33 9 () V o l. 33 N o. 9 2005 9 Jour. of N o rthw est Sci2T ech U niv. of A gri. and Fo r. (N aṫ Sci. Ed. ) Sep. 2005 Ξ,,,, (, 450002) [ ] 750, 5 0 ( ), 50 (g ), 100 (g ), 150 (g ) 200 ggkg (g ),, (1) g, (P > 0. 05), 50 ggkg ; g (P < 0. 05), 50 ggkg (P < 0. 05); g g (P < 0. 05) (2) g, (P < 0. 05); g, 3 (P < 0. 05), (3), 50 ggkg (g ) [ ]; ; ; [] S965. 116. 22 + 3. 3 [] A [ ] 167129387 (2005) 0920024207 (M ed icag o sa tiva L. ),, [1 ], [2 4 ],,,, 4,, 1 1. 1, 400 800 mm, 600 mm, 14. 3, 2 000 2 600 h 1, 2 000 m 2, 1. 5 2. 0 m,, 20. 0 30. 8, N H 32N 1. 0 1. 5 m ggl, 8 12 m ggl, H 2S 0. 05 m ggl 25 30 cm, ph 7 8, 1. 2 1. 2. 1 1, 1. 2. 2, 1. 7 m 1. 3 m 1. 5 m, 1. 5 cm,,, 1. 2. 3,,, 80 : 875. 6 ggkg, 195. 5 ggkg, 23. 6 ggkg, 228. 2 ggkg, 78. 0 ggkg, 348. 3 ggkg, 18. 7 ggkg, 4. 8 ggkg (CK), : 50 (g ), 100 (g ), 150 (g ) 200 ggkg (g ) 1, 2. 0 mm Ξ [ ] 2005201220 [ ] (0223013600) [ ] (1976- ),,,, [ ] (1955- ),,,,
9 : 25 ( 2), A 1 650 Λg, D 3 26. 25 Λg, E 20 m g, K 3 3. 0 m g, B 2 6. 0 m g, B 6 8. 0 m g, Full2fat soybean Soybean 1 20. 0 m g, 16. 0 m g, Fe 35. 0 m g, Cu 2. 8 m g,m n 15. 0 m g, Zn 35. 0 m g T able 1 D ietary compo sition of different treatm ents Rapeseed Rapeseed cake F ish W heat m iddling and reddog R ice bran Co rn A lfalfa gluten CK 19. 3 192. 8 106. 0 134. 9 125. 3 96. 4 115. 7 38. 6 0. 0 48. 2 g 30. 0 200. 0 80. 0 130. 0 125. 0 115. 0 105. 0 40. 0 50. 0 50. 0 g 35. 0 220. 0 69. 0 80. 0 130. 0 105. 0 85. 5 45. 0 100. 0 50. 0 g 35. 0 255. 0 20. 0 55. 0 136. 0 96. 1 70. 0 50. 0 150. 0 50. 0 g 50. 0 265. 0 10. 0 20. 0 142. 0 90. 7 40. 0 50. 0 200. 0 45. 0 Bow els residue W heat bran Soybean o il Calcium pho sphate monobasic L 2 L 2L ysine monohydro2 chlo ride M eth ionine Salt Bentonite ggkg Sesam e cake 1. 2% P rem ix CK 14. 5 48. 2 4. 8 19. 3 1. 9 1. 0 1. 9 19. 3 12. 0 g 15. 0 0. 0 4. 4 19. 0 1. 6 1. 0 1. 9 20. 1 12. 0 g 15. 0 0. 0 11. 0 18. 0 1. 2 1. 3 1. 9 20. 1 12. 0 g 15. 0 0. 0 14. 8 17. 0 0. 5 1. 6 1. 9 20. 1 12. 0 g 15. 0 0. 0 21. 0 15. 5 0. 0 1. 8 1. 9 20. 1 12. 0 g (M J kg - 1 ) D E 2 T able 2 N utrient ingredient of different treatm ents g CP g EE g CF g Ca g T P g A P CK 12. 3 341. 4 60. 5 55. 7 13. 0 15. 7 10. 5 g 12. 3 341. 5 59. 7 61. 0 13. 5 15. 2 10. 5 g 12. 3 341. 4 62. 0 65. 5 14. 0 14. 6 10. 5 g 12. 3 341. 4 62. 9 69. 1 14. 4 14. 0 10. 5 g 12. 3 341. 3 65. 3 74. 4 14. 8 13. 3 10. 5 g L ys g M et ( + ) g M et+ Cys g T h r g T rp g Salt CK 19. 0 7. 3 12. 8 13. 4 4. 1 1. 9 g 19. 0 7. 3 12. 8 13. 5 4. 2 1. 9 g 19. 0 7. 6 12. 8 13. 5 4. 3 1. 9 g 19. 0 7. 8 12. 8 13. 6 4. 5 1. 9 g 19. 0 8. 0 12. 8 13. 6 4. 6 1. 9 1. 3 1. 3. 1, 5 (CK, g, g, g, g ), 3, 50, 750, 15, 1. 5 m 1. 3. 2, 10 d, 2003208201 15, 60, (P > 0. 05),, 50, ( 18. 31 1. 09) g, (10. 98 0. 26) cm, (3. 00 0. 01) cm ( ) 39 d, 0, 18 39 d ;, 5, 1. 3. 3,,, 4 ( 08: 00, 11: 00, 14: 00, 17: 00), 40 60 m in, 2% 4%,
