A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish
There are wide variations in the published estimates of essential amino acid (EAA) requirements. Variationsare thought to originate from different choices in mode of expression, response variable, and mathematicalmodel. Here we conduct a meta-analysis of the growth-based, dose-response trials of 10...
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | inglés |
| Publicado: |
Facultad de Ciencias Biologicas
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://nutricionacuicola.uanl.mx/index.php/acu/article/view/19 |
| _version_ | 1824324435362971648 |
|---|---|
| author | Guillaume, Salze Margaret, Quinton Dominique, Bureau |
| author_facet | Guillaume, Salze Margaret, Quinton Dominique, Bureau |
| author_sort | Guillaume, Salze |
| collection | Artículos de Revistas UANL |
| description | There are wide variations in the published estimates of essential amino acid (EAA) requirements. Variationsare thought to originate from different choices in mode of expression, response variable, and mathematicalmodel. Here we conduct a meta-analysis of the growth-based, dose-response trials of 10 EAA in 22 teleostspecies: 249 studies were reviewed. Published data were entered in a spreadsheet and re-calculated across in astandard and systematic manner to allow comparisons. The considered unit of requirement were percentage ofdry diet, g of EAA per MJ of digestible energy (DE), and g of ingested EAA per kg of metabolic body weight(MBW) per day. Response variables included growth in g per kg MBW per day and thermal-unit growthcoefficient (TGC). Four mathematical models were also compared: broken-lime model (BLM), quadratic model(QM), broken-quadratic model (BQM), and saturation kinetic model (SKM). Results first indicate importantdifferences in study quality, as 54% of the reviewed papers were excluded from the meta-analysis, often timesbecause of poor growth or missing information. Additionally, the final dataset was greatly fragmented: 31% ofthe studied concerned rainbow trout, and lysine was the focus of 29% of all studies, leaving some species andEAA poorly covered. Comparisons of the requirement estimates show important variations between studies,even within species. With such variability there was no difference in requirement estimates calculated withdifferent response variables. Similarly, this variability was not different between the three modes of expression,nor was it between mathematical models. However, there were significant effects of experimental design on thequality of fit of the models. Specifically, experiments that failed to produce a clear, plateauing dose-responsecurve had greatly increased probability to yielding absurd results (e.g. negative requirement). Finally, thepresent study emphasizes the critical need of a global, standard and systematic system to report and captureresults from nutrition trials. |
| first_indexed | 2025-02-05T19:05:21Z |
| format | Article |
| id | nutrucionacuicola-article-19 |
| institution | UANL |
| language | eng |
| last_indexed | 2025-02-05T19:05:21Z |
| physical | Avances en Nutrición Acuicola; 2017: Investigación y Desarrollo en Nutrición Acuícola 2017 |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | Facultad de Ciencias Biologicas |
| record_format | ojs |
| spelling | nutrucionacuicola-article-192020-07-29T23:23:47Z A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish Guillaume, Salze Margaret, Quinton Dominique, Bureau Meta-analysis amino acid requirement Meta-analysis amino acid requirement There are wide variations in the published estimates of essential amino acid (EAA) requirements. Variationsare thought to originate from different choices in mode of expression, response variable, and mathematicalmodel. Here we conduct a meta-analysis of the growth-based, dose-response trials of 10 EAA in 22 teleostspecies: 249 studies were reviewed. Published data were entered in a spreadsheet and re-calculated across in astandard and systematic manner to allow comparisons. The considered unit of requirement were percentage ofdry diet, g of EAA per MJ of digestible energy (DE), and g of ingested EAA per kg of metabolic body weight(MBW) per day. Response variables included growth in g per kg MBW per day and thermal-unit growthcoefficient (TGC). Four mathematical models were also compared: broken-lime model (BLM), quadratic model(QM), broken-quadratic model (BQM), and saturation kinetic model (SKM). Results first indicate importantdifferences in study quality, as 54% of the reviewed papers were excluded from the meta-analysis, often timesbecause of poor growth or missing information. Additionally, the final dataset was greatly fragmented: 31% ofthe studied concerned rainbow trout, and lysine was the focus of 29% of all studies, leaving