IMIS | Flanders Marine Institute

Flanders Marine Institute

Platform for marine research


Publications | Institutes | Persons | Datasets | Projects | Maps
[ report an error in this record ]basket (0): add | show Printer-friendly version

Vegetable oil blend as alternative lipid resources in diets for gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata
Wassef, E.A.; Saleh, N.E.; El-Abd El-Hady, H.A. (2009). Vegetable oil blend as alternative lipid resources in diets for gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata. Aquacult. Int. 17(5): 421-435.
In: Aquaculture International. Springer: London. ISSN 0967-6120, more
Peer reviewed article  

Available in  Authors 

    Fatty acids; Feed composition; Food intake; Growth rate; Stocking density; Vegetable oils; Weight; Sparus aurata Linnaeus, 1758 [WoRMS]; Marine
Author keywords
    Fatty acids profile; Gilthead seabream; Growth performance; Sparusaurata; Vegetable oils blend

Authors  Top 
  • Wassef, E.A.
  • Saleh, N.E.
  • El-Abd El-Hady, H.A.

    The recent decreasing worldwide supplies of marine oils have forced the aquaculture industry to investigate alternative lipid sources for use in marine fish feeds. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of dietary replacement of fish oil by vegetable oils on gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) growth performance, nutritive utilization, body composition, and fatty acid profile as well as feed cost. Two dietary vegetable oil (VO) mix blends (VO1 and VO2) in which: sunflower (SO), cottonseed (CO) and linseed (LO) for VO1 or soybean oil (SBO) for VO2, were tested as 60% fish oil (FO) substitutes versus the 100% FO control or reference diet (FO). Three iso-proteic (46% CP) and iso-lipidic (18%) experimental diets were hand fed, twice a day, 6 days a week to apparent visual satiety to triplicate groups of seabream growers (average initial weight, 130.9 ± 3.44 g), until fish reached market size (300–400 g/fish) after 20 weeks at mean ambient temperature 27.0 ± 1.8°C. All experimental diets were well accepted by seabream growers regardless of the different lipid sources used, as overall mean feed intake (FI) and daily intake (DFI) were not significantly different (P > 0.05) among dietary treatments. In terms of growth performance, fish fed VO1 diet (with LO) exhibited a relatively lower, but significant (P < 0.05), total weight gain (WG) than fish fed all FO diet (FO). However, mean value of WG of fish fed either vegetable oil-tested diet was nonsignificantly different. Feeding seabream growers vegetable oil (VO) diets (VO1 or VO2) had no significant effect on specific growth rate (SGR), daily weight index (DWI), or feed conversion ratio (FCR) among dietary treatments. Consumption of VO for 20 weeks did not significantly alter the major nutrient composition of fish, but the muscle fatty acid (FA) profile was significantly altered compared to the reference FO diet. Comparatively reduced levels of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acids (DHA), as well as elevated levels of linoleic and linolenic acids (LA and LNA) compared with fish fed the FO were noticed. In terms of economics, 17 or 20% reduction in Kg feed cost was obtained for diets VO1 or VO2, respectively. In terms of growth performance and cost, VO2 diet showed slight relative superiority over VO1 diet. However, in terms of liver structure morphology, VO1 diet (with LO) has resulted in less fat-infiltration and altered hepatic cells than VO2 (with SBO). As these traits do not affect yield or the price paid for the fish, VO2 diet has therefore been considered better than VO1 as complementary lipid sources for gilthead seabream grower diets.

All data in IMIS is subject to the VLIZ privacy policy Top | Authors