Feed Additives in Aquaculture: Benefits, Risks, and the Need for Robust Regulatory Frameworks

Aquaculture currently supplies over half of the world’s fish and relies heavily on feed additives to enhance growth, improve feed efficiency, and increase disease resistance. This review consolidates peer-reviewed studies identified through targeted searches of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, focusing on aquaculture feed additives. It emphasizes the principal classes of additives employed in finfish and shrimp cultivation, such as natural immunostimulants (including beta-glucans and nucleotides), probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, phytogenics, enzymes, and synthetic nutrients. For each, it summarizes their mechanisms of action, commonly reported inclusion rates, production outcomes, environmental risks, and regulatory statuses. Evidence indicates that immunostimulants enhance innate defences (including phagocyte activity and cytokine responses). Probiotics and prebiotics, on the other hand, regulate gut microbiota and barrier function. Phytogenics offer antimicrobial and antioxidant effects, and synthetic additives provide targeted nutrients or functional compounds that support growth and product quality. Where data are available, typical application ranges include probiotics in the order of 104–109 CFU per gram, prebiotics at approximately 2–10 g per kilogram, and pigments or antioxidants (such as astaxanthin) at 50–100 mg per kilogram. Significant gaps exist, notably the absence of species-specific dose–response data for tropical and subtropical aquaculture species, as well as limited experimental evidence regarding additive–additive interactions under commercial rearing conditions. Additional gaps include long-term ecological fate, regional regulatory discrepancies, and species-specific dose–response relationships. It is recommended that mechanistic studies employing omics approaches, standardised dose–response trials, and harmonized risk assessments be conducted to promote the sustainable and evidence-based application of feed additives.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Fishes
Published
2025-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes10090471
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
15.92
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Feed Additives in Aquaculture: Benefits, Risks, and the Need for Robust Regulatory Frameworks

Reuben Chukwuka Okocha, M. L. Adeleke, Ekemini Moses Okon, Nelson Matekwe et al.
7 citations
Fishes
Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
15.92
article

Feed Additives in Aquaculture: Benefits, Risks, and the Need for Robust Regulatory Frameworks

Reuben Chukwuka Okocha, M. L. Adeleke, Ekemini Moses Okon, Nelson Matekwe, Matthew Iyobhebhe, Paul Oluwatimileyin Olatunji
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Aquaculture currently supplies over half of the world’s fish and relies heavily on feed additives to enhance growth, improve feed efficiency, and increase disease resistance. This review consolidates peer-reviewed studies identified through targeted searches of Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar, focusing on aquaculture feed additives. It emphasizes the principal classes of additives employed in finfish and shrimp cultivation, such as natural immunostimulants (including beta-glucans and nucleotides), probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, phytogenics, enzymes, and synthetic nutrients. For each, it summarizes their mechanisms of action, commonly reported inclusion rates, production outcomes, environmental risks, and regulatory statuses. Evidence indicates that immunostimulants enhance innate defences (including phagocyte activity and cytokine responses). Probiotics and prebiotics, on the other hand, regulate gut microbiota and barrier function. Phytogenics offer antimicrobial and antioxidant effects, and synthetic additives provide targeted nutrients or functional compounds that support growth and product quality. Where data are available, typical application ranges include probiotics in the order of 104–109 CFU per gram, prebiotics at approximately 2–10 g per kilogram, and pigments or antioxidants (such as astaxanthin) at 50–100 mg per kilogram. Significant gaps exist, notably the absence of species-specific dose–response data for tropical and subtropical aquaculture species, as well as limited experimental evidence regarding additive–additive interactions under commercial rearing conditions. Additional gaps include long-term ecological fate, regional regulatory discrepancies, and species-specific dose–response relationships. It is recommended that mechanistic studies employing omics approaches, standardised dose–response trials, and harmonized risk assessments be conducted to promote the sustainable and evidence-based application of feed additives.

FishesVol. 10(9)
Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (ZA), University of Liège (BE), Landmark University (NG), Ghent University (BE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
15.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.