Table 2.
Growth performance, somatic indexes and hormone levels of gilthead sea bream juveniles (Sparus aurata) supplemented with cysteamine hydrochloride after 9 and 18 weeks.
| Phase 1 (week 1 to 9) | Phase 2 (week 10 to 18) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | CSH-1.65 | Control | CSH-1.65 | CSH-3.3 | |
| n = 3 | n = 6 | n = 3 | n = 3 | n = 3 | |
| IBW (g) | 1.77 ± 0.03 | 1.81 ± 0.03 | 13.13 ± 0.4 b | 15.4 ± 0.4 a | 14.85 ± 0.3 a |
| IBL (cm) | 4.56 ± 0.04 | 4.63 ± 0.03 | 8.23 ± 0.07 b | 8.6 ± 0.02 ab | 8.47 ± 0.08 a |
| FBW (g) | 12.84 ± 0.25 | 14.9 ± 0.1*** | 41.4 ± 0.5 b | 52.45 ± 1 a | 54.74 ± 1 a |
| BL (cm) | 8.17 ± 0.07 | 8.5 ± 0.03*** | 11.7 ± 0.04 b | 12.65 ± 0.04 a | 12.55 ± 0.06 a |
| CF1 | 2.34 ± 0.03 | 2.39 ± 0.02 | 2.57 ± 0.03 | 2.61 ± 0.08 | 2.75 ± 0.03 |
| SGR2 | 3.25 ± 0.05 | 3.46 ± 0.03** | 2.015 ± 0.04 b | 2.15 ± 0.04 ab | 2.29 ± 0.07 a |
| VSI3 | 7.89 ± 0.1 | 7.76 ± 0.06 | 6.03 ± 0.31 | 5.76 ± 0.1 | 6.18 ± 0.14 |
| HSI4 | 1.94 ± 0.12 | 1.91 ± 0.03 | 1.37 ± 0.05 | 1.29 ± 0.08 | 1.47 ± 0.04 |
| MFI5 | 1.04 ± 0.13 | 1.05 ± 0.06 | 0.81 ± 0.03 b | 0.99 ± 0.05 ab | 1.11 ± 0.08 a |
| n = 10 | n = 12-13 | n = 13 | n = 13 | n = 14 | |
| GH (ng/ml) | 1.72 ± 0.24 | 1.84 ± 0.23 | 1.66 ± 0.44 a | 0.96 ± 0.28 ab | 0.36 ± 0.14 b |
| IGF-1 (ng/ml) | 13.83 ± 2.01 | 22.53 ± 3.23* | 16.88 ± 1.72 a | 23.37 ± 1.96 b | 21.71 ± 1.7 ab |
IBW, initial body weight; IBL, initial body length; FBW, final body weight; BL, body length; GH, growth hormone; IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor 1; 1Condition Factor (CF) = (body weight/body length3) * 100; 2Specific Growth Rate (SGR) = [ln (FBW) – ln (IBW)] * (days)-1 * 100; 3Viscerosomatic Index (VSI) = (viscera weight/body weight) * 100; 4Hepatosomatic Index (HSI) = (liver weight/body weight) * 100; 5Mesenteric Fat Index (MFI) = (mesenteric fat weight/body weight) * 100.
Significant differences were evaluated by a t-test (p-value: **<0.01; ***<0.001) for Phase 1 and one-way ANOVA followed by a Tukey’s post hoc test for Phase 2. Different letters in the same raw indicate significant differences between groups.
Data are shown as mean ± S.E.M. Tank was used as a technical replicate for the biometric data.