Research & Development – Research briefs
Tiger prawn
Agricultural Economics: Vol 45, Issue 5, September 2014 Aquaculture imports from Asia: an analysis of US consumer demand for select food quality
attributes DL ORTEGA; HH WANG; NJO WIDMAR The increasing share of imported food in the United States, coupled with highly publicied incidents of food contamination and adulteration in Asia, particularly China, is posing new challenges for consumers and food safety regulators. In this study, we focus on imported shrimp and tilapia, to evaluate consumer willingness-to-pay (WTP) for enhanced food safe- ty, use of antibiotics, and eco-friendly environmental practices. Results show that US consumers were willing-to-pay more for enhanced food safety, followed by the use of no antibiotics and environmental friendly production practices. American consumers in our sample were found to have a higher WTP for domestic products and placed more trust on US government verification of product attributes followed by third-party certification.
Food Chemistry: Vol 157, August 2014
Full substitution of fish oil with camelina (Camelina sativa) oil, with partial substitution of fish meal with camelina meal, in diets for farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and its
effect on tissue lipids and sensory quality SM HIXSON; CC PARRISH; DM ANDERSON Camelina oil (CO) and meal (CM) are potential replacements of fish meal (FM) and oil (FO) in aquaculture feeds. CO is high in alpha-linolenic acid (18:3 omega 3, ALA) (30%), with an omega 3/omega 6 ratio >1. This study tested diets with 100% CO, solvent extracted FM (SEFM) and partially substituted FM with 10% CM, in a 16 week feeding trial with Atlantic salmon (initial weight 240 g fish(-1)). Final weight (529-691 g fish(-1)) was not affected by using 100% CO; however it was lower in
36
groups fed SEFM and 10% CM diets. Total lipid in salmon flesh fed a diet with CO, SEFM and CM (22% ww(-1)) was significantly higher than FO flesh (14% ww(-1)). There was no difference in the sensory quality of salmon fillets that were fed either FO or 100% CO diets. This was the first study to use CO as a complete FO replacement in diets for farmed Atlantic salmon.
Fish and Shellfish Immunology: Vol 39, issue 2 (August 2014) Anti-viral gene induction is absent upon sec- ondary challenge with double-stranded RNA in
the Pacific oyster, Crassostrea gigas TJ GREEN; K BENKENDORFF; N ROBINSON; D RAFTOS; P SPECK
Oyster farming is one of the most important aquaculture industries in the world. However, its productivity is increasingly limited by viral disease and we do not yet have management practices, such as protec- tive vaccination, that can control these disease outbreaks. Hence, in the current study we investigated the expression of known anti-viral genes in oysters (Crassostrea gigas) in response to primary and secondary encounter with a virus associated molecular pattern (dsRNA), and tested whether a common form of epigenetic gene regulation (DNA methyla- tion) was associated with the expression of these antiviral genes. Injection of dsRNA into the adductor muscle resulted in the rapid and transient expression of virus recognition receptors (TLR & MDA5), whereas several anti-viral signalling (IRF & SOC-1) and effector (PKR & viperin) genes were still up-regulated at one week post primary challenge (p < 0.05). This primary encounter with dsRNA appeared to deplete the immune system because anti-viral gene induction was absent in the gills when oysters were given a second injection of dsRNA at 1-week post-primary injection. The expression of DNA methylation genes (DNMT1, DNMT3b, TDG, TET2) and DNA methylation profiles up-stream of specific anti-viral genes (STING, SOC-1 & Viperin) did not change in response to dsRNA injection (p > 0.05). These results collectively suggest that C. gigas does not have an enhanced anti-viral gene response (immune-priming) to secondary dsRNA challenge and that the sustained up-regulation of anti-viral signalling and effector genes following primary challenge is unlikely to be associated with upstream DNA methylation levels.
www.fishfarmer-magazine.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84