Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


5.0 FEEDING OF HATCHLINGS AND FRY

Lakshmanan, (1969) from India discussed the 'problems of feeding, hatchlings and fry: His findings are as follows: One of the important factors governing survival and growth of hatchlings and fry is the availability of proper food. In the majority of the fresh-water species (Schaeperclaus, (1933); Alikunhi (1952), (1958); Hora and Pillay (1962), the hatchlings of all cultivated carps commence feeding after they assume the horizontal swimming position. Initial feeding from environment commences even before the completion of yolk absorption at a stage when the mouth parts of the hatchlings are under-developed and the motile capabilities are limited. This compels the hatchlings to hunt for food items which are microscopic and relatively slow moving. The stage of yolk absorption and commencement of feeding from the environment is the most critical period for want of the proper type of food in sufficient quantities (Alikunhi, 1958).

As far as nursery pond treatments are concerned, green and organic manures appear more suitable for the production of food for hatchlings and fry. The higher economy of organic fertilization could be justified by the better returns in terms of high survival rates and healthy growth of fry. However, in relation to the problem of feeding hatchlings and fry of fish, the need is to evolve techniques for the sustained production of selected items of plankters under controlled conditions.

Growing of fry, exclusively on additional feed is extremely difficult though not impossible (Kuronuma 1968). According to Schaeperclaus, at least 50% of the food must be composed of natural feed ingredients. Hence in the practice of rearing hatchlings and fry in concrete tanks, cemented or brick-lined nursery ponds, feeding with zooplankters collected from other sources is a necessity in order to get satisfactory results in survival and growth. It is established that the growth under additional feeds is poorer than that under natural diet and that the growth with a mixture of natural feed and conventional feed is better than that of natural feed alone. According to Tal and Hepher (1967), a balanced diet formulated with due consideration of the natural feed in the ponds may bring good returns in carp yield.

Feeds of plant and animal origin are many. Some of the important and commonly used supplementary feed ingredients for hatchlings/fry are presented in Table 8.

Table 8: Supplementary feed ingredients

Feed of plant originFeed of animal origin
Oil cakes (many variecies)Dried milk
Soybean milkMeat scrap and flour
Wheat starch and flavourFish meal and flour
Dried lab-labDried raw blood
MaizeShrimp
BarleySplean and liver (beef)
LupineYolk of egg
OatsDried sardine meal
YeastSilk worm pupae

Source: Lakshmanan, 1969

Jeyachandran and Raj (1976) made experiments with additional feeds on Cyprinus carpio fingerlings. Results of the feeding experiments, growth measurement, proximate composition of different feeds used and protein and fat content of fish fed with different feeds at the end of the experiment (dry basis) are given in Tables 9–12.

Table 9 : Experimental results of the feeding experiments

FeedsSilkworm pupaeSilkworm littreMaize cobPelletConventional feed
Size of pool (ha)           0.0002           0.0002           0.0002           0.0002           0.0002
Duration of experiment (days)8878908890
Actual number of fingerlings stocked  5  5  5  5  5
No. of fingerlings stocked (in thousands/ha)2525252525
Average initial weight (g)   11.6    21.6  8   13.2     7.6
Total weight stocked (kg/ha)290   540   200  330   190  
Actual number of fingerlings harvested  5  5  4  5  4
No. of fingerlings harvested (in thousands/ha)2525202520
Individual weight at harvest (g)   25.4   17.0  817     9.2
Daily increment in individual growth (g)       0.16         0.059    nil         0.043         0.017
Total weight harvested (g)127.0  85.0  32.0   85.0   36.8
Total weight harvested (kg/ha)635    490   160   425   184  
Daily increment (kg/ha)    3.9     -0.64       1.44      1.08       0.35
Amount of food consumed (g)364.3241.8153   274.5154.8
Amount of food consumed (kg/day/ha)  20.7  15.5     8.5  15.6    8.6
Food conversion rate    5.3  1423

Table 10 : Growth measurement

ParticularsPupaeLittreMaize cobPelletConventional feed
Weight
(g)
Inct.
(g)
Av. length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Inct.
(g)
Av. length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Inct.
(g)
Av. length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Inct.
(g)
Av. length
(mm)
Weight
(g)
Inct.
(g)
Av. length
(mm)
Initial  58-   90107.8-11340   -8266   -9438   -99
After 1st week     64.48.4   95106.8-1.011340   -8168.32.39539.51.580
After 2nd week     75.38.9   97103.7-.3.111340   -8268.80.59640.00.581
After 3rd week     84.79.4   9999  -4.711339.4-0.68169.20.49641.61.681
After 4th week10015.3     103.103.31.311238.5-0.98173.24.09743.72.182
After 5th week   106.26.210499  -1.311336.9-1.68174.81.69844.50.882
After 6th week1125.810597  -2.011337   -0.18277.02.29945.00.584
After 7th week1153.010796  -1.011436   -1.08181.04.0101   46.81.884
After 8th week1194.010995  -1.011435.5-0.58283.52.5102   47.00.287
After 9th week1256.011198    3 011534   -1.58186.02.5103   47.0-85
After 10th week1261.0109      84.0-2.0  103   49.02.086
After 11th week1282.0110      87.03.0104      
After 12th week127-1.0111      85.0-2.0  105      

Table 11 : Proximate composition of different feeds used

FeedsMoisture
%
Protein
%
Fat
%
Crude fibre
%
Carbonate
%
Ash
%
Pupae4.6254.8624.85     2.22  7.49  5.96
Silkworm litter6.1511.460.6019.0038.6916.10
Maize cob7.00  3.060.7532.5055.45  3.24
Pellet1.3521.093.3012.6047.8613.80
Conventional feed9.9021.008.9025.0025.60  9.60

Source: Jeyachandran and Raj, 1976.

Table 12 : Protein and fat content of fish fed with different feeds at the end of the experiment (dry basis)

FeedsProtein
%
Fat
%
Pupae47.3846.4
Silkworm litter74.7311.0
Maize cob42.0010.4
Peelt62.1028.0
Concentional feed63.3510.5

Conclusions have been derived as under: The results of the chemical analysis for protein and fat of the fish fed with the different feeds are compared with protein and fat present in the different feeds. It is observed that there is a negative correlation between the protein in the feed and the protein in the fish (r=0.23), that is to say, when the protein in the feed increases, the protein in the fish decreases. A positive correlation was found between the fat content of the feed and the fat in the fish (r=0.76) indicating that as the fat in the feed increases, the fat in the fish also increases.

Comprehensive nutritional studies related to vitamin and miner. l requirements were reported by Ketola (1976) The requirements for various fish species are given in Table 13.

Table. 13 : Summary of minimum dietary requirements of fishes

Nutrients and fish(wt)1Requirement
(per kg dry diet)
Criteria
(other than growth)
Thiamin
Rainbow trout
(12)1–10 mg-
Riboflavin
Rainbow trout
(12)5–15 mg-
Carp
(3)5–10 mgVitamin storage
Carp
(2)4 mg-
Carp
(2)6.2 mgVitamin storage
Panthothenic acid
Rainbow trout
(12)10–20 mg-
Carp
(3)40–50 mg+ Vitamin storage2
Niacin
Rainbow trout
(12)1–5 mg-
Carp
(2)28 mg+Feed conversion 2
Carp
(2)223 mgSurvival
Pyridoxine
Rainbow trout
(12)5–15 mg-
Carp
(5)5 mg-
Sea bream
(8)2–5 mgBody fat, anemia
Sea bream
(8)5–6 mgEnzyme activity
Biotin
Rainbow trout
(12)0.05–0.25 mg-
Carp
(4)1 mg-
Folacin
Rainbow trout
(12)1–5 mg-
Choline
Rainbow trout
(12)50–100 mg-
Carp
(10)≤ 2000 mgPrevent fatty liver
Lake trout
(5)≤ 1000 mg-
Ascorbic acid
Rainbow trout
(0.3)100 mg-
Coho salmon
(0.4)50 mg-
Catfish
(15)253 mg-
Catfish
(2)50 mg-
Inositol
Rainbow trout
(12)250–500 mg-
Carp
(9)400 mg 
Sea bream
(52)500–900 mg+vitamin storage2
Vitamin A
Rainbow trout
(<1)2500–5000 IU-
Rainbow trout
(5)≤ 2500 IU-
Carp
(3)4000–20,000 IU+ Vitamin storage and revention of all symptoms2
Carp
(2)30003 IU-
Vitamin E
Chinoock salmon
(<1)5.5–333IU+Presention of anemia2
Iodine
Chinoock salmon
(0.5)0.6 mgIodine storage
Chinoock salmon
(9)1.1 mgIodine storage
Phosphorus
Catfish
(24)8 g(avail.P)-
Atlantic salmon
(7)6 g(inorganic)-

1 initial body weight in grams;
2 also growth;
3 estimated from date.,
Source: Ketola, 1976.


Previous Page Top of Page Next Page