Feedipedia
Animal feed resources information system
Feedipedia
Feedipedia

Fish protein concentrate and fish hydrolysate

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This datasheet is pending revision and updating; its contents are currently derived from FAO's Animal Feed Resources Information System (1991-2002) and from Bo Göhl's Tropical Feeds (1976-1982).

Datasheet

Description
Click on the "Nutritional aspects" tab for recommendations for ruminants, pigs, poultry, rabbits, horses, fish and crustaceans
Common names 

Fish protein concentrate, FPC, fish hydrolysate, fish hydrolyzate

Species 
Description 

Fish Protein Concentrate can be prepared from any type of fish or fishery waste. It is prepared from fish by extracting out the oil, screening or settling out the bones and drying, so that the resultant product (Fish Protein Concentrate) is higher in protein *85% to 95 %) and lower in ash content than fish meal. Fish Hydrolyzate is similar to Fish Protein Concentrate, except that the oil and water has not been removed. The fish protein is sometimes enzymatically hydrolyzed, using a combination of enzymes and acids, so that the bone can be more easily removed. The particle size of the Fish Protein Concentrate is smaller than fish meal and more uniform in color and texture. Do to the processing costs associated with producing this product it is more expensive than fish meal and is usually only used in human applications or for very specialized applications primarily in milk replacers. Since its oil content is low the problem of fishy taste occurring in the edible portion is less.

Processes 

There are a number of options that can be used to prepare Fish Protein Concentrate (Orejana et al., 1985). Considerable variation has been found between Fish Protein Concentrates (Pronczuk et al., 1976). The extent of enzymatic hydrolyzes can vary between batches when no acid is added (43.7% to 61%) and when acid is used (54.0% to 67.9%)(Yap et al., 1996). It is an excellent source of highly digestible amino acids, but its costs normally limit its usage. If available as at a price that is comparable to other supplemental protein sources, it can be used to replace other protein sources. Fish oil residues in Fish Protein Concentrate may cause fishy taste to develop in some applications in monogastric animals.

Nutritional aspects
Nutritional attributes 

Fish Protein Concentrate has primarily been used in specialized feeding applications with monogastric animals, such as, in milk replacers or starter feeds. It is an excellent source of highly digestible amino acids, but its costs normally limit its usage. If available as at a price that is comparable to other supplemental protein sources, it can be used to replace other protein sources.

Potential constraints 

The quality of the source of materials used to prepare Fish Protein Concentrate will influence the quality of the material produced, if it has been prepared from material that has decomposed, then the histamine, dimethyamine and trimethylamine levels in the finished product can be high. High levels of histamines in fish meal has been thought to cause gizzard erosion and black vomit in poultry to which it has been fed.

Ruminants 

Research with ruminant animals has only been done for applications in pre-ruminant animals. It has either been found to improve performance when replacing milk protein in the milk replacer (Su et al., 1982) or no differences in performance was observed (Abarzua, 1992). Carcass acceptability was improved when Fish Protein Concentrate replaced fish meal when fed to calves (Gorrill et al., 1975).

Pigs 

It has also been fed at 3.5% to 5% in swine starter / creep diets as the only supplemental protein source without reducing performance (Deboer et al., 1988).

Poultry 

Several Fish Protein Concentrates were evaluated using broilers, that were prepared from; 1) hake (Pacific Whiting), 2)dover sole and brown rock, 4) Atlantic cod and similar performance was observed (Wu et al., 1984).

Fish 

It was found to be more efficient than casein when evaluated in trout (Kellems et al., 1982).

Other species 

Fish Protein Concentrate was shown to have a higher Protein Efficiency Ratio and improved gains in rats as compared to casein (Atia et al., 1992). In a trial that lasted five generations Fish Protein Concentrate was compared to casein in a feeding trial with rats (Newberne et al., 1973b) and mice (Newberne et al., 1973a), with no differences being observed.

Nutritional tables
Tables of chemical composition and nutritional value 

Avg: average or predicted value; SD: standard deviation; Min: minimum value; Max: maximum value; Nb: number of values (samples) used

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This datasheet is pending revision and updating; its contents are currently derived from FAO's Animal Feed Resources Information System (1991-2002) and from Bo Göhl's Tropical Feeds (1976-1982).

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Dry matter % as fed 97.7 1
Crude protein % DM 63.4 1
Ether extract % DM 32.6 1
Ash % DM 1.8 1

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

Yanez et al., 1976

Last updated on 24/10/2012 00:44:11

Main analysis Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Dry matter % as fed 95.0 2.6 91.6 99.6 10
Crude protein % DM 76.8 7.8 62.3 88.0 13
Crude fibre % DM 2.3 1.6 0.5 3.7 3
Ether extract % DM 11.1 12.6 0.2 23.1 4
Ash % DM 7.1 3.9 0.1 11.6 11
Gross energy MJ/kg DM 23.3 *
 
Minerals Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Calcium g/kg DM 26.1 15.9 2.0 43.5 5
Phosphorus g/kg DM 18.4 8.2 6.1 26.0 5
Potassium g/kg DM 5.0 1
Sodium g/kg DM 5.3 2.0 8.6 2
Magnesium g/kg DM 1.5 1
Manganese mg/kg DM 81 1
Zinc mg/kg DM 127 1
Iron mg/kg DM 1208 67 2350 2
 
Amino acids Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Arginine % protein 5.5 4.7 6.4 2
Cystine % protein 1.0 1
Glycine % protein 5.6 1
Histidine % protein 2.2 2.0 2.5 2
Isoleucine % protein 4.7 3.9 5.5 2
Leucine % protein 7.4 6.4 8.5 2
Lysine % protein 7.7 6.4 9.0 2
Methionine % protein 2.9 2.0 3.7 2
Phenylalanine % protein 4.0 3.4 4.7 2
Threonine % protein 4.2 3.3 5.1 2
Tryptophan % protein 1.1 0.8 1.5 2
Tyrosine % protein 3.9 1
Valine % protein 5.6 5.1 6.1 2
 
Pig nutritive values Unit Avg SD Min Max Nb
Energy digestibility, growing pig % 86.5 *
DE growing pig MJ/kg DM 20.1 *

The asterisk * indicates that the average value was obtained by an equation.

References

AFZ, 2011; Dreosti, 1962; Dust et al., 2005; Hoskins et al., 1974; Iwaya et al., 1979; Molndal, 1975; Su et al., 1982

Last updated on 24/10/2012 00:44:11

References
References 
Datasheet citation 

DATASHEET UNDER CONSTRUCTION. DO NOT QUOTE. http://www.feedipedia.org/node/206 Last updated on October 9, 2011, 15:28

Image credits