Just out of interest, has anyone conducted an experiment using live/dead foods of the exact same species and origin as food and compared growth rates then?
e.g. if you caught your own wild minnows etc. kept half of them alive, and killed/froze the other half and fed one cichla the live ones and the other the same number of dead ones.
That to my mind would be the only way to scientifically test the 'live vs. dead' theory. Of course, the behaviours of cichla hunting live food are interesting, and may alleviate whatever 'boredom' (if they're capable of experiencing that) they may be feeling, but in terms of growth rates, I don't see how a live fish is nutritionally different to a dead one of the same species.
A lot of the anecdotes on here seem to be of people feeding live fish of one species to their fish and observing a definite difference in growth rate to a fish being fed nothing but processed foods, or frozen foods of a very different nutritional value.
I personally know of a couple of studies out there detailing the fact that fish are digested much quicker than inverterbrates by marine fish, and would therefore contribute to faster growth rates. I do not however, recall if the fish 'food' was alive at the time of ingestion.
Any thoughts?
e.g. if you caught your own wild minnows etc. kept half of them alive, and killed/froze the other half and fed one cichla the live ones and the other the same number of dead ones.
That to my mind would be the only way to scientifically test the 'live vs. dead' theory. Of course, the behaviours of cichla hunting live food are interesting, and may alleviate whatever 'boredom' (if they're capable of experiencing that) they may be feeling, but in terms of growth rates, I don't see how a live fish is nutritionally different to a dead one of the same species.
A lot of the anecdotes on here seem to be of people feeding live fish of one species to their fish and observing a definite difference in growth rate to a fish being fed nothing but processed foods, or frozen foods of a very different nutritional value.
I personally know of a couple of studies out there detailing the fact that fish are digested much quicker than inverterbrates by marine fish, and would therefore contribute to faster growth rates. I do not however, recall if the fish 'food' was alive at the time of ingestion.
Any thoughts?