Fish Physiology and Biochemistry

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 1037–1049 | Cite as

Comparative evaluation of fermented and non-fermented de-oiled rice bran with or without exogenous enzymes supplementation in the diet of Labeo rohita (Hamilton, 1822)

  • Amit Ranjan
  • Narottam Prasad Sahu
  • Ashutosh Dharmendra Deo
  • H. Sanath Kumar
  • Sarvendra Kumar
  • Kamal Kant Jain


A 60-day feeding trial was conducted to study the effect of exogenous enzymes (xylanase and phytase) supplementation in the non-fermented and fermented de-oiled rice bran (DORB)-based diet of Labeo rohita. Four test diets (T1-DORB-based diet, T2-fermented DORB-based diet, T3-phytase and xylanase supplemented DORB-based diet, and T4-phytase and xylanase supplemented fermented DORB-based diet) were formulated and fed to the respective groups. Test diets T3 and T4 were supplemented with 0.01% xylanase (16,000 U kg−1) and 0.01% phytase (500 U kg−1) enzymes. One hundred twenty juveniles of L. rohita, with an average weight 5.01 ± 0.02 g, were stocked in 12 uniform size plastic rectangular tanks in triplicate with 10 fishes per tank following a completely randomized design (CRD). Exogenous enzyme supplementation to the T3 group significantly improved the growth performance of L. rohita (p < 0.05). Fermented DORB fed groups registered significantly lower growth irrespective of the supplementation of exogenous enzymes. The carcass composition (except CP %), enzyme activities (except amylase activity), globulin, and A/G ratio did not vary significantly (p > 0.05). Based on the results of the present study, it is concluded that exogenous enzyme supplementation significantly increases the growth of fish fed with DORB-based diet.


De-oiled rice bran (DORB) Labeo rohita Exogenous enzyme Xylanase Phytase Growth 



The authors are very thankful to the Director, Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Versova, Mumbai, for providing all the facilities during the research work. The financial support given by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, is also gratefully acknowledged. The authors are also sincerely acknowledging the support of Vaighai Agro Products Limited, Tamil Nadu, and AB Vista, India, for supplying DORB and enzymes free of cost for the successful completion of this research work.


  1. Adeoye A, Jaramillo-Torres A, Fox S, Merrifield D Davies S (2016). Supplementation of formulated diets for tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) with selected exogenous enzymes: Overall performance and effects on intestinal histology and microbiota. Anim Feed Sci Technol 215: 133-143Google Scholar
  2. Ai Q, Mai K, Zhang W, Xu W, Tan B, Zhang C, Li H (2007) Effects of exogenous enzymes (phytase, non-starch polysaccharide enzyme) in diets on growth, feed utilization, nitrogen and phosphorus excretion of Japanese seabass, Lateolabrax japonicus. Comp Biochem Physiol 147(2):502–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander C, Sahu NP, Pal AK, Akhtar M, Saravanan S, Xavier B, Munilkumar S (2011) Higher water temperature enhances dietary carbohydrate utilization and growth performance in Labeo rohita (Hamilton) fingerlings. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 95(5):642–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alltech (2014) Alltech global feed survey summary, 8p. Alltech Nicholasville, KentuckyGoogle Scholar
  5. Angelovičová M, Mendel J, Angelovič M, Kačániová M (2005) Effect of enzyme addition to wheat based diets in broilers. Trakya Univ J Sci 6(1):29–33Google Scholar
  6. Annison G, Moughan P, Thomas D (1995) Nutritive activity of soluble rice bran arabinoxylans in broiler diets. Br Poult Sci 36(3):479–488CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Anupama, Ravindra P (2001) Studies on production of single cell protein by Aspergillus niger in solid state fermentation of rice bran. Braz Arch Biol Technol 44(1):79–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. AOAC (Association of Official Analytical Chemists) (1995) Official methods of analysis of the Association Official Analytical Chemists, 16th edn. AOAC, Inc., ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  9. APHA (1998) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, Washigton DC, 20th Edition, pp. 1220Google Scholar
  10. Bedford M (1995) Mechanism of action and potential environmental benefits from the use of feed enzymes. Anim Feed Sci Techol 53(2):145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bedford MR (2000) Exogenous enzymes in monogastric nutrition—their current value and future benefits. Anim Feed Sci Technol 86:1):1–1)13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bradford MM (1976) A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem 72(1–2):248–254CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Buchanan J, Sarac H, Poppi D, Cowan R (1997) Effects of enzyme addition to canola meal in prawn diets. Aquaculture 151(1):29–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell G, Bedford M (1992) Enzyme applications for monogastric feeds: A review. Can J Anim Sci 72: 449-466Google Scholar
  15. Carter C, Houlihan D, Buchanan B, Mitchell A (1994) Growth and feed utilization efficiencies of seawater Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., fed a diet containing supplementary enzymes. Aquac Res 25(1):37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Castanon J, Flores M, Pettersson D (1997) Mode of degradation of non-starch polysaccharides by feed enzyme preparations. Anim Feed Sci Technol 68(3–4):361–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chakrabarti I, Gani MA, Chaki K, Sur R, Misra K (1995) Digestive enzymes in 11 freshwater teleost fish species in relation to food habit and niche segregation. Comp Biochem Physiol 112(1):167–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cherry IS, Crandall LA (1932) The specificity of pancreatic lipase: its appearance in the blood after pancreatic injury. Am J Physiol Legacy Content 100(2):266–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chesson A (1993) Feed enzymes. Anim Feed Sci Technol 45(1):65–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cho CY, Slinger SJ (1979) Apparent digestibility measurement in feedstuffs for rainbow trout. In: Halver J, Tiews K (eds) Proc. World Symposium on Finfish Nutrition and Fish Feed Technology, vol 2. Heenemann, Berlin, pp 239-247Google Scholar
  21. Choct M (1997) Enzymes in animal nutrition: the unseen benefits. Enzym Poult Swine Nutr 43–51Google Scholar
  22. Debnath D, Pal AK, Sahu NP, Yengkokpam S, Baruah K, Choudhury D, Venkateshwarlu G (2007) Digestive enzymes and metabolic profile of Labeo rohita fingerlings fed diets with different crude protein levels. Comp Biochem Physiol 146(1):107–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Deng J, Mai K, Chen L, Mi H, Zhang L (2015) Effects of replacing soybean meal with rubber seed meal on growth, antioxidant capacity, non-specific immune response, and resistance to Aeromonas hydrophila in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus × O. aureus). Fish Shellfish Immunol 44(2):436–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Drapeau G (1974) Protease from Staphylococcus aureus. In: Lorand BL (ed) Methods in enzymology. Academic Press, NY 469 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Farhangi M, Carter CG (2007) Effect of enzyme supplementation to dehulled lupin-based diets on growth, feed efficiency, nutrient digestibility and carcass composition of rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum). Aquac Res 38(12):1274–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Fawole FJ, Sahu NP, Jain K, Gupta S, Shamna N, Phulia V, Prabu D (2016) Nutritional evaluation of protein isolate from rubber seed in the diet of Labeo rohita: effects on growth performance, nutrient utilization, whole body composition and metabolic enzymes activity. Anim Feed Sci Technol 219:189–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Furukawa A, Tsukahara H (1966) On the acid digestion method for the determination of chromic oxide as the index substance in the study of fish feed. Bull Jpn Soc Sci Fish 32:502–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ghosh K, Sen SK, Ray AK (2003) Supplementation of an isolated fish gut bacterium, Bacillus circulans, in formulated diets for rohu, Labeo rohita, fingerlings. Isr J Aquacult Bamid 55: 13-21Google Scholar
