Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Diet 1 (7.5) Diet 2 (10.9) Diet 3 (14.1) Diet 4 (17.2) Diet 5 (20.6) Diet 6 (23.5)
IBW 14.01 ± 0.48 14.20 ± 0.18 14.30 ± 0.26 14.27 ± 0.10 14.23 ± 0.19 14.25 ± 0.18
FBW 52.28 ± 0.73c 58.02 ± 1.47b 59.68 ± 1.48ab 62.27 ± 2.70a 60.60 ± 1.29ab 59.40 ± 1.71ab
Survival 95.00 ± 5.00 96.67 ± 2.87 96.67 ± 5.77 100.00 ± 0.00 96.67 ± 5.77 91.67 ± 2.89
WG 273.44 ± 10.56d 308.64 ± 4.44c 318.39 ± 4.25bc 335.50 ± 6.03a 326.08 ± 5.07ab 316.86 ± 4.83bc
SGR 2.49 ± 0.05c 2.66 ± 0.02b 2.69 ± 0.03b 2.78 ± 0.05a 2.73 ± 0.04ab 2.69 ± 0.01b
CF 2.01 ± 0.06 1.96 ± 0.07 1.96 ± 0.03 1.99 ± 0.13 1.93 ± 0.05 1.91 ± 0.25
HSI 2.20 ± 0.16b 2.27 ± 0.06ab 2.38 ± 0.06ab 2.27 ± 0.13ab 2.23 ± 0.08ab 2.51 ± 0.10a
MFI 0.88 ± 0.01b 0.95 ± 0.03ab 0.96 ± 0.03a 0.97 ± 0.03a 0.95 ± 0.03ab 0.95 ± 0.04ab
FER 0.78 ± 0.02d 0.82 ± 0.02c 0.84 ± 0.01bc 0.89 ± 0.01a 0.87 ± 0.01ab 0.85 ± 0.02b
PER 2.09 ± 0.03d 2.20 ± 0.02c 2.27 ± 0.03b 2.32 ± 0.03a 2.27 ± 0.02b 2.23 ± 0.01bc
N gain 1.05 ± 0.01c 1.25 ± 0.05b 1.31 ± 0.05b 1.42 ± 0.06a 1.37 ± 0.03a 1.37 ± 0.02a
PPV 0.30 ± 0.01c 0.35 ± 0.01bc 0.37 ± 0.02b 0.43 ± 0.02a 0.40 ± 0.04ab 0.40 ± 0.01ab
Values are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3); values with different superscripts in the same row differ significantly (P < 0.05).
Survival (%) = 100 · final fish number/initial fish number; weight gain (WG) (%) = 100 · (FBW ) IBW)/IBW; Specific growth rate (SGR) (%
day)1) = 100 · (ln FBW ) ln IBW)/day; CF (Condition factor) (g cm)3) = 100 · (live weight, g)/(body length, cm)3; hepatosomatic index
(HSI) = 100 · (liver weight, g)/(body weight, g); intraperitoneal ratio (IPR) = 100 · (intraperitoneal fat weight)/(body weight); mean feed
intake (MFI) = g fish)1 day)1; feed efficiency ratio (FER) = 100 · wet weight gain in g/dry diet fed in g; protein efficiency ratio (PER) =
weight gain in g/protein intake in dry basis in g; N gain (%) = 100 · (FBW · Nf ) IBW · Ni); protein productive value (PPV) = protein gain in
g/protein fed in dry basis in g; where IBW is initial mean body weight and FBW is final mean body weight; Nf and Ni are the N contents of
the carcass at the end and at the beginning of the feeding trial.
..............................................................................................
2.65
of crude protein was lower in fish fed the diet without
Y = 2.782 – 0.0137 (X – 17.1) (X > 17.1) methionine supplement (P < 0.05), while the values in the
2.6
R2 = 0.9106
2.55 rest groups were very stable (P > 0.05). ADCs of gross en-
2.5 ergy increased significantly with increasing methionine level
Xopt = 17.1
2.45 up to 17.2 g methionine kg)1 diet and then decreased slightly
2.4 (P < 0.05). However, ADCs of crude lipid were unaffected
7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Dietary methionine level (g kg–1 dry diet) by dietary treatments (P > 0.05).
