Use of Feed Additives with Sorption Properties in Fish Farming: Literature Review

Introduction. Aquaculture is currently recognised as the most rapidly developing branch of agriculture. Various feed additives enable reduction of the negative impact of the production intensification measures on the hydrobionts and improve their immune status. The natural additives with sorption properties are of particular interest, they are environmentally friendly and cause no dependence. Humic acids, zeolites, aluminosilicates, charcoal, etc. are used as the sorption feed additives for fish. It is necessary not only to find a substance possessing the sorption properties that can be used as a feed additive, but also to determine its dosage, interaction with feed ingredients and other preparations, as well as its safety. The existing publications in the foreign and native scientific literature describe the research held in the certain hydrobionts species on inclusion in their diet of the certain sorption feed additives for a limited period of time. However, in the scientific literature, the review papers analysing the use of such feed additives in aquaculture are not available yet. The objective of the present review is to summarise the data available in the literature on the results of using the feed additives with sorption properties in fish farming.

Materials and Methods. To achieve the set objective, a search for the articles published on this topic in the period from 2006 to 2023 in the eLIBRARY.RU, PubMed databases was carried out by the keywords: feed additives in fish farming, fish feeding, feed additives with sorption properties, charcoal, zeolites, humic acids, chitosan, silica, opoka in the feed for hydrobionts. Only sources in Russian and English languages were included in the search. The papers that passed screening were analysed, systematized and presented in the form of a table, chart and PRISMA flow chart.

Results. The search yielded with 55 articles, which were included in this review. The information was systematized by the thematic units according to the substances used as feed additives and possessing the sorption properties. It was revealed that the most frequently used sorbents for both freshwater and marine fish were: active feed additive made of charcoal, zeolites, humic acids, humates. The main purposes for using the sorption feed additives were improving the physiological parameters of fish organisms and increasing the profitability of production. According to the literature sources, the natural sorbents were less often added directly to water.

Discussion and Conclusion. The summarised data obtained as a result of the review allow us to consider the feed additives with sorption properties as having a good perspective for implementation into fish farming. However, in the numerous studies conducted by the native and foreign authors, the dosages of sorbents included in the diet of the most of fish farming objects are not specified, the mechanism of their impact on fish is poorly studied, as well as there is no information on the duration and frequency of using the sorption feed additives in conditions of the industrial production, the reliable data on non-toxicity, synergism or antagonism of co-usage of the various feed additives is not available either. Thus, a more extensive work in this direction is required.

1. Fedotov AA, Altukhov NM, Zhukov IV. Efficacy of Zeolites in Fish Breeding in Artificial Water Reservoirs. Vestnik of Voronezh State Agrarian University. 2012;1(32):77–79. (In Russ.)

2. Fiorella KJ, Okronipa H, Baker K, Heilpern S. Contemporary Aquaculture: Implications for Human Nutrition. Current Opinion in Biotechnology. 2021;70:83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2020.11.014

3. Udintsev SN, Zhilyakova TP. The Use of Humic Compounded Preparations in Aquaculture. Fisheries. 2016; 2:82–86. (In Russ.)

4. Naylor RL, Hardy RW, Buschmann AH, Bush SR, Cao L, Klinger DH, et al. A 20-Year Retrospective Review of Global Aquaculture. Nature. 2021;591:551–563. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03308-6

5. Valladão GM, Gallani SU, Pilarski F. Phytotherapy as an Alternative for Treating Fish Disease. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 2015:38(5):417–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/jvp.12202

6. Canham R, Gonzales-Prieto AM, Elliott JE. Mercury Exposure and Toxicological Consequences in Fish and Fish‐ Eating Wildlife from Anthropogenic Activity in Latin America. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. 2021;17(1):13–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.4313

7. Connolly M, Martinez-Morcillo S, Kalman J., Navas J-M, Bleeker E, Fernández-Cruz M-L. Considerations for Bioaccumulation Studies in Fish with Nanomaterials. Chemosphere. 2023;312(Pt.1):137299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.137299

8. Arhitskaya EV, Iakushkin IV. The Practical Significance and Efficiency of Applying the Chelators in Animal Husbandry. Ehlektronnyi nauchno-metodicheskii zhurnal Omskogo GAU (Electronic scientific and methodological journal of Omsk State Agrarian University). 2016;(S2):16. (In Russ.)

9. Kalaida AA. Influence of Enterosorbents on Vitamin C Oxidation. In: Proceedings of the XIV International Youth Scientific Conference “Tinchurin Readings”. In 3 Vol. Abdullazyanov EYu (Ed.). Kazan: Kazan State Power Engineering University; 2019. P. 356–366. (In Russ.)

10. Maksim EA, Yurina NA., Danilova AA. Method of Increasing the Growth and Development of Young Fish. In: Proceedings of the II National Scientific and Practical Conference “State and Ways of Development of Aquaculture in the Russian Federation in the Context of Import Substitution and Food Security of the Country”. Saint Petersburg: “TseSAin” Publ. LLC; 2017. P. 126–133. (In Russ.)

11. Chernyshov EV, Tletseruk IR, Yurina NA. Increasing the Growth of Young Fish Using Fodder Additives. Novosti nauki v APK (Agribusiness Science News). 2018;2–1(11):494–496. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25930/v48r-2r57

12. Ostrenko KS, Yurina NA, Chernyshov EV, Ovcharova AN. Use of Sorption Feed Additive in the Feeding of Young Fish. Problemy biologii productivnykh zhivotnykh (Problems of Productive Animal Biology). 2020;3:98–105. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25687/1996-6733.prodanimbiol.2020.3.98-105

13. Chernyshov EV, Tletseruk IR, Yurina NA, Maxim EA. Effect of the Sorbent in Composition of the Compound Feed on Chemical Composition of Young Sturgeon Body and Content of Heavy Metals. Collection of Scientific Papers of Krasnodar Research Centre for Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine. 2017;6(1):257–262. (In Russ.)

14. Firdus F, Samadi S, Muhammadar AA, Sarong MA., Muchlisin ZA, Sari1 W, et al. Supplementation of Rice Husk Activated Charcoal in Feed and its Effects on Growth and Histology of the Stomach and Intestines from Giant Trevally, Caranx Ignobilis. F1000Research. 2021;9:1274. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.27036.2

15. Firdus F, Samadi S, Muhammadar AA, Sarong MA, Muchlisin ZA, Sari W, et al. Gut and Intestinal Biometrics of the Giant Trevally, Caranx Ignobilis, Fed an Experimental Diet with Difference Sources of Activated Charcoal. F1000Research. 2020;9:444. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23788.2

16. Abd El-hameed SAA, Negm SS, Ismael NEM, Naiel MAE, Mohamed Mohamed Soliman MM, Shukry M, et al. Effects of Activated Charcoal on Growth, Immunity, Oxidative Stress Markers, and Physiological Responses of Nile Tilapia Exposed to Sub-Lethal Imidacloprid Toxicity. Animals. 2021;11(5):1357. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11051357

17. Elhetawy AIG, Abdel-Rahim MM, Sallam AE, Shahin SA, Lotfy AMA, El Basuini MF. Dietary Wood and Activated Charcoal Improved Ammonium Removal, Heavy Metals Detoxification, Growth Performance, Blood Biochemistry, Carcass Traits, and Histopathology of European Seabass. Aquaculture Nutrition. 2023;2023(1):8860652. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/8860652

18. Wu CC, Connell M, Zarb A, Akemann C, Morgan S, McElmurry SP, et al. Point-of-Use Carbon-Block Drinking Water Filters Change Gut Microbiome of Larval Zebrafish. Environmental Microbiology Reports. 2022;14(4):655-663. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-2229.13077

19. Ju K, Kil M, Ri S, Kim T, Kim J, Shi W, et al. Impacts of Dietary Supplementation of Bamboo Vinegar and Charcoal Powder on Growth Performance, Intestinal Morphology, and Gut Microflora of Large-Scale Loach Paramisgurnus Dabryanus. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology. 2023;41:1187–1196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00343-022-1412-y

20. Jiang F, Lin Y, Miao L, Hao J. Addition of Bamboo Charcoal to Selenium (Se)-Rich Feed Improves Growth and Antioxidant Capacity of Blunt Snout Bream (Megalobrama Amblycephala). Animals. 2021;11(9):2585. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11092585

21. Collado-González M, Esteban MA. Chitosan-Nanoparticles Effects on Mucosal Immunity: A Systematic Review. Fish & Shellfish Immunology. 2022;130:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2022.08.030

22. Ingle PU, Shende SS, Shingote PR, Mishra SS, Sarda V, Wasule DL, et al. Chitosan Nanoparticles (Chnps): A Versatile Growth Promoter in Modern Agricultural Production. Heliyon. 2022;8(11):e11893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11893

23. Dawood MAO, Gewaily MS, Soliman AA, Shukry M, Amer AA, Youniset EM, et al. Marine-Derived Chitosan Nanoparticles Improved the Intestinal Histo-Morphometrical Features in Association with the Health and Immune Response of Grey Mullet (Liza Ramada). Marine Drugs. 2020;18(12):611. https://doi.org/10.3390/md18120611

24. Aly SM, Eissa AE, Abdel-Razek N, El-Ramlawy AO. The Antibacterial Activity and Immunomodulatory Effect of Naturally Synthesized Chitosan and Silver Nanoparticles against Pseudomonas Fluorescence Infection in Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis Niloticus): An in Vivo Study. Fish & Shellfish Immunology. 2023;135:108628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2023.108628

