Alimentação de larvas de jundiá (Rhamdia quelen), com dietas artificiais
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X26768Keywords:
Liver, nutrition, soybean meal, yeast.Abstract
The study had the purpose of evaluating the effects of different protean sources in the performance of Rhamdia quelen larvae during 21 days. Five treatments and three repetition were utilized. The experimental foods utilized were: T1 (fish meal, hard boiled yolk eggs); T2 (yeast, crud bovine liver); T3 (soybean's meal, bovine liver); T4 (corn's meal, soybean meal and rice); T5 (fish meal and meat, soybean and rice). Groups of 200 larvae were maintained in controlled conditions of culture, utilizing a water reuse system, termoregulated. The food was offered every 2 hours. The T2 and T4 treatments showed higher rates of survival than T1, T3, and T5. No difference was found between T2 and T4, but both were different from T1, T3, and T5. T1 showed higher length mean in 21 days than T2, but T2 had better performance than T3, T4 and T5. No difference was found among T3, T4, and T5. The treatment with yeast and liver was more efficient in the inicial performance of the larvae and it showed to be a good alternative to be utilized in future studies.Downloads
References
ALAMI-DURANTE, H., CHARLON, N., BERGOT, P. Supplementation of artificial diets for common carp (Cyprinus carpio) larvae. Aquaculture, p. 167-175, 1991.
ANDRIGUETTO, J.N. Nutrição animal. 2a ed. São Paulo: Nobel, 1983. v. 1,395 p.
BERGOT, P. Elevage larvaire de Ia carpe commune (Cyprinus carpio L.): alimentation artificielle. Aquaculture of Cyprinides, INRA, Paris, p. 227 -233, 1986.
CASTAGNOLLI, N. Fundamentos da nutrição de peixes. Piracicaba: Livroceres, 1979. 107 p.
CHARLON, N., BERGOT, P. Rearing system for feeding fish larvae on dry diets. Trial with carp (Cyprinus carpio, L.) larvae. Aquaculture, n. 41, p. 1-9, 1984.
ESCAFFRE, A.M., KAUSHIK, S.J. Survival and growth of first-fee-ding Coomon carp larvae fed artificial diets containing soybean protein concentrate. Aquaculture, n. 129, p. 251-259, 1995.
HEPHER, B. Nutrition 01 pond 1ishs. Inglaterra: Cambridge Univ Press, 1990.388 p.
KAUSHIK, S.J. Major constraints and recent advances in the field of nutrition and feeding of fish larvae. 1988. Sept 19-23. Seminar on "Aquacultura Marina". 14 p.
KAUSHIK, S.J., GRAVEDI, J.P., LALLES, J.P. Partial or total replacement of fish meal by soybean protein on growth, protein utilization, potential estrogenic or antigenic effects, cholesterolemia and flesh quality in rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss. Aquaculture, n. 133, p. 257-274,1995.
LUCHINI, L., SALAS, T. Preliminary data on larval survival of south American catfish, Rhamdia sapo. Aquaculture, n. 42, p. 175-177, 1984.
PEZZATO, L.E. Alimentos convencionais e não convencionais dispo-níveis para a indústria de nutrição de peixes no Brasil. In: SIMPÓSIO INTERNACIONAL SOBRE NUTRIÇÃO DE PEIXES E CRUSTÁCEOS, 1995, Campos do Jordão. Anais... CBNA, Campos do Jordão, 1995, 126 p. p. 32-52.
RADÜNZ NETO, J. Desenvolvimento de técnicas de reprodução e manejo de larvas e alevinos de jundiá - Rhamdia quelen. Dissertação (Mestrado em lootecnia) Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (1981). 77 p. Santa Maria - RS.
SANTOS, A.B., CHWA, E.Q., THOMPSON, D.M. Produção e criação de alevinos de Rhamdia sapo Valenciennes. In: VI SIMPÓSIO LATINOAMERICANO E V SIMPÓSIO DE AQÜICULTURA, 1988, Florianópolis, SC. Anais ... Florianópolis, 1988, p. 615-620.
VARELA, Z., FABIANO, G., FISCHER, K. Cria de larvas de bagre negro (Rhamdia sapo, Valenciennes) en el laboratorio. Resumenes. Associación Ciencias Naturales, INSN, Montivedeo. Uruguai, n. 3, p. 117-118,1983.
WOYNAROVICH, Tambaqui e pirapitinga propagação artificial e criação de alevinos, CODEVASF, 1986,67 p. Brasília.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
