nutritive value of nutritionally upgraded sunflower meal...
TRANSCRIPT
Nutritive value of nutritionally upgraded sunflower meal for post-juvenile Atlantic
salmon (Salmo salar) in sea water
N. Gill 1/, D. Higgs 2/, B. Skura 1/, M. Rowshandeli 2/, B. Dosanjh 3/, and J. Mann 3
1/ Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, UBC2/ Fisheries and Oceans, Canada, West Vancouver Lab.
3/ Ewos Canada Ltd.
Rationale
• Diets for farmed Atlantic salmon are too costly (contain significant amounts of fishmeal and oil).
• Global supplies of fishmeal and oil are finite. Costs will increase unless suitable alternatives are identified/and or developed.
• Nutritionally upgraded oilseed protein and lipid products offer great potential (economical production procedures need to be used or developed).
Total global estimates for fishery catches, products produced and used (Hardy et al.,
2000; Tidwell and Allan, 2001, USDA 2002)
FISHMEAL PRICES US$ FOB/MT - PERU
300350400450500550600650700
Jun-99
Oct-99
Feb-00
Jun-00
Oct-00
Feb-01
Jun-01
Oct-01
Feb-02
Jun-02
MONTHS
PRIC
E U
S$ P
ER M
T
Special Prime 68-120-1000
Taiwan67 - 120FOB - FCL
Thailand67 - 150FOB - FCLFAQ 67
FOB - FCL
FAQ 65FAS
World protein meal production (million tonnes; 2002/2003; USDA)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
soybean rapeseed sunflower fishmeal
Prices (US $/kg protein) of fishmeal (Hamburg) and sunflower meal (Rotterdam; USDA;2001/2002)
00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9
1
Fishmeal sunflower
Factors limiting sunflower meal (SFM) use in salmonid diets
• Low crude protein content in undehulled SFM (~25%)
• High fibre (>20%) and low bioavailable energy content
• Low lysine content• Chlorogenic acid (tannin-like compound;
may decrease digestive enzyme activity, amino acid availability and possibly diet palatability)
Previous research on sunflower meal in salmonids
• Work so far has focused on trout. No adverse effects on rainbow trout growth noted when partially de-hulled sunflower meal comprised either 33% (Scott et al., 1982), 36.5% (Tacon et al., 1984), 40% (Cardenete et al., 1993) or 41.8% (Sanz et al., 1994) of diet.
• To date no comparable work on salmon
Goal
• To determine the acceptable dietary level (nutritive value) of partially dehulled and extruded sunflower meal for post-juvenile Atlantic salmon in sea water
Percent yields of different fractions of sunflower meal
F r a c t i o n 1 / S c r e e no p e n i n g s i z e
( m i c r o n )
Y i e l d ( % )
1 3 8 1 1 5 . 32 5 1 6 1 3 . 43 8 6 4 3 4 . 34 T o p d i s c a r d 3 7 . 1
1 / F r a c t i o n s 1 & 2 w e r e c o m b i n e d a n d p e r c e n t a g e s o f p r o t e i n , l i p i d a n d a s h o n a d r y w e i g h t b a s i s w e r e r e s p e c t i v e l y , 4 0 . 9 , 2 . 8 4 a n d 8 . 0 0 .
Experimental diets• Five steam pelleted dry diets (formulated to be
equal in digestible protein (442 g/kg dry weight) and digestible energy (19.2 MJ/kg dry weight) content were prepared for the study.
• Partially dehulled and extruded (Abernathy FishTechnol. Center, Longview, WA) SFM comprised 0 %, 6.8 %, 13.6 %, 20.4 % or 27.1 % of dry diet by progressive replacement of fish meal protein in basal diet on an equivalent digestible protein basis.
Ingredient compositions of diets DietIngredients
(g/kg dwb) 1/ 0.0 %SFM(Basal)
6.8 % SFM 13.6 % SFM 20.4 % SFM 27.1 % SFM
Austral fishmeal 450.3 413.1 376.0 338.8 301.7Sunflower meal(SFM)
0.0 67.9 135.7 203.5 271.4
Pre-gelatinizedwheat starch
122.3 89.8 77.3 39.8 2.3
Raw wheatstarch
20.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Anchovy oil;stabilized
121.8 123.5 125.3 132.0 138.7
DL-methionine 1.82 1.88 1.94 2.00 2.09Santoquin 0.022 0.029 0.036 0.043 0.050Common ingred. 283.8 283.8 283.8 283.8 283.81/ Common ingredients (g/kg) = Blood flour, 50; squid meal, 70; wheat gluten
meal, 80; vitamin/mineral supplement, 40; soya lecithin, 10; choline chloride,(60%), 5.0; vitamin C monophosphate (42%),1.0; carophyll pink (2%), 2.75;permapell, 10; Finnstim, 10; chromic oxide, 5.0.
Protein and energy digestibility (%)
65
70
75
80
85
90
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
ADCproteinADCenergy
n = 3/diet each based on the analysis of combined intestinally dissected feces from 30 fish
Dietary proximate constituents and energy
DietProximateconstituent(g/kg)/energy(MJ/kg)
0.0 % SFM 6.8 % SFM 13.6 % SFM 20.4% SFM 27.1 % SFM
Dry matter 908 908 911 910 907Crude protein 493 486 487 480 504Digestibleprotein (DP)
430 421 418 411 431
Lipid 182 190 188 187 188Nitrogen-freeextract
228 218 215 213 179
Gross energy 21.0 20.9 20.9 21.1 21.0Digestibleenergy (DE)
16.8 16.4 16.4 16.2 15.5
DP/DE 25.6 25.6 25.5 25.4 27.9
Dietary crude fiber and chlorogenic acid levels (% dwb)
0.000.501.001.502.00
2.503.003.504.00
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
crude fiberchlorogenic acid
Experimental conditions• Triplicate groups of 50 (mean initial weight
~116 g) salmon /diet treatment• During study fish held in 4000 L outdoor
fibreglass tanks with running (25-40 L/min), filtered, oxygenated seawater for 84 days
• Water temperature (11.0-12.1 °C), dissolved oxygen (7.0-8.5 ppm), salinity (29.0-31.0 p.p.t.)
• Fish fed prescribed diet to satiation 2X/day
Fish sampling• On day 0, 5 fish sampled for individual
determinations of whole body proximate composition and 5 for muscle proximate composition of whole fillets (L&R).
• On day 84, 30 fish sampled/tank (each intestinally dissected to obtain feces and then samples pooled and freeze-dried). Five fish individually analyzed for body proximate composition and five pools of 2 fish each for muscle proximate analyses.
Weight gain (g) and dry feed intake (g/fish)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
WGDFI
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 50 fish P>0.05 diet & block
Specific Growth Rate (%/day)
1.361.371.381.391.401.411.421.431.441.45
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 50 fish P>0.05 diet & block
Feed efficiency and protein efficiency ratio (g/g)
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
FEPER
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 50 fish P>0.05 diet & block
Percent protein deposited and gross energy utilization (%)
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
PPDGEU
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 50 fish P>0.05 diet & block
Fish survival (%)
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
Survival
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 50 fish P>0.05 diet & block
Whole body proximate composition (%)
01020304050607080
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
proteinlipidmoisture
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 5 fish per diet replicate P>0.05 diet & block
Muscle proximate composition (%)
01020304050607080
0.0%SFM
6.8%SFM
13.6%SFM
20.4%SFM
27.1%SFM
proteinlipidmoisture
n = 3 per diet treatment each based on 5 composite samples of 2 fish (left fillets) each P>0.05 diet & block
Conclusions
• Nutritionally upgraded SFM – can comprise ≥ 27.1% of the dry diet or ≥
22.6% of the digestible protein in diets for post-juvenile Atlantic salmon
– no adverse effects on growth, feed intake, feed efficiency, health or body or muscle proximate composition noted
• Findings support previous studies on– rainbow trout, and tilapia