Introduction
Aquaculture in the Philippines has a long history, the earliest type of aquaculture in the Philippines was milkfish farming, which started in the Philippines approximately 400–600 years ago and then expanded to Indonesia, Taiwan, and other parts of the Pacific (Bagarinao, 1999; FAO, 2009). It is essential for the food security and economic stability of fish farmers in the Philippines, with fisherfolk numbering close to 1.6 million fishers and fish farmers (Macusi et al., 2020; Macusi et al., 2022). The Philippines is ranked 11th as the world’s top producer of fisheries, and the Philippines’ fisheries rely heavily on aquaculture, with coastal aquaculture being the dominant form of production (Guerrero, 2019). In recent years, there is a clamor of fish farmers for a cheaper feed alternative to current feed. Various fish feed formulations similar to poultry and other livestock in the market are pernicious for their high costs. The favorability of fishmeal as a feed ingredient and its increasing scarcity have driven up its price (up to USD 1210/t) (Rana et al., 2009). This is partly responsible for the high costs of fish feed (Lukuyu et al., 2014). It has been reported that in Africa, fish feed accounts for about 60% of the total cost of fish production (Lawal et al., 2012), while in the Philippines this is reported to be as high as 80% of the cost of fish farming operation (Macusi et al., 2023b). The high costs of fishfeeds limits the ability of fish farmers to intensify their aquaculture production (Aya, 2017). Alternative feeds or supplementary feeds that can perform similarly to the existing commercial feeds may reduce the expenses of farmers, cutting down their cost of production to increase profitability.
Some examples of agricultural crops that have potential for feed use includes taro (Colocasia esculenta), cassava (Manihot esculenta), coprameal, ipil-ipil (Leucaena leucocephala), banana (Musa balbisiana/acuminata hybrid), cacao pods (Theobroma cacao), and other agricultural waste products. Taro is known to be an alternative food, high in starch, protein and vitamins and minerals which is considered native to Southern India, Southeast Asia and has good distribution in Africa, Polynesia, South America, and Japan (Onsay et al., 2022). Taro leaves are popularly used for food dishes such as laing and pinangat in Bicol region. It is considered as a backyard plant and giving taro harvests for animal feed is a common practice in the rural areas in the Philippines utilizing its leaves, petioles and peelings normally chopped, cooked and fed directly to hogs (Matthews, 2012). Other processed products of taro are taro flour, cookies, noodles, achu and it is also a major constituent of baby food products due to its easily digestible nature (Aditika et al., 2021). Archeological surveys in the Solomon Islands suggest that taro was one of the oldest domesticated crops and used as far back as 28,000 years ago (Lebot, 2020; Loy et al., 1992).
Moreover, the Philippines, like many agricultural countries face problems of waste disposal (Abreo et al., 2020; Macusi et al., 2019), especially for agricultural waste products including banana stem, leaves, rejected fruits, coconut husks, and shell and coffee bean wastes (Dou et al., 2018). Previously, it has been stated that green banana wastes and coffee pulp are promising waste products that can be utilized as animal feeds (Ulloa et al., 2004). Banana production in the Philippines reached 9 million tons in 2020 of which Mindanao region ranks first in production, 52% of which was Cavendish for export (Gueco, 2022). Worldwide, about 114.08 million metric tons of banana waste-loss are produced, leading to environmental problems which could be turned to cellulose, hemicellulose and natural fibers and modified to obtain bioplastics, organic fertilizers and biofuels or animal feeds (Alzate Acevedo et al., 2021). In Africa, specifically Nigeria which is known to have large banana production, fish culture is gaining importance and seeking to develop locally available raw materials such as yam (Dioscorea esculenta), banana (Musa paradisiaca), cowpeas (Vigna unguiculata), mucuna (Mucuna acuminata), maize (Zea maize), cassava (Manihot esculenta), millet (Panicum miliaceum), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), groundnut (Arachis hypogaea), sunhemp (Crotalaria juncea) seed and brewery wastes for fish feed (Audu and Yola, 2020). Other non-conventional feeds have been recommended for extensive culturing for Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) and African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) to save on costs such as leaves of gallant soldier (Galisonga parviflora), sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), cassava (Manihot esculenta) and papaya (Papaya carica) which were identified as high potential feedstuffs of plant origin either processed or in raw form for small-scale fish farming (Munguti et al., 2012).
Moreover, there are efforts to recycle and use agricultural wastes but are not widely adopted in the agro-industrial sectors for various reasons such as lack of assessment, adoption and intermittent supply which dampen farmer’s enthusiasm to use the product (Sun et al., 2024). An encouraging sign is the current drive to use food loss and agricultural wastes and turn them to animal feeds since these contain high crude protein especially plant seeds, shells, fruit pulp, and mushroom substrate (Quintero-Herrera et al., 2023; Siddique et al., 2024). The use of agricultural wastes, including fruit wastes is being adopted for a sustainable circular economy model for human production and consumption (Medhekar, 2024). This is the key to reducing waste, environmental impact and securing a sustainable future for farmers, businesses, and the household sectors (Gatto et al., 2024). Thus, being able to find a cheaper feed alternatives from these agricultural wastes mean a lot in terms of valorization of wastes, sustainable development, and as a contribution to promoting the circular economy (Dou et al., 2024). A circular economy offers a model for improving resource efficiency by regenerating ecosystems, maintaining resources, eliminating waste, and enhancing business models (Hoof et al., 2024).
Cheaper alternative feeds can help increase the profit of fish farmers. Despite the high growth rate of aquaculture in the Philippines, e.g. producing 415,000 metric tons of milkfish in 2019, feed cost hampers plans for expansion of production. Davao region’s milkfish production started to increase from 19,000 mt in 2019 to 20,000 mt in 2021, showing an increasing trend of production (PSA, 2022). Likewise, the milkfish aquaculture production in Davao Oriental from 2015 to 2023 reached a total production of 7,594.23 mt. Additionally, the total milkfish production in 2023 was only 240.23 mt, about 53.96% and 81.28% decrease compared to the last output in 2022 and 2021, which were, 521.84 and 1,283.18 mt (PSA, 2024). As a result, this study was crafted to find locally available indigenous feed materials and develop feed formula/s using such raw materials to assist the milkfish aquaculture industry towards inclusion and sustainability. Moreover, this will assess locally developed feed materials for the growth response of juvenile milkfish in grow-out culture and determine their cost-benefit ratio to commercially available feeds.
Results of the study
Changes in length and weight over the 12 weeks of culture period and monitoring from week 1 to week 12 under different feed treatments were shown below (
Figure 5).
The change in weight over the 12 weeks period showed higher increase for the control, taro and bloodmeal treatments especially during the 5
th, 6
th, 7
th and 8
th weeks but banana stem treatment also increased during the 8
th week with a range already similar to the control (
Figure 5A). The change in length was also higher from the 6
th week onwards and almost all treatments grew to similar sizes (
Figure 5B). In terms of statistics, there were no significant differences between feed treatments from 6
th weeks onwards, whether with weight [MS=0.130, df=3,
F=1.14,
P=0.333] or total length of the treatments [MS=0.008, df=3,
F=0.40,
P=0.75] (
Figure 6).
Moreover, the data on the final week (12th week) was also analyzed and compared in terms of the differences per treatment and this showed no differences whether with weight [MS=0.0078, df=3, F=1.53, P=0.223] or length [MS=0.0009, df=3, F=2.02, P=0.123] of the sampled fishes in the treatments.
In
Table 3 below you can see the changes in terms of percentages based on average change of weight, daily weight gain and average specific growth rate. In terms of weight gain, the treatments bloodmeal, taro, control, are superior to the banana stem (1476%>1104%>1053%> 859%) in terms of % average weight gain. While for the average daily weight gain this was dominated by bloodmeal (2.82 g), control (2.66 g), taro (2.59 g) and banana stem (2.35 g). This was followed by the final weight gain of bloodmeal>control>taro>banana stem. Despite this the cage culture happened to have moderate survival rates at Control (90%)>Taro (89%)>bloodmeal (87%)> banana stem (77%) for the various treatments.
For the average specific growth rate, bloodmeal (4.55%) and taro (3.96%) are higher than the control (3.93) and banana stem (3.72); For Fulton’s Condition Factor which generally assesses the health condition of cultivated fish, the nearer the value to 1 and above, control had the highest value (1.17), followed by the taro (1.15), banana stem (1.09), and bloodmeal last (1.07). The FCR ratio shows how efficient the fish can convert a given kilo of feeds to its body weight. Thus a good feed should have a low FCR value which means it takes lower amount of feed to produce one kilogram of fish. In this case, bloodmeal (1.60) was lowest, followed by control (1.65), and taro (1.71) and then banana stem (2.18). In the case of PER or protein efficiency ratio, this has a similar reading when compared to FCR values as this is highly dependent on the crude protein content of the feeds, which means that higher PER values signify more proteins efficiently converted into bodymass of the fish, bloodmeal (0.97) had lowest value followed by control (1.31), banana stem (1.36), and then taro last (3.20).
Table 3.
Growth parameters, including cost-benefit analysis of the different treatments fed with alternative diets.
Table 3.
