A GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND METABOLIC RATES OF GENETICALLY IMPROVED AND CONVENTIONAL STRAINS OF NILE TILAPIA, OREOCHROMIS NILOTICUS (L.) Shmsuddin M. Mmun, U. Focken, G. Frncis nd K. Becker University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgrt, Germny September 2004
INTRODUCTION Tilpi is most promising protein source in ner future Afric! Philippines! GIFT Geneticlly Improved Frmed Tilpi
GIFT vs. CNT (Conventionl Nile Tilpi) Authors System Dys Strin Conclusion Circ et l. 1995 Rice-fish 90 GIFT, Is., Se. All similr Hussin et l. 2000 Pond 180 GIFT, CNT GIFT: 57% better Dey et l. 2000 - - GIFT, CNT GIFT: better 18% (Chin) 58% (Bngldesh) Nndll et l. 2001 Pond 120 GIFT, CNT GIFT: 25% better
Why is GIFT climed to perform better? Becuse of - Higher feed intke Better utiliztion of feed nutrients Better feed conversion efficiency More ggressive behvior Higher metbolic performnce
OBJECTIVES OF PRESENT STUDY Comprison of growth nd metbolism of GIFT nd CNT by determintion of -! Metbolic prmeters: " Stndrd metbolic rte (SMR) " Routine metbolic rte (RMR) " Active metbolic rte (AMR)! Growth prmeters: " Growth, growth rtes nd feed utiliztion efficiency " Energy budget nd energy utiliztion " Orgno-somtic indices! Behviorl prmeter: " Swimming ctivity of fish
HYPOTHESIS GIFT re climed to hve >50% better growth performnce thn CNT, therefore, there re differences in metbolic rtes (SMR, RMR) in growth potentil
MATERIALS AND METHODS Experimentl fish Tilpi strin Sex Obtined from / when GIFT-SR* GIFT-NSR* CNT-NSR HTM Mixed Mixed *Ninth genertion (HTM: Hormone treted mle) GenoMr ASA, Philippines December 2002 University of Göttingen October 2002
Fish feed Components nd chemicl composition Bsl composition of feed Ingredients % Fish mel 50 Proximte composition of feed Composition % Dry mtter (% FM) 95.1 Whet mel 42 Crude protein (% DM) 41.0 Sunflower oil 4 Crude lipid (% DM) 9.0 Vitmin premix 2 Ash (% DM) 12.7 Minerl premix 2 Gross energy (kj/g DM) 19.9 FM = fresh mtter, DM = dry mtter
Experimentl set up! Recirculting respirometer system " 15 respirometer chmbers " Volume: 11.3 l " Computer controlled " Continuous O 2 mesurement " Automtic feeding! Conditions " 5 fish of ech strin " Durtion: 17 weeks " Temperture: 27 ± 0.2 O C " Dissolved O 2 : 5.93 7.58 mg/l " ph: 7.32 7.62 " Light: 12 h light / 12 h drk
Mesurement of swimming ctivity 39 cm 17 cm " Trnsprent plstic sheet with grid lines (8.5 cm 9.75 cm) " Observed from bove for 15 min for ech fish " Twice dy t vrying hours " Twice week
Dissection detils Fish were dissected for mesuring the intestinl prmeters: Egg mss Gut mss Intestinl ft mss Liver mss Egg Intestinl ft Gut Liver
RESULTS: Body mss development Fresh body mss (g) 250 200 150 100 50 GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR 0 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 Weeks
Body mss, growth rte nd feed utiliztion efficiencies Prmeters GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR Initil body mss (g) 58.8 ± 13.5 52.6 ± 32.5 68.7 ± 16.3 Finl body mss (g) 215.7 ± 34.3 199.5 ± 66.9 216.5 ± 53.9 Metbolic growth rte (g kg 0.8 d 1 ) 10.2 ± 2.8 11.0 ± 3.0 9.9 ± 2.7 Feed conversion efficiency (g gin / g feed DM) 0.8 ± 0.3 0.7 ± 0.3 0.6 ± 0.3 (n = 5, DM = dry mtter)
