This investigation demonstrates the impact of dietary carbohydrate/lipid ratios on growth and health in Ussuri catfish, indicating optimal nutritional guidelines for aquaculture.
To investigate the effects of dietary carbohydrate/lipid (CHO: L) ratios on the growth performance, nonspecific immune responses, oxidative status, and disease resistance of Ussuri catfish (Pseudobagrus ussuriensis), and to determine the optimal dietary CHO: L ratio, we designed six isonitrogenous and isocaloric diets (with carbohydrate-lipid ratios ranging from 0.89 to 7.02) for an 8-week feeding trail on Pseudobagrus ussuriensis. The results showed that the WG and SGR first increased and then decreased, reaching the highest values when the CHO:L ratio was 2.02. Meanwhile, the plasma LZM activity, complement 3 level, and respiratory burst activity reached their maximum values. In addition, when the CHO:L ratio was 2.02, the SOD activity, CAT activity, and TAC in the fish liver reached the highest values, and the MDA level decreased as the CHO:L ratio increased from 0.89 to 2.02 and then leveled off. Moreover, as the CHO:L ratio increased from 0.89 to 7.02, the mRNA levels of TNF-α, IL-1β, and HSP70 all showed a trend of first decreasing and then increasing and reached their lowest values when the CHO:L ratio was 2.02. In contrast, the mRNA expression level of IL-10 in the fish liver first increased and then decreased, reaching the highest value when the CHO:L ratio was 2.02. It is worth noting that when the CHO:L ratio exceeds 2.02, the mortality rate of fish after infection with Aeromonas hydrophila increases, and the mortality rate reaches the highest when the CHO:L ratio is 7.02. To sum up, based on various physiological indicators, the feed with a CHO:L ratio of 2.02 is most suitable for the needs of juvenile Pseudobagrus ussuriensis. This finding provides a reliable reference for the precise nutritional requirement of juvenile Pseudobagrus ussuriensis., which has certain reference value for actual aquaculture production.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bai et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: