Digestibilidad aparente de la harina de vísceras de pollo y harina de pescado en juveniles dePiaractus brachypomus Cuvier 1818
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Título en ingles: Apparent digestibility of fish meal and poultry by-product meal for Piaractus brachypomus Cuvier 1818Título en portugués: Digestibilidad aparente da farinha de visceras de frango e farinha de peixe em juvenis de Piaractus brachypomusCuvier 1818Resumen: El objeto de este estudio fue determinar la digestibilidad de la materia seca y proteína de la harina de vísceras de pollo (HVP) y de la harina de pescado (HP) en cachama blanca, Piaractus brachypomus, para establecer si la HVP puede sustituir la HP en esta especie. Para éste experimento se seleccionaron juveniles de cachama blanca con peso promedio de 60 gr. Para estimar los Coeficientes de Digestibilidad Aparente (CDA) se utilizó el método indirecto con marcador (óxido de cromo), recolectando las heces por medio del sistema Guelph modificado, 10 horas después de suministrar el alimento, cada hora por durante 12 horas. Las dietas experimentales estaban compuestas por 69.5% de Dieta Referencia (DR), 0.5% de marcador inerte (Cr2O3) y 30% de la materia prima a evaluar (HP o HVP). