Journal of Applied Phycology

, Volume 28, Issue 6, pp 3659–3665 | Cite as

Ulva lactuca (Chlorophyta Ulvales) as co-feed for Pacific white shrimp

  • Mariane Fontoura Pallaoro
  • Felipe do Nascimento Vieira
  • Leila Hayashi


The expansion of shrimp farming is limited by dependency on fish meal and fish oil as the main sources of protein and lipids. Alternative sources of protein could decrease production costs, making shrimp farming more sustainable. Therefore, this paper aimed to evaluate the growth performance of Litopenaeus vannamei (formerly Penaeus vannamei), also known as Pacific white shrimp, co-fed with the green seaweed Ulva lactuca in different percentages (25, 50, 75, and 100 %) of substitution for commercial feed. Shrimps were cultivated in 30-L plastic boxes under constant aeration, temperature of 26 ± 2 °C, 35‰ salinity, and daily water exchange of 80 % for 28 days. Ten shrimp (3.7 ± 0.2 g) were stocked in each experimental unit and fed according to the treatments. Shrimp fed with no algal substitution were used as control. All treatments and control were performed in triplicate. Algal biomass was kept available for shrimp for 24 h, and commercial feed, calculated as 5 % of mean starting shrimp biomass in each unit, was given three times a day. Results indicate that commercial feed can be replaced by as much as 50 % without significant loss on the growth performance of the marine shrimp L. vannamei when cultivated in a clear water system.


Co-feeding Feed management Growth performance Litopenaeus vannamei Seaweed 


  1. AOAC (1995) Official methods of analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists Arlington. J Assoc Off Anal Chem Method 954:02Google Scholar
  2. AOAC (1997) Official methods of analysis of the Association of Analytical Chemists Arlington. J Assoc Off Anal Chem. Bc 6–49Google Scholar
  3. AOAC (2007) Crude protein in meat and meat products including pet foods: official methods of analysis. Gaithersburg, MD, USA. Method 992, 15: 6–7Google Scholar
  4. Baloo L, Azman S, Said MIM, Ahmad F, Mohamad M (2014) Biofiltration potential of macroalgae for ammonium removal in outdoor tank shrimp wastewater recirculation system. Biomass Bioenergy 66:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bixler HJ, Porse H (2011) A decade of change in the seaweed hydrocolloids industry. J Appl Phycol 23:321–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brito LO, Arantes R, Magnotti C, Derner R, Pchara F, Oliveira A, Vinatea L (2014) Water quality and growth of Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei (Boone) in co-culture with green seaweed Ulva lactuca (Linnaeus) in intensive system. Aquac Int 22:497–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruhn A, Dahl J, Nielsen HB, Nikolaisen L, Rasmussen MB, Markager S, Olesen B, Arias C, Jensen PD (2011) Bioenergy potential of Ulva lactuca: biomass yield, methane production and combustion. Bioresour Technol 102:2595–2604CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chopin T, Buschmann AH, Halling C, Troell M, Kautsky N, Neori A, Kraemer GP, Zertuche-González JA, Yarish C, Neefus C (2001) Integrating seaweeds into marine aquaculture systems: a key toward sustainability. J Appl Phycol 37:975–986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cruz-Suárez LE, Tapia-Salazar M, Nieto-López MG, Guajardo-Barbosa C, Ricque-Marie D (2009) Comparison of Ulva clathrata and the kelps Macrocystis pyrifera and Ascophyllum nodosum as ingredients in shrimp feeds. Aquac Nutr 15:421–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cruz-Suárez LE, León A, Peña-Rodriguez A, Rodríguez-Peña G, Moll B, Ricque-Marie D (2010) Shrimp/Ulva co-culture: a sustainable alternative to diminish the need for artificial feed and improve shrimp quality. Aquaculture 301:64–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Davis DA, Lawrence AL (1997) Minerals. In: D’Abramo LR, Conklin DE, Akiyama DM (eds) Crustacean nutrition, vol 6. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, pp 150–163Google Scholar
  12. Edwards P (1970) Illustrated guide to the seaweeds and seagrass in the vicinity of Porto Aransas, Texas. Contrib Mar Sci 15:1–228Google Scholar
  13. Evans FD, Critchley AT (2014) Seaweed for animal production use. J Appl Phycol 26:891–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2014) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture. Rome, p 25–27Google Scholar
  15. Ferreira BL, Barufi BJ, Plastino ME (2006) Growth of red and green strains of the tropical agarophyte Gracilaria cornea J. Agardh (Gracilariales, Rhodophyta) in laboratory. Rev Bras Bot 29:187–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fleurence J (1999) Seaweed proteins: biochemical, nutritional aspects and potential uses. LWT Food Sci Technol 10:25–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fleurence J, Morançais M, Dumay J, Decottignies P, Turpin V, Munier M, Garcia-Bueno N, Jaqoen P (2012) What are the prospects for using seaweed in human nutrition and for marine animals raised through aquaculture? LWT Food Sci Technol 27:57–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fox JM, Lawrence AL, Li-Chan E (1995) Dietary requirement for lysine by juvenile Penaeus vannamei using intact and free amino acid sources. Aquaculture 131:279–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gamboa-Delgado J, Peña-Rodriguez A, Ricque-Marie D, Cruz-Suárez LE (2011) Assessment of nutrient allocation and metabolic turnover rate in Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei co-fed live macroalgae Ulva clathrata and inert feed: dual staple isotope analysis. J Shellfish Res 30:969–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hagen SR, Frost B, Augustin J (1989) Precolumn phenylisothiocyanate derivatization and liquid-chromatography of amino-acid in food. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 72:912–916PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kureshy N, Davis DA (2002) Protein requirement for maintenance and maximum weight gain for the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquaculture 204:125–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lahaye M, Jegou D (1993) Chemical and physical-chemical characteristics of dietary fibres from Ulva lactuca (L.) Thuret and Enteromorpha compressa (L.) Grev. J Appl Phycol 5:195–2000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lartigue J, Neill A, Hayden BL, Pulfer J, Cebrian J (2003) The impact of salinity fluctuations on net oxygen production and inorganic nitrogen uptake by Ulva lactuca (Chlorophyceae). Aquat Bot 75:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marinho-Soriano E, Camara MR, Cabral TM, Carneiro MAA (2007) Preliminary evaluation of the seaweed Gracilaria cervicornis (Rhodophyta) as a partial substitute for the industrial feeds used in shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) farming. Aquacult Res 38:182–187Google Scholar
  25. Neori A, Chopin T, Troell M, Buschmann AH, Kraemer GP, Halling C, Shpigel M, Yarish C (2004) Integrated aquaculture: rationale, evolution and state of the art emphasizing seaweed biofiltration in modern mariculture. Aquaculture 231:361–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ortiz J, Romero N, Robert P, Araya J, Lopez-Hernández J, Bozzo C, Navarrete E, Osorio A, Rios A (2006) Dietary fiber, amino acid, fatty acid and tocopherol contents of the edible seaweeds Ulva lactuca and Durvillaea antartica. Food Chem 99:98–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pacheco MR (2011) Macroalgas marinhas associadas a bancos de rodolitos do infralitoral do Espírito Santo, Brasil. Doctoral Thesis, Universidade de São PauloGoogle Scholar
  28. Peñaflorida VD, Golez NV (1996) Use of seaweed meals from Kappaphycus alvarezii and Gracilaria heteroclata as binders in diets for juvenile shrimp Penaeus monodon. Aquaculture 143:393–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Porchas-Cornejo MA, Córdova LM, Magallón FB, Páramo JN, Clark GP (1999) Efecto de la macroalga Caulerpa sertularioides en el desarrollo del camarón Penaeus californiensis (Decapoda: Peneidae). Rev Biol Trop 47:437–442Google Scholar
  30. Rodríguez-González H, Orduña-Rojas J, Villalobos-Medina JP, García-Ulloa M, Polanco-Torres A, López-Álvarez ES, Montoya-Mejía M, Hernández-Llamas A (2014) Partial inclusión of Ulva lactuca and Gracilaria parvispora meal in balanced diets for white leg shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei). J Appl Phycol 26:2453–2459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rover T, Simioni C, Hable W, Bouzon ZL (2015) Ultrastructural and structural characterization of zygotes and embryos during development in Sargassum cymosum (Phaeophyceae, Fucales). Protoplasma 252:505–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Sánchez A, Sanchéz-Rodríguez I, Casas-Valdez M (2012) The stable isotope of nitrogen in an experimental culture of Ulva spp. and its assimilation in the nutrition of white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei, Baja California Sur, Mexico. J Appl Phycol 24:507–511Google Scholar
  33. Shiau SY (1997) Carbohydrates and fiber. In: D’Abramo LR, Conklin DE, Akiyama DM (eds) Crustacean nutrition, vol 6. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, pp 108–122Google Scholar
  34. Silva RL, Barbosa JM (2009) Seaweed meal as a protein source for the white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. J Appl Phycol 21:193–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Steinberg PD (1985) Feeding preferences of Tegula funebralis and chemical defenses of marine brown algae. Ecol Monogr 55:333–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tabarsa M, Rezaei M, Ramezanpour Z, Waaland JR (2012) Chemical compositions of the marine algae Gracilaria salicornia (Rhodophyta) and Ulva lactuca (Chlorophyta) as a potential food source. J Sci Food Agric 92:2500–2506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Tacon AGJ, Metian M (2008) Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in industrially compounded aquafeeds: trends and future prospects. Aquaculture 285:146–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tan RKH, Dominy WG (1997) Commercial pelleting of crustacean feeds. Crustacean nutrition. In: D’Abramo LR, Conklin DE, Akiyama DM (eds) Crustacean nutrition, vol 6. World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, pp 520–549Google Scholar
  39. Valente LMP, Gouveia A, Rema P, Matos J, Gomes EF, Pinto IS (2006) Evaluation of three seaweeds Gracilaria bursa-pastoris, Ulva rigida and Gracilaria cornea as dietary ingredients in European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) juveniles. Aquaculture 252:85–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wyk PV (1999) Nutrition and feeding of Litpenaeus vannamei in intensive culture systems. In: WYK PV et al., (eds.) Farming marine shrimp in recirculating freshwater systems, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Tallahassee, USA, p 125–139Google Scholar
  41. Yaich H, Garna H, Besbes S, Paquot M, Blecker C, Attia H (2011) Chemical composition and functional properties of Ulva lactuca seaweed collected in Tunisia. Food Chem 128:895–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zubia M, Payri C, Deslandes E (2008) Alginate, mannitol, phenolic compounds and biological actives of two range-extending brown algae, Sargassum mangarevense and Turbinaria ornata (Phaeophyta: Fucales), from Tahiti (French Polynesia). J Appl Phycol 20:1033–1043CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mariane Fontoura Pallaoro
    • 1
  • Felipe do Nascimento Vieira
    • 1
  • Leila Hayashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Departamento de Aquicultura, Seção de Macroalgas do Laboratório de Camarões MarinhosUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaFlorianópolisBrazil

Personalised recommendations