Growth parameters, including cost-benefit analysis of the different treatments fed with alternative diets.
Technical basis |
Treatments |
Commercial |
Taro+Commercial |
Bloodmeal |
Banana Stem+Commercial |
Stocking density |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
3000 |
Culture period (days) |
84 |
84 |
84 |
84 |
Initial ABW (g) |
18 |
19.2 |
17 |
19.6 |
Final ABW (g) |
249.93 |
241.67 |
253.965 |
221.185 |
Weight gain (g) |
223.33 |
217.67 |
236.97 |
196.99 |
% Ave. weight gain |
1053.34 |
1103.71 |
1476.35 |
898.62 |
Ave daily weight gain (g) |
2.66 |
2.59 |
2.82 |
2.35 |
Specific growth rate (%) |
3.93 |
3.96 |
4.55 |
3.72 |
Survival Rate (%) |
90 |
89 |
87 |
77 |
Feed Conversion Ratio |
1.65 |
1.71 |
1.60 |
2.18 |
Protein Efficiency Ratio |
1.31 |
3.21 |
0.97 |
1.36 |
Fulton's Condition Factor |
1.17 |
1.15 |
1.07 |
1.09 |
Yield (kg) |
674.81 |
645.26 |
662.85 |
510.94 |
Operational Cost (Php) |
|
|
|
Cost of fingerlings |
16,250 |
16,250 |
16,250 |
16,250 |
Labor expense |
7,500 |
7,500 |
7,500 |
7,500 |
Cost of feed consumed |
52,109.76 |
32,140.80 |
44,461.44 |
27,190.77 |
Cost per kilogram of feeds |
52.53 |
32.4 |
44.82 |
27.41 |
Total cost of production |
75,857.78 |
55,894.77 |
68,191.60 |
50,934.77 |
Return (Php) |
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
101,221.65 |
96,788.84 |
99,427.30 |
76,641.00 |
Gross Profit |
25,363.87 |
40,894.07 |
31,235.70 |
25,706.23 |
Gross Profit Margin (%) |
25.06 |
42.25 |
31.42 |
33.54 |
Cost-Benefit Ratio |
2.99 |
1.37 |
2.18 |
1.98 |
*Note: Buying price at 150/kg |
|
|
|
Discussion
Feed comparison
The result of the study during the 84 days of grow-out period already showed that there were no significant differences between treatments. While the earlier result of the monitoring pointed to taro and bloodmeal showing higher weights and length and comparable to the control from the 4th to the 5th weeks, the banana stem treatment also caught up with the other treatments by the time it reached 6th week and onwards. This therefore showed a positive result supporting the use of locally available feed materials that could be used as alternative feeds using a mixture or in combination with the commercial feeds available in the market. In previous studies, such as those by (Windarto, 2023) who used maggot meal as a fishmeal replacement, they found out that 35% maggot flour replacement was best for their culture. The replacement was vital as it is the primary protein source used by the fish for its growth (Pratiwi and Andhikawati, 2021). The replacement meal must have a characteristic that is both easily digestible and contains the necessary amino acids for its growth rate and success. Since fishmeal price has been increasing in the market and it has limited source, alternative protein sources are critical for aquaculture species such as milkfish (Agbo et al., 2011). Given the high cost of fishmeal, and feeds in aquaculture operation, it is therefore necessary to find other alternatives to fish meal in formulated feeds (El-Sayed, 2004). The flour used as an alternative to fish meal in this case which was taro, bloodmeal and banana pseudostem seems to have met the protein content needed by the fish so that it induced growth and weight in the cultured fish. When the nutritional profile of the three alternative feeds were evaluated, the bloodmeal had the highest crude protein content (49%), and this was followed by the commercial (34%), banana+commercial (26%) and taro+commercial (17%). Protein is crucial and indispensable for growth and maintenance of life but the diets also contained vitamins which could play critical role in gut health and growth, for instance, vitamin C, riboflavin, thiamine and niacin found in taro play a role in maintaining connective tissues and collagen, in charge of glucose and amino acid breakdown while also keeping the fish healthy (Molina-Poveda, 2016).
Moreover, the presence of calcium, phosphorous, sodium, potassium, and magnesium or macroelements are needed by cultured fish because they could not manufacture these. Absorbed calcium is rapidly deposited as calcium salts in the skeleton but absorbed phosphorus is distributed to all the major tissues: viscera, skeleton, skin, and muscle (Molina-Poveda, 2016). Although perhaps in trace amounts, these minerals are still essential as they are used for the maintenance of the fish, including magnesium for bone density and cartilage formation. Since levels of phosphorus are low in most natural waters, there is a dietary requirement. Meanwhile the use of sodium and potassium are for maintaining homeostasis in the fish.
