Insights into the Potential of Pre-Processing of Ingredients to Improve their Economical Value to Aquaculture Species

Autores/as

  • Dominique P Bureau University of Guelph
  • Yuhong Yang
  • Chunfang Cai
  • Guillaume Pfeuti

Palabras clave:

Processing, ingredient, protein, phosphorus, fish

Resumen

Processed animal protein ingredients are valuable ingredients for aquaculture feed formulations. However, the variability of the chemical composition of different batches of these ingredients and the relatively low digestibility of some of the nutrients (i.e. amino acids, phosphorus) occasionally represent significant limitations for these ingredients at high levels in the diet of some species. Research efforts carried out at the University of Guelph explored the potential of simple and potentially costeffective processing techniques to improve the digestibility and nutritive value of these ingredients. Processing aimed at improving digestibility of phosphorus showed that incubation with different organic acids and a chelating agent and fine grinding significantly improved in vitro bio-availability of bone phosphorus of high ash poultry by-products meal. However, this processing offered no advantage in terms of in vivo digestibility of phosphorus to rainbow trout, a species with an acid stomach. The technique may be useful for species lacking an acid stomach (e.g. carps, shrimp) but this hypothesis has not been verified. In another series of research efforts, incubation of feather meals with protease and a reducing agent, aiming to disrupt residual disulphide bonds and cross-linkage of keratin, significantly improved in vivo digestibility of protein and amino acids and bio-availability of arginine of this ingredient to rainbow trout. The results illustrate the potential of simple processing techniques, based on sound chemical principles, to improve the bio-availability of nutrients of processed animal protein ingredients. However, careful animal assays need to be carried out to confirm the usefulness of these techniques in different species.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

AOAC, Official Methods of Analysis, 1995. Official Methods of Analysis, sixteenth edition. Association of

Official Analytical Chemists, 1, pp. 16-17.

Bockle, B., and Muller, R. 1997. Reduction of disulfide bonds by Streptomyces pactum during growth on

chicken feathers. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 63: 790–792.

Bureau, D., Harris, A., and Cho, C. 1999. Apparent digestibility of rendered animal protein ingredients for

rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquaculture 180: 345–358.

CCAC, 1984. Canadian Council on Animal Care. Guide to the Care and Use of Experimental Animals, Ottawa,

Ontario, Canada.

Davies, S.J., Gouveia, A., Laporte, J., Woodgate, S.L., and Nates, S. 2009. Nutrient digestibility profile of

premium (category III grade) animal protein by-products for temperate marine fish species (European

sea bass, gilthead sea bream and turbot). Aquaculture Research 40: 1759–1769.

Eslahi, N., Dadashian, F., and Nejad, N.H. 2013. An investigation on keratin extraction from wool and feather

waste by enzymatic hydrolysis. Preparative Biochemistry and Biotechnology 43: 624–648.

Fraser, R., MacRae, T., and Rogers, G.E. 1972. Keratins: their composition, structure, and biosynthesis. The

Quarterly Review of Biology 48: 378-379

Hua, K. and D.P. Bureau. 2010. Quantification of differences in digestibility of phosphorus among cyprinids,

cichlids, and salmonids through a mathematical modelling approach. Aquaculture, 308: 152-158.

Hua, K. and D.P. Bureau. 2006. Modelling digestible phosphorus content of salmonid fish feeds. Aquaculture

: 455-465.

Huda, S., and Yang, Y. 2009. Feather fiber reinforced light-weight composites with good acoustic properties.

Journal of Polymers and the Environment 17: 131–142.

Laporte, J. 2007. Nutritional evaluation of animal by-products for the partial replacement of fishmeal in diets

for gilthead sea bream (Sparus aurata L.). University of Plymouth.

Latshaw, J. 1990. Quality of feather meal as affected by feather processing conditions. Poultry Science 69: 953–

Latshaw, J.D., Musharaf, N., and Retrum, R. 1994. Processing of feather meal to maximize its nutritional value

for poultry. Animal Feed Science and Technology 47: 179–188.

Mangold, E., and Dubiski, J. 1930. Die Verdauung des Keratins, besonders der Hornsubstanz von Vogelfedern,

durch Säugetiere und Vӧgel. Wiss. Arch. Landw., Abt. B., Tierernähr. Tierzucht 4: 200–211.

Moran, E., Bayley, H., and Summers, J. 1967. Keratins as sources of protein for the growing chick 3. The

metabolizable energy and amino acid composition of raw and processed hog hair meal with emphasis

on cystine destruction with autoclaving. Poultry Science 46: 548–553.

Poole, A.J., Lyons, R.E., and Church, J.S. 2011. Dissolving feather keratin using sodium sulfide for bio-polymer

applications. Journal of Polymers and the Environment 19: 995–1004.

Ramnani, P., and Gupta, R. 2007. Keratinases vis-à-vis conventional proteases and feather degradation. World

Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 23: 1537–1540.

Ramnani, P., Singh, R., and Gupta, R. 2005. Keratinolytic potential of Bacillus licheniformis RG1: structural and biochemical mechanism of feather degradation. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 51: 191–196.

Serwata, R.D. 2007. Nutritional evaluation of rendered animal by products and blends as suitable partial alternatives for fishmeal in diets for rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). University of Stirling.

Sarker, M.S.A., Satoh, S., Kiron, V., 2005. Supplementation of citric acid and amino acid-chelated trace element to develop environment friendly feed for red sea bream, Pagrus major. Aquaculture 248, 3–11.

Sugiura, S.H., Dong, F.M., Rathbone, C.K., and Hardy, R.W. 1998. Apparent protein digestibility and mineral availabilities in various feed ingredients for salmonid feeds. Aquaculture 159: 177–202.

Vielma,J., Lall, S.P., 1997. Dietary formic acid enhances apparent digestibility of minerals in rainbow trout,

Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). Aquaculture Nutrition 3, 265–268.

Wang, X., and Parsons, C. 1997. Effect of processing systems on protein quality of feather meals and hog hair

meals. Poultry Science 76: 491–496.

Williams, C., Lee, C., Garlich, J., and Shih, J.C. 1991. Evaluation of a bacterial feather fermentation product,

feather-lysate, as a feed protein. Poultry Science 70: 85–94.

Wrzesniewska-Tosik, K., and Adamiec, J. 2007. Biocomposites with a content of keratin from chicken feathers.

Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe 15: 60.

Yamamura, S., Morita, Y., Hasan, Q., Yokoyama, K., and Tamiya, E. 2002. Keratin degradation: a cooperative

action of two enzymes from Stenotrophomonas sp. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 294: 1138–1143.

Descargas

Publicado

2017-11-30

Cómo citar

P Bureau, D., Yang, Y., Cai, C., & Pfeuti, G. (2017). Insights into the Potential of Pre-Processing of Ingredients to Improve their Economical Value to Aquaculture Species. Avances En Nutrición Acuicola. Recuperado a partir de https://nutricionacuicola.uanl.mx/index.php/acu/article/view/1

Artículos similares

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

También puede Iniciar una búsqueda de similitud avanzada para este artículo.