Averge metbolic rtes (mg O 2 kg 0.8 h 1 ) Tilpi groups (n = 5) GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR SMR Initil Finl 49 ± 13 91 ± 31 48 ± 10 108 ± 36 55 ± 5 85 ± 31 RMR (Av. 15 weeks) 148 ± 16 147 ± 15 154 ± 12 (men ± stndrd devition)
Protein nd lipid utiliztion efficiency Prmeters GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR Protein efficiency rtio 2.0 ± 0.2 1.8 ± 0.6 1.6 ± 0.1 Productive protein vlue (%) 38.3 ± 1.7 33.1 ± 10.2 30.0 ± 2.5 Apprent lipid conversion (%) 99.2 ± 9.5 79.9 ± 34.6 68.6 ± 10.5 (n = 5)
Energy utiliztion Prmeters GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR Feed GEO (kj) 3879 ± 715 4082 ± 1307 4425 ± 1013 Totl energy expenditure* (kj) 1194 ± 169 1135 ± 361 1326 ± 245 Energy expenditure (% GEO) 31.1 ± 3.3 28.5 ± 1.1 30.2 ± 2.0 Energy retention (% GEO) 36.7 ±2.0 30.7 b ± 10.1 26.9 b ±3.2 Apprent not metbolized energy (% GEO) *Clculted from O 2 consumption GEO = Gross energy offered Significnt t p<0.05 32.3 b ±3.6 40.9 b ± 10.3 42.8 ±4.0
Initil nd finl proximte body composition Proximte composition Initil (n = 3) Finl (n = 5) Ingredients GIFT -SR GIFT -NSR CNT- NSR GIFT -SR GIFT -NSR CNT -NSR Dry mtter (DM, % of fresh mtter) 20.1 24.5 24.9 32.3 32.2 31.3 Crude protein (% DM) 63.9 62.2 65.6 54.8 55.1 57.1 Crude lipid (% DM) 16.9 19.3 13.4 27.8 26.0 b 23.6 b Ash (% DM) 16.7 b 16.0 b 18.9 14.5 b 15.4 b 16.2 Gross energy (kj/g DM) 21.7 21.9 20.6 24.6 24.0 b 23.4 b Significnt t p<0.05
Orgno-somtic indices nd intestinl ft content 3.0 GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR Vlues of indices (%) 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 b c 0.5 0.0 HSI ISI GSI IF Significnt t p<0.05
Intestinl ft mss (A) nd swimming ctivity (B) 70.0 IFM / TVM(%) 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 b 10.0 0.0 Grid crossings no./h 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 b b 0.0 GIFT-SR GIFT-NSR CNT-NSR *Intestinl ft mss (IFM) / Totl viscerl mss (TVM) Significnt t p<0.05
CONCLUSION # No significnt differences were observed in growth performnce nd metbolic efficiency between the three Nile tilpi groups under stndrdized lbortory conditions # No significnt differences were observed in FCE nd feed intke mong the three groups # No significnt differences were observed in SMR nd RMR mong the three groups # GIFT strins were less ctive nd retined more energy in the form of deposited ft # There is mjor conflict between the frm feeding trils nd lbortory experiments
Further studies Following behviorl studies my lso help to resolve the conflicts between frm nd lbortory experiment - " Competition for feed " Reproduction " Other behviors $ Territory protection $ Mle dominncy $ Sexul influence None of these hppen in our lbortory experiment!
Thnk you
A GROWTH PERFORMANCE AND METABOLIC RATES OF GENETICALLY IMPROVED AND CONVENTIONAL STRAINS OF NILE TILAPIA, OREOCHROMIS NILOTICUS (L.) Shmsuddin M. Mmun, U. Focken, G. Frncis nd K. Becker University of Hohenheim, 70599 Stuttgrt, Germny September 2004
Der Reders, Unprinted text: line 01, Pge 384 (NH 4 +), nitrte (NO 3 -) nd nitrte (NO 2 -) remined fvorble for fishing during the experiment