Androgenic and anabolic effects of pinus tabulaeformis carr. Pollen in clarias gariepinus

Abstract

Feeding trials were conducted to evaluate the effects of dietary pine pollen from Pinus tabulaeformis Carr. on masculinization, growth, food conversion efficiency, and survival of Clarias gariepinus. Experimental diets were prepared using a commercial feed for fry as basal diet with 5 levels of pine pollen supplementation: 0 (control, T1), 80 (T2), 160 (T3), 320 (T4), and 640 (T5) mg/kg diet; two positive control diets were also included, namely 17-α-methyltestosterone, and testosterone at 60 mg/kg diet. Two feeding trials were conducted, the first; larvae to fry for 72 days (Phase 1) and the second; fry to fingerling for an additional 45 days (Phase 2). Results showed that the percentage of males was significantly lower in the untreated diet (50.4%) and significantly higher in all of the pine pollen groups although there was no significant difference between the pine pollen groups. The male percentage was significantly highest in the 17-α-methyltestosterone and testosterone groups with no significant difference between the two groups. Phase 1 feeding showed that pine pollen did not affect growth, feed intake, food conversion efficiency, and survival of catfish. In Phase 2 feeding, the final average body weight (FABW), weight gain (WG), feed intake (FI), and protein efficiency ratio (PER) in all pine pollen groups similarly increased, but specific growth rate (SGR) and food conversion ratio (FCR) did not. 17-α-methyltestosterone treatment significantly increased WG and SGR, but enhancement was significantly inferior to the pine pollen groups (P<0.05). Testosterone did not have any effect on any of the response parameters. FIs were significantly higher in the pine pollen groups than either the control, 17-α-methyltestosterone, and testosterone groups. There was no effect on survival rate in any of the treatments All rates were statistically similar (P>0.05). Conclusion: pine pollen resulted in slightly but significantly inferior androgenic effect, but anabolic effect was superior compared to both 17-α-methyltestosterone, and testosterone. Its use for sex reversal and improved growth is recommended.