  29. Hassaan M, Goda AS, Kumar V (2017) Evaluation of nutritive value of fermented de-oiled physic nut, Jatropha curcas, seed meal for Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus fingerlings. Aquac Nutr 23(3):571–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hlophe-Ginindza SN, Moyo NA, Ngambi JW, Ncube I (2015) The effect of exogenous enzyme supplementation on growth performance and digestive enzyme activities in Oreochromis mossambicus fed kikuyu-based diets. Aquac Res 47(12):3777–3787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Huerta S, Favela E, Lopez-Ulibarri R, Fonseca A, Viniegra-Gonzalez G, Gutierrez-Rojas M (1994) Absorbed substrate fermentation for pectinase production with Aspergillus niger. Biotechnol Tech 8(11):837–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kang S, Park Y, Lee J, Hong S, Kim S (2004) Production of cellulases and hemicellulases by Aspergillus niger KK2 from lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour Technol 91(2):153–156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Kazerani HR, Shahsavani D (2011) The effect of supplementation of feed with exogenous enzymes on the growth of common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Iran J Vet Res 12(2):127–132Google Scholar
  34. Kolkovski S, Tandler A, Kissil GW, Gertler A (1993) The effect of dietary exogenous digestive enzymes on ingestion, assimilation, growth and survival of gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata, Sparidae, Linnaeus) larvae. Fish Physiol Biochem 12(3):203–209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Kumar S, Sahu N, Pal A, Choudhury D, Yengkokpam S, Mukherjee S (2005) Effect of dietary carbohydrate on haematology, respiratory burst activity and histological changes in L. rohita juveniles. Fish Shellfish Immunol 19(4):331–344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kumar S, Sahu N, Pal A, Choudhury D, Mukherjee S (2006) Studies on digestibility and digestive enzyme activities in Labeo rohita (Hamilton) juveniles: effect of microbial α-amylase supplementation in non-gelatinized or gelatinized corn-based diet at two protein levels. Fish Physiol Biochem 32(3):209–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kumar V, Sahu NP, Pal AK, Kumar S, Sinha AK, Ranjan J, Baruah K (2010) Modulation of key enzymes of glycolysis, gluconeogenesis, amino acid catabolism, and TCA cycle of the tropical freshwater fish Labeo rohita fed gelatinized and non-gelatinized starch diet. Fish Physiol Biochem 36: 491-499Google Scholar
  38. Kumar S, Sahu N, Gal D (2015) Mitigation of immunosuppressive and oxidative stress effect of dietary gelatinized starch in Labeo rohita fingerlings by elevation of rearing temperature within optimum range. Fish Shellfish Immunol 47(2):868–877CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Kupski L, Cipolatti E, Md R, Oliveira MS, Souza-Soares LA, Badiale-Furlong E (2012) Solid-state fermentation for the enrichment and extraction of proteins and antioxidant compounds in rice bran by Rhizopus oryzae. Braz Arch Biol Technol 55(6):937–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Laufenberg G, Kunz B, Nystroem M (2003) Transformation of vegetable waste into value added products: (A) the upgrading concept; (B) practical implementations. Bioresour Technol 87(2):167–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Li J, Li J, Wu T (2009) Effects of non-starch polysaccharides enzyme, phytase and citric acid on activities of endogenous digestive enzymes of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus × Oreochromis aureus). Aquac Nutr 15(4):415–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lopez-Lopez S, Nolasco H, Villarreal-Colmenares H, Civera-Cerecedo R (2005) Digestive enzyme response to supplemental ingredients in practical diets for juvenile freshwater crayfish Cherax quadricarinatus. Aquac Nutr 11(2):79–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lundstedt L, Melo JFB, Moraes G (2004) Digestive enzymes and metabolic profile of Pseudoplatystoma corruscans (Teleostei: Siluriformes) in response to diet composition. Comp Biochem Physiol 137(3):331–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Magalhães R, Lopes T, Martins N, Díaz-Rosales P, Couto A, Pousão-Ferreira P, Oliva-Teles A, Peres H (2016) Carbohydrases supplementation increased nutrient utilization in white seabream (Diplodus sargus) juveniles fed high soybean meal diets. Aquaculture 463:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Msangi S, Kobayashi M, Batka M, Vannuccini S, Dey M, Anderson J (2013) Fish to 2030: prospects for fisheries and aquaculture. World Bank Report (83177-GLB)Google Scholar
