Pond Boss Forums Thread Like Summary - Optimal vs. Purina

Okay, I decided to up my game and feed my Bluegill a higher quality of food than I was getting at the local Tractor Supply. I ordered two bags of the Optimal Bluegill (40% crude protein, 10% crude fat, 4% crude fiber, etc.). However, I researched the Purina Aquamax Sport Fish MVP (43% protein, 12% fat, etc.). Purina says they have a mixture of different sized pellets and have some pellets that will sink for the fish who are afraid to surface feed. Pound for pound, the Purina is a bit less expensive. I have to drive just a bit to get it at the nearest Purina retailer which is no big deal. Also, as I am farm tax exempt, I can save on taxes on the Purina. Pond Boss guy endorses Purina. Anybody out there using the Purina Aquamax MVP? Your thoughts?

Both are excellent products and Pond Boss supporters.
There is a whole lot more to this subject than people are noting.
Each fish species has its own nutritional requirements.
Each application is pond specific.
You can not compare CC , BG , LMB , RT, HSB , Crappie, YP and others for nutritional requirements. Here is a bit from a PB conv. presentation on Fish Nutrition.

The immense variety of cultured finfish species hampers efforts to simplify production industry wide. Approximately 170 taxa are currently cultured, including carnivores, herbivores, planktivores, and omnivores, each posing its own set of nutritional demands

• Fish meal has proven to be an excellent dietary protein source for finfish, leading to its description as an ‘‘ideal protein.’’ The ideal protein concept is based on the premise that if the amino acid profile of the feed mimics the whole-body amino acid profile of the animal being fed, protein utilization and growth should be maximized
• Lipids, fatty acids, and their derivatives play a role in virtually every physiological process that occurs and for this reason dietary lipid composition and content represent a massive sector of overall nutrition. Nowhere is this more true than in finfish nutrition where lipid can exceed protein in the body composition of finfish, a testament to the physiological and energetic importance of this nutrient class (Tocher2003). Aside from physiological importance, lipids are indispensable energy sources, especially for finfish, which are not well-adapted to carbohydrate utilization.
• Dietary protein and energy must be kept in proper balance because a deficiency or excess of dietary energy can reduce growth rates. Fish fed diets deficient in energy will metabolize more expensive dietary protein to meet energy requirements. Excess dietary energy can decrease protein intake and suppress growth.
• finfish do not require carbohydrates in their diet, … complex carbohydrates cannot be digested and utilized efficiently by most finfish species. A general dichotomy exists in the carbohydrate digestive ability of warmwater omnivores and herbivores versus the inability of coolwater and coldwater carnivores, which lack the appropriate function necessary for digestion of carbohydrates.
• For this reason, diets fed to these fish rarely contain more than 20% complex carbohydrate
• Conversely, warmwater omnivores or herbivores (e.g., channel catfish, tilapia, common carp, and white sturgeon) adapt well to diets containing as much as 40% dietary carbohydrate .
• Although vitamins and minerals are required in minute amounts compared with protein, lipid, and so forth, they are critically important, … Every micronutrient has a deficiency disease associated with it, the effects of which are sometimes irreversible or fatal. For a few vitamins and most minerals, excess can be equally detrimental, resulting in toxicity.

Mean fat percentage of Dorosoma spp. (24.2%) exceeded that of Lepomis spp. (15.2%) and fathead minnows (19.1%), but was less than that of mosquitofish (25.8%) and golden shiners (34.8%) . Bluegills had lower caloric contents than gizzard and threadfin shad ; preliminary data collected for the present study also showed Lepomis spp. To the lower in caloric content than the clupeids.

Although carnivorous fish species generally have a limited ability to use carbohydrates for energy, hybrid striped bass are relatively adept at it. Digestibility coefficients for the carbohydrates were generally high (83.3 to100 percent), indicating that both simple carbohydrates and complex carbohydrates were digested efficiently by these hybrids.

