.73±0.01<0.0001***

Student t–test shows significantly difference among the experimental fishes at extreme levels.

The compares of the values of proximate composition of initial carcass with final carcass reveals that all the species had significantly higher values in final carcass for most proximate parameters except for NFE (Table 5).

Discussion Good growth, health and reproduction

of commercial fish and other aquatic animals are primarily dependent upon an adequate supply of nutrient, both in terms of quantity and quality, irrespective of the culture system

in which they are grown. Proximate composition of commercial

diet shows differences in values obtained in the laboratory and those reported by coppens manufacturers. Ayuba AYUBA and IORKOHOL, 2013 had reported similar finding for 2 mm commercial feed of Adolf Calyx, Coppens, Dizengoff and Durante feeds. Disparity in proximate composition of commercial diet leads to undernutrition, leading to increased fish production cost VANDER MEER et al., 1997.

Despite this disparity observed,

Available on-line at http://www.bjbabe.ro

Banats Journal of Biotechnology

2013, IV(8),

75

proximate composition of diet in the present study were within acceptable range recommended for commercial fish NRC, 1983,

Wilson, 2000 had earlier reported that most commercial catfish feeds contain 32% Crude protein and above.

Fagbenro FAGBENRO et al. 2003 reported earlier that Clarias gariepinus, Heterobranchus bidorsalis, H. longifilis and Cyprinus carpio grow better when fed diets containing 40–50% CP, hence, feeding catfishes with diets containing at least 40% CP was recommended.

Cowey COWEY and SERGENT, 1979 reported that 10–20% lipid in the diet of freshwater fishes gives optimal growth rates without producing an excessively fatty carcass. On the other hand WILSON, 2000 reported that lipid level in catfish feeds should be 5 to 6 %. The reason for observed difference may due to nutrient deterioration in storage.

Physiochemical parameters of water analyzed in this study were within the acceptable and tolerable range for rearing catfishes fingerlings as reported by omitoyin (2007). Fish differ in their response to feeding, based on their nutrient requirement, biology, feeding habits and growth pattern, this study reveals that the C. gariepinus grew better than H. bidorsalis and Heteroclarias using coppens commercial feed, though LEGENDRE et al. 1992 reported that Heterobranchus sp. has a growth rate twice as fast as that of C. gariepinus, the present study has shown otherwise probably due to growth response of fishes at the time this study was conducted, some fish may have marginal growth in early stage of life after which growth rate increase sporadically at latter times in their life cycle.

The result of the present study is consistent with the reported works of Ataguba ATAGUBA et al., 2009, ATAGUBA et al., 2010, as C. gariepinus was reported to grow faster than H. bidorsalis and the reciprocal crosses of the two catfishes.

The SGR of 1.71 %. day–1 reported in the present study pure fingerling of H. bidorsalis is significantly lower than range of 2.12 % day–1 to 3.96 % day–1 reported for various strains of Heterobranchus longifilis by

Nguenga NGUENGA et al., 2000. The higher value of higher specific

growth rate (SGR) recorded C. gariepinus (2.10) compare to Heteroclarias and H. bidorsalis is in agreement with the report of Wang WANG et., al., 1998 though the value obtained from the experiment were higher. Suvival rate of fishes were the same across all species (P>0.05) and are in line with de Graaf GRAAF et al., 1995 reported of 41.5% survival for Clarias gariepinus reared under a medium stocking density in protected tanks.

The higher values of carcass composition after the experiment reveal that all species utilized the commercial feed for growth; protein gain was higher in C. gariepinus while H. bidorsalis had higher lipid gain compared to the other species EKELEMU and

OGBA, 2005. Nutrient utilization observed in this study for C. gariepinus is in agreement with the works of other authors.

Acknowledgements This research was funded by the West

African Agricultural Productivity Program (WAAPP) under the Fingerlings and Broodstock Multiplication Project domicile at the University of Agriculture Makurdi. The authors also acknowledge the contribution of all technical staffs in the department of Fisheries and Aquaculture during data collection. References 1. Ajana, A.M. and P.E. Anyanwe,. NIOMR

Aquaculture Extension Guide, 1995. 7: 15. 2. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis.

Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Virginia, USA. 1990. pp 125–291.

3. Ataguba G A, Annune P A and Ogbe F G: Growth performance of two African catfishes Clarias gariepinus and Heterobranchus longifilis and their hybrids in plastic aquaria. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 2010. Volume 22, Article #30.Retrieved September 9, 2013, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd22/2/atag22030.htm

4. Ayuba V.O. and Iorkohol, E.K. Proximate Composition of Some Commercial Fish Feeds Sold in Nigeria. Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 2013. 8: pp 248–252.

