Feed experts, hoping you can chime in. Spoke with Skretting again today in my search to replace Aquamax due to lower feed rates and several other issues. Skretting recommended the following, hoping Bill Cody or others can provide some feedback.

SMB: Classic Bass formula - 48% protein, 18% crude fat, 3% fiber

HSB, YP and BG would also have access to this food - any concerns on them eating it or other impressions?

YP:

1. Steelhead formula - 46% protein, 16% crude fat, 3% fiber

or

2. Classic Trout formula - 40% protein, 12% crude fat, 3% fiber

BG would also have access to this food, same questions as above.

IIRC Cody suggested the ideal diet for YP was 45/12 - the Steelhead comes closest to matching this level.

Pricing:

Classic Bass: $34/40#
Steelhead: $32/40#
Classic Trout: $27/40#

Shipping is $20.50/bag, orders of 10 bags drops to $13/bag, and 3 pallets shipping is free.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

I would try the classic trout formulation 40-12. Other options have too much fat shortening the life span of the adult fish. Normal adult pond sport fish do not need all that fat concentration above 8%-10%-12%. Truth be known, 12% fat is probably too high for maintaining healthy fish long term to the trophy status. Higher fat and protein is more beneficial to getting the fish from fingerling to adult. The protein:fat above 40%:8%-10% is likely not all that beneficial similar to a healthy option for the human diet. Look what happens to us when we eat too much fat and carbohydrates. Digestibility and the amount excreted of the diet is important IMO after talking to fish nutrition & physiology experts. I am not sure there are any real fish food experts that regularly attend this forum.

Look at these brook trout that Cecil Baird1 raised in his 0.1ac pond. Do they look healthy after eating high fat food - almost obese deformed? The high fat unhealthy food allows these brookies to only live a short time in Cecil's pond. Let's see if CB1 reads this and tells us what the fat content was of the food he fed those tubby trout? It was probably Amax 600 12% fat.
http://forums.pondboss.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=389599

Of the fish listed what % of their food will be pellets and what % will be natural ?

There are a lot of unknowns in relation to what fish need wrt pelleted food. Much conjecture , salesmanship and marketing. Much of the known data comes from aquaculture applications for food fish. Cold/cool water fish need (can process) more protein and fat than typical pond fish. As a result most trout type food is too rich. Like what Bill is expressing.

ewest has good points. However when fish are fed daily IMO they default to eating primarily pellets because it is 'easy' and implements the Optimal Foraging Theory or concept - easiest path to a full belly. What percent of the food we eat is healthy? Those that eat healthiest tend to be healthiest individuals.

Bill - Can you enlighten us on this Optimal Theory or Concept?

Most nutrition for least amount of effort, I believe.

Sounds reasonable, but saw Bills mug on the Optimal website for BG feed and wondered how he came to the conclusions. It don't fill you in. Just gives you a testimonial... as limited as some Chinese manufacturers, but expected some meat!!!

Esshup gave me some of the feed last Friday that they used in that Bell rig for YP. Supposed to sink so the YP can snatch it on the way down, but most of it floated and stayed that way for days.

Me thinks they need to rethink this?

Optimal Forage Theory, per Bruce Condello.

http://bigbluegill.com/profiles/blogs/2036984:BlogPost:988

On the cover of a website tho, even with Optimal. What's the basis for the endorsement?

Can a guy ask? What tests have been conducted? This better than that?, and why?

Need some meat!!!

JKB I think Cody has performed some product tests on BG or HBG and the results were favorable for Optimal vs. other products. Bruce has also performed some tests with RES and results were similarly promising. It's a food designed specifically for Lepomis to improve longevity and still provide reliable growth. That's the universe of my knowledge regarding the food and tests performed, probably more out there than I'm aware.

Do not confuse 'Optimal' fish food with Optimal Foraging Theory. Optimal Foraging Theory has a history that dates back to 1966 (see link below). In its pure sense it relates more to an evolutionary concept rather than how we use it in this forum to describe fish feeding behavior (see links below). Bruce Condello first introduced forum members here to the Optimal foraging Theory as it applies to fish.

Ideal Optimal Foraging Theory (OFT)
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3565560?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Optimal Diet Theory
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003347200915926

Optimal Foraging Theory Applied to Fish
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-7918-8_3

OFT in Bluegill
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1937507?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Optimal foraging of smallmouth bass and crayfish
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1935078?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Optimal foraging May Not Apply to Predator fish
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/1548-8659(1993)122%3C0902%3AFTAPFA%3E2.3.CO%3B2

Disagreement Critical Review
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3565560?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Optimal foraging and fear behavior
http://jmammal.oxfordjournals.org/content/80/2/385.abstract

History of the Optimal Foraging Theory
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4613-1839-2_1#page-1

JKB - FYI - "The Meat" - Here is the summary of the first 6 weeks of the green sunfish (GSF) feeding trial that was the basis for my endorsement / testimonial on the Optimal Website. esshup has a similar study using bluegill.

Six Weeks Fish Food Feeding Trial for Green Sunfish by Bill Cody
These are the results for feeding green sunfish (GSF) Aquamax 600 and Optimal Fish foods for the first six weeks of my feeding trial. Starting sizes for body length of GSF in both groups ranged from 2.625” to 3.25”. Twenty five GSF were placed into separate fish cages. Cage 1 fish were fed Aquamax and fish in Cage 2 were fed Optimal Bluegill Food. Both fish foods were hydrated prior to feeding because some of the fish appeared to be too small to eat the food of a dried large size pellet. The hydrated pellets were chopped into smaller pieces prior to feeding. Fish in both cages were fed daily to the point of satiation.

The 23 GSF (2 died) as a group eating Aquamax gained a total of 24.2495” (615.93mm) which converts to an average 0.970” (24.63mm) gain per fish.
The 25 GSF as a group eating Optimal gained a total of 32.74” (831.6mm) which converts to an average 1.423” (36.16mm) gain per fish. Not all fish gained equally in length.

After six weeks the GSF body lengths for the Aquamax group ranged from 3.0” to 4.75”. Body lengths for Optimal food were 2.75” to 5.06”. Pecking order and behavior of fish in a cage where the most dominant fish probably ate most of the food was likely the reason why some fish in each cage displayed little growth. GSF are notorious for having an aggressive dominant type of behavior.

At the end of six weeks half of the GSF from the Aquamax group were placed in a separate cage and fed Optimal. The other half of the GSF eating Aquamax continued to be fed Aquamax. Splitting the Aquamax test fish into two groups was to see if the half now eating Optimum will out perform those still eating Aquamax. The caged GSF eating Optimal continued to be fed Optimal.

My feed trial study will conclude when the water temperature drops to 60F around the first week of October 2015.

Fascinating study Bill! Any particular reason you chose GSF instead of BG for the test subjects? I look forward to you publishing the final data and conclusions in the future!

Yes it was Bill: 5D06 but the last tw months was an astaxanthin enhanced feed from Bell.

I only fed once per day about a pound per 300 lbs. of trout toward the end.

Another reason for the massive weight gain was they weren't swimming against a current as in a raceway.

Well, the Aqua Max I've been feeding for 8 years happens to have very similar formula: 41% protein; 12% fat. Looks like I'm back to square one, then - assuming the Skretting 40/12 can't be much different than the AM I've been feeding.

Bill any other suggestions on feed sources?

teehjaeh,
I know you asked Bill but have you looked at FinFish Silver by Ziegler. I do not have any experience with it but Brehm's, where I sourced my YP, switched from AM a few years back and said they were going to stick with it. Stated they were seeing better growth. It is a 40/10 mix. Only problem I have is trying to source. There is a fish farm, Fin Farm, near Bill C. that carry's it but have not seen it anywhere else.

Bill C.
Ziegler also has a product called Koi Grower, specs are

Protein Minimum 42.0%
Fat Minimum 6.0%
Fiber Maximum 3.5%

The protein being up and fat being below the range you stated, what is the down side? I assume this would be better for older fish vs younger fish?

Ben

Thanks for the clarity Bill.

For purposes of this thread , if you only feed 5 % of the required total nutritional demand by using pellets then Optimal Foraging Theory as to pellets can only apply that much. All the rest is supplied naturally. I agree with the energetics principals of the theory (not necessarily the rest) and studies provide that pelleted feeding is more efficient by a factor of between 4 and 8 X IIRC. Fish will , if possible , max energy input with the least energy output (eat pellets rather than chase bugs and fish).

However you have to look at the total diet to decide what is the "best" pellet for your situation ( ingredients , costs , results , etc.). Supplemental feeding at 10% is a lot different than meeting nutritional requirements by using 50% pellets IMO.

Im not using it all year but I had to get some Sportsman's Choice from TSC 36 percent protein and I am surprised at how good my fish are eating it. They seem to like it. I have AM600 on order and will be in this week but had nothing when I put feeder out so thought I would try some. Plus it has smaller pellets in it also... I think I may mix some in with the AM600...

RC

TJ - I would trust Skretting 40/12 more compared to the current AM 41-12 because of the recent change in AM philosophy and manufacturer and apparent changes in the AM visual quality. However if the Sk40-12 is more expensive then stick with AM or similar product. IMO we are in a transition period, learning curve and evolution for best foods for pond sportfish. It will take some time to learn what best food formulation suits adult sport fish to provide our goal of longer life span and eventual trophy size. Then the availability network has to be worked out. In the meantime we will have to use what has marginally worked for us in the past. Our goals may be too lofty for a relatively small market.

I've got 5 bags of Cargil triton on the way now. I got hooked on Aquamax back in 2008 when I first started feeding it because it was a excellent feed at a reasonable price and fish did great on it. Now it's still a good feed but it's not what it was and it cost twice as much as it did then. I hope this Cargil is a better feed cause it seems like it will be easier to get. I wish Purina would go back to the original formula and sell it for a decent price.

Thanks Ben, I have contacted Zeigler and they weren't very interested/helpful in serving small order guys like me/us or that's the impression I got. However, you do raise a great point here:

1. Would the Koi grower at 42/6 be a good formula, given Bill's comments above regarding dangers of high fat content?

Gentlemen,

In case it hasn't been addressed here, and my apologies if it has, what about carbohydrates? According to a feed researcher at Purdue, Dr. Paul Brown, carbs are the big fatty deposit maker. Furthermore he says too many carbs makes fish into functional diabetics whatever that means.

Spot on. In humans, processed/refined carbs are the number one cause of obesity. That's because they stimulate high secretions of insulin to store all the glucose, and too much insulin for too long leads to insulin resistance. Insulin resistance leads to obesity and diabetes.

I'd wondered about this before, since we now know that fat per se does not cause us to get fat. One very recent study showed that skim milk consumption is far more correlated with diabetes than whole milk, for instance. However, the digestive system of a fish is different than a mammal, so I wasn't sure what hurts us would hurt fish.

Apparently it does.

Yes to a certain extent carbs can be a problem.

From the PB Conf on Fish Nutrition - posted here in other threads.

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 .

Note HSB can use and absorb carbs - an exception.

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.

One thing that I see everybody getting hung up on is the protein/fat ratio, i.e. more is better, right? I was the same way a year ago, now I know a little bit more. It's a good "guide", but it isn't the only thing that needs to be looked at. You also have to look at what species of fish the food was designed to feed.

For instance, if you have cat food at 30%/15% and you have dog food at 30%/15% and cat food was $10/bag cheaper would you buy cat food for your dog? You may laugh at the comparison, but it's not so far fetched when talking about different species of fish and their food requirements.

Proteins can be sourced from many, many different things. Some are not very easily digestible by fish, others are. There are different trace/micro nutrients and amino acids that are in the different foods. Different fish species need different blends. Different protein sources that may be not very digestible by fish can be made more easily digested by modifying the other ingredients in the food. Also, different fish species respond to different protein/fat sources than others. So, it's not just a matter of what protein/fat levels.

That is why there is food for different species of fish. If there wasn't a need for that, then there could be a maximum of 3 different fish feeds. High protein/high fat/small pellet size for fingerlings, medium protein/medium fat/medium pellet size for middle of the road fish, and low protein/low fat/large pellet size for the largest fish in the pond.

Will the different fish food producers tell you what trace/micro nutrients and amino acids are in the food? I highly doubt it, as that is part of their propriety information that makes their food "theirs" and how well it works.

What ewest is saying is pretty much what I was told by the Optimal feed guy Steve.

He as well told me the big difference and he could not tell me, is the propriety ingredients (trace) that make their feed different and better.

I think ewest is very right and we do need to rely to some degree on what is said here on PB and what research is released to try and make a reasonable decision on feed type,size, and digestibility, along with the general protein and fat assumptions we all have. IMHO

I liked the Aquamax product until the change and lack of access to the product, and have decided to, at least temporally, switch to the Optimal feed like several have here.

I have always wanted the very best feed for fastest growth and least waste in growing CNBG but have not felt I have the details, white papers, research, etc.. that make me think I "have the best product". I do feel since I have become a PB'er that I and most of us feed our fish way better than most.

I guess feed will continue to change and flexibility and an open mind will help until one of our bright scientific PB' mind(s) dedicates themselves to making the best product, and then a few general products that will sell enough to make a good living on. One can always dream, Right!

TJ,

I'm a big fan of Skretting now. Still irked at AM. I've used both the trout and steelhead. Honestly, I'm a little bit odd. I want a 'varied' diet for my fish - always have. Even when my BG were blowing up I used a varied diet. I always supplemented AM even when it was my foundation. So here's what I do with my supplemental (admittedly primary) feed.

Rotate. Use different foods. Honestly, it takes the fish some getting used to but it helps me because I can't rely on anyone having food my fish like, so I teach them to like everything (except the new AM which they eat like I ate broccoli as a kid).

Right now, I use Skretting trout and Optimal. I did the Steelhead in late fall, and rotate it occasionally. I like to do higher fat going into winter as that seems like a thing that animals do in the wild...

The previous four posts are very enlightening,,, study their words carefully. The statements pretty well summarize this thread. The posts also answer TJ's question about usefulness of the protein:fat content of the Koi food for other pond fish. It likely has high carbohydrates and a formulation for Koi but probably a poor food for most sport fish. Hopefully the fish food for sport fish will continue to improve and become widely available. It will take time.

IMO until recently, pond owners feeding pellets were more interested in achieving high relative weights rather than the health and life span of their fish. As this thinking slowly changes to looking for both growth and health, I think we can look for companies like Optima to lead the way to the future as fish chow is their main product line. We are small potatoes to the huge livestock and pet food chow producers.

Just my 1 cent

Interesting and informative discussion! There are quite a few people on here with good knowledge about commercial extruded feeds. I have an interest and some knowledge about commercial dog foods and a lot of the issues are similar.

When it comes to commercial feeds ash and fiber content is usually a good indicator of quality. Ash content is rarely reported on dog food labels unless a company is bragging. A higher ash indicates poorer quality ingredients, usually more bone content. Ash is what's left after the food is burned at a very high temperature and consists of minerals and also heavy metals and toxic materials. Fiber is usually a filler, something undigestible. High amounts of ash and fiber can result in poor growth. You may have to ask the feed company what their levels are if it's not already on the bag.

I noticed that some values in the posts are expressed as crude protein, another as just protein (assuming crude?). Crude protein is different than digestible protein, digestible protein is what the species is able to assimilate, some crude protein isn't very digestible and produces more waste and less nutrition. Quality of protein and how the food is produced can have a great influence on how digestible it is. If the research is there for fish, digestible protein is what you should compare and will be a lower value than crude protein.

I would feed to your specific needs, most things are a give and take, there is no perfect commercial food! If a maintenance diet is what you need then that is what you should probably feed as you will have less waste.

I found this article very useful, don't know if it's been posted before:
Interpreting a Fish Food Package Label
https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa159

With dogs, slow growth is desired when raising a puppy so a moderate food is usually best. If the diet is adequate during growth the final adult size will be the same as if a "hot" food is fed with faster growth. The final result in either case is determined by genetics not food but the slower growing puppy is usually a healthier specimen orthopedically. Don't know if this can be applied in any way to fish, lol.

Yo Matos, great to hear from you! Thanks for your feedback - you are growing enormous gills in the desert, I'm glad to hear you've found something that works. Everything I'm hearing is positive on the Optimal BG feed, hope you chime in with your results.

My fish are still reluctantly taking the remaining AM I have stockpiled, but I am obviously looking for a change. I'd really like identify a quality food that fits the bill for YP diet, but sounds like there's nothing available. I think I'll give Skretting a try when I finally deplete the AM stores.

Good to hear from you Aaron.

This year I'm feeding nothing but Optimal @ 4 seconds per day in a 1.5 to 2 acre pond. So far, the BG's size indicates that it's a game changer for me.

Dave same here.Optimal only since October.48 sec/day split between 2 feeders on 13 ac pond

Right or wrong or foolish my new pond has been exclusively Optimal except for Aquamax 400 for 4 months after stocking last spring

I too am happy wirh the Optimal for bluegills. Have been feeding it hydrated and refrigerated to my ~ 150 bluegills in the RAS tank and some of them are 8 inches. Most are in the high 6 to 7 inch range and not even a year old yet.

Now if they could ge me a larger yellow perch feed I'd never use any feed from Purina Mills again.

Cecil, there will be 4.5mm YP feed run next week, and an even larger pellet size of 5.5mm run some time after that. BUT since YP in a RAS aren't raised to the size of YP that you need for the taxidermy trade before they hit a knife, I don't know if you will get the pellet size that you want.

I could talk to them and get 1,000# added to the order if you want of the 4.5mm feed, and if you really wanted larger pellet size YP feed, the small mill can run some special order 7mm YP feed. But, to run the special order, I think that has to be 1,000# minimum. I know that smaller batches can be run, but due to the labor costs being the same anything less and the price per pound really gets high.

