Non-Fishmeal Based, and Selected Indigenous Raw Materials as Cost-Effective Feeds for Milkfish Aquaculture

This study aimed to find alternative feeds or supplementary feeds that can perform similarly to the existing commercial feeds thereby reducing farmer expense and cutting down their cost of production and increasing their profitability. The formulations for the study included four grow-out treatments mainly: control (commercial feed), taro+control (powdered Colocasia esculenta+commercial fish feed), bloodmeal (formulated fish feed based on bloodmeal), banana stem+control (chopped banana stem+commercial fish feed). A total of 12,000 fingerlings initially weighing 16 g (TL=10 cm) individually were assigned randomly to the four treatments (3000 in each cage measuring 6 x 6 m). The result of the study showed no significant differences between feed treatments from 6^th week 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]. The FCR ratio showed bloodmeal (1.60) as lowest, followed by the control (1.65), and taro+commercial (1.71) and then banana stem+commercial (2.18). In terms of weight gain, fish from the bloodmeal treatment gained the highest (236.97 g), followed by control (223.33 g), then taro (217.67 g) and banana stem (196.99 g). As a result, we find that any of the tested treatments can serve as an alternative feed to using purely commercial fish feeds. Cost-benefit analysis showed that a better gross profit margin of 42% and cost-benefit ratio of 1.37 was observed in taro+commercial feed diet.