Comparative analysis of feed conversion ratio in Indian major carps: Traditional vs formulated feeding regimens (original) (raw)

Abstract

This study presents a comparative analysis of the Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) in Indian major carps, specifically Rohu (Labeo rohita) and Catla (Catla catla), under traditional and formulated feeding regimens. Conducted in the West Godavari district of Andhra Pradesh, India, the research involved nine ponds, each spanning 10 acres. Before stocking, optimal pond preparation techniques were utilized, including the application of quick lime, cattle dung, poultry manure, urea, and superphosphate. Fingerlings were introduced at densities of 2500 Rohu (200 grams) and 250 Catla (300 grams) per acre. The study employed various feeding regimes: De-oiled Rice Bran (DORB), Groundnut Oil Cake (GNOC), Cottonseed Cake (CSC), commercial sinking feed, and commercial floating feed, both containing 22% protein and 5% fat. The analysis focused on the FCR of traditional feeding methods compared to commercial feeding strategies. Key metrics evaluated included the average cost of fish production per kilogram and the total protein requirement for producing one kilogram of fish. Results indicated significant variations in FCR and cost-efficiency between traditional and commercial feeding regimens, providing valuable insights for optimizing feeding practices in aquaculture to enhance production efficiency and profitability.

Figures (8)

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (15)

  1. Salmo gairdneri). World Rev Nutr Diet. 1990;61:132- 172.
  2. Das PC, Ayyappan S, Jena JK, Das BK. Aquaculture feed and feeding strategies in India. J Appl Aquac. 2014;26(1):1-20.
  3. De Silva SS, Hasan MR. Feeds and fertilizers: the key to the long-term sustainability of Asian aquaculture. FAO Fish Tech Pap. 2007;497:19-47.
  4. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2020: Sustainability in Action. Rome: FAO; c2020.
  5. National Research Council (NRC). Nutrient requirements of fish and shrimp. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; c2011.
  6. Jhingran VG. Fish and fisheries of India. New Delhi: Hindustan Publishing Corporation; c1991.
  7. Nandeesha MC, De Silva SS, Davy FB. Use of wild fish and other aquatic organisms as feed in aquaculture: A review of practices and implications in Asia. Rome: FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department; c2002.
  8. De Silva SS, Anderson TA. Fish nutrition in aquaculture. London: Springer; c1995.
  9. Ali MZ, Hossain MA, Rahman MH. Comparative study of formulated and traditional feeds on growth and production of carp polyculture. Aquac Res. 2016;47(4):1016-1026.
  10. Kumar P, Sahu NP, Pal AK, Choudhury D. Comparative evaluation of traditional and formulated feed on growth, feed conversion ratio, and protein efficiency ratio of Labeo rohita. Aquac Nutr. 2014;20(3):275-281.
  11. Das PC, Mishra BK, Sahu S. Economic evaluation of formulated versus traditional feed in carp culture. Indian J Fish. 2018;65(3):44-50.
  12. Singh RK, Sharma J, Kumar A. Impact of different feeding regimens on growth performance and water quality in Indian major carp culture. Aquac Int. 2020;28(2):899-910.
  13. Manam VK. Fish feed nutrition and its management in aquaculture. Int J Fish Aquat Stud. 2023;11(2):58-61.
  14. Manam VK, Quraishi MA. Comprehensive review on Indian major carps: An integrated approach to pond cultivation, nutrition, and health management for sustainable aquaculture. Int J Fish Aquat Stud. 2024;12(1):1-12.
  15. Manam VK. Management of feed nutrition in aquaculture. Aquac Guide Mag. 2023;25(2):61-66.