25. Ismael NEM, Abd El-Hameed SAA, Salama AM, Naiel MAE, Abdel-Latif HMR. The Effects of Dietary Clinoptilolite and Chitosan Nanoparticles on Growth, Body Composition, Haemato-Biochemical Parameters, Immune Responses, and Antioxidative Status of Nile Tilapia Exposed to Imidacloprid. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2021;28(23):29535–29550. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-12693-4

26. Lapin AA, Chugunov YV, Govorkova LK, Potapov VV. Zelenkov VN, Shtyrov IN. Application of Nanodispersed Silica as an Enterosorbent in Fish Farming. In: Collection of Scientific Papers “Non-Traditional Natural Resources, Innovative Technologies and Products”. Vol. 23. Zelenkov VN (Ed.). Moscow: Rossiiskaya akademiya estestvennykh nauk; 2016. P. 9–29. (In Russ.)

27. Vasukevich TA, Nitievskaya LS. Application of Deactivating Properties of Some Sorbents in Aquaculture Feed Production. Radiatsionnaya biologiya. Radioehkologiyaya (Radiation biology. Radioecology). 2014;54(6):613–620. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.7868/S0869803114050166

28. Matveeva AYu. Influence of the Mineral Additive “Baymak Zeolites” on the Physiological State of This-Year-Born Carp (Cyprinus Carpio). In book: Innovative Technologies in Science and Education: Topical Issues and Achievements. Monograph. Penza: Nauka i Prosveshchenie; 2016. P. 101–113. (In Russ.)

29. Poyakov AD, Buzmakov GT, Rassolov SN. Use of Zeolite Tuff as an Additive in the Ration of Carp Segolytes. Sovremennye naukoyemkie tekhnologii. 2009;(2):35–36. (In Russ.)

30. Bakaneva YM, Bakanev NM, Fedorovykh YV. Mineral Nutrition of Sturgeon Fish. Vestnik Gosudarstvennoi polyarnoi akademii (Bulletin of the State Polar Academy). 2014;(1(18)):17–18. (In Russ.)

31. Bakaneva YuM, Bychkova AP, Bakanev NM, Fedorovykh YuV. Natural Ceolites in the Productive Diets for Sturgeon Fish. Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Fishing industry. 2013;1:162–166. (In Russ.)

32. Ponomarev SV, Levina OA, Fedorovykh YuV, Akhmedzhanova AB. Evaluating Effectiveness of Biologically Active Additives with Antioxidant Effect in Combination with Vitamin E in Fish Food Composition. Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Fishing Industry. 2022;(3):39–47. https://doi.org/10.24143/2073-5529-2022-3-39-47

33. Shirina YuM, Konkova AV, Faizulina DR, Bogatov IA. Mineral Additive "Zeolite" Based on Natural Opoka in Fish and Crustacean Feeds. In: Proceedings of the International Scientific and Practical Conference “Problems of Complex Security of the Caspian Macro-Region. Romanova AP, Chernichkin DA (Eds.). Astrakhan: Astrakhan State University Named after V.N. Tatishchev; 2023. P. 338–343. (In Russ.)

34. Kotelnikov AV, Kotelnikova SV, Shirina YuM, Ponomarev SV. Morphological Characteristics of Liver and Intestine of Carp when Using Gaize as Feed Supplement. Vestnik of Astrakhan State Technical University. Series: Fishing Industry. 2019;(3):117–124. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24143/2073-5529-2019-3-117-124

35. Adamiano A, Fellet G, Vuerich M, Scarpin D, Carella F, Piccirillo C, et al. Calcium Phosphate Particles Coated with Humic Substances: A Potential Plant Biostimulant from Circular Economy. Molecules. 2021;26(9):2810. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26092810

36. Jansen van Rensburg C, van Rensburg CEJ, van Ryssen JBJ, Casey NH, Rottinghaus GE. In Vitro and in Vivo Assessment of Humic Acid as an Aflatoxin Binder in Broiler Chickens. Poultry Science. 2006;85(9):1576–1583. https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/85.9.1576

37. Sallam SMA, Ibrahim MAM, Allam AM, El-Waziry AM, Attia MFA, Elazab MA, et. al. Feeding Damascus Goats Humic or Fulvic Acid Alone or in Combination: In Vitro and In Vivo Investigations on Impacts on Feed Intake, Ruminal Fermentation Parameters, and Apparent Nutrients Digestibility. Tropical Animal Health and Production. 2023;55:265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-023-03672-7

38. Vasiliev AA, Korobov AA, Zimens YuN. Experience in the Use of Humic Acids in the Composition of Compound Feeds in the Cultivation of Clary Catfish. The Agrarian Scientific Journal. 2022;(4):57–60. (In Russ.) http://doi.org/10.28983/asj.y2022i4pp57-60

39. Vasiliev AA, Tarasov PS, Turenko OYu. Effectiveness of Humic Acids Use in Stugreon Feeding in RAS. Fisheries. 2019;(5):89–92. (In Russ.)

40. Korobov AA, Ziemens JN, Vasiliev AA, Tishenkov PI, Skachkova OA. Productivy of Clarias Gariepinus Feeding Humic Substances. Zootechniya. 2022;(7):26–30. (In Russ.)

41. Ale A, Galdopórpora JM, Desimone MF, de la Torre FR, Cazenave J. Nanosilver and Silver Nitrate Toxicity in Ex Vivo-Exposed Gills of Fish and Mitigation by Humic Acids. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2021;107:421–426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-021-03257-w

42. Vasiliev AA. Global Experience of Using Humic Acid in Cattle Breeding. Osnovy i perspektivy organicheskikh biotekhnologiy (Fundamentals and Perspectives of Organic Biotechnologies. 2019;(1):3–4.

43. Manieson V.E., Kachepa U.E., Vasiliev A.A. Use of Humic Acid in Cattle Production. The Agrarian Scientific Journal. 2018;(5):35–36.

44. Ermakov MD. The Effectiveness of the Use of Humic Acids in Feeding the Lena Sturgeon with Combined Feeds in the Conditions of ICW. In: Proceedings of the Conference on the 2020 Results in Research, Teaching and Educational Work of the Faculty Members and Postgraduate Students. Nepovinnykh NV, Popova OM (Eds.). Saratov: “Center for Social Agroinnovations of Saratov State University of Genetics, Biotechnology and Engineering Named after N.I. Vavilov”, LLC; 2021. P. 90–93. (In Russ.)

45. Turenko OYu, Vasiliev AA, Guseva YuA, Groza EV. Economic Efficiency of the Use of “Reasil®Humic Health” during Sturgeon Rearing. Agrarian Scientific Journal. 2021;(5):75–78. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.28983/asj.y2021i5pp75-78

46. Vasiliev AA, Korobov AP, Moskalenko SP, Sivokhina LA, Kuznetsov MYu. Value, Theory and Practice Use of Humic Acids in Animal Husbandry. Agrarian Scientific Journal. 2018;(1):3–6. (In Russ.)

47. Guseva YuA, Vasiliev АА, Moskalenko SP, Zabelina MV, Lushnikov VP, Kalyuzhny II. The Effect of Pancreatic Hydrolysate of Soy Protein on Growth, Development and Amino Acid Composition of Muscle Tissues in Lena Sturgeons. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research. 2017;9(12):2516–2519. URL: https://www.jpsr.pharmainfo.in/Documents/Volumes/vol9Issue12/jpsr09121743.pdf (accessed: 10.08.2024)

48. Prokešová M, Bušová M, Zare M, Tran HQ, Kučerová E, Ivanova AP, et al. Effect of Humic Substances as Feed Additive on the Growth Performance, Antioxidant Status, and Health Condition of African Catfish (Clarias Gariepinus, Burchell 1822). Animals. 2021;11(8):2266. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11082266

49. Zhilyakova TP, Udintsev SN. Application of Gumiton Feed Additive in Carp Breeding in Aquaculture. Achievements of Science and Technology of AIC. 2017;31(12):50–52. (In Russ.)

50. Yamin G, Falk R, Avtalion RR, Shoshana N, Ofek T, Smirnov R, et al. The Protective Effect of Humic-Rich Substances on Atypical Aeromonas Salmonicida Subsp. Salmonicida Infection in Common Carp (Cyprinus Carpio L.). Journal of Fish Diseases. 2017;40(12):1783–1790. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfd.12645

51. Vasiliev AA, Korsakov KV, Moskalenko SP, Kuznetsov MYu, Sivokhina LA, Kitaev IA. Leonardite Humic Acids as a Component of Feed Additives against Mycotoxins. Feed Production. 2018;(5):33–37. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.25685/KRM.2018.2018.13028

52. Korovushkin AA, Nefedova SA, Yakunin YuV, Baryshev RV. Efficiency of Use of Non-Modified Microporous Humic Acids from Leonardite in the Diet of Carp. Herald of Ryazan State Agrotechnological University Named after. P.A. Kostychev. 2019;3(43):59–64. (in Russ.)

53. Makeyenko AA. Wasteless Use of Peat Chemical Destruction Products of Humic Preparations Production. Trudy Instorfa (Proceedings of Instorf). 2019;19(72):49–52. (In Russ.)

54. Lishtvan II, Naumova GV, Pantelei SN, Zhmakova NA, Ovchinnikova TF, Makarova NL et al. The Efficiency of Using the Humic Preparations’ Production Waste at Pond Fish Farming. The North Caucasus Ecological Herald. 2020;16(4):4–10. (In Russ.)