The experiment resulted in better growth for all of the fish cultured although there are lesser values found in the case of banana stem (SGR of 3.72 compared to 4.55 for bloodmeal, and 3.96 for taro and 3.93 for control), still this shows that the feed combination was easily digested by the fish and protein for example was readily absorbed or digested in the case of the bloodmeal. With regards to the condition factor which shows how healthy the fish are, most of the fish examined under the different treatments also reached 1, with the control reaching 1.17, taro reaching 1.15, followed by the banana stem at 1.09, and bloodmeal at 1.07. Our findings demonstrate that the combination using available local ingredients can be used as a replacement when farmers are looking at reducing their feed cost.
Contribution to circular economy
In the end, we want to assist local farmers to produce top ingredients that are useful for feed usage. We think that government assistance in providing farmers with peeling and drying machine as well as pulverizing machine could be helpful in realizing a taro flour which can be combined to be used as a feed ingredient, given its usefulness and the available vitamins found in the taro. In the case of the banana pseudostem, this is readily available in the locality which was useful as it can be readily prepared in combination with commercial feeds. Studies on banana pseudostem as an aquafeed is scarce, including its utilization as a natural source of fiber (Provin et al., 2024). The role of banana wastes and its increased utilization as a source of animal feed and fiber should be encouraged and explored further by the government to assist farmers, as it can help contribute in the reduction of greenhouse gas emission. Other agricultural waste products can also be converted to value added products as fertilizers and feeds or bioactive additives (Upadhyay et al., 2024). For instance, cacao husks, coconut wastes, banana peelings, mango peelings and slaughterhouse wastes from bone, to feathers and blood (Macusi et al., 2023a; Wanapat et al., 2024). In addition, other market waste products can be used as a feed for insects such as the black soldier fly (Gasco et al., 2020). Most insect meals come from the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) which has the potential to reduce the demand for soybean production as it can be utilized in feed replacement (Tahamtani et al., 2021). This has received a lot of attention due to the larvae's ability to convert organic food waste into high-value biomass (van Huis et al., 2013) and rich in protein and fat (Ewald et al., 2020). Moreover, other food waste materials that contain high protein, fat, and carbohydrates, can also be very valuable in the production of prebiotics, animal feed, and cosmetics (Ganesan et al., 2024; Wong et al., 2016). Thus due to the precarious status of global fisheries, the aquaculture sector is pressured to move away from fishmeal (FM) and fish oil (FO) as feed ingredients, toward more sustainable alternatives (McLean, 2023). In this country, participation in the agricultural sector, such as farming, fisheries and raising livestocks are the main livelihoods of the poorest of the poor. This population when taught proper waste evaluation and techniques and given funds to improve their efficiency of agricultural production and convert agricultural wastes such as banana stem, fruit peels and cacao pods and coconut husks into livestock feed, can reduce environmental impact of agricultural activities (Sehgal and Sharma, 1993; Wong et al., 2016). Applying common principles of circular economy will help reduce the impact on natural resources and economically uplift society by enhancing the quality of life and creating new jobs (Mujtaba et al., 2023; Najar et al., 2024).
Cost-effective alternative feeds
The result of the financial assessment of the feed cost clearly showed that commercial control treatment was still more costly compared to the alternative feeds, including the fishmeal free bloodmeal. There was higher profit margin with regards to the taro treatment (42.25), followed by the banana stem (33.55) and bloodmeal (31.42), when compared to the control (25.06). The cost-benefit ratio follows the same with Taro having the lowest ratio at 1.37, followed by the banana stem at 1.98, all of these provide us an overview that the alternative feeds are much better compared to the control. Considering that one of the treatments was readily available in the area at no cost to the researchers, we assumed that the cost would be from electricity incurred by the machine shredder. Thus, we used an approximation of processing cost which was done by identifying the power rating of the shredder device, determining the duration of shredding the banana stem and calculating the energy consumption. In the case of the taro, this was more labor intensive as a farmer must peel the taro, clean and chop it and soak overnight then dry under the sun. We assumed that the cost of peeling and drying would be the labor cost incurred per day of peeling and drying the taro and operating a pulverizing machine. On the other hand, bloodmeal requires formulation, because it is a replacement of the fishmeal diet together with other sourced ingredients. The ingredient can be easily found in crude or dried blood from slaughterhouses but this may not be hygienically sourced or clean compared to buying it commercially. Still, the cost benefit ratio showed that bloodmeal has better CBR compared to the control (2.18 vs 2.99). Our study has proven that fishmeal-free and other alternative feeds can replace the use of pure commercial feeds in milkfish aquaculture.