No More BS About BS!

Status
Not open for further replies.
So do you really want to know how live brine shrimp typically sold at local fish stores can be largely devoid of nutritional value. How can they lose protein, how much protein did they start with how much was there after enrichment and how much is lost when they are starved: So you want to know how you are wrong SUB- here is the science and the research that will enlighten you.

Losses of lipid, protein and n−3 fatty acids in enriched Artemia franciscana starved at different temperatures



  • [SUP]a[/SUP] Department of Botany, Faculty of Chemistry and Biology, Brattøra Research Centre, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Gryta 2, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
  • [SUP]b[/SUP] Trondhjem Biological Station, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
  • [SUP]c[/SUP] TiMar (Culturas Em Água), Lda Apartado 49, Fuzeta 8700, Olhão, Portugal

Abstract

The loss rates of protein and lipids were determined for enriched Artemia franciscana starved at different temperatures after enrichment. Following 12-h enrichment with DHA Selco (0.2 g l[SUP]−1[/SUP]) at 28°C, the nauplii were temperature acclimated and transferred to starving condition (0–96 h; 5°C to 30°C).
The total lipid content during enrichment increased from 145 mg g[SUP]−1[/SUP] dry weight (DW) (newly hatched nauplii) to 222 mg g[SUP]−1[/SUP] DW after 12 h. The DHA/EPA ratio reached an optimum after 12 h (1.85), where DHA and EPA constituted 12% and 6.7% of total fatty acids, respectively.
When the nauplii were transferred to starving conditions the contents of all lipid components became reduced. The specific loss rate was found to be exponential for all components and significantly higher for DHA than for EPA and the sum of the other n−3 fatty acids. A. franciscana starved at the highest temperature (30°C) showed a loss rate of 92% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] (of DHA). Nauplii starved at 12°C had a loss rate of 51% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] (of DHA). At the same temperature (12°C) the corresponding loss rate of EPA, the sum of the other n−3 fatty acids and for the total lipid content was 15%, 30% and 11% day[SUP]−1[/SUP], respectively.
The protein content was relatively stable in the nauplii kept at the lowest temperatures (5°C and 8°C), but as temperature increased, the loss rate of protein gradually increased reaching a loss rate of 28% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] in nauplii starved at 26°C. The survival of the nauplii was >67% throughout the starvation period (96 h), but at temperatures below 8°C and above 19°C, the survival was <13% after 96 h.
Results show that the when Artemia nauplii are starved the lipid and protein content decreases as a function of temperature. This might affect the nutritional value of A. franciscana quite strongly if the nauplii reside in the fish tanks before being eaten by the larvae, or stored at ambient temperature before they are transferred to the fish tanks.

You can read the entire study here http://elmu.umm.ac.id/file.php/1/jurnal/A/Aquaculture/Vol193.Issue1-2.2001/61373.pdf

Now take your dictionary and go home, Sub.
 
TwoTankAmin said:
So do you really want to know how live brine shrimp typically sold at local fish stores can be largely devoid of nutritional value. How can they lose protein, how much protein did they start with how much was there after enrichment and how much is lost when they are starved: So you want to know how you are wrong SUB- here is the science and the research that will enlighten you.

Losses of lipid, protein and n−3 fatty acids in enriched Artemia franciscana starved at different temperatures



  • [SUP]a[/SUP] Department of Botany, Faculty of Chemistry and Biology, Brattøra Research Centre, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Gryta 2, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
  • [SUP]b[/SUP] Trondhjem Biological Station, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, N-7491 Trondheim, Norway
  • [SUP]c[/SUP] TiMar (Culturas Em Água), Lda Apartado 49, Fuzeta 8700, Olhão, Portugal

Abstract

The loss rates of protein and lipids were determined for enriched Artemia franciscana starved at different temperatures after enrichment. Following 12-h enrichment with DHA Selco (0.2 g l[SUP]−1[/SUP]) at 28°C, the nauplii were temperature acclimated and transferred to starving condition (0–96 h; 5°C to 30°C).
The total lipid content during enrichment increased from 145 mg g[SUP]−1[/SUP] dry weight (DW) (newly hatched nauplii) to 222 mg g[SUP]−1[/SUP] DW after 12 h. The DHA/EPA ratio reached an optimum after 12 h (1.85), where DHA and EPA constituted 12% and 6.7% of total fatty acids, respectively.
When the nauplii were transferred to starving conditions the contents of all lipid components became reduced. The specific loss rate was found to be exponential for all components and significantly higher for DHA than for EPA and the sum of the other n−3 fatty acids. A. franciscana starved at the highest temperature (30°C) showed a loss rate of 92% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] (of DHA). Nauplii starved at 12°C had a loss rate of 51% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] (of DHA). At the same temperature (12°C) the corresponding loss rate of EPA, the sum of the other n−3 fatty acids and for the total lipid content was 15%, 30% and 11% day[SUP]−1[/SUP], respectively.
The protein content was relatively stable in the nauplii kept at the lowest temperatures (5°C and 8°C), but as temperature increased, the loss rate of protein gradually increased reaching a loss rate of 28% day[SUP]−1[/SUP] in nauplii starved at 26°C. The survival of the nauplii was >67% throughout the starvation period (96 h), but at temperatures below 8°C and above 19°C, the survival was <13% after 96 h.
Results show that the when Artemia nauplii are starved the lipid and protein content decreases as a function of temperature. This might affect the nutritional value of A. franciscana quite strongly if the nauplii reside in the fish tanks before being eaten by the larvae, or stored at ambient temperature before they are transferred to the fish tanks.