• Because fish growth often is limited by food availability, supplemental feeding is a logical tool to improve the condition of fish in small impoundments as the energy cost for bluegill to feed on pellets is small relative to the high caloric intake, which can be 4-5 times greater than those fed natural foods (Schalles and Wissing 1976).
• Substantial increases in the standing stock of bluegill in ponds that receive pellet feed have been recorded (Schmittou 1969) and, in lakes, pellet feeding has been found to increase the number of large bluegills (Nail and Powell 1975).
• These results indicate that total fish production and production of bluegill were each increased approximately 75 to 80% by supplemental feeding in 19 months after stocking (Schmittou 1967)

• Previous studies demonstrated that feed in excess of 10 pounds per acre per day in bluegill ponds was not utilized. Some accumulated and decomposed, thus depleting the supply of dissolved oxygen which resulted in fish kills (Schmittou 1967) .
• the rate of growth of sunfish can be increased by short-circuiting the food cycle, thereby producing harvestable size sunfish in a shorter period of time than would occur under natural conditions (Carnes 1966).
• The pellet size should be approximately 20-30% of the size of the fish species mouth gape. Feeding too small a pellet results in inefficient feeding because more energy is used in finding and eating more pellets. Conversely, pellets that are too large will depress feeding and, in the extreme, cause choking. Select the largest sized feed the fish will actively eat.
• Addition of supplemental pelleted feed did not contribute to the rate of growth of young shad, but did increase the growth and spawning frequency of adults.

There have been new developments in this field since the presentation.

I post reluctantly to this thread. People hear what they want and take what they want to take from the info posted.
There are some very sharp fisheries management people here with great knowledge, that live this every day.
I see a post above about there being too many variables to believe anything "observed".. The key is to remove all of the variables you can control in a feed trial to get the best results we can as humans.
With that said, one manufacturer has test results of 1.12 to 1 conversion. I feed the same and have only observed 1.42 to 1 on BG.
One thing I have learned is if a pellet sinks it is not the same ingredients as one that floats, MVP has both, but is intended to be used for many species at the same time so in a feed trial, it is not apples to apples to use MVP against any other feed for a specific species because-as jpsdad says- the digestive process is different in each. So... with that said, "observation" is incredibly important in selecting your feed. BUT,, knowing what you are looking for is even more important and I think there are aspects in this part that we as humans, may never have the answers to. Is it maximum growth rate? Maximum growth with longevity in lifespan? Just because they grow faster doesn't mean they will achieve their true potential.
I guess I'm trying to say observation is important, to include the fishery as a whole, not just 1 species. Listen to the guys here that do this every day, there's good data right here.

October , through May , I mix Trout and BG Optimal .My RBT go from 10"-12" to 17"-19" hogs , don't get in their path for the Optimal. Now, my hunch is Purina will provide equivalent results , but Mark ships my 2 bags a month to my front door and Purina dealer , after multiple calls , didn't return calls, told me they couldn't get Fish Feed because of minimum orders, might be able to get some in 3-6 months , they would call me if and when they got any in stock . ( 2 and a half years now, guess how many calls ) Now, just as I believe "P" can grow fish, and very healthy fish, I'm sure there are very top end , professional Feed dealers for Purina . Suspicion if my SMB , YP, RBT, CC, ETC , all had Hooves instead of fins , Had white faces , had tails designed to swat flies instead of to swim , phone calls would be returned , feed would be readily available , LOL !!!June - September it's all BG , sometimes mixed with JR , still delivered to my front door , just a quick text message to Mark , and in return I get a courteous "Thank You , it's on the way " , Feed that I ordered on my Front porch in 4-7 working days of my text , and extra happy GSH, BG, GSF, in season RBT, CC, and a few YP that have trained themselves. May you have happy, pudgy , beautifully colored fishes with which ever brand you choose , Front door delivery is hard to beat. Thank You, Mark ! And Snipe , for the excellent referral.

Mary Ann, when she was dressed as Ginger.

(I know, I should be feeding Purina out of an Optimal bag.)

I avoid the Optimal vs Purina debates, because I think the choice that makes the most sense is the one that works for the individual wrt availability and price.

I don't recall anyone doing a double blind study between the two.

TH Feeder set at 1 sec per day at noon. It throws it in the open water that the winter diffuser makes.

I've fed Purina, Optimal, Triton, and Skretting over the years, and all of them are good. Trying to figure out which is the best for each pond owner is like splitting a hair. Region, water, habitat, density, volume of food fed, etc, all make a difference.

I have 2 questions. 1) Those that have grown out multiple, and repetitive, 2# BG in their pond, please stand up. 2) Next time you pick up fish at a hatchery, or even a fish truck, ask them what they feed.

Haven’t made it to 2# yet but all my original stock CNBG are over .75# in the first year.
I feed MVP. Also hand throw Skreeting to my fish and the BG won’t touch it .
No idea where they came from originally.
Fish pictured were all stocked 9/29/23 as fingerlings

Attachments