4.5 Article

Effect of dietary lysine on growth, intestinal enzymes activities and antioxidant status of sub-adult grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella)

期刊

FISH PHYSIOLOGY AND BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 40, 期 3, 页码 659-671

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10695-013-9874-7

关键词

Ctenopharyngodon idella; Lysine Growth; Digestion; Intestinal enzymes activities; Antioxidant enzyme

资金

  1. National Department Public Benefit Research Foundation (Agriculture) of China [201003020]
  2. Science and Technology Support Programme of Sichuan Province [2011NZ0071]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The dietary lysine requirement of sub-adult grass carp (460 +/- A 1.5 g) was assessed by feeding diets supplemented with grade levels of lysine (6.6, 8.5, 10.8, 12.9, 15.0 and 16.7 g kg(-1) diet) for 56 days. The test diets (28 % CP) contained fish meal, casein and gelatin as sources of intact protein, supplemented with crystalline amino acids. Weight gain (WG), feed intake and feed efficiency were significantly improved with increasing levels of lysine up to 12.9 g kg(-1) diet and thereafter declined (P < 0.05). Quadratic regression analysis of WG at 95 % maximum response indicated lysine requirement was 10.9 g kg(-1) diet. Activities of trypsin, chymotrypsin, lipase, Na+, K+-ATPase and alkaline phosphatase in intestine, creatine kinase activity in proximal and mid-intestine responded similar to WG (P < 0.05). In addition, lipid and protein oxidation decreased with increasing levels of lysine up to certain values and increased thereafter (P < 0.05); the anti-hydroxyl radical capacity, dismutase, catalase, glutathione peroxidase, glutathione reductase, glutathione-S-transferase (GST) activities and glutathione content were increased with increasing dietary lysine levels up to certain values in the detected tissues, except for hepatopancreatic GST. Requirement estimated on the basis of malondialdehyde content in intestine and hepatopancreas was 10.6 and 9.53 g lysine kg(-1) diet, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据