Yp feed? I'm all ears!

AaronM - It is really great that you visited and posted. Still growing fish? - GREAT! Can you update us on your current fishery?

It sounds like progress is being made toward improved extruded food for our sport fish. Hooray!

TJ, PM sent.

I understand all that Scott as I do understand supply and demand and the costs associated with it, along with the gouging we are taking by UPS and Fed Ex. It's just as long as it's not availabe to me in smaller quantities I'll get it elsewhere.

Cecil, I think I might put in an order next year for some of the feed in the biggest pellet size available when it is available and see if I can get enough guys that are local to go in on it. They won't break up shipping the bags individually, so it would have to be shipped here and picked up, or picked up from a more central location.

Let me think about it Scott. I don't want you sitting on feed you can't sell, and I don't use much now that I use the Optima for the bluegills. A bag of 5D06 lasts me a couple of months now that I won't have trout until later.

I have a place within 20 minutes of me now that will order 5DO6 for me.

Scott, correct this if I missed something. This is for the YP feed. (you can also delete this if you want )

Based on texts, and my take on it.
Minimum run from the mill for economical purposes is 20,000 lb or more. That is what they would like to run for any particular setup. Sounds reasonable, and makes an attractive price.

Minimum order within that 20,000 lb run or more is 1,000 lb. Still an attractive price.

They can combine multiple orders to hit the 20,000 lb run, but not till that benchmark is met, so it may be a while.

Or, they could run thru another mill and make smaller quantities, but the price would really suck!

That about right?

Interesting scenario JKB. I think if I owned a business, and was launching a new product I had faith in, I would risk release a mill run and have it on the shelf so when a customer orders he can get it in a timely fashion. I would think it would turn customers off being told they will get the product someday when enough people place orders. I know I would never place a large order for any new product. I would want to try a small quantity first.

I have no idea how Optima's business plan works so please nobody take my comment as this is what they do. Just commenting to the scenario presented.

Bill,

I think the problem is these guys are mainly supplying aquaculture where they buy a few tons at a time. We are not their main focus. At least I don't think so.

That would be my take on it with the YP feed, and you know it.

I have quite a few texts from Scott, and the suggested route I got is to get into a spot on a larger run, but the minimum would be 1,000 lbs. for an order.

If that logic... Sucks... Well... They are calling the shot's on what they will or will not do.

Damn bean counters

I agree Cecil. If you had 10s of thousands of dollars invested in fish, would you order a few tons of something you hadn't tried first?

This is well known in the proper circles that don't care about you or your pond. They make it all the time, just that it is coming to light here.

You understand?

It ain't Petco

There's talk of a few guys going together to get 1,000# of the 5.5mm feed. I will talk to them and see what it would cost (IF it was possible) to get 7mm YP pellets.

Awesome stuff Bill! Will you be posting your results here? I can tell you there is a group of my guys here in MN wanting this data. Some of my guys have switched over feed to Optimal, including myself, for various reasons. It would be great to have blind study results. It's perfect for us too because of the GSF experimenting that we are conducting in shallow water ponds

I'd love 9.5mm floating pellets! How's that for making things complicated? Sorry.

Skretting makes them. Talk to Al. He has some.....

Scott, TJ and I already had food talk. He had to talk me down off the ledge though, because I won't be happy until I need a potato gun to feed my CNBG.

I can't comment on the merits of size versus volume when relating to fish food and fish digestion, but I do know my CNBG specifically target the bigger pellets when mixed with a more standard 1/4" pellet.

Al says "...but I do know my CNBG specifically target the bigger pellets when mixed with a more standard 1/4" pellet." Again the Optimal Foraging principle applies, most food eaten for the least amount of effort. Many fish and people ascribe to this philosophy.

Yep, that's why I prefer 9.5mm. It's favored by all my fish significantly.

So your telling me when you chunk a handful or cupful of fish food into the water and it's of different sizes you can tell which food your bigger fish are going after??? Heck I can't see nothing but a bunch a splashes and waves and flipping going on????

You guys must have reeeeaaaaaallllll good eyes..... lol

RC

RC51, I hand feed the larger pellets at the feeder platform on the dam. The water 10' out gets deep, and smaller CNBG don't venture out there. Or at least they'll only venture out there away from cover once.

The larger Skretting I currently have is also a darker color(think coffee) than the Cargill(think coffee with cream) I feed via the feeder, so it's pretty easy to differentiate.