中国科学院水生生物研究所机构知识库
Advanced  
IHB OpenIR  > 中科院水生所知识产出(2009年前)  > 学位论文
题名: 两种鲟鱼补偿生长和投喂策略的研究
作者: 黄莹
答辩日期: 2009-01-17
导师: 朱晓鸣
授予单位: 中国科学院水生生物研究所
授予地点: 水生生物研究所
学位: 硕士
关键词: 鲟鱼 ; 补偿生长 ; 投喂策略 ; 饥饿 ; 投喂水平波动 ; 饲料蛋白水平波动 ; 氮排放 ; 经济效益
其他题名: Study on the Compensatory Growth for Two Kinds of Sturgeon
摘要: 本文通过四个实验研究了在饥饿后恢复摄食、不同饲料水平和不同蛋白水平交替投喂对两种鲟鱼(西伯利亚鲟Acipenser baeri;杂交鲟Acipenser ruthenus ♂ × A. baeri ♀)生长、饲料利用和免疫力的影响,了解鲟鱼实现补偿生长的生理生态学机制,从而找出适合鲟鱼的养殖模式和投喂策略,以降低饲料成本和废物排放。实验一、二分别探讨了在不同温度下饥饿后恢复投喂对西伯利亚鲟的生长和品质的影响。实验三分别以2d、5d、10d为交替周期,采用饥饿或2%BW投喂水平和饱食交替投喂,探讨不同的投喂策略对杂交鲟生长和品质的影响。实验四分别以2d、5d、10d为交替周期,采用低蛋白饲料和适宜蛋白饲料交替投喂,探讨不同的投喂策略对杂交鲟生长和品质的影响。 主要研究结果如下: 1) 实验一结果表明,高温条件下(29±1℃),在饥饿结束时各饥饿组西伯利亚鲟体重均显著低于对照组(C组)(P < 0.05),而在恢复摄食3周后,饥饿6d组(S6组)和饥饿12d组(S12组)体重均能赶上对照组(C组)(P﹥0.05),而饥饿18d组(S18组)体重仍显著低于对照(P < 0.05)。在恢复摄食1周后,饥饿6d组(S6组)特定生长率和摄食率均显著高于对照组(P < 0.05),饥饿12d组(S12组)饲料效率显著高于对照(P < 0.05)。饥饿6d的西伯利亚鲟通过提高摄食率实现补偿生长,而饥饿12d的西伯利亚鲟是通过提高饲料效率来实现补偿生长。 2) 各饥饿组鱼体蛋白质含量(占湿重)和干物质含量在整个实验过程中与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。在饥饿过程中,脂肪含量和肝脏肝糖原含量下降的同时,各饥饿组的灰分含量上升,但仅S18组与对照差异显著(P < 0.05),其它各组与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。在饥饿结束时,S6和S12鱼体能量和脂瘦肉比均低于对照但无显著差异(P﹥0.05),S18组显著低于对照组(P < 0.05)。在恢复摄食1周后,饥饿组脂肪、肌糖原含量、肝糖原含量、灰分能量以及脂瘦肉比等均恢复到正常水平(P﹥0.05)。 3) 实验二结果表明,在适宜温度下(18±2℃),饥饿结束时各饥饿组体重均 显著低于对照组(P < 0.05),而在恢复摄食3周后,饥饿6d组(S6组)和饥 饿12d组(S12组)体重均能赶上对照组(C组)(P ﹥0.05),饥饿18d组(S18组)体重显著低于对照(P < 0.05)。在恢复摄食1周后,各饥饿组特定生长率均显著高于对照组(P < 0.05),各饥饿组间的特定生长率也存在显著差异(P < 0.05), 以饥饿18天组最高。S6组和S12组摄食率在恢复摄食第1周时均显著低于对照组(P < 0.05),从第2周开始均与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。S18组摄食率在恢复摄食1周时与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05),在恢复摄食的第2周显著高于对照(P < 0.05),在恢复摄食3周后恢复到正常水平(P﹥0.05)。各饥饿组饲料效率在恢复摄食1周时均显著高于对照组(P < 0.05),而后恢复到正常水平(P﹥0.05),说明在适宜温度下饥饿6d和饥饿12d的西伯利亚鲟幼鱼是通过提高饲料效率来实现补偿生长的,饥饿18d西伯利亚鲟实现补偿生长是饲料效率提高和食欲增强这两个因素共同作用的结果。 4) 各饥饿组在饥饿结束时,鱼体空壳除蛋白、干物质无显著变化外(P﹥0.05) 脂肪、能量、肝糖原、溶菌酶等指标都低于对照,而恢复摄食后可以恢复到正常水平(P﹥0.05)。在饥饿结束和恢复摄食一周后,各饥饿组肌肉弹性、硬度、黏聚性、咀嚼性等物理性状与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。 5) 实验三结果表明,在实验结束时,R2组(2d限食2%BW饲料+2d饱食 交替组)和R5组(5d限食2%BW饲料+5d饱食 交替组)杂交鲟体重与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05),其它各组的终末体重均显著低于对照组(P < 0.05)。在第1阶段(0-20d),各饥饿交替组和限食交替组其特定生长率显著低于对照(P <0.05),到第3阶段(40-60d),R5(5d限食2%BW饲料+5d饱食 交替组)和R10组(10d限食2%BW饲料+10d饱食 交替组)特定生长率均显著高于对照(P < 0.05)。在整个实验过程中,各限食交替组总特定生长率与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05),各饥饿交替组特定生长率显著低于对照组(P < 0.05);R5组(5d限食2%BW饲料+5d饱食 交替组)总饲料效率显著高于对照(P < 0.05),其它各限食交替组总饲料效率均高于对照但无显著差异(P﹥0.05);各交替组总摄食量均显著低于对照组(P < 0.05)。 6) 实验结束时,各饥饿交替组和限食交替组的杂交鲟鱼体蛋白、水分、灰分含量与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05);鱼体脂肪和能量含量除S5组(5d饥饿+5d饱食 交替组)显著低于对照外(P < 0.05),其它各组与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05);除R2组(2d限饲2%BW+2d饱食 交替组)外其它各组内脏脂肪含量均显著低于对照(P < 0.05),说明采用R5组(5d限食2%BW饲料+5d饱食 交替组)这种投喂在可以在不影响杂交鲟的生长在一定程度上减少鱼体内脏脂肪积累;各交替组杂交鲟血清SOD与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。 7) S5组(5d饥饿+5d饱食 交替组)氮贮积率显著低于对照组(P < 0.05),其它 各组与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05),采用“限食2%BW饲料+饱食”交替投喂策略可节约饲料成本、提高经济效益,且在生产每吨鱼时氮排放量均低于对照组,而采用饥饿交替策略的各组其饲料成本均高于对照而经济效益低于对照组。 8) 实验四结果表明,实验结束时L5组(5d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+5d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)和L10组(10d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+10d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)杂交鲟体重与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05),L2组(2d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+2d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)体重显著低于对照(P < 0.05)。在第1阶段(0-20d),L5组(5d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+5d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)特定生长率显著低于对照组(P < 0.05),从第2阶段(20-40d)开始各交替组特定生长率与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。在整个实验过程组各交替组摄食率及饲料效率均与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。 9)实验结束时,各交替组杂交鲟鱼体蛋白、脂肪、能量、灰分、水分含量与对照组无显著差异(P﹥0.05);L2组(2d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+2d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)和L5组(5d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+5d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料 交替组)杂交鲟内脏脂肪含量显著低于对照组(P < 0.05);各交替组杂交鲟血清SOD与对照无显著差异(P﹥0.05)。 10)采用“5d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+5d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料”和“10d 投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+10d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料”这种交替投喂策略可以在不影响生长的情况下节约饲料成本,减少环境污染,特别是“5d投喂32.3%蛋白水平饲料+5d投喂42.9%蛋白水平饲料”这种投喂策略更可以减少内脏脂肪水平,提高鱼体品质。
英文摘要: In this study, four growth trails were conducted to investigate the effect of re-feeding following feed deprivation, cycled feeding of feed restriction and satiation, cycled feeding of low protein diet and optimal protein diet on fish growth, feed efficiency and immunological responses of two kinds of sturgeon (Siberian sturgeon, Acipenser baeri; Hybrid strugeon, Acipenser ruthenus ♂× A. baeri ♀). In experiment I and II, growth and body composition variation of Acipenser baeri received feed deprivation (S6: 6 days: S12: 12 days; S18: 18 days) and refeeding were investigated at high temperature (29ºC) and at optimal temperature (18 ºC). In experiment III, the effect of repeated cycles of feed restriction and satiation (2, 5 or 10 days 2% BW/d feeding + 2, 5 or 10 days satiation) on growth and body composition of hybrid sturgeon. In experiment IV, 60-day growth trail was conducted to test the effect of repeated cycles of low protein diet and optimal protein diet (2, 5 or 10 days low protein diet + 2, 5 or 10 days optimal protein diet) on growth and body composition of hybrid sturgeon.. The results are shown as follows: 1) Experiment I showed that no significant difference was found in final body weight between S6, S12 and the control group (continues feeding) (P﹥0.05), indicating complete compensation was obtained in the starved fish. The fish in S6 and S12 groups could catch up in final body weight with that of the control within 1 week of refeeding while the fish in S18 group could not (P<0.05). In the first week of re-feeding, specific growth rate and feeing rate in S6 group was significantly higher than that in the control group (P<0.05) while feed efficiency in S12 group was significantly higher than the control (P<0.05). The results suggested that the fish starved for 6 days achieved compensatory growth through increased feeding rate while the fish starved for 12 days achieved compensatory growth by improving feed efficiency. 2) There were no significantly difference in protein and lipid content in wet weight of fish body between starved groups and the control at different sampling time of the experiment (P﹥0.05). At the end of the experiment, fish body lipid and hepatic glycogen content in S18 group was significantly lower while ash content in S18 group higher than the control (P < 0.05). After one week of refeeding, fish body contents of lipid, energy, glycogen and lipid to lean body mass ratio were similar to the control group (P﹥0.05). 3) ExperimentⅡshowed that there was no significant difference in final body weight between the fish in C, S6, S12 groups (P﹥0.05), indicating complete compensation in the starved fish. The S6 and S12 groups caught up in body weight with that of the control within 1 week of refeeding while fish body weight in S18 group was still lower (P<0.05). During the first week of re-feeding, specific growth rates of deprived groups were significantly higher than that of the control group (P <0.05). Feeding rate in S6 and S12 group were significantly lower than control group (P < 0.05), but there were no significant difference in feeding rates between S6, S12 and the control group after two weeks of re-feeding (P﹥0.05). Feeding rate in S18 group was significantly higher than the control group (P<0.05) during the second week of refeeding. Feed efficiency in all deprived groups were significant higher than that in the control group (P < 0.05) during the first week of refeeding and then similar to that in the control group during the following weeks. These results indicated that the fish starved for 6 or 12 days obtained compensatory growth through improving feed efficiency while the fish starved for 18 days obtained compensatory growth through increased feeding rate and feed efficiency. 4) At the end of the experiment, fish body content of protein, lipid, energy, hepatic glycogen and serum lysozyme activity were similar to that of the control fish after 1 week of re-feeding (P﹥0.05). Springness, hardness, cohesiveness and chewiness of fish muscle showed no significant difference between deprived groups and the control after starvation or re-feeding (P﹥0.05). 5) Experiment III showed that the fish in R2 group (received cycled 2 days feed restriction and 2 days satiation) and R5 group (received cycled 5 days feed restriction and 5 days satiation) could obtain similar body weight to the control fish (P﹥0.05) while fish body weight in R10 group (received cycled 10 days feed restriction and 10 days satiation) and starvation groups (S2: 2 days starvation+ 2 days satiation; S5: 5 days starvation+ 5 days satiation; S10: 10 days starvation+ 10 days satiation) was still lower than that of the control fish (P<0.05). SGR in R5 and R10 groups was significantly higher than the control group during the third cycle (P < 0.05). During the whole experiment, there was no significant difference in SGR between restricted groups and the control group (P>0.05) while SGR in starved groups was significant lower than the control group (P<0.05). Total feed efficiency in R5 group was significantly higher than the control (P < 0.05) while no significant difference was obtained between other groups (P>0.05). Feed intake in restricted and starved groups was significantly lower than control group (P < 0.05) . 6) At the end of the experiment, fish body content of protein, water and ash showed no significant difference between groups (P﹥0.05). Fish lipid and energy content in S5 group was significantly lower than control (P < 0.05) while no significant difference was found between other groups (P>0.05). Ash content of the fish in S10 group was the highest and that in R5 group was the lowest while there was no significantly difference between other groups (P﹥0.05). Visceral lipid content in starved and feed restricted groups except R2 were significantly higher than the control (P < 0.05). There was no significantly difference in serum SOD activivties between groups (P﹥0.05). 7) Protein retention efficiency(PRE)in S5 group was significantly lower than the control (P<0.05) while there was no significant difference in PRE between other groups and the control (P﹥0.05). Cycled feed restricting could reduce feed cost and improve economy efficiency and nitrogen loading, but cycled starvation regime could not. 8) Experiment IV showed that hybrid sturgeon in L5 group (cycled 5 days 32.3% crude protein diet+5 days 42.9% crude protein diet) and L10 group (cycled 10 days 32.3% crude protein diet + 10 days 42.9% crude protein diet) could obtain similar final body weight to the control (P﹥0.05) while those in L2 group (cycled 2 days 32.3% crude protein diet+2 days 42.9% crude protein diet) showed significant lower final body weight than the control (P < 0.05). SGR during the first period (0-20d) in L5 group was significantly lower than the control (P < 0.05) and there was no significant difference from the second period(20-40d) (P﹥0.05). There was no significant difference in feeding rate or feed efficiency was observed during the whole experiment (P﹥0.05). 9) At the end of the experiment, fish body protein, fat, energy, ash or water showed no significant difference compared to the control (P﹥0.05). Visceral fat in the fish in L2 and L5 group were significantly lower than that of the control fish (P < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in serum SOD activities between the fish in different groups (P﹥0.05) . 10) The feeding regime of 5 or 10 days cycled low protein diet and optimal protein diet could reduce feed cost and nitrogen loading without affecting growth. 5 days cycled low protein diet and optimal protein diet could also reduce visceral fat content.
语种: 中文
内容类型: 学位论文
URI标识: http://ir.ihb.ac.cn/handle/342005/12324
Appears in Collections:中科院水生所知识产出(2009年前)_学位论文

Files in This Item:
File Name/ File Size Content Type Version Access License
10001_200528011915020黄莹_paper.pdf(898KB)----暂不开放-- 联系获取全文

Recommended Citation:
两种鲟鱼补偿生长和投喂策略的研究.黄莹[d].中国科学院水生生物研究所,2009.20-25
Service
Recommend this item
Sava as my favorate item
Show this item's statistics
Export Endnote File
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[黄莹]'s Articles
CSDL cross search
Similar articles in CSDL Cross Search
[黄莹]‘s Articles
Related Copyright Policies
Null
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 
评注功能仅针对注册用户开放,请您登录
您对该条目有什么异议,请填写以下表单,管理员会尽快联系您。
内 容:
Email:  *
单位:
验证码:   刷新
您在IR的使用过程中有什么好的想法或者建议可以反馈给我们。
标 题:
 *
内 容:
Email:  *
验证码:   刷新

Items in IR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

 

 

Valid XHTML 1.0!
Copyright © 2007-2016  中国科学院水生生物研究所 - Feedback
Powered by CSpace