  46. Ogunkoya AE, Page GI, Adewolu MA, Bureau DP (2006) Dietary incorporation of soybean meal and exogenous enzyme cocktail can affect physical characteristics of faecal material egested by rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Aquaculture 254: 466-475Google Scholar
  47. Oliveira DSM, Feddern V, Kupski L, Cipolatti EP, Badiale-Furlong E, de Souza-Soares LA (2011) Changes in lipid, fatty acids and phospholipids composition of whole rice bran after solid-state fungal fermentation. Bioresour Technol 102(17):8335–8338CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pandey A, Soccol CR (1998) Bioconversion of biomass: a case study of ligno-cellulosics bioconversions in solid state fermentation. Braz Arch Biol Technol 41(4):379–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Prusty A, Kohli M, Sahu N, Pal A, Saharan N, Mohapatra S, Gupta S (2011) Effect of short term exposure of fenvalerate on biochemical and haematological responses in Labeo rohita (Hamilton) fingerlings. Pest Biochem Physiol 100(2):124–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ramakrishna R, Shipton TA, Hasan MR (2013) Feeding and feed management of Indian major carps in Andhra Pradesh, India. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Technical Paper No. 578, p. 90Google Scholar
  51. Ranjan A, Jain KK, Srivastava PP, Muralidhar PA (2018a) Dietary energy requirement of Pangasianodon hypophthalmus (Sauvage, 1878) juveniles reared at two temperatures. Turk J Fish Aquat Sci 18(1):101–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ranjan A, Sahu NP, Deo AD, Kumar S (2018b) Comparative growth performance, in vivo digestibility and enzyme activities of Labeo rohita fed with DORB based formulated diet and commercial carp feed. Turk J Fish Aquat Sci 18. doi:
  53. Ravinder R, Venkateshwar Rao L, Ravindra P (2003) Studies on Aspergillus oryzae mutants for the production of single cell proteins from deoiled rice bran. Food Technol Biotech 41(3):243–246Google Scholar
  54. Raza S, Ashraf M, Pasha TN, Latif F (2009) Effect of enzyme supplementation of broiler diets containing varying level of sunflower meal and crude fiber. Pak J Bot 41(5):2543–2550Google Scholar
  55. Reinhold J (1953) Manual determination of serum total protein, albumin and globulin fraction by Biuret method. Standard methods in clinical chemistry. Academic Press, New York 88pGoogle Scholar
  56. Rick W, Stegbauer HP (1974) Amylase measurement of reducing groups. In: Bergmeyer HV (ed) Methods of enzymatic analysis, vol. 2, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New York, pp 885–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rudravaram R, Chandel AK, Linga VR, Pogaku R (2006) Optimization of protein enrichment of deoiled rice bran by solid state fermentation using Aspergillus oryzae MTCC 1846. Int J Food Eng 2(4):1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Samsonova M, Min'kova N, Lapteva T, Mikodina E, Filippovich YB (2003) Aspartate and alanine aminotransferases in early development of the keta. Russ J Dev Biol 34(1):14–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Shamna N, Sardar P, Sahu NP, Pal AK, Jain KK, Phulia V (2015) Nutritional evaluation of fermented Jatropha protein concentrate in Labeo rohita fingerlings. Aquac Nutr 21(1):33–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shiau SY, Liang HS (1994) Nutrient digestibility and growth of hybrid tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus× O. aureus, as influenced by agar supplementation at two dietary protein levels. Aquaculture 127: 41-48Google Scholar
  61. Silveira CMD, Furlong EB (2007) Characterization of nitrogenated compounds in solid state fermented bran. Food Sci Tech 27:805–811Google Scholar
  62. Silveira CMD, Badiale-Furlong E (2009) Sperathe effects of solid-state fermentation in the functional properties of defatted rice bran and wheat bran. Braz Arch Biol Technol 52(6):1555–1562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Soltan M (2009) Effect of dietary fish meal replacement by poultry by-product meal with different grain source and enzyme supplementation on performance, feces recovery, body composition and nutrient balance of Nile Tilapia. Pak J Nutr 8(4):395–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Stone D, Allan G, Anderson A (2003) Carbohydrate utilization by juvenile silver perch, Bidyanus bidyanus (Mitchell). IV. Can dietary enzymes increase digestible energy from wheat starch, wheat and dehulled lupin? Aquac Res 34(2):135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Supriyati TH, Susanti T, Susana I (2015) Nutritional value of rice bran fermented by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens and humic substances and its utilization as a feed ingredient for broiler chickens. Asian Australas J Anim Sci 28(2):231–238CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. Thanh N, Nout M (2002) Rhizopus oligosporus biomass, sporangiospore yield and viability as influenced by harvesting age and processing conditions. Food Microbiol 19(1):91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Tok NC, Jain KK, Prabu DL, Sahu NP, Munilkumar S, Pal AK, Siddiah GM, Kumar P (2016) Metabolic and digestive enzyme activity of Pangasianodon hypophthalmus (Sauvage, 1878) fingerlings in response to alternate feeding of different protein levels in the diet. Aquac Res:1–17Google Scholar
  68. Usmani N, Khalil Jafri A, Afzal Khan M (2003) Nutrient digestibility studies in Heteropneustes fossilis (Bloch), Clarias batrachus (Linnaeus) and C. gariepinus (Burchell). Aquac Res 34(14):1247–1253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Van WJH, Khalaf KA, Aartsen FJ, Tijssen PAT (1999) Balance trials with African catfish Clarias gariepinus fed phytase-treated soybean meal-based diets. Aquac Nutr 5(2):135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Wootton IDP (1964) Micro-analysis in medical biochemistry. Micro-analysis in medical biochemistry, 4th ed. London 101–107Google Scholar
  71. Yengkokpam S, Debnath D, Pal AK, Sahu NP, Jain KK, Norouzitallab P, Baruah K (2013) Short-term periodic feed deprivation in Labeo rohita fingerlings: effect on the activities of digestive, metabolic and anti-oxidative enzymes. Aquaculture 412:186–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Xavier B, Sahu NP, Pal AK, Jain KK, Misra S, Dalvi R, Baruah K (2012) Water soaking and exogenous enzyme treatment of plant-based diets: effect on growth performance, whole-body composition, and digestive enzyme activities of rohu, Labeo rohita (Hamilton), fingerlings. Fish Physiol Biochem 38: 341-353Google Scholar
  73. Yigit N, Olmez M (2011) Effects of cellulase addition to canola meal in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus L.) diets. Aquac Nutr 17(2):494–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yildirim YB, Turan F (2010) Effects of exogenous enzyme supplementation in diets on growth and feed utilization in African catfish, Clarias gariepinus. J Anim Vet Adv 9(2):327–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zamini A, Kanani HG, azam Esmaeili A, Ramezani S, Zoriezahra SJ (2014) Effects of two dietary exogenous multi-enzyme supplementation, Natuzyme® and beta-mannanase (Hemicell®), on growth and blood parameters of Caspian salmon (Salmo trutta caspius). Comp Clin Path 23(1):187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zhang L, Mai KS, Ai QH, Tan BP (2006) Effects of phytase and non-starch polysaccharide enzyme supplementation in diets on growth and digestive enzyme activity in large yellow croaker, Pseudosciaena crocea R. Period Ocean Univ China 6:014Google Scholar
  77. Zhang L, Qing Hui A, Kang Sen M, Jing L, Hui Tao L, Chun Xiao Z, Shi Xuan Z (2009) Effects of phytase and non-starch polysaccharide enzyme supplementation in diets on growth and digestive enzyme activity for Japanese seabass, Lateolabrax japonicus C. Acta Hydrobiol Sin 33(1):82–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zhou C, Ge X, Lin H, Niu J (2014) Effect of dietary carbohydrate on non-specific immune response, hepatic antioxidative abilities and disease resistance of juvenile golden pompano (Trachinotus ovatus). Fish Shellfish Immunol 41(2):183–190CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Fish Nutrition, Biochemistry and Physiology DivisionICAR—Central Institute Of Fisheries EducationMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Fisheries Resources, Harvest & Post-Harvest DivisionICAR—Central Institute Of Fisheries EducationMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations