Centesimal composition and meat yield of Hoplias malabaricus: association with intestinal parasites

Composição centesimal e rendimento da carne de Hoplias malabaricus: associação com parasitos intestinais

Abstract

Hoplias malabaricus is a non-migratory fish commonly found in the Mogi Guaçu River basin, mainly feeding on fish, small crustaceans and insects. It forms part of the diet for humans, birds and some mammals. This fish has great nutritional value, with both good quality and good quantities of essential vitamins and amino acids. Regarding parasitic fauna, this fish can host different species of helminths in its gastrointestinal tract. The aim of the present study was to investigate the possible interference of parasitism in the meat yield from H. malabaricus and the centesimal composition. For this purpose, fish specimens were collected from marginal lagoons of the Mogi Guaçu River (Pirassununga, state of São Paulo, Brazil) using hooks and fishing nets. We found that all specimens of H. malabaricus were parasitized by at least one species, including larvae of Contracaecum sp. (Nematoda: Anisakidae). Parasitism did not have any significant influence on centesimal composition, but meat yield was negatively correlated with the abundance of larvae.

Keywords:
Mogi Guaçu river fish; Hoplias malabaricus; intestinal helminths; musculature centesimal composition; meat yield

Resumo

Hoplias malabaricus é um peixe comumente encontrado na bacia do rio Mogi Guaçu. Não realiza migração e alimenta-se de peixes, pequenos crustáceos e insetos. Faz parte da dieta de seres humanos, aves e outros mamíferos piscívoros. Apresenta grande valor nutricional em relação à quantidade e à qualidade de vitaminas e aminoácidos essenciais. Em relação à fauna parasitária, este peixe pode albergar diferentes espécies de helmintos em seu trato gastrointestinal. O presente estudo teve como objetivo verificar a eventual interferência do parasitismo no rendimento e na composição centesimal da carne do pescado de H. malabaricus. Para isso, foram realizadas coletas por um ano, em lagoas marginais do rio Mogi Guaçu, Pirassununga, estado de São Paulo, Brasil, utilizando-se anzol e rede de espera. Como resultado, todos os exemplares de H. malabaricus estavam parasitados por, pelo menos, uma espécie de parasita, prevalecendo larvas de Contracaecum sp. (Nematoda: Anisakidae). O parasitismo não afetou a composição centesimal da carne do peixe, mas foi encontrada uma correlação negativa forte entre o rendimento da carne e o número de larvas de parasitos.

Palavras-chave:
Peixes do rio Mogi Guaçu; Hoplias malabaricus; helmintos intestinais; composição centesimal da musculatura; rendimento da carne

Introduction

Fish meat is used as food by both humans and other animals. It is rich in proteins and has a reserve of polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic omega 3 series, thus providing numerous benefits for its consumers (Durmuş, 2019).

Hoplias malabaricus (Bloch, 1794) (Characiformes: Erythrinidae), commonly known in Brazil as traíra (trahira in English), is a neotropical predatory fish with importance for both commercial and subsistence fishing (Oliveira et al., 2018). It serves as food for birds and mammals (Meneguetti et al., 2013). It has lentic and lotic habits and its diet consists of other fish and insects (when young) and their fry feeds on microcrustaceans (copepods and cladocerans) (Oliveira et al., 2018).

Hoplias malabaricus is considered to be a lean fish with low fat content (about 0.84%) and has high nutritional value due to its high protein content (Santos et al., 2001). About 800,000 kg of this fish are produced through Brazilian aquaculture annually (IBGE, 2016).

Hoplias malabaricus can be parasitized by different helminths, predominantly nematodes, such as Contracaecum larvae (Nematoda: Anisakidae) (Oliveira et al., 2018). The metabolic requirements of these parasites, especially regarding proteins, carbohydrates and lipids, may be reflected not only in terms of fish health, such that the consequent nutrient deficits may be detrimental for fish growth (Frantz et al., 2018), but also in terms of reduction of the nutritional value and/or meat yield from the fish (Hajji et al., 2015).

We found no available studies showing the effect of nematode infection on fish yield, therefore, the aim of the present study was to identify the gastrointestinal helminthological fauna of H. malabaricus from the marginal lagoons of the Mogi Guaçu River (Pirassununga, state of São Paulo, Brazil) and its influence on meat yield and centesimal composition.

Material and Methods

Specimens collection and identification

Five specimens of H. malabaricus were collected every month (February 2017 to January 2018) from marginal lagoons of the Mogi Guaçu River, in Pirassununga, state of São Paulo, Brazil (21° 59’ 46” S; 47° 25’ 33” W), using fishing nets and hooks. The fish were weighed and measured (standard length), and gender and sexual maturity (Stage A – immature; Stage B - in maturation; Stage C – mature) were determined (Vazzoler, 1996). The fish were then euthanized through pithing, and the abdominal cavity was exposed through longitudinal sectioning from the anus to the mouth. The stomach, intestine, liver and gallbladder were removed and searched for helminths. The nematodes found were collected, counted and fixed. Fish fillets were removed (always by the same handler), using a sharp knife, and fish yield and centesimal composition were compared between parasitized and non-parasitized specimens (Britto et al., 2014).

Helminth prevalence and average intensity were calculated as described by Bush et al. (1997). The helminths were screened under a stereoscopic microscope in a Petri dish containing saline solution, counted, killed by heating and placed in glycerinated alcohol or fixed in Railliet-Henry solution. They were clarified with glycerinated alcohol, lactophenol, lactic acid or methyl salicylate to view internal structures and for identification. Slides were mounted using Canadian balsam (May, 1922) for identification (Luque et al., 2011).

Relative condition factor (Kn)

The relative condition factor (Kn) (a quantitative measurement that is used to ascertain fish wellbeing) was determined through the relationship between the standard length (Ls) and the total weight (Wt) of each specimen, using the equation W = a.L^b (a and b are constants, estimated through linear regression on the transformed equation log W = log a + b x log L). Under normal conditions, the expected value is Kn = 1. If any episode, such as parasitism, causes interference to fish health, the Kn value will vary (Tavares-Dias et al., 2010).

Analysis on centesimal composition

Centesimal composition was analyzed through measurement of humidity, total proteins, total lipids and total mineral salts. For this, groups of fishes were formed according to their intensity of infection: low (less than 100 parasites; group 1) and high (more than 100 parasites; group 2), and without parasites (control group). All analyses were done in triplicate. Since all specimens collected from the Mogi Guaçu River were parasitized, for the control group, non-parasitized fish raised in tanks at the National Center for Continental Fish Research and Conservation (CEPTA) were used.

Total humidity was calculated through the oven drying method, in which the fillets were cut and homogenized while they were frozen, dried in an oven, ground up and weighed. The samples resulting from this drying were used for total protein and total lipid analyses. Total protein content was determined following the Kjeldahl method (Horwitz, 1980). Total lipid content was determined following the methodology described by Bligh & Dyer (1959). Ash analysis was used to assess the mineral salt content, through the difference in relation to the sum of other components (% total humidity + % total protein + % total lipids + % mineral salts = 100%).

Meat yield assessment

Fish fillets, without scales or fishbones, were removed using a thin knife. Fish yield was compared between parasitized and non-parasitized specimens, as described by Britto et al. (2014).

To assess meat yield, specimens were selected based on the quantity of parasites: three specimens with less than 100 larvae (group I); three specimens with more than 100 parasites and less than 300 parasites (group II); and three specimens with more than 300 parasites (group III). Six specimens (three males and three females) without parasites were used as control groups (male control group and female control group). Yield was calculated proportionally to the fillet weight and the fish weight value.

Statistical analysis

All the data were analyzed for normality using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Parametric tests were used when the data showed normal distribution and nonparametric tests were used when the data did not have normal distribution.

Correlations between the number of H. malabaricus parasites and their weight, length, Kn, gender, sexual maturity and collection period were investigated through Spearman's correlation and their significances and statistical differences within each maturity stage was analyzed by Mann-Whitney test.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) (p-value<0.05) was also used to compare the centesimal compositions of muscles with and without H. malabaricus infection. For statistical analysis on meat yield, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied. Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was also used to assess whether there was any correlation between fish meat yield and the number of parasites. The statistical tests were performed using the GraphPad Prism software, v7.0.

Ethics statement

This project was approved by SISBIO, under number 57102-1 and by the Ethics Committee for Animal Use of the National Center for Continental Fish Research and Conservation (CEUA/CEPTA number 02031.000003/2017-68), as validated by the Ethics Committee for Animal Use of the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP).

Results

Specimens collected

Between February 2017 and January 2018, 59 specimens (39 females and 20 males) of H. malabaricus were collected and examined.

All specimens were parasitized with Contracaecum sp. larvae (type 2), and five specimens also carried other nematodes, one was infected with Goezia sp. (2 larvae) and four with Eustrongylides sp. (one fish with two larvae and the remaining with one larva each). Because of the small number of coinfected specimens, these were not included in the analysis. No platyhelminths or acanthocephalans were found.

Regarding H. malabaricus control specimens (non-parasitized), 29 specimens (17 females and 12 males) were collected and examined (Table 1).

Table 1
Biological data from specimens collected, based on their infection status gender and maturity stage (A – immature; B - in maturation; C – mature). N – Number of specimens.

	Gender	Maturity stage	N	Number of parasites	Standard length (cm)	Weight (g)
				Average	Average	Average
Infected	Male	A	1	188 ± 0	26.2 ± 0	343.0 ± 0
		B	20	155.9 ± 26.9	26.9 ± 0.72a	391.4 ± 31.2b.c.d
		Total (average)	21	157.4 ± 25.6	26.9 ± 0.68g	389.1 ± 29.7h
	Female	B	13	146.3 ± 27.4	24.3 ± 0.77	274.3 ± 29.0c.d
		C	26	207.2 ± 29.0	26.3 ± 0.65f	383.8 ± 31.6e
		Total (average)	39	186.9 ± 21.6	25.6 ± 0.52j	347.3 ± 24.4i
Uninfected control	Male	A	1	0 ± 0	22.0 ± 0	192.0 ± 0
		B	11	0 ± 0	22.8 ± 0.92a	253.6 ± 30.8b
		Total (average)	12	0 ± 0	22.4 ± 0.62g	222.8 ± 20.9h
	Female	A	3	0 ± 0	23.0 ± 0.47	233.8 ± 21.0
		B	5	0 ± 0	22.0 ± 0.85	207.0 ± 32.7
		C	9	0 ± 0	21.9 ± 0.67f	216.7 ± 20.9e
		Total (average)	17	0 ± 0	22.3 ± 0.16j	219.1 ± 4.6i

• Numbers with the same letter show statistical differences between each other (p-values: a = 0.032; b = 0.0139; c = 0.0268; d = 0.038; e = 0.0005; f = 0.006; g = 0.0034; h = 0.0137; i = 0.0015; j = 0.0002).

Apart from the Kn, all other variables from Table 1 did not pass the Shapiro-Wilk test, therefore a non-parametric approach was used.

Based on gender or sexual maturity, no significant differences in the numbers of parasites infecting H. malabaricus were found. Regarding length and weight, both the infected males and the infected females showed significant differences, compared with uninfected fish (Table 1).

Using the Spearman correlation test, we found a positive correlation between the number of parasites and their length (r = 0.6450; p-value < 0.0001) and between the number of parasites and their weight (r = 0.6130; p-value < 0.0001).

No significant correlations were found between Kn and the number of parasites, gender, length, weight or season.

Centesimal composition

Centesimal composition analysis was done to compare the control fish (non-parasitized) (Humidity%: 78.91±0.14; Lipids%: 0.49±0.028; Protein%: 19.48±0.49; Mineral salts%: 1.12) with fish with low numbers of parasites (less than 100 parasites; group 1) (Humidity%: 79.49±1.45; Lipids%: 0.57±0.026; Protein%: 19.02± 1.62; Mineral salts%: 1.02) and with fish that were highly parasitized (more than 100 parasites; group 2) (Humidity%: 78.86±0.93; Lipids%: 0.50±0.038; Protein%: 19.55±0.66; Mineral salts%: 0.82). No statistical differences were found between the groups (Two-Way ANOVA, p > 0.05).

Fish yield

Overall, there was a significant reduction in fish yield with increasing numbers of parasites. Table 2 and Figure 1 shows the average biological values for the fish (standard length, weight, number of Contracaecum sp. larvae and yield from H. malabaricus fillets). Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) was -0.900, with a significance level (p-value) of 0.037. This indicated that there was a statistically strong, negative correlation between fish yield and the number of Contracaecum sp. larvae, i.e. meaning that the higher the number of parasites was, the lower the yield would be.

Table 2
Lengths of H. malabaricus specimens, meat weight, intensity of infection by Contracaecum sp. larvae. (mean ± standard error) and meat yield.

Group	Length (cm)	Weight (g)	Number of parasites	Yield (%)
Group I	20.5 ± 0.76	163 ± 18	74.3 ± 12.7	34.9 ± 2.74a
Group II	24.5 ± 1.6	306 ± 86	154 ± 20	26.9 ± 4.63 b
Group III	27.8 ± 0.92	430 ± 39	345 ± 23	23.9 ± 1.54a.b.c
Female control group	22.3 ± 0.88	220 ± 33	0 ± 0	32.5 ± 0.75c
Male control group	21 ± 0.76	184 ± 15	0 ± 0	34.7 ± 1.4c

• Group I – less than 100 Contracaecum sp. larvae, Group II – 100 to 300 Contracaecum sp. larvae; Group III – more than 300 Contracaecum sp. larvae. ^abcYield values with the same letters show statistical differences between each other (One-way ANOVA (Fisher's LSD); p < 0.05).

Figure 1
Graphical representation between the number of parasites and meat yield of H. malabaricus (Group I - less than 100 Contracaecum sp. larvae, Group II - 100 to 300 Contracaecum sp. larvae; Group III - more than 300 Contracaecum sp. larvae).

Discussion and Conclusion

All the specimens of H. malabaricus that were collected were parasitized, with predominance of Contracaecum sp. larvae. This was similar to the results found by Madi & Silva (2005) in the Jaguarí reservoir (São Paulo, Brazil) and by Oliveira et al. (2018) in the Eastern Amazon region (Brazil). Since all collected fish (100%) were parasitized, tank raised fish had to be used as non-parasitized control. Although using tank raised fishes might bring some limitations when comparing to specimens collected from the Mogi Guaçu marginal lagoons, the absence of statistical difference in centesimal composition between low parasitized fish and the control group suggests, at least for the analyzed parameters, this limitations might not be significant.

In this study, we also found Eustrongylides sp. larvae encysted in the cavity and muscles of 1% of the fish collected, while Rodrigues et al. (2017) found that 7.1% of H. malabaricus were positive for this nematode in flooded regions of the Maranhão lowlands (Baixada Maranhense, Maranhão, Brazil).

Polyansky & Bychowsky (1963) suggested that there might be a correlation between the number of parasites and their weight, length and Kn, in which the host body mass would have an influence on the intensity of infection, such that the higher the body mass was, the greater the number of parasites might be. Poulin (2000) also stated that older fish accumulated higher numbers of parasites and that bigger fish offered more space for parasites to become established. These authors also believed that higher infection rates would occur through ingestion of higher quantities of parasitized prey.

Guidelli et al. (2011) reported that fish parasitized by different genera of endoparasites showed lower condition factor (Kn) values than those parasitized with larval nematode stages, but without any significant difference. This finding seems to be in accordance with our results, considering that no significant difference was found between Kn nor any correlation with the number of Contracaecum sp. larvae.

Regarding the centesimal composition, we obtained values similar to those obtained by Santos et al. (2001) and Araújo et al. (2018), who analyzed the centesimal composition of uninfected H. malabaricus. In our comparison between infected and uninfected fish, we did not find any significant differences between the groups. This suggested that Contracaecum sp. larvae do not interfere with the centesimal composition of the meat and that, despite infection, H. malabaricus can still be considered to be a lean and high-protein fish. However, it is important to notice that there was a correlation between the number of Contracaecum sp. larvae and reduction of meat yield, which was in line with the association between the number of parasites and the fish yield, such that fish with higher numbers of parasites had lower meat yields.

There are several factors that may interfere with meat centesimal composition and/or meat yield. In this study, we assessed the effect of parasite infection, specifically by Contracaecum larvae, since this parasite has high prevalence and usually has high intensity of infection. Although we did not find any significant differences in the centesimal composition of infected fish meat, we did, however, find a strong negative correlation between the number of parasites and the meat yield. It is therefore important to track Contracaecum infection, since reduction in fish yield results in commercial losses.

Acknowledgements

To Lucas Mattos Souza, Aldrey Villas Bôas, Larissa Ribeiro da Silva and Mariana Racioni Gonçalves, students of Institute of Mathematics, Statistics and Scientific Computation of Unicamp, for statistics consultancy. To Cepta/ICMBio of Pirassununga – São Paulo for the availability of the study site and of all its technical team, Ricardo Afonso Torres Oliveira, Dalton Donizetti and Benedito Correa. To José Roberto from School of Food Engineering (Unicamp). To Cirene Alves Lima, João Batista Alves de Oliveira, Carlos Alberto Martins de Lima for their valuable assistance.

• How to cite: Guimarães CBS, Pflanzer Junior SB, Pinheiro HP, Mendes TMF, Ueta MT. Centesimal composition and meat yield of Hoplias malabaricus: association with intestinal parasites. Braz J Vet Parasitol 2021; 30(1): e021120. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1984-29612021020
• Financial support: This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001.

References

• Araújo KC, Cirne LGA, Souza WS, Silva JR, Feltran RB, Melo DR, et al. Características morfométricas, rendimento de filé e composição química da traíra. Agrossistemas 2018; 10(2): 25-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.18542/ragros.v10i2.5198
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.18542/ragros.v10i2.5198
• Bligh EG, Dyer WJ. A rapid method of total lipid extraction and purification. Can J Biochem Physiol 1959; 37(8): 911-917. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/o59-099 PMid:13671378.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/o59-099
• Britto ACP, Rocha CB, Tavares RA, Fernandes JM, Piedras SRN, Pouey JLOF. Rendimento corporal e composição química do filé da viola (Loricariichthys anus). Cienc Anim Bras 2014; 15(1): 3844. http://dx.doi.org/10.5216/cab.v15i1.21673
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5216/cab.v15i1.21673
• Bush AO, Lafferty KD, Lotz JM, Shostak AW. Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: margolis et al. revisited. J Parasitol 1997; 83(4): 575-583. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3284227 PMid:9267395.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3284227
• Durmuş M. Fish oil for human health: omega-3 fatty acid profiles of marine seafood species. Food Sci Technol 2019; 39(Suppl. 2): 454-461. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/fst.21318
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/fst.21318
• Frantz A, Perga ME, Guillard J. Parasitic versus nutritional regulation of natural fish populations. Ecol Evol 2018; 8(17): 8713-8725. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4391 PMid:30271539.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4391
• Guidelli G, Tavechio WLG, Takemoto SRM, Pavanelli GC. Relative condition factor and parasitism in anostomid fishes from the floodplain of the Upper Paraná River, Brazil. Vet. Parasitol 2011; 177(1-2): 145-151. http://dx.doi.org/ http://dx.doi.org/ PMid: PMid:
  » http://dx.doi.org/» http://dx.doi.org/
• Hajji T, Telahigue K, Bennour S, Gharbi M, El Cafsi M. Impact of Peroderma cylindricum (Copepoda: Pennellidae) infection on fatty acid composition and lipid quality of sardine (Sardina pilchardus). J Parasitol 2015; 101(6): 682-686. http://dx.doi.org/10.1645/15-777 PMid:26244411.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1645/15-777
• Horwitz W. Official Methods of Analysis of Association of Oficial Analytical Chemists 13rd ed. Arlington: AOAC International; 1980.
• Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatistica – IBGE. Pesquisa da Pecuária Municipal - PPM. [online]. Rio de Janeiro: IBGE; 2016 [cited in 2020 Aug 1]. Available from: https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9107-producao-da-pecuaria-municipal.html
  » https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9107-producao-da-pecuaria-municipal.html
• Luque JL, Aguiar JC, Vieira FM, Gibson DI, Santos CP. Checklist of Nematoda associated with the fishes of Brazil. Zootaxa 2011; 3082(1): 188. http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3082.1.1
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3082.1.1
• Madi RR, Silva MSR. Contracaecum Railliet & Henry, 1912 (Nematoda, Anisakidae): o parasitismo relacionado à biologia de três espécies de peixes piscívoros no reservatório do Jaguari, SP. Rev Bras Zoociênc 2005; 7(1): 15-24.
• May HG. Killing, staining and mounting parasitic nematodes. Trans Am Microsc Soc 1922; 41(2): 103-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3221900
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3221900
• Meneguetti DUO, Laray MPO, Camargo LMA. Primeiro relato de larvas de Eustrongylides sp. (Nematoda: Dioctophymatidae) em Hoplias malabaricus (Characiformes: Erythrinidae) no Estado de Rondônia, Amazônia Ocidental, Brasil. Rev Pan-Amaz Saude 2013;4(3):55-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.5123/S2176-62232013000300008
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5123/S2176-62232013000300008
• Oliveira MSB, Lima Corrêa L, Prestes L, Neves LR, Brasiliense ARP, Ferreira DO, et al. Comparison of The Endoparasite Fauna of Hoplias Malabaricus and Hoplerythrinus unitaeniatus (Erythrinidae), Sympatric Hosts in the Eastern Amazon Region (Brazil). Helminthologia 2018; 55(2): 157-165. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/helm-2018-0003 PMid:31662642.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/helm-2018-0003
• Polyansky YI, Bychowsky BE. Parasite fauna of sea fish. Results and perspectives of investigations by Soviet parasitologists on fish parasites in seas of the USSR Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations; 1963.
• Poulin R. Variation in the intraspecific relationship between fish length and intensity of parasitic infection: biological and statistical causes. J Fish Biol 2000; 56(1): 123-137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2000.tb02090.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2000.tb02090.x
• Rodrigues LC, Santos ACG, Ferreira EM, Teófilo TS, Pereira DM, Costa FN. Aspectos parasitológicos da traíra (Hoplias malabaricus) proveniente da cidade de São Bento, MA. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec 2017; 69(1): 264-268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-8798
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-4162-8798
• Santos AB, Melo JFB, Lopes PRS, Malgarim SB. Composição química e rendimento do filé da traíra (Hoplias malabaricus). Rev FZVA (Online) 2001; 7-8(1): 140-150.
• Tavares-Dias M, Araujo CSO, Gomes AL, Andrade SMS. Relação peso-comprimento e fator de condição relativo (Kn) do pirarucu Arapaima gigas Schinz, 1822 (Arapaimidae) em cultivo semi-intensivo no estado do Amazonas, Brasil. Rev Bras Zoocienc (Online) 2010; 12(1): 59-65.
• Vazzoler AE. Biologia da reprodução de peixes teleósteos: teoria e prática Maringá, PR: Eduem; 1996.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  26 Apr 2021
• Date of issue
  2021

History

• Received
  31 Aug 2020
• Accepted
  19 Feb 2021