Skip to Content
MDPIMDPI

Advanced

FishesFishes
PDF
  • Editorial
  • Open Access

17 April 2026

4 Pages

Fishmeal and Fish Oil Replacement in Aquaculture: Insights and Advances in Current Research

and
1
State Key Laboratory of Mariculture Biobreeding and Sustainable Goods, Yellow Sea Fisheries Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences, Qingdao 266071, China
2
Laboratory for Marine Fisheries Science and Food Production Processes, Qingdao Marine Science and Technology Center, Qingdao 266237, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fishes2026, 11(4), 240;https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes11040240
This article belongs to the Special Issue Development of Low-Crop, Low-Fishmeal or Low-Fish Oil Feeds for Aquaculture
Version Notes
Order Reprints
With the rapid expansion of global aquaculture, the stagnating production and fluctuating prices of fishmeal and fish oil have become limiting factors for the sustainable development of the aquafeed industry [1,2]. Therefore, searching for alternative ingredients has emerged as an urgent task and hotspot of aquaculture nutrition research [3,4]. As Guest Editors of the Special Issue “Development of Low-Crop, Low-Fishmeal or Low-Fish Oil Feeds for Aquaculture”, we are pleased to summarize the papers collected herein and to offer an outlook on future research directions. A total of eight papers were published in this Special Issue, namely, seven research articles and one review. Their authors investigated eight types of feed ingredients, including both microalgae and macroalgae such as Chlorella pyrenoidosa, Gracilaria lemaneiformis, Alaria esculenta, and Saccharina japonica, enzymatically hydrolyzed by-products (fish stickwater and chicken pulp), polychaeta (Neanthes japonica) meal, and copra meal, which indicates the efforts currently made to explore diverse ingredient resources. Experiments were also conducted on diverse aquatic animal species including marine fish species such as tiger puffer (Takifugu rubripes) and gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata), freshwater fish species such as largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) and Furong crucian carp (Cyprinus capio furong.♀ × Carassius auratus red var.♂), and marine invertebrates such as sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus intermedius) and sea cucumber (Apostichopus japonicus). The results inspired the development of novel ingredients and further improved the utilization efficiency of current ingredient sources in the aforementioned species.
Algae contain high levels of protein, polyunsaturated fatty acids, functional non-starch polysaccharides, natural pigments, phenolics, vitamins, and other secondary metabolites [5,6,7]. These characteristics make them ideal alternatives to fishmeal and fish oil, positively contributing to the growth and health of aquatic animals [8,9,10]. Liu et al. [11] evaluated the inclusion of 2.8% Chlorella pyrenoidosa meal to replace 5% fishmeal in tiger puffer diets, and found no adverse effects on growth or body composition, but higher Chlorella levels linearly reduced growth, feed efficiency, muscle n−3/n−6 PUFA ratio, and taurine content. Cheng et al. [12] reported that replacing 33.3–66.7% of wheat strong flour with Gracilaria lemaneiformis–konjac glucomannan mixture (2:1) did not affect the apparent digestibility of dry matter, protein, lipid, phosphorus or amino acids, but increased the survival rate, feed intake, final weight, weight gain, and specific growth rate of largemouth bass. Ayala et al. [13] observed that gilthead seabream fed a low-fishmeal diet with raw microalgae (10%) and macroalgae (2%) showed higher body weight, muscle fiber hyperplasia, and a lower feed conversion rate. Furthermore, fish fed hydrolyzed algae exhibited the highest new fiber generation, which correlated with a firmer filet texture. These findings collectively indicate that microalgae and macroalgae can effectively replace both fishmeal and plant ingredients, improving growth and muscle quality. However, the rigid algal cell wall limits algal nutrient bioavailability in carnivorous species, and thus cell-wall disruption techniques should be applied to improve the digestibility and utilization of algae in aquafeed [14]. Enzymatic hydrolysis technology can enhance the nutritional value and utilization efficiency of low-value feed ingredients [15]. Li et al. [16] demonstrated that in diets for juvenile sea cucumber, replacing 2% fishmeal and 5% soybean meal with either 8% enzymatically hydrolyzed fish stickwater or 8% enzymatically hydrolyzed chicken pulp significantly increased the final weight, specific growth rate, digestive enzyme, antioxidant, and lysozyme activities, while reducing malondialdehyde levels compared to the control diet containing 10% fishmeal and 5% soybean meal. Moreover, the enzymatically hydrolyzed chicken pulp exhibited greater potency as a sustainable fishmeal and soybean meal replacement. Gao et al. [17] found that replacing fishmeal with Neanthes japonica meal (3–9%, freeze- or oven-dried) in juvenile tiger puffer diets did not significantly affect growth, feed efficiency, somatic indices, whole-fish proximate composition, fatty acid and amino acid profiles, or muscle texture. However, the high chitin level reduced intestinal lipase and α-amylase activities, negatively affecting digestive function. Peng et al. [18] provided a comprehensive review of copra meal as an alternative protein source in aquafeeds. Copra meal is abundant and cheaper than fish and soybean meals, but has a low protein content, an imbalanced amino acid profile (lysine and methionine as limiting factors), a high crude fiber content, numerous anti-nutritional factors (phytic acid and tannins), and low digestibility. Copra meal can partially replace fish/soybean meal in some fish and shrimp, but high inclusion levels (>30%) generally impair growth and increase fecal output. Fermentation or water soaking can enhance the nutritional value and utilization of raw copra meal, and the authors emphasize the need to determine species-specific inclusion limits as well as assessing the effects on gut health and the environment.
In addition, the feed formulation in general, and the levels of dietary protein, carbohydrate, and lipid in particular, significantly affect the utilization efficiency of feed ingredients [19,20]. He et al. [21] formulated nine diets combining three protein (30.0, 35.0, and 40.0%) and three lipid (4.0, 7.0, and 10.0%) levels for Furong crucian carp. The researchers found that increasing dietary lipid levels significantly decreased growth performance and the whole-fish moisture content. Conversely, feed efficiency, the energy deposition rate, the protein efficiency ratio, and the whole-fish lipid content were decreased with increasing dietary protein levels. The authors recommended a diet comprising 30% protein and 4% lipid as the optimal protein-to-lipid ratio, and warned that excessive protein and lipid levels may induce metabolic disorders. Gong et al. [22] found that a diet with a carbohydrate-to-lipid ratio of 4 yielded the highest weight gain and test diameter/height gain rate in juvenile sea urchin, whereas a diet with a carbohydrate-to-lipid ratio of 2 resulted in a higher test magnesium content, larger holes, and longer and thinner trabeculae. The authors suggested that the optimal carbohydrate-to-lipid ratio for rapid growth in juvenile S. intermedius lies between 2 and 4. Therefore, appropriate protein-to-lipid and carbohydrate-to-lipid ratios are crucial for the regulation of energy metabolism, growth, and overall health in aquatic animals.
In summary, the articles in this collection clearly reveal that algal proteins and by-products derived from fisheries, poultry, and plant sources represent highly promising alternatives to fishmeal. However, the algal cell wall restricts digestibility, necessitating the development and application of cell disruption techniques, such as cellulase supplementation and high-pressure homogenization, along with efforts to reduce the production costs of algal proteins [23,24]. By-products from fisheries and poultry should undergo enzymatic hydrolysis (e.g., alkaline protease) [25], whereas plant-derived by-products should be processed via fermentation techniques to eliminate anti-nutritional factors [26]. By implementing these strategies, the nutritional value and utilization efficiency of these low-value raw materials can be enhanced to ensure the growth and health of farmed aquatic animals [27]. Furthermore, various insect and microbial proteins not included in this Special Issue also constitute important alternatives to fishmeal [28,29]. Future research should focus on the efficient and cost-effective removal of chitin from insect meals and the improvement of the cell disruption rate in microbial proteins.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft preparation and supervision, Q.M.; funding acquisition and writing—review and editing, H.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by the National Key R&D Program of China (2024YFD2402000), the Central Public-interest Scientific Institution Basal Research Fund, CAFS (2023TD52), and the Earmarked Fund for China Agriculture Research System (CARS-47).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created in this Editorial. All the results we cite in this manuscript are contained in published articles, which can be found in the database.

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank all the authors who contributed their valuable work to this Special Issue for their excellent research and patience during the peer-review process. We are also grateful to all reviewers for their time and expertise, and to the Fishes Editorial Team for their professional support.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Watanabe, T. Strategies for further development of aquatic feeds. Fish. Sci. 2002, 68, 242–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Cottrell, R.S.; Blanchard, J.L.; Halpern, B.S.; Metian, M.; Froehlich, H.E. Global adoption of novel aquaculture feeds could substantially reduce forage fish demand by 2030. Nat. Food 2020, 1, 301–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Hardy, R.W. Utilization of plant proteins in fish diets: Effects of global demand and supplies of fishmeal. Aquac. Res. 2010, 41, 770–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Teves, J.F.C.; Ragaza, J.A. The quest for indigenous aquafeed ingredients: A review. Rev. Aquac. 2016, 8, 154–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Karapanagiotidis, I.T.; Metsoviti, M.N.; Gkalogianni, E.Z.; Psofakis, P.; Asimaki, A.; Katsoulas, N.; Papapolymerou, G.; Zarkadas, I. The effects of replacing fishmeal by Chlorella vulgaris and fish oil by Schizochytrium sp. and Microchloropsis gaditana blend on growth performance, feed efficiency, muscle fatty acid composition and liver histology of gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata). Aquaculture 2022, 561, 738709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  6. Bakky, M.A.H.; Tran, N.T.; Zhang, Y.; Li, S. Utilization of marine macroalgae-derived sulphated polysaccharides as dynamic nutraceutical components in the feed of aquatic animals: A review. Aquac. Res. 2022, 53, 5787–5808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  7. Ansari, F.A.; Guldhe, A.; Gupta, S.K.; Rawat, I.; Bux, F. Improving the feasibility of aquaculture feed by using microalgae. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 43234–43257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Shah, M.R.; Lutzu, G.A.; Alam, A.; Sarker, P.; Chowdhury, M.A.K.; Parsaeimehr, A.; Liang, Y.; Daroch, M. Microalgae in aquafeeds for a sustainable aquaculture industry. J. Appl. Phycol. 2018, 30, 197–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Sarker, P.K.; Kapuscinski, A.R.; McKuin, B.; Fitzgerald, D.S.; Nash, H.M.; Greenwood, C. Microalgae-blend tilapia feed eliminates fishmeal and fish oil, improves growth, and is cost viable. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 19328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Bansemer, M.S.; Qin, J.G.; Harris, J.O.; Duong, D.N.; Hoang, T.H.; Howarth, G.S.; Stone, D.A.J. Growth and feed utilisation of greenlip abalone (Haliotis laevigata) fed nutrient enriched macroalgae. Aquaculture 2016, 452, 62–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  11. Liu, J.; Gao, Q.; Bian, C.; Ma, Q.; Wei, Y.; Liang, M.; Xu, H. An evaluation of Chlorella (Chlorella pyrenoidosa) in the feed of juvenile tiger puffer (Takifugu rubripes). Fishes 2025, 10, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Cheng, Y.B.; Wu, D.; Gao, L.; Rong, S.; Xu, G.H.; Liang, X.F. Evaluation of seaweed meal and Konjac Glucomannan mixture as feed ingredients in largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides. Fishes 2025, 10, 345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Ayala, M.D.; Chaves-Pozo, E.; Sáez, M.I.; Alarcón, F.J.; Martínez, T.F.; Arizcun, M. Effects of micro- and macroalgae-supplemented diets on growth and muscle fibrillar constitution of gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata L., in the final on-growing phase. Fishes 2025, 10, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  14. Wan, A.H.L.; Davies, S.J.; Soler-Vila, A.; Fitzgerald, R.; Johnson, M.P. Macroalgae as a sustainable aquafeed ingredient. Rev. Aquac. 2019, 11, 458–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Fabrini, S.A.; Stroher, R.; Scheufele, F.B.; Mauerwerk, M.T.; Cupertino Ballester, E.L. Optimization of the enzymatic hydrolysis process of shrimp viscera (Macrobrachium rosenbergii) with two commercial enzymes, aiming to produce an alternative protein source for aquaculture feed formulation. Aquac. Int. 2023, 31, 807–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  16. Li, Q.; Liu, Z.; Yang, G.; Zhang, D.; Qin, H.; Xia, B.; Liu, S.; Chen, J. Supplementation of enzymatic hydrolysate in low-fishmeal and low-crop diet improves growth, antioxidant capacity, and immunity of juvenile sea cucumber Apostichopus japonicus (Selenka). Fishes 2025, 10, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Gao, Q.; Fan, Y.; Zhang, R.; Fang, J.; Ma, Q.; Wei, Y.; Liang, M.; Liu, F.; Xu, H. Effect of low-proportion replacement of dietary fishmeal with Neanthes japonica meal on growth performance, body composition, muscle texture, serum biochemistry, digestive enzymes and gene expression in juvenile tiger puffer Takifugu rubripes. Fishes 2024, 9, 362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  18. Peng, X.; Du, J.; Qian, Y.; Ou, W. Research progress on copra meal in aquafeed. Fishes 2026, 11, 110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Penka, T.; Tellbuscher, A.A.; Mraz, J.; Policar, T.; Roy, K. Aquaculture nutrition of perch and pikeperch: An analysis for European percid aquaculture. Aquaculture 2025, 606, 742589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Li, S.; Yin, J.; Zhang, H.; Liu, Z.; Chen, N. Effects of dietary carbohydrate and lipid levels on growth performance, feed utilization, body composition and non-specific immunity of large yellow croaker (Larimichthys crocea). Aquac. Nutr. 2019, 25, 995–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  21. He, Z.; Tian, X.; Li, J.; Guo, J.; Cheng, X.; Wang, D. Effects of dietary protein and lipid levels on the growth performance and serum biochemical indices of juvenile Furong crucian carp. Fishes 2024, 9, 466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Gong, P.; Liu, H.; Gou, D.; Di, W.; Cao, J.; Ding, J.; Chang, Y.; Zuo, R. Optimal dietary carbohydrates to lipids ratio for fast and coordinated test growth of juvenile sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus intermedius). Fishes 2025, 10, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  23. Garcia-Marquez, J.; Morcillo-Guillen, A.; Alvarez-Torres, D.; Galafat, A.; Morinigo, M.A.; Abdala-Diaz, R.T.; Bejar, J.; Vizcaino, A.J.; Alarcon-Lopez, F.J. Biotechnological approaches to enhance nutrient bio-accessibility from algal biomasses: A comparative study of enzymatic hydrolysis and microbial fermentation. Anim. Feed. Sci. Technol. 2025, 325, 116352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  24. Fernandes, H.; Salgado, J.M.; Martins, N.; Peres, H.; Oliva-Teles, A.; Belo, I. Sequential bioprocessing of Ulva rigida to produce lignocellulolytic enzymes and to improve its nutritional value as aquaculture feed. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 281, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  25. Torsabo, D.; Pius Danba, E.; Terhemen Akange, E.; Ariffin, H.; Luthada-Raswiswi, R.; Olanipekun Jimoh, J.; Femi Pius, A.; Dahlianis Ishak, S.; Mat Noordin, N. Recent advancements in the fisheries by-products processing technologies as sustainable feedstuff for aquaculture: Current knowledge and future perspectives. J. Aquat. Food Prod. Technol. 2025, 34, 692–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Ding, T.; Wang, H.; Liang, X.; Yang, J.; Zhu, Y.; Xue, M. Evaluation of enzymatic hydrolysis of palm kernel meal in largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides). Aquac. Rep. 2025, 41, 102672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  27. Wang, Q.; Qi, Z.; Fu, W.; Pan, M.; Ren, X.; Zhang, X.; Rao, Z. Research and prospects of enzymatic hydrolysis and microbial fermentation technologies in protein raw materials for aquatic feed. Fermentation 2024, 10, 648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  28. Sarker, P.K. Microorganisms in fish feeds, technological innovations, and key strategies for sustainable aquaculture. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Henry, M.; Gasco, L.; Piccolo, G.; Fountoulaki, E. Review on the use of insects in the diet of farmed fish: Past and future. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2015, 203, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Synergistic Effects of Achyranthes aspera and Ricinus communis Seed Extracts with an Inactivated Vaccine Enhance Growth, Immunity, and Disease Resistance in Labeo rohita
Previous
Exercise-Induced Epigenetic Regulation of Chchd10 Promoter Methylation Improves Muscle Morphology in Zebrafish
Next