Txelen,
Here is the problem with what you are proposing.
It takes a lot longer to raise a cow on grass than it does to stick them in the feedlot and shove cereal grains down their throat.
In addition to altering the % fat / nutrient composition, what you feed the animal drastically influences the taste.
I was raised like a lot of people my age (early 20's) on feedlot beef.
As part of my animal science curriculum, I have been forced to learn stuff about meat that I never really wanted to know. Grass fed may be more healthy, but to me it tastes terrible and to me there is very little flavor because of reduced marbeling / fat. But again, I have a bias because I was raised on feedlot beef.
The USDA's cattle rating system (as far as prime, choice, select, etc) is designed to favor those animals that have a higher degree of marbeling. This was done in an effort to try and create a "consistent" product that the consumer could depend on. When you throw grass fed animals into the mix, they are at an extreme disadvantage and the eating experience is not what the consumer was expecting.
I guess what I am trying to say is that a new system will probably have to be created or "natural" grass fed animals (namely the producers) will continue to struggle in the marketplace.
So this leads us to your question about channel cats.
Txelen, when most scientists (who are oftentimes funded by commercial organizations) propose research, they are limited to studying what the funding is available for.
The commercial catfish industry is interested in Growth / high catfish turn over rates. It would take much longer to grow out the catfish, even if there are benefits to deviating their feed from its current grain composition. So you can see why there is very little research on CC that are grown in a more "natural" way. It just doesn't put more money in the pocket of the intensive catfish farm operation.
I can tell you one thing from experience though...
The catfish that is fed cereal grains tastes DRASTICALLY different than those that are raised on natural forage.
In my opinion, those that are raised naturally taste VERY fishy. Those that are raised on the grain taste well, not very fishy at all.
Taking an educated guess, I would say that those catfish raised in an unfed pond, as you have put it, would have the same protein make-up, but less fat. There would probably be a statistically relevant difference in fatty acid composition (unsaturated vs saturated).
The problem with bringing a natural fed catfish to market is that people are getting used to the commercial grain fed catfish. The big wig intensive operations don't want to "fix" it if it isn't broken or if the public isn't boycotting their current product.
The catfish industry is so new (in relation to the other animal agriculture industries) that they haven't even figured out a close to optimal feed as far as growth rate is concerned. It will probably be awhile before we see intensive studies of grain fed vs natural fed.
The research doesn't put money into anyones pocket. You will however see research in the near future where catfish are being Genetically Engineered so that their meat composition is altered in a way that is "healthier" for us. That way the farmers can keep feeding what they are feeding, and can boast of a new and improved product. There is money in it for all involved with this route.
Last edited by Gflo; 07/22/10 03:04 PM.
