Repashy Superfood (for cichlids)?
- Thread starter flowerpower
- Start date
- Status
Just got in from a long day and briefly ran through the recent posts, so if I miss something, let me know.
I am not sure what we are arguing about on this water issue and feel like we are going in circles. JD, like you point out, when you add water to any dry product, you are changing the nutritional composition of the product because your dry ingredients become "diluted" for lack of a better word.
If I wanted to compare the nutrition of dried bloodworms to frozen bloodworms, I would take the water out of the frozen ones and compare them.... and it would be the same. Yes, if the bloodworms are for example 1 gram frozen, and 90% water, then the fish would have to eat .1 gram of dry ones.... But, before those dried worms get digested, they will have hydrated to the same water content as the frozen ones before they are digested.
If you are arguing that the fish can eat more dried food than the dry weight of saturated food, then we just plain disagree. It might take longer for them to eat the equivalent amount of food, but they will eat it soon enough. and because it is not eaten as quickly, will likely be more thoroughly digested in a natural way. grazing fish and fry insitu, pick at food all day long.
I am not the one who is saying how much by weight of food that the product makes. I provide my information on a dry matter basis because that is what I sell, and that is how you use to compare the nutritional value of foods on a scientific basis. The water content of the product, like I said prior, is very close to that of any live aquatic organism and any hydrated pellet or flake once it is in the water, is going to have the same "water content" as the gel. I don't try to figure out what the nutritional value of a water saturated flake is by filling a cup with water, adding flakes, pouring off all the extra water, and then weighing it again to see how much water is in it before I decide what it's nutritional value is.
Like I said before, a dry flake or pellet has to be hydrated to be digested either by soaking up water from the environment, or from the digestive tract of the fish. A product that is 80-90% water is not going to prevent digestion of nutrients
you quoted some publications.
"The moisture content of a feed pellet also will influence its nutrient and energy densities because more water adds weight but no nutrients or calories. Therefore, dry, nutrient-dense feeds will have higher energy and nutrient densities."
I agree, the feed has higher density when it has less water... more low density food has to be eaten to get the same energy. But if you look at them both on a dry matter basis. it all comes down to how much they eat in dry weight. If they both have the same nutrient values at dry weight, then the moisture is irrelevant. It is obvious they have to eat more of a product that has high levels of moisture and I never said they don't. I am not sure what your argument even is unless you are saying that they just won't eat more food. Which we will just have to disagree on if that's the case. Feed conversion ratios are not measured by comparing different types of hydrated feed, they are compared on a dry matter basis. If a fish takes 100 grams of dry food to grow to a hundred grams, and it takes 1 kilo of a food that is 90% water and 10% dry, then we have the same feed conversion ratio on a dry matter basis.
"When feeds with low nutrient densities are used, the capacity of the gut may be exceeded before the fish consumes adequate amounts of nutrients."
First of all, nutrient densities don't just apply to moisture contend and are more likely discussed when comparing feeds of higher and lower levels of protein to each other. a food that is 30% protein has a lower nutrient density than a feed that is 40% protein when they are both dry feeds. There is no way around that. Corn meal doesn't get absorbed by the body like water does, so effects nutrient density in a much different way when it comes to it's effect on a protein level.
Secondly, the very nature of gel foods being available for long periods of time negates any effect that the potential "filling" of the gut by water. They can feed for much longer periods. If you were filling this gut with wheat or corn or something else, it would have a much greater effect. And again, the levels of water in frozen foods and gel foods are no different than the levels found in natural aquatic organisms. How natural is it for a fish to eat something dry... and how dry is a flake or a pellet when it is actually consumed, or digested.
Fish overfeeding is not something that likely happens to a fish in nature even when there is as much food around as they can eat. Ad RD points out Overfeeding?FCR ratio issues are from wasted food, or food that is eaten which is not properly digested for many reasons, one of which is that the density is too high for the fish to process all the nutrients, which also loads the biological filtration system and can lead to ammonia, and nitrogen spikes, which can have their own effects on FCR. Too much protein in a food leads to a poor FCR, just as not enough. I have quite a bit of aquaculture experience and know first hand that when you are intensively culturing something like tilapia, FCR and water quality is everything because the margins are so tight.
There are lots of other cool things to talk about when it comes to foods and formulations and I would rather spend my time on a new subject than beating this dead horse. Hopefully RD, you will agree!
Allen
I am not sure what we are arguing about on this water issue and feel like we are going in circles. JD, like you point out, when you add water to any dry product, you are changing the nutritional composition of the product because your dry ingredients become "diluted" for lack of a better word.
If I wanted to compare the nutrition of dried bloodworms to frozen bloodworms, I would take the water out of the frozen ones and compare them.... and it would be the same. Yes, if the bloodworms are for example 1 gram frozen, and 90% water, then the fish would have to eat .1 gram of dry ones.... But, before those dried worms get digested, they will have hydrated to the same water content as the frozen ones before they are digested.
If you are arguing that the fish can eat more dried food than the dry weight of saturated food, then we just plain disagree. It might take longer for them to eat the equivalent amount of food, but they will eat it soon enough. and because it is not eaten as quickly, will likely be more thoroughly digested in a natural way. grazing fish and fry insitu, pick at food all day long.
I am not the one who is saying how much by weight of food that the product makes. I provide my information on a dry matter basis because that is what I sell, and that is how you use to compare the nutritional value of foods on a scientific basis. The water content of the product, like I said prior, is very close to that of any live aquatic organism and any hydrated pellet or flake once it is in the water, is going to have the same "water content" as the gel. I don't try to figure out what the nutritional value of a water saturated flake is by filling a cup with water, adding flakes, pouring off all the extra water, and then weighing it again to see how much water is in it before I decide what it's nutritional value is.
Like I said before, a dry flake or pellet has to be hydrated to be digested either by soaking up water from the environment, or from the digestive tract of the fish. A product that is 80-90% water is not going to prevent digestion of nutrients
you quoted some publications.
"The moisture content of a feed pellet also will influence its nutrient and energy densities because more water adds weight but no nutrients or calories. Therefore, dry, nutrient-dense feeds will have higher energy and nutrient densities."
I agree, the feed has higher density when it has less water... more low density food has to be eaten to get the same energy. But if you look at them both on a dry matter basis. it all comes down to how much they eat in dry weight. If they both have the same nutrient values at dry weight, then the moisture is irrelevant. It is obvious they have to eat more of a product that has high levels of moisture and I never said they don't. I am not sure what your argument even is unless you are saying that they just won't eat more food. Which we will just have to disagree on if that's the case. Feed conversion ratios are not measured by comparing different types of hydrated feed, they are compared on a dry matter basis. If a fish takes 100 grams of dry food to grow to a hundred grams, and it takes 1 kilo of a food that is 90% water and 10% dry, then we have the same feed conversion ratio on a dry matter basis.
"When feeds with low nutrient densities are used, the capacity of the gut may be exceeded before the fish consumes adequate amounts of nutrients."
First of all, nutrient densities don't just apply to moisture contend and are more likely discussed when comparing feeds of higher and lower levels of protein to each other. a food that is 30% protein has a lower nutrient density than a feed that is 40% protein when they are both dry feeds. There is no way around that. Corn meal doesn't get absorbed by the body like water does, so effects nutrient density in a much different way when it comes to it's effect on a protein level.
Secondly, the very nature of gel foods being available for long periods of time negates any effect that the potential "filling" of the gut by water. They can feed for much longer periods. If you were filling this gut with wheat or corn or something else, it would have a much greater effect. And again, the levels of water in frozen foods and gel foods are no different than the levels found in natural aquatic organisms. How natural is it for a fish to eat something dry... and how dry is a flake or a pellet when it is actually consumed, or digested.
Fish overfeeding is not something that likely happens to a fish in nature even when there is as much food around as they can eat. Ad RD points out Overfeeding?FCR ratio issues are from wasted food, or food that is eaten which is not properly digested for many reasons, one of which is that the density is too high for the fish to process all the nutrients, which also loads the biological filtration system and can lead to ammonia, and nitrogen spikes, which can have their own effects on FCR. Too much protein in a food leads to a poor FCR, just as not enough. I have quite a bit of aquaculture experience and know first hand that when you are intensively culturing something like tilapia, FCR and water quality is everything because the margins are so tight.
There are lots of other cool things to talk about when it comes to foods and formulations and I would rather spend my time on a new subject than beating this dead horse. Hopefully RD, you will agree!
Allen
I'm not arguing about anything, I'm merely pointing out certain facts that were previously dismissed, as though they had no merit. If you don't want potential customers to know how low the actual nutrient levels are in your food once they are reconstituted with 75% tap water, that's your business, but I felt that it was an important issue that members here should be aware of. You have made a lot of assumptions with regards to digestibility, hydration of pellets once in water, etc, yet there is a massive amount of variables between various dry foods, from their nutrient density, their stability in water, and the amount of gastric acids & enzymes that a fish has to produce to break those foods down once they enter the gut. I can state with 100% certainty that when my fish eat pellets, those pellets do not contain 75% water content, as you have implied. Not even remotely close.
Wonderbar! Again, there was no argument on my part, I was simply demonstrating the difference between volume, and value. I'm glad to see that we can agree on that.
I never said that it would. I was pointing out that they have to eat a LOT more of a product that has high levels of moisture, to get the same amount of nutrients as one with low water content, which you just confirmed. Again, this goes back to volume & value, something that at least some members here seemed to be confused about.
A fish will eat until it reaches a point of satiation, at which times it will stop feeding.
Whether its stomach is filled with dry food (broken down by gastric acids & enzymes), or wet food, that consists mostly of water, it will make no difference to a fish. I understand & agree that nutrient densities don't just apply to moisture content, but moisture content in any feed is a factor, which goes directly back to:
More water adds weight, but no nutrients or calories.
I understand that you would prefer to discuss everything on a DMB, and why, but the reality is that those are NOT the nutrient levels that the end consumer is feeding their fish when feeding a powder food that is reconstituted with 75% water into a gel food. Of course the fish can feed for longer periods on a large chunk of gel food, they not only can, they have to in order to glean sufficient nutrient levels compared to feeding a nutrient dense pellet food, that on average contains less than 10% water content. That's all I was pointing out, and I'm glad to see that you agree with that.
As you stated previously in this discussion - fish of course, are different then everything else, because they have no problem with hydration. Which is precisely why one can feed a nutrient dense dry pellet with low water content and end up with FCRs as low as 0.7-0.8, something unheard of in years past when lower quality pellets were being used within the aquaculture industry.
No problem, glad that we got that cleared up.
In my opinion, the proof is in the pudding. If I can raise up fry faster and easier than lets say using a pellet, or live food, or whatever I'm gonna do it.
If I feed X food in one tank and Y food in another and 3 month later Y food has given better results, then I'm gonna feed Y. Even if my neighbor gets great results with food X. Food Y might work better for me.
Also the comments about "what stops me from grinding up pellets and adding them to gel myself" is a pretty weak thing to argue. What's stopping me from collecting my own pellets ingredients and buying a pellet extruder? Time, and money of course. What's stopping me from setting up a hatchery on a river where they can get free food and water changes? Where I live... There are always circumstances that are useful to consider. In a vacuum I'd just own the water way where the fish I was interested lived and I'd observe them there.
As I stated on my blog, I am most excited to try this food out on different groups of fry. As right now, my schedule is feeding morning and night 2x. With culturing brine shrimp, micro worms, white worms, pellets, flakes, golden pearls, frozen foods etc. All with different times they can remain unfouled in the water. With higher end guppies for instance they need to eat every 2 hours to reach full potential by show time. For someone like me this is impossible while having a job. This gel food could be a step closer. It could also be a leap backwards. I have no idea if it'll do what I want it to do. But it seems to me that I should try it and see the results myself.
I've got more foods than I know what to do with sitting on shelves. I think a lot of us have tried quite a few different foods. Lots of them are different tools for the job. Pellets may be my flat head screwdriver that doubles as my crowbar/wedge/scraper/whatever else I can use it for. Gel food may be my Allen wrench.(pun intended lol). At the end of the day, the more tools I have the easier tasks are to complete.
If I feed X food in one tank and Y food in another and 3 month later Y food has given better results, then I'm gonna feed Y. Even if my neighbor gets great results with food X. Food Y might work better for me.
Also the comments about "what stops me from grinding up pellets and adding them to gel myself" is a pretty weak thing to argue. What's stopping me from collecting my own pellets ingredients and buying a pellet extruder? Time, and money of course. What's stopping me from setting up a hatchery on a river where they can get free food and water changes? Where I live... There are always circumstances that are useful to consider. In a vacuum I'd just own the water way where the fish I was interested lived and I'd observe them there.
As I stated on my blog, I am most excited to try this food out on different groups of fry. As right now, my schedule is feeding morning and night 2x. With culturing brine shrimp, micro worms, white worms, pellets, flakes, golden pearls, frozen foods etc. All with different times they can remain unfouled in the water. With higher end guppies for instance they need to eat every 2 hours to reach full potential by show time. For someone like me this is impossible while having a job. This gel food could be a step closer. It could also be a leap backwards. I have no idea if it'll do what I want it to do. But it seems to me that I should try it and see the results myself.
I've got more foods than I know what to do with sitting on shelves. I think a lot of us have tried quite a few different foods. Lots of them are different tools for the job. Pellets may be my flat head screwdriver that doubles as my crowbar/wedge/scraper/whatever else I can use it for. Gel food may be my Allen wrench.(pun intended lol). At the end of the day, the more tools I have the easier tasks are to complete.
There's no need to grind pellets, there are already fine "powder" fry food available on the market, including the brand of food that I use. For those that simply want to fine grind the pellets that they already have on hand, an electric coffee grinder works pretty slick.
So the only time involved in making your own food would be sourcing the binding agent, and then mixing with hot water, just as one has to do with this product. Initially there may be some experimenting involved to get the gel ratio to ones liking, but there are plenty of recipes that can be found on the WWW. Comparing that with buying an extruder, and sourcing out these same raw ingredients for a premium powder, is laughable.
Also, if time & money is a factor, there are already fish foods that will remain "unfouled" for extended periods of time in ones tank that fish (including fry) can pick at all day long, such as wafers, which was also previously mentioned in this discussion. I know scores of breeders that breed numerous species of fish that utilize wafers during periods when they can't be present to feed their fish.
Apparently even guppies will eat them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBzOkarUgHQ
Most young fry don't have any problem figuring out that wafers are a source of food. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBOPtB-ypS0
I've seen fry that are only "days" old start picking at wafers.
I've been using wafers for years when I can't always be present to feed young fish, and/or for those species that are slow eaters, grazers etc. Plecos, cories, even ottos will utilize wafers. The wafers that I use will remain stable in my tanks for 24-48 hrs, supplying a constant source of nutrient dense nutrition. For very small fry I simply break them up into smaller pieces.
Same brand of wafer that I have used for years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CEY-UTLV1Y
Just another option for those that can't always be there to feed their fish.
So the only time involved in making your own food would be sourcing the binding agent, and then mixing with hot water, just as one has to do with this product. Initially there may be some experimenting involved to get the gel ratio to ones liking, but there are plenty of recipes that can be found on the WWW. Comparing that with buying an extruder, and sourcing out these same raw ingredients for a premium powder, is laughable.
Also, if time & money is a factor, there are already fish foods that will remain "unfouled" for extended periods of time in ones tank that fish (including fry) can pick at all day long, such as wafers, which was also previously mentioned in this discussion. I know scores of breeders that breed numerous species of fish that utilize wafers during periods when they can't be present to feed their fish.
Apparently even guppies will eat them.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBzOkarUgHQ
Most young fry don't have any problem figuring out that wafers are a source of food. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBOPtB-ypS0
I've seen fry that are only "days" old start picking at wafers.
I've been using wafers for years when I can't always be present to feed young fish, and/or for those species that are slow eaters, grazers etc. Plecos, cories, even ottos will utilize wafers. The wafers that I use will remain stable in my tanks for 24-48 hrs, supplying a constant source of nutrient dense nutrition. For very small fry I simply break them up into smaller pieces.
Same brand of wafer that I have used for years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4CEY-UTLV1Y
Just another option for those that can't always be there to feed their fish.
Comparing the extra minute it would take to grind a pellet (and as Neil pointed out there are powders on the market already!) to manufacturing your own food is like comparing grinding your own coffee beans in the morning to growing it and roasting it yourself. Where do people come up with this stuff?
whether they sell it or not anybody who has tried this stuff seems to like it and we havent had anybody come on here who doesnt like it that has actually used it so till we all try it this is all just wasted conversation in my eyes. if it works it works and if it doesnt it doesnt plain and simple.
great thread and alot of info here. Its clearly not a staple food that is superior to pellets. It may have a small niche though. Maybe for plecos that like a almost vegeterian diet. But my wafers are so excellent that im not sure that it is a improvement.Plus the veg plecos eat fresh vegtables so... I like the idea and i will try the food bc thats what i do, ahha try stuff.For medicine it may help but i believe that is already on the market
- Status
