Can nutritional programming in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) be optimised with a reduced stimulus period?
Can nutritional programming in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) be optimised with a reduced stimulus period?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.aquaculture.2024.740686
复制
发表时间：
2024-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Betancor，Monica B.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mcmillan，Stuart;Martin，Samuel A. M.;Betancor，Monica B.
需要新的策略来增强大西洋鲑鱼（萨尔莫salar）饮食中植物性成分的有效同化和生物转化，特别是与必需的长链多不饱和脂肪酸（LC-PUFA）、二十碳五烯酸（EPA; 20：5 n-3）和二十二碳六烯酸（DHA; 22：6 n-3）相关的植物性成分。我们的研究调查了营养计划，并特别评估了饮食“刺激”的最佳持续时间，以及与之前使用三周“刺激”的研究相比，它是否可以减少。从第一次外源性喂食开始，鱼被喂食实验性的“刺激”植物性饮食（VS，5%海洋膳食[MM]/0%鱼油[FO]）或标准海洋性对照（MS，82%MM/4%FO）一周（V1）或两周（V2和M）。然后，所有组都喂食标准的基于海洋的制剂，用于“中间”生长阶段至第一次喂食后16周结束，然后是六周的“攻击”阶段，此时所有鱼都喂食基于蔬菜的饮食（VC，10%MM/0%FO）。与M相比，V1和V2组的鱼在“刺激”阶段结束时显着较小，但在试验结束时，总体生长、近似或脂肪酸组成没有统计学差异。然而，肝体和内脏指数显着降低V1相比，V2鱼和有一个整体的趋势，提高性能inV 1鱼在整个“中间”和“挑战”阶段。在“挑战”阶段，M鱼显示出比V1鱼更大的DHA净增益，而V2是在同一时期的alln-3 LC-PUFA的净消费者。与M相比，幽门盲囊中的n-3 LC-PUFA生物合成基因在两个实验组中均下调，表明考虑到组间DHA保留水平的差异，V1或V2中该途径可能存在转录后修饰。总之，结果表明，营养规划不是由一个或两个星期的“刺激”开始的。然而，需要更多的研究来阐明V1鱼增强性能背后的机制。
New strategies are required to enhance the efficient assimilation and bioconversion of plant-based ingredients in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) diets, especially relating to the essential long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC-PUFA), eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5n-3) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6n-3). Our study investigated nutritional programming and specifically evaluated the optimal duration of dietary ‘stimulus’ and whether it could be reduced compared to a previous study using a three- week ‘stimulus’. Fish were fed an experimental ‘stimulus’ vegetable-based diet (VS, 5% marine meals [MM]/0% fish oil [FO]) or a standard marine-based control (MS, 82% MM/4% FO) for either one (V1) or two weeks (V2 and M) from first exogenous feeding. All groups were then fed a standard marine based formulation, for an ‘intermediate’ grow-out phase to the end of 16 weeks post-first feeding, prior to a ‘challenge’ phase of six weeks when all fish were fed a vegetable-based diet (VC, 10% MM/0% FO). Compared to M, fish from both V1 and V2 groups were significantly smaller at the end of the ‘stimulus’ phase, but there were no statistical differences in overall growth, proximate or fatty acid compositions at the end of the trial. However, hepatosomatic and viscerosomatic indices were significantly lower in V1 compared to V2 fishand there was an overall trend of improved performance inV1 fish throughout the ‘intermediate’ and ‘challenge’ phases. During the ‘challenge’ phase, M fish displayed a greater net gain of DHA than V1 fish, whilst V2 was a net consumer of alln-3 LC-PUFA over the same period. Compared to M,n-3 LC-PUFA biosynthesis genes in pyloric caeca were downregulated in both experimental groups indicating possible post-transcriptional modification of this pathway in either V1 or V2, considering the differences in DHA retention levels between groups. Taken together, the results suggested that nutritional programming was not initiated by a one- or two- week ‘stimulus’. However, more studies are required to elucidate the mechanism behind enhanced performance of V1 fish.