You can read the entire study here http://elmu.umm.ac.id/file.php/1/jurnal/A/Aquaculture/Vol193.Issue1-2.2001/61373.pdf

Now take your dictionary and go home, Sub.
Click to expand...
It took you that long to post THAT? Pitiful! Once again I'm discussing apples and you're arguing oranges! That study gives no information on the loss of protein in ADULT artemia, which is what I'm discussing. Since their entire exoskeleton consists of chitin, which in case you didn't know is a protein which fish can utilize, I stand by my assertion. Do you really think that by constantly attempting to switch the premise of the debate that you can prove something? Try harder next time.
 
Last edited:
Since TTA showed up I'm beginning to think the title of the thread needs to be changed. He apparently never runs out of BS about BS!
 
Last edited:
Check the egos, guys. This is an entertaining and informative thread and there is nothing wrong with a healthy debate. This thread will remain open, but be aware that it is walking a tight rope. ;)
 
authmal said:
Maybe I'm a bit slow (I lack a doctorate, you know), but I still fail to see how something that is greater than 50% protein is largely devoid of nutritional value.

Just think, maybe we as hobbyists haven't figured out that a balanced diet is important for our fish, although we know we shouldn't only eat red beans and rice for our own diets.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's the semantics of it. What does the word "nutritional" imply...balanced diet, nah, too much work.

Of course if I ate hamburgers exclusively I wouldn't be very healthy (of course if we consider the toppings...lettuce [veggies], cheese [dairy], ketchup [fruit]...it probably is pretty balanced and hits most the food groups...). That probably doesn't mean hamburgers are largely devoid of nutritional value. Coincidentally (okay, not at all), 'hamburgers' are what I refer to live food as around here. Since my fiance insists on throwing live brine, mosquito fish and ghost shrimp into the saltwater tank as entertainment occasionally. :grinyes:



Personally, after keeping a saltwater tank, I find the whole thing even more funny. Because I have fish that could survive exclusively off of film algae and copepods, and other fish that'd die of starvation attempting the same thing. Put a Salarias Blenny, a Mandarin and a Basslet into a tank filled with algae and copepods and the Basslet will starve to death. The Blenny and the Mandarin will both be fat and happy. So it isn't even as simple as a balanced diet. A balanced diet for an Oto would be rather different then a balanced diet for a dwarf puffer. A crayfish or crab could probably survive off dirt...
 
Last edited:
Sub- you failed to show any evidence that the effects of starvation on young brine shrimp protein content does not apply to adults. You brought up bbs in your very first post, so no we were never only talking about adults unless you changed the topic. In fact Dr. Toonen's statement about the adults being largely devoid of any nutritional value when purchased at a local pets shop began with these words following his explanation about BBS and the need for them to be enriched etc.: "The same is true of adult brine:"

What it boils down to is if you start with low quality cysts, which is what the aquarium trade gets and if you then do not keep the brine in proper conditions and fail to feed them properly, their nutritional value will rapidly erode..

Khemel- let me ask you this of your hamburger analogy. Do you think it would matter, in terms of the nutritional value of those burgers, if the cows that they are made from were well fed and healthy when they were killed and ground vs if they had been poorly fed and not in good health prior to becoming hamburger. That is the gist of the discussion at this point. Is it possible that artemia shatched from poor caliber cysts and grown into adults and are ill fed and kept in poor temps. etc. have largely no nutritional value or not. I am not even sure how Sub can prove that such an adult has the same protein content/value as a healthy well fed one. I don't know if the form of protein in an adult is the same as in a newly hatched one, and I'm sure as heck he doesn't either. Does starvation make it less digestible?

So once again I will fall back on somebody who has the degrees, the hands on experience and the day to day working in the wild and in the lab to know this. I mean are we now going to say that this man is not aware of the dietary requirements of marine fish, at the very least? Do we presume with his education, his work, his research his history of publishing he does not know what the nutritional values of various foods are? And the man writes copiously, so why are we to assume he does not chose his word carefully. I believe he said what he meant, I believe he was correct in his assessment. I do not believe Sub Rosa has any real clue what he is talking about. Just as he can say I don't know what i am talking about.

