HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Azevedo, P. A. Articles by Bureau, D. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Azevedo, P. A. Articles by Bureau, D. P.

Comparing efficiency of metabolizable energy utilization by rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using factorial and multivariate approaches

P. A. Azevedo^*, J. van Milgen, S. Leeson^* and D. P. Bureau^*,1

^* Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1, Canada; and and Unité Mixte de Recherches sur le Veau et le Porc, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, 35590 St. Gilles, France

¹ Correspondence—phone: 519-924-4120, ext. 53668; fax: 519-767-0573; e-mail: dbureau{at}uoguelph.ca).

A study was conducted to compare utilization of ME for growth vs. maintenance in rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon. Fish were hand-fed to satiation one of four isoenergetic diets (DE = 20 MJ/kg, as-fed basis) with different digestible protein (DP) to DE ratios (24, 22, 20, and 18 g/MJ). Intake of ME (kJ/d), energy deposited as protein (PD, kJ/d), and energy deposited as lipid (LD, kJ/d) were determined by a comparative slaughter technique. Data were analyzed by a factorial approach or by multivariate analysis of PD and LD on ME. Maintenance energy requirements (ME_m) and efficiency of ME utilization for PD (k_p) and LD (k_f) were estimated with both approaches. For the multivariate analysis, an additional parameter, the fraction of ME intake above maintenance used for PD (X) was defined as linear function of BW, with slope (d) and intercept (c) estimated simultaneously with the above parameters. Estimates were highly dependent on the approach and assumptions used. The ME_m and k_p values were higher and less accurate with the factorial approach than with multivariate analysis. The factorial approach estimated unrealistic k_f values (k_f > 1). With the multivariate analysis, ME_m did not differ between species (20 kJ•d^–1•kg^–0.8). On the other hand, k_p was significantly higher (e.g., 0.52 ± 0.06 vs. 0.43 ± 0.06; P < 0.05) for salmon than for trout and independent of diet, but k_f was 0.81 (±0.13) regardless of species or diet. The ME intake above ME_m used for PD (c) was higher in salmon than trout (57 vs. 55%; P < 0.05). The change in partitioning of ME for PD due to the change in BW was negative for trout (d = –0.18), but positive for salmon (d = 0.16). The d values agreed well with the increase of LD:PD ratio with BW for trout and the decrease of LD:PD with BW for salmon, which may have been related to the maturation status of this fish and the associated loss of body lipid observed by maturing salmon. In conclusion, ME_m and cost of LD were similar for rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon, but the cost of PD was lower for salmon than for trout.

Key Words: Energy Efficiency • Energy Requirements • Oncorhynchus mykiss • Salmo salar

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Esposito, L. Fabrizi, D. Lucchetti, L. Marvasi, E. Coni, and E. Guandalini Orally Administered Erythromycin in Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Residues in Edible Tissues and Withdrawal Time Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., March 1, 2007; 51(3): 1043 - 1047. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]