26 () 33 ( 10: 00), 1, 1 ( 30 cm ), 20 d 1, 1. 4 1. 4. 10, 18 39 d, : g(g d - 1 ( - ) ) = ; ( - ) g% = 100% ; (SGR ) g% = [ (ln - ln ) g ] 100% ; (FCR ) = ; g% = 100% 1. 4. 2(1) 5 10, ( ),, - 30,, [5 ], ( ) () (2), 10, (L (cm ) ), (W (g) ), K (K = 100 W gl 3 ) (3) 1. 4. 3( gkg) : [ (kg) ( gkg) ] = [ (kg) ] 1. 5,, SA S (V er. 6. 12), 2 2. 1 2. 1. 1 3, 18 d 21 d, (P > 0. 05) ; 18 d, g, g, g, g, 21 d, g 2. 1. 2 3, 18 d, (P > 0. 05), g, g g (P < 0. 05), (P > 0. 05), 2. 1. 3 3, 18 d 21 d, g, g, g, g 18 d, g 16. 13%, (P > 0. 05) ; g, g, g 6. 45%, 17. 74% 24. 19%, g (P < 0. 05), 3 (P > 0. 05), g g (P < 0. 05), g, g g (P < 0. 01)21 d, g, g, g, g 18 d, g g (P > 0. 05), g g (P < 0. 05), 18 d 2. 1. 4 3, 18 d,, g (P < 0. 05) ; g, g, (P > 0. 05) ; g (P < 0. 05), g (P < 0. 01), g (P < 0. 01) 21 d,, (P > 0. 05) 18 d 2. 1. 5, 18 d 21 d, g, g, g, g, 18 d, g 19. 18%, (P > 0. 05) ; g, g, g 14. 94%, 22. 99% 33. 33%, g (P > 0. 05), g (P < 0. 05), g (P < 0. 01), g, g, g, g (P < 0. 01), ; 21 d, g 21 d, g g
9 : 27 (P > 0. 05) ; g g (P < 0. 05) ; g, g g (P > 0. 05) 18 d, g, g g (P < 0. 05), 3 T able 3 Effect of different level alfalfa on grow th perfo rm ance of Cy rinus carp io gd D ay g% Survival rate g A verage individual w eight g A verage feed intale g (g d - 1 ) A verage individual daily w eigh t gain CK 0 18 96. 67 2. 31 18. 02 0. 67 9. 64 0. 13 0. 62 0. 07 ABbc 19 39 100. 00 0. 00 29. 17 1. 13 18. 40 0. 396 b 0. 85 0. 08 ABbc 0 39 96. 67 2. 31 46. 92 2. 02 A bc 28. 03 0. 52 0. 74 0. 06 BCcd g 0 18 100. 00 0. 00 17. 31 1. 15 9. 42 0. 88 0. 72 0. 08 Bc 19 39 100. 00 0. 00 30. 18 2. 28 18. 04 0. 86 b 0. 86 0. 09 Bc 0 39 100. 00 0. 00 48. 30 2. 52 Bc 27. 46 1. 55 0. 79 0. 06 Cd g 0 18 100. 00 0. 00 19. 19 0. 92 10. 34 0. 64 0. 58 0. 06 ABab 19 39 100. 00 0. 00 29. 63 0. 72 17. 64 0. 76 ab 0. 76 0. 05 ABabc 0 39 100. 00 0. 00 45. 63 1. 18 ABbc 27. 98 1. 36 0. 68 0. 01 ABCbc g 0 18 98. 67 2. 31 18. 15 0. 69 9. 82 0. 36 0. 51 0. 02 A ab 19 39 99. 31 1. 20 27. 34 0. 46 16. 29 0. 83 a 0. 70 0. 10 ABab 0 39 98. 00 3. 46 42. 02 2. 54 ABab 26. 11 0. 82 0. 61 0. 05 ABab g 0 18 98. 67 1. 15 18. 88 1. 36 9. 79 1. 27 0. 47 0. 09 A a 19 39 100. 00 0. 00 27. 40 2. 86 15. 95 1. 39 a 0. 63 0. 08 A a 0 39 98. 67 1. 16 40. 57 3. 07 A a 25. 73 2. 66 0. 56 0. 06 A a gd D ay g% W eigh t gain rate g% Relative grow th rate Feed conversion CK 0 18 62. 06 7. 73 ABb 2. 68 0. 27 BCb 0. 87 0. 09 ABab 19 39 60. 89 5. 64 2. 26 0. 17 1. 04 0. 09 ab 0 39 160. 89 19. 16 BCbc 2. 45 0. 18 BCbc 0. 97 0. 07 ABab g 0 18 74. 37 6. 26 Bc 3. 09 0. 20 Cc 0. 73 0. 04 A a 19 39 60. 35 8. 54 2. 24 0. 26 1. 00 0. 10 a 0 39 179. 70 7. 56 A ab 2. 42 0. 27 ABab 0. 89 0. 06 A a g 0 18 54. 59 7. 56 A ab 2. 42 0. 27 ABab 1. 00 0. 12 BCbc 19 39 54. 02 3. 77 2. 06 0. 12 1. 10 0. 04 ab 0 39 137. 92 5. 86 ABab 2. 22 0. 06 ABab 1. 06 0. 04 ABCbc g 0 18 50. 70 3. 44 A ab 2. 28 0. 13 ABab 1. 07 0. 07 BCcd 19 39 53. 63 6. 87 2. 04 0. 21 1. 12 0. 11 ab 0 39 131. 41 8. 05 ABa 2. 15 0. 09 ABa 1. 10 0. 07 BCbc g 0 18 44. 92 5. 15 A a 2. 06 0. 20 A a 1. 16 0. 07 Cd 19 39 48. 41 7. 98 1. 88 0. 26 1. 22 0. 17 b 0 39 114. 98 11. 49 A a 1. 96 0. 14 A a 1. 19 0. 10 Cc : (P < 0. 05), (P < 0. 01), (P > 0. 05) N o te:m eans in a co lum n w ith different superscrip ts are different, a sm all letter m eans the significant difference (P < 0. 05), a cap ital letter m eans extrem e difference (P < 0. 01), w ith the sam e letters o r no letter m ean the non2significant differences (P > 0. 05). It is sam e in the fo l2 low ing table. 2. 2 4, g, 3 (P < 0. 05),,, g, g (P < 0. 05), g (P < 0. 01), g g (P > 0. 05),,,,,, g, 2. 3 4, g
28 () 33 0. 11 gkg,,,, 4 T able 4 Effect of different level alfalfa on quality of fish body and econom ic p rofit of Cy rinus carp io s g% Relative fatness g CP g EE g(kg - 1 ) W eigh t co st 3 CK 1. 16 0. 09 ab 171. 49 3. 52 a 20. 24 2. 35 Bc 2. 03 0. 15A Ba g 1. 17 0. 05 ab 179. 87 0. 50 b 17. 54 1. 85 ABbc 1. 92 0. 16 A a g 1. 23 0. 03 b 180. 46 1. 91 b 14. 80 2. 26 ABab 2. 37 0. 06 BCb g 1. 13 0. 02 ab 179. 10 3. 39 b 13. 11 1. 97 ABab 2. 44 0. 12 CD b g 1. 12 0. 04 a 174. 67 2. 01 ab 10. 72 1. 25 A a 2. 83 0. 23 D c 3. 1 3. 1. 1 [6, 7 ],, A,, ;,,,,, E,,,,,, [8 ],, E E,, 3. 1. 2, [9 ],,,,,, 21 d, g, g,,, 3. 1. 3 123 261 ggkg, 175 ggkg, ;,, 10. 6 13. 8 ggkg;, C E, [10 ], 50 ggkg, 22. 5%, 10%, 29. 3% [11 ],, [12 ] 100 ggkg,, ;, 228 ggkg,, [13 ],,,,,, [14 ],,, ;,,,,,,, (50 ggkg), 50 ggkg18 d, 21 d,
9 : 29,, ;,, 21 d,,, 100, 150 200 ggkg,,,,,,, 50 ggkg ( 61. 0 ggkg),, 3. 2,, [15 ],,,,,, Jo r2 gen sen [16 ],,, Stah ly [17 ], 1% (ND F), 0. 025 0. 071 cm,,,,,, [18 ] [19 ], [20 ],,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 100 550 m ggkg, 60 m ggkg, [21 23 ] [24 ],,, 3. 3, g 0. 11 gkg, g, g g, 50 ggkg,,,, 50ggkg,, [ 1 ],. [M ]. :, 2003. [ 2 ]. [J ]., 2000, (1) : 8-10. [ ] [ 3 ],,,. [J ]., 2001, 22 (8) : 36-37. [ 4 ]. [J ]., 2000, (9) : 28-30. [ 5 ],,,. [J ]., 2000, 30 (1) : 34-36. [ 6 ],,. [J ]., 2002, (3) : 27-29. [ 7 ],. Β2 [J ]., 2001, (1) : 26-28.
30 () 33 [ 8 ],,. E [J ]., 2001, 47 (S1) : 120-124. [ 9 ],,. [J ]., 1999, 16 (4) : 53-59. [ 10 ]. [J ]., 1996, (5) : 29. [ 11 ],,. (U GF) [J ]., 1994, 30 (1) : 3-4. [ 12 ],,,. [J ]., 1993, 23 (3) : 15-16. [ 13 ]. [M ].,,. :, 1987. [ 14 ]. [M ]. :, 1996. [ 15 ]. [M ]. :, 1999. [ 16 ] Jo rgensen W, Zhao X, Eggum B O. T he influence of dietary fiber and environm ental temperature on the developm ent of gastro intestinal tract, digestibility, degree of ferm entation in the h ind2gut and energy m etabo lism in p igs[j ]. B r J N utr, 1986, 75: 365-378. [ 17 ] Stah ly T S, Gromw ell G L. Response to dietary addition of fiber (alfalfa ) in grow ing p igs boused in a co ld w arm o r ho t therm al en2 vironm ent[j ]. A nim Sci, 1986, 63: 488-496. [ 18 ] W illiam D A. Study of athero sclero sis regression in m acaca m ulatta[j ]. Am J Patho l, 1980, 100: 633-650. [ 19 ],,,. AA [J ]., 2002, (18) : 9-10. [ 20 ],. [J ]., 1999, 12 (2) : 65-68. [ 21 ] B inkow sk i F P, Sedm ak J J, Jo lly S O. A n evaluateon of Phaffia yeast as a p igm ent source fo r salmonids[j ]. A quaculm ag, 1993, 19: 54-59. [ 22 ] To rrissen O J. P igm entation of salmono ids: interactions of astaxanth in and canthaxanth in on p igm ent depo sition in rainbow trout [J ]. A quaculture, 1989, 79: 363-374. [ 23 ] To rrissen O J, Ch ristiansen R. Requirem ents fo r caro teneo ids in fish diets[j ]. A pp l Ich thyo l, 1995, 11: 225-230. [ 24 ] Scalia S, Isak sen M, F rancis G W. Caro teno ids of the A rctic charr, S alvelinus alp inus (L ) [J ]. F ish B io l, 1989, 34: 969-970. Effect of differen t level alfalfa on grow th perfo rm ance and qu lity of fish body of Cy rinus ca rp io ZHANG Chun-m e i,w ANG Cheng-zhang, HU X i-feng, HE Y un,l IU Quan-we i (College of A nim al S cience, H enan A g ricultural U niversity, Zhengzhou, H enan 450002, China) Abstract: A n experim en t w as conducted u sing 750 Cy rinus ca rp io to study the effect of alfalfa on p roduction perfo rm ance and qu lity of fish body. Carp s w ere random ly divided in to five treatm en ts acco rding to a random facto rial arrangem en ṫ Carp s w ere fed diet w ith 0, 50, 100, 150 and 200 ggkg alfalfa du ring the ph rase of 39 dayṡ T he resu lts show ed that (1)Carp s added 50 ggkg alfalfa w ere superio r in aver2 age individual daily w eigh t gain,w eigh t gain rate, relative grow th rate than tho se of no treatm en t (P > 0. 05). A lthough the tw o group s had no sign ifican t differences, it also show ed that 50 ggkg alfalfa had an active effect on p roduction perfo rm ance. Carp s added 100 ggkg alfalfa w ere inferio r than tho se of no treatm en t, bu t the tw o group s had no sign ifican t differences too (P > 0. 05). But average individual daily w eigh t gain,w eigh t gain rate, relative grow th rate and feed conversion rate of carp s fed alfalfa at 150 ggkg and 200 ggkg in diet sign ifican tly decreased (P < 0. 05). (2) C rude p ro tein con ten t of m u scle w as sign ifican tly imp roved excep t group 4 and EE w as sign ifican tly decreased w hen amoun t of alfalfa w as increased (P < 0. 05). It show ed that alfalfa cou ld imp rove the qu lity of fish body of carp ṡ (3) Eco2 nom ic p rofit of carp s fed diets w ith 50 ggkg alfalfa w as besṫ Key words: alfalfa ; common carp; p roduction perfo rm ance; qu lity of fish body