And for me that is the end of this discussion. We will just have to agree to disagree.
 
Funny thing is no one was saying that isn't true.

The point is that Brine Shrimp are a source of protein. And that babies and adults offer similar values. A fish needing more then just protein to survive doesn't negate that the shrimp are offering that nutrition. Lacking nutritional value is a horrible phrasing, since it implies they are useless as a food. They are fine as a food, as long as one uses some common sense.
 
Khemul said:
Yep, that's the semantics of it. What does the word "nutritional" imply...balanced diet, nah, too much work.

Of course if I ate hamburgers exclusively I wouldn't be very healthy (of course if we consider the toppings...lettuce [veggies], cheese [dairy], ketchup [fruit]...it probably is pretty balanced and hits most the food groups...). That probably doesn't mean hamburgers are largely devoid of nutritional value. Coincidentally (okay, not at all), 'hamburgers' are what I refer to live food as around here. Since my fiance insists on throwing live brine, mosquito fish and ghost shrimp into the saltwater tank as entertainment occasionally. :grinyes:



Personally, after keeping a saltwater tank, I find the whole thing even more funny. Because I have fish that could survive exclusively off of film algae and copepods, and other fish that'd die of starvation attempting the same thing. Put a Salarias Blenny, a Mandarin and a Basslet into a tank filled with algae and copepods and the Basslet will starve to death. The Blenny and the Mandarin will both be fat and happy. So it isn't even as simple as a balanced diet. A balanced diet for an Oto would be rather different then a balanced diet for a dwarf puffer. A crayfish or crab could probably survive off dirt...
Click to expand...

I hardly think "nutritional" would translate into or infer "balanced". Though I understand your point, that is reading something into it that was not stated or suggested. Nutrtional would suggest a derived value from it but not necessarily the sum total of a required diet.
 
TwoTankAmin said:
Sub- you failed to show any evidence that the effects of starvation on young brine shrimp protein content does not apply to adults. You brought up bbs in your very first post, so no we were never only talking about adults unless you changed the topic. In fact Dr. Toonen's statement about the adults being largely devoid of any nutritional value when purchased at a local pets shop began with these words following his explanation about BBS and the need for them to be enriched etc.: "The same is true of adult brine:"

What it boils down to is if you start with low quality cysts, which is what the aquarium trade gets and if you then do not keep the brine in proper conditions and fail to feed them properly, their nutritional value will rapidly erode..

Khemel- let me ask you this of your hamburger analogy. Do you think it would matter, in terms of the nutritional value of those burgers, if the cows that they are made from were well fed and healthy when they were killed and ground vs if they had been poorly fed and not in good health prior to becoming hamburger. That is the gist of the discussion at this point. Is it possible that artemia shatched from poor caliber cysts and grown into adults and are ill fed and kept in poor temps. etc. have largely no nutritional value or not. I am not even sure how Sub can prove that such an adult has the same protein content/value as a healthy well fed one. I don't know if the form of protein in an adult is the same as in a newly hatched one, and I'm sure as heck he doesn't either. Does starvation make it less digestible?

So once again I will fall back on somebody who has the degrees, the hands on experience and the day to day working in the wild and in the lab to know this. I mean are we now going to say that this man is not aware of the dietary requirements of marine fish, at the very least? Do we presume with his education, his work, his research his history of publishing he does not know what the nutritional values of various foods are? And the man writes copiously, so why are we to assume he does not chose his word carefully. I believe he said what he meant, I believe he was correct in his assessment. I do not believe Sub Rosa has any real clue what he is talking about. Just as he can say I don't know what i am talking about.

And for me that is the end of this discussion. We will just have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
You understand neither semantics, nor basic logic. And your reading comprehension leaves much to be desired as well. Or more likely you're simply willing to dispense with these things in situations in which you feel it is justified. It is your responsibility to show that your assertions are valid and applicable to the discussion. It is your burden to prove that the research you cited applies to adult artemia. You try to play at being a scientist, and then claim I must accept your unproven assumption, and/or prove it wrong. And you still have your own definition (which I strongly suspect is changeable from one scenario to another depending upon the point you wish to make) of the phrase "largely void of nutrition". And fyi, chitin is chitin regardless of the age of the creature wearing it. And now you're going away. Accepting your own limitations in this manner is the most sensible action you've taken in this matter.
 
Last edited:
excuzzzeme said:
I hardly think "nutritional" would translate into or infer "balanced". Though I understand your point, that is reading something into it that was not stated or suggested. Nutrtional would suggest a derived value from it but not necessarily the sum total of a required diet.
Click to expand...
Are you aware you're agreeing with me Jeff?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom