Hmm...an old magazine article stated that "ash" in general was a blanket term that also included most of the minerals included in the fish food itself. I think it came from Corals&ReefUSA. Or is this a different ash that you're talking about?
1. Ash is the inert residue of the rendering process of feed meal. The less inert materials lower the Ash. Scales, bone and cartilage will render to ash. Altho the ash can contain trace minerals and calcium it is usually a low percentage of total volume that has value to bio-mass conversion. For low nutrient value feed like carp or commercial catfish/tilapia feed additional ash is added to stretch food to allow more fish opportunity to get a chance to feed. This is not great for recirculating systems as it increases the bio load of waste processing systems.
I was under the impression that "probiotics" were bacteria cultures. Yeast is a fungus. Do you mean instead that you use yeast to feed live bacterial cultures? Or something different? Yeast infections look nasty, and I'm pretty sure that I wouldn't want to give my fish one of those through ingestion...
2. Probiotic bacteria needs a food source to stay alive. Yeast as a live culture is a great food source for this live bacteraia. Yeast is not a fungus but is also a great food source for fungus. That is why milling is done at 200- 280 degrees. This is hot enough to kill mold spores but not hot enough to kill the yeast or the probiotics. Yeast infections are different. They are a yeast/fungal colony that grows on dead or necrotic tissue. Definitely not a good food source.
Fiber is also very important for herbivores as well. They have long digestive tracts that are used to slowly leaching out the nutrients from their large amounts of nutrient poor food. Whereas carnivores have shorter digestive tracts that quickly digest proteins before they start to rot in their gut. I'm curious however...wouldn't increasing the amount of protein not really work, as herbivores are better used to eating nutrient poor food? They're digestive systems are not used to such rich foods, and as such, would they not be able to cope with such a food?
3. Very true in regards to digestive track. Studies of these fish on a 20% protein vegetable only diet vs our 67% protein diet show a 250% increase in bio-mass growth conversion. How ever using formulations that have 50% protein made up of gluten only yielded a 40% increase in bio-mass conversion. This mean that the amino acids from both fish and plant proteins are more digestible than the gluten proteins.
While I do agree that feathers probably aren't the best source of protein, isn't protein protein? Fish probably lack the enzymes necessary to break down feather proteins into amino acids that are usable, right? Additionally, I'm curious as to your mentions of fish scales and bones. Sharks, piranhas, and many large predatory fish all eat smaller fish, which are rich in scales and bones. These scales and bones are rich in calcium and other minerals, right? I know that a member of ReefCentral, PaulB, was/is advocated the use of fish fry as good sources of lipids and minerals due to their bones and such, and PaulB also feeds frozen clams that haven't been cleaned (and thus have "indigestible" ash in them, correct?)