Increasing dietary methionine level increased EAA and
Figure 1 The relationship between weight gain (SGR, %/day, y) and non-essential amino acids (NEAA) contents of whole fish
P P
dietary methionine levels (g kg)1, x) of juvenile black sea bream fed body, and the EAA/ NEAA ratio was also increased
with the experimental diets for 8 weeks. SGR, specific growth rate. significantly (P < 0.05) (Table 7), and the values peaked at
fish fed 23.5, 20.6 and 23.5 g methionine kg)1 diets, respec-
0.5 tively. The contents of Val, Leu and Ile in different groups
Y = 0.0132X + 0.1993
2
Y = 4.13 were very stable (P > 0.05); however, the levels of rest EAAs
0.45 R = 0.9275
in whole body showed increasing tendency (P < 0.05) with
0.4 increasing dietary methionine level. Body methionine con-
centration increased significantly with dietary methionine
PPV
0.35
levels from 7.5 to 20.6 g kg)1, but kept relatively constant
0.3
Xopt = 17.21 thereafter (P > 0.05).
0.25 In serum profile, total cholesterol concentration was
0.2
highest in fish fed 7.5 g methionine kg)1 diet (P < 0.05), but
7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 showed no significant differences for fish fed other diets
Dietary methionine level (g kg–1 dry diet) (Table 8). Fish supplied with 7.5 and 23.5 g methionine kg)1
diets showed higher glucose content (P < 0.05), compared to
Figure 2 The relationship between protein productive value (PPV, y)
and dietary methionine levels (g kg)1, x) of juvenile black sea bream that of fish fed the diets containing 10.9 and 20.6 g kg)1
fed with the experimental diets for 8 weeks. methionine. Serum free methionine concentration signifi-
Table 5 Effect of dietary methionine level on proximate compositions of whole body and muscle of juvenile black sea bream (% on wet matter
basis)
Diet 1 (0.75) Diet 2 (10.9) Diet 3 (14.1) Diet 4 (17.2) Diet 5 (20.6) Diet 6 (23.5)
Whole body
Protein 16.94 ± 0.16b 17.52 ± 0.18ab 17.66 ± 0.10a 18.03 ± 0.23a 18.05 ± 0.31a 17.78 ± 0.37a
Lipid 13.27 ± 0.34 13.36 ± 1.60 13.29 ± 0.87 13.50 ± 1.27 13.63 ± 1.51 13.35 ± 1.52
Ash 4.78 ± 0.29 4.80 ± 0.37 4.62 ± 0.29 4.79 ± 0.21 4.86 ± 0.17 4.66 ± 0.18
Moisture 63.77 ± 0.16 64.08 ± 1.01 64.17 ± 3.01 63.47 ± 0.15 63.40 ± 1.03 64.18 ± 1.82
Dorsal muscle
Protein 19.27 ± 0.53b 19.76 ± 0.43ab 20.36 ± 0.70ab 20.49 ± 0.30a 20.57 ± 0.14a 20.46 ± 0.16a
Lipid 5.04 ± 0.42a 4.57 ± 0.11ab 4.48 ± 0.18ab 4.03 ± 0.50b 4.16 ± 0.09b 4.19 ± 0.18b
Ash 1.45 ± 0.08 1.41 ± 0.03 1.39 ± 0.03 1.43 ± 0.02 1.41 ± 0.03 1.41 ± 0.02
Moisture 73.48 ± 1.11 73.52 ± 0.73 73.52 ± 0.48 73.89 ± 0.33 73.19 ± 0.54 73.19 ± 0.57
Values are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3); values with different superscripts in the same row differ significantly (P < 0.05).
..............................................................................................
Diet 1 (7.5) Diet 2 (10.9) Diet 3 (14.1) Diet 4 (17.2) Diet 5 (20.6) Diet 6 (23.5)
b ab ab a ab
Dry matter 85.17 ± 1.24 87.86 ± 1.29 88.18 ± 1.68 90.21 ± 0.77 88.04 ± 0.54 87.47 ± 1.39ab
Protein 95.32 ± 0.50b 97.15 ± 0.42a 96.65 ± 0.48a 97.30 ± 0.63a 96.78 ± 0.22a 96.63 ± 0.35a
Lipid 96.59 ± 0.36 97.82 ± 0.51 97.98 ± 0.35 97.95 ± 0.34 97.28 ± 1.26 98.10 ± 0.52
Gross energy 88.17 ± 0.40c 89.12 ± 0.43bc 90.29 ± 0.30b 91.83 ± 0.21a 91.45 ± 0.72ab 90.19 ± 0.53b
Table 7 Effect of dietary methionine levels on amino acid contents of whole body (g kg)1 on a dry matter basis) in juvenile black sea bream fed
for 8 weeks
Diet 1 (7.5) Diet 2 (10.9) Diet 3 (14.1) Diet 4 (17.2) Diet 5 (20.6) Diet 6 (23.5)
EAA
Val 3.27 ± 0.03 3.28 ± 0.06 3.27 ± 0.05 3.30 ± 0.03 3.29 ± 0.04 3.35 ± 0.03
Leu 4.62 ± 0.05 4.66 ± 0.09 4.93 ± 0.04 4.80 ± 0.17 4.74 ± 0.06 4.75 ± 0.05
Ile 2.79 ± 0.03 2.86 ± 0.07 2.85 ± 0.07 2.84 ± 0.09 2.84 ± 0.09 2.89 ± 0.07
Lys 4.68 ± 0.02c 4.75 ± 0.01b 4.81 ± 0.02b 4.92 ± 0.01a 4.94 ± 0.03a 4.99 ± 0.04a
Phe 2.55 ± 0.02b 2.55 ± 0.05b 2.67 ± 0.10ab 2.71 ± 0.03ab 2.74 ± 0.07a 2.77 ± 0.05a
Thr 2.48 ± 0.07c 2.50 ± 0.05c 2.59 ± 0.02b 2.66 ± 0.03ab 2.74 ± 0.05a 2.72 ± 0.04a
His 1.07 ± 0.02b 1.09 ± 0.02b 1.10 ± 0.03b 1.09 ± 0.01b 1.17 ± 0.03a 1.19 ± 0.02a
Arg 4.12 ± 0.05b 4.13 ± 0.02ab 4.17 ± 0.03ab 4.18 ± 0.03ab 4.20 ± 0.01ab 4.23 ± 0.03a
Met 1.76 ± 0.03c 1.78 ± 0.05c 1.83 ± 0.02c 1.97 ± 0.06b 2.12 ± 0.01a 2.14 ± 0.02a
NEAA
Asp 4.37 ± 0.02b 4.37 ± 0.07b 4.42 ± 0.03ab 4.41 ± 0.04ab 4.49 ± 0.02a 4.42 ± 0.04ab
Tyr 1.75 ± 0.01 1.80 ± 0.04 1.81 ± 0.04 1.78 ± 0.04 1.76 ± 0.04 1.78 ± 0.04
Pro 3.03 ± 0.02 3.04 ± 0.07 3.07 ± 0.04 3.09 ± 0.06 3.14 ± 0.06 3.09 ± 0.02
Ser 1.90 ± 0.03 1.92 ± 0.01 1.88 ± 0.03 1.92 ± 0.03 1.96 ± 0.04 1.95 ± 0.04
Glu 7.68 ± 0.03c 7.73 ± 0.05c 7.87 ± 0.05b 7.90 ± 0.02ab 7.98 ± 0.06a 7.97 ± 0.01ab
Gly 5.74 ± 0.03c 5.81 ± 0.03c 5.93 ± 0.05b 5.95 ± 0.02ab 6.03 ± 0.05a 6.00 ± 0.03ab
Ala 4.29 ± 0.03b 4.35 ± 0.06ab 4.31 ± 0.02ab 4.35 ± 0.03ab 4.40 ± 0.02a 4.38 ± 0.05ab
P
EAA 27.34 ± 0.06d 27.60 ± 0.15cd 28.01 ± 0.26c 28.46 ± 0.21b 28.78 ± 0.11ab 29.05 ± 0.06a
P
NEAA 28.99 ± 0.08d 29.26 ± 0.27cd 29.54 ± 0.15c 29.62 ± 0.10bc 30.08 ± 0.19a 29.83 ± 0.04ab
P P
EAA/ NEAA 0.94 ± 0.09c 0.94 ± 0.01c 0.95 ± 0.01bc 0.96 ± 0.02ab 0.96 ± 0.01a 0.97 ± 0.01a
Values are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3); values with different superscripts in the same row differ significantly (P < 0.05).
P P
EAA, essential amino acids; NEAA, non-essential amino acids; EAA, total essential amino acids; NEAA, total essential amino acids.
cantly increased with increasing dietary methionine levels dietary amino acid requirements (Cowey 1995), and the
(P < 0.05) although there was no statistical difference for fish model used to analyse the dose–response relationship will
fed 20.6 and 23.5 g methionine kg)1 diets (P > 0.05). Serum influence the estimate of requirements. Because the SGR
total protein content (ranging from 27.68 to 32.80 g L)1) response of fish in the current study was linear, a broken-line
showed an insignificantly increasing trend with increasing model resulted in the lowest error term for estimating the
methionine level, while triacylglycerol concentration de- requirement appeared to give a more precise empirical figure.
creased from 5.47 to 3.93 mmol L)1, and no significant dif- In previous studies, some researchers have demonstrated that
ferences were observed among treatments (P > 0.05). cystine could spare dietary methionine portion about 60% in
channel catfish (Harding et al. 1977), 51% in yellow perch
(Twibell et al. 2000), 50% in red drum (Moon & Gatlin 1991;
Goff & Gatlin 2004), 42% in rainbow trout (Kim et al. 1992)
Dose–response experiments with increasing supply of amino and 40% in hybrid striped bass (Griffin et al. 1994); the
acid are accepted in principle as a method for determining presence of dietary cystine reduces the amount of methionine
..............................................................................................
Diet 1 (7.5) Diet 2 (10.9) Diet 3 (14.1) Diet 4 (17.2) Diet 5 (20.6) Diet 6 (23.5)
)1
Total protein (g L ) 27.68 ± 1.06 30.56 ± 2.16 31.29 ± 1.94 32.79 ± 3.08 30.52 ± 2.10 32.80 ± 1.76
T-CHO (mmol L)1) 9.33 ± 0.70a 7.27 ± 0.42b 6.76 ± 0.21b 6.60 ± 0.11b 6.61 ± 0.54b 6.99 ± 0.52b
TG (mmol L)1) 5.47 ± 1.22 5.36 ± 0.47 4.94 ± 0.43 4.71 ± 0.49 3.93 ± 0.47 4.98 ± 0.96
GLU (mmol L)1) 9.66 ± 1.37a 6.52 ± 1.35b 6.43 ± 1.21b 6.61 ± 0.58b 6.39 ± 0.74b 7.45 ± 0.68a
Free met (mmol 100 mL)1) 8.22 ± 0.06e 8.39 ± 0.05d 8.61 ± 0.07c 8.79 ± 0.03bc 8.96 ± 0.11ab 9.14 ± 0.07a
Values are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3); values with different superscripts in the same row differ significantly (P < 0.05).
T-CHO, total cholesterol; TG, triacylglycerol; GLU, glucose concentration.
required for maximum growth. Thus, Wilson & Halver for maximum growth. The replacement value of cystine for
(1986) suggested that fish have a TSAA (Met + Cys) methionine and the use of methionine to provide for the total
requirement rather than a specific methionine requirement. sulphur amino acid requirement of black sea bream should
Methionine or total sulphur amino acids requirements have be further evaluated.
been reported varying from 22.0 to 65.0 g kg)1 of dietary Amino acid balance in diets is necessary for optimal
protein in different fish species (De Silva & Anderson 1995). growth of fish (Wilson & Halver 1986), and most authors
In the present study, the TSAA requirement of juvenile black reported that fish fed dietary increasing methionine showed
sea bream was determined to be 53.2 g kg)1 of dietary pro- two different growth pattern: (i) increased with increasing
tein (in the presence of dietary 3.1 g kg)1 cystine) based on dietary methionine and then remained constant when dietary
growth performance. This value was higher than that re- methionine is higher than requirement (Ruchimat et al. 1997;
ported for some commercially important finfish species, Coloso et al. 1999; Alam et al. 2001; Luo et al. 2005; Nguyen
namely, milkfish (43.7 g kg)1, Borlongon & Coloso 1993), & Davis 2009a) (ii) increased with increasing dietary methi-
Jian carp (42.9 g kg)1, Tang et al. 2009), large yellow croaker onine level and then decreased significantly when dietary
(40.2 g kg)1, Mai et al. 2006), catla (35.5 g kg)1, Ravi & methionine is higher than requirement (Murthy & Varghese
Devaraj 1991), yellowtail (32.8 g kg)1, Ruchimat et al. 1997), 1998; Mai et al. 2006; Yan et al. 2007). A few studies
grouper (32.3 g kg)1, Luo et al. 2005), African catfish reported that none of the fish fed the test diets containing
(32 g kg)1, Fagbenro et al. 1998), Japanese flounder increased methionine showed a significant difference in
(31 g kg)1, Alam et al. 2000) and yellow perch (30 g kg)1, growth (Sveier et al. 2001; Espe et al. 2008). In the present
Twibell et al. 2000). But, the requirement of black sea bream study, the growth response black sea bream fed increasing
is nearer to Indian major carp (55.0 g kg)1, Ahmed et al. methionine diets is in accordance with the second pattern.
2003) and rohu (55.8 g kg)1, Khan & Jafri 1993). The wide Reduction in the growth rate in fish fed diets with superflu-
variation observed in the methionine requirement among ous level of TSAA may be because of toxic effects (Choo
species may be because of fish size, age, laboratory condition et al. 1991), and excess amount of total sulphur amino acid in
including feeding regime, feed allowance, water temperature, fish body would lead to extra energy expenditure towards
stock density and ingredients used for basal diet such as zein, deamination and excretion (Walton 1985; Murthy & Var-
casein, gelatin, gluten, soybean meal, fishmeal and CAAs in ghese 1998; Sveier et al. 2001).
various combinations (Tacon & Cowey 1985; Rodehutscord FER obtained in the present study ranged from 0.78 to 0.89,
et al. 1997; Forster & Dominy 2006; Nguyen & Davis 2009b). which exhibited correlation with fish growth and seems satis-
In the current work, higher levels of cystine were not tested factory. One possible reason may be that fish were slowly fed
so that it is not apparent whether this dietary level of cystine by hand little by little till apparent satiation (visual observa-
is adequate, and it could also be a possible reason for the tion of fish feeding behaviour) and prevent the waste of feeds.
relatively higher methionine requirement in this study. On the other hand, generally high FER suggested that black
However, in the study of rainbow trout, Walton et al. (1982) sea bream is able to utilize CAAs well in diets. However, there
observed similar growth performance of fish fed diets with or was a marked decline in FER when fish fed methionine defi-
without cystine provided that the level of methionine was ciency diet or superfluous methionine diets, indicating that the
adjusted to meet the requirement level. Because a portion of supplementing level of methionine should be optimized. Feed
dietary methionine is converted to cystine the presence of intake was much lower when fish fed diet methionine-unsup-
dietary cystine reduces the amount of methionine required plemented diets. These results are similar to those reported in
..............................................................................................