some species andEAA poorly covered. Comparisons of the requirement estimates show important variations between studies,even within species. With such variability there was no difference in requirement estimates calculated withdifferent response variables. Similarly, this variability was not different between the three modes of expression,nor was it between mathematical models. However, there were significant effects of experimental design on thequality of fit of the models. Specifically, experiments that failed to produce a clear, plateauing dose-responsecurve had greatly increased probability to yielding absurd results (e.g. negative requirement). Finally, thepresent study emphasizes the critical need of a global, standard and systematic system to report and captureresults from nutrition trials. There are wide variations in the published estimates of essential amino acid (EAA) requirements. Variationsare thought to originate from different choices in mode of expression, response variable, and mathematicalmodel. Here we conduct a meta-analysis of the growth-based, dose-response trials of 10 EAA in 22 teleostspecies: 249 studies were reviewed. Published data were entered in a spreadsheet and re-calculated across in astandard and systematic manner to allow comparisons. The considered unit of requirement were percentage ofdry diet, g of EAA per MJ of digestible energy (DE), and g of ingested EAA per kg of metabolic body weight(MBW) per day. Response variables included growth in g per kg MBW per day and thermal-unit growthcoefficient (TGC). Four mathematical models were also compared: broken-lime model (BLM), quadratic model(QM), broken-quadratic model (BQM), and saturation kinetic model (SKM). Results first indicate importantdifferences in study quality, as 54% of the reviewed papers were excluded from the meta-analysis, often timesbecause of poor growth or missing information. Additionally, the final dataset was greatly fragmented: 31% ofthe studied concerned rainbow trout, and lysine was the focus of 29% of all studies, leaving some species andEAA poorly covered. Comparisons of the requirement estimates show important variations between studies,even within species. With such variability there was no difference in requirement estimates calculated withdifferent response variables. Similarly, this variability was not different between the three modes of expression,nor was it between mathematical models. However, there were significant effects of experimental design on thequality of fit of the models. Specifically, experiments that failed to produce a clear, plateauing dose-responsecurve had greatly increased probability to yielding absurd results (e.g. negative requirement). Finally, thepresent study emphasizes the critical need of a global, standard and systematic system to report and captureresults from nutrition trials. Facultad de Ciencias Biologicas 2017-11-30 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artículo revisado por pares application/pdf https://nutricionacuicola.uanl.mx/index.php/acu/article/view/19 Avances en Nutrición Acuicola; 2017: Investigación y Desarrollo en Nutrición Acuícola 2017 eng https://nutricionacuicola.uanl.mx/index.php/acu/article/view/19/19 Derechos de autor 2019 Salze Guillaume, Quinton Margaret, Bureau Dominique |
| spellingShingle | Meta-analysis amino acid requirement Meta-analysis amino acid requirement Guillaume, Salze Margaret, Quinton Dominique, Bureau A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| thumbnail | https://rediab.uanl.mx/themes/sandal5/images/article.gif |
| title | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_alt | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_full | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_fullStr | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_full_unstemmed | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_short | A Meta-Analysis of Essential Amino Acid Requirements of Fish |
| title_sort | meta analysis of essential amino acid requirements of fish |
| topic | Meta-analysis amino acid requirement Meta-analysis amino acid requirement |
| topic_facet | Meta-analysis amino acid requirement Meta-analysis amino acid requirement |
| url | https://nutricionacuicola.uanl.mx/index.php/acu/article/view/19 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT guillaumesalze ametaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish AT margaretquinton ametaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish AT dominiquebureau ametaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish AT guillaumesalze metaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish AT margaretquinton metaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish AT dominiquebureau metaanalysisofessentialaminoacidrequirementsoffish |