5. Chen HY, Tsai HC. Optimal dietary protein level for the growth of juvenile grouper

Banat’s University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine "Regele Mihai I al României" from Timisoara

Contact: web: http://www.bjbabe.ro, e-mail: bjb@usab–tm.ro

76

Epinephelus malabaricus fed semi purified diet. Aquaculture, 1994. 119: pp265–271.

6. Cowey, C.B. and J.R. Sargent. Nutrition. In: Fish Physiology, Hoar, W.S., D.J. Randall and J.R. Brett (Eds.). Academic Press, London, 1979. pp. 1–69.

7. de Graaf G J, Galemoni F, and Banzoussi B. Artificial reproduction and fingerling production of the African catfish, Clarias gariepinus (Burchell 1822), in protected and unprotected ponds. Aquaculture Research, 1995. 26. pp. 233–242 http://www.fao.org/docrep/ field/003/ AC 578E/AC578E11.htm.

8. Ekelemu, J.K.and Ogba, O. Growth performance of Clarias gariepinus fed rations of maggot meal as replacement for fish meal. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Fisheries Society of Nigeria (FISON) Port–Harcourt, 14th–18th Nov, 2005. 2005. pp. 159–162.

9. Fagbenro OA, Adeparusi EO, Fapohunda OO. Feedstuffs and dietary Substitution for farmed Fish in Nigeria. In: Eyo AA (Ed.). National Workshop on Fish Feed Development and Feeding Practices in Aquaculture of FISON at NIFFR, New Bussa, 15th–19th Sept. 2003. 2003. pp. 60–72.

10. Falaye AE. Nutrient Requirements of Fish Feed Formulations and Preparation. In: Proc. of Nation–wide Fish Farmers Workshop, DFRRI/NIOMR, 1988. pp 151–152.

11. Hecht, T. and W. Lublinkhof, Clarias gariepinus x Heterobranchus longifilis (Clariidae: Pisces) a news hybrid for aquaculture? South Afr. J. Sci., 1985. 81. pp. 620–621.

12. Hogendoorn, H. Controlled propagation of the African catfish, Clarias lazera (C and V) IV. Effect of feeding culture. Aquaculture, 1981. 24. pp. 123–131.

13. Huisman EA. Hatchery and Nursery Operations in Fish Culture Management. 1986.

14. Idodo–Umeh, G. Freshwater Fishes of Nigeria (Taxonomy, Ecological Notes, Diets and utilization) Idodo Umeh Publishers Ltd. Benin City. 2003. pp. 232.

15. Keremah, R.I. and Green, H.J. Effect of Replacing Fish meal with Graded levels of Fish Offal on Growth and Survival hybrid Catfish fingerlings. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual

Conference of the Fisheries Society of Nigeria (FISON) Port–Harcourt 14th–18th November, 2005. 2005. pp. 144–149.

16. Legendre, M., G.G. Teugel, G. Carty and B. Jalabart, A comparative study on morphology, growth rate and reproduction of Clarias gariepinus (Burchell 1822), Heterobranchus longifilis (Valenciences 1840) and their reciprocal hybrids (Pisces: Clariidae). J. Fish Biol., 1992. 40. pp. 59–79

17. Miller, J. Private Sector Aquaculture Feed Development in Nigeria. In Fish Feed Development and Feeding practices in Aquaculture (ed. A.A. Eyo) A National work–shop, organised by FISON/NIFFR/FAO–NSPFS. Sept 2003. 2003. pp. 114.

18. Nguenga D, Teugels G G, and Ollevier F. Fertilization, hatching, survival and growth rates in reciprocal crosses of two strains of an African catfish Heterobranchus longifilis Valenciennes 1840 under controlled hatchery conditions. Aquaculture Research. 2000. 31. pp. 565–573.

19. NRC. Nutrients Requirements of Warm Water Fishes and Shell–Fishes. 1st Edn., National Academy Press, Washington, DC., USA., 1983. pp. 102.

20. Shyong, W.J., C.H. Huang and H.C. Chen, Effects of dietary protein concentration on growth and muscle composition of juvenile. Aquaculture, 1998. 167. pp. 35–42.

21. Ufodike, E.B.C, Onun, U., Effiong, M.U. Effect of substitution of fish meal with lizard meal on growh of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Journal of Aquatic Sciences, 2011. 26 (1). pp. 8–11

22. Wilson, R.P. Channel Catfish, Ictalurus Punctatus. In: Handbook of Nutrient Requirement of Finfish, Wilson, R.P. (Ed.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, 2000. pp. 35–53.

Received: October 8, 2012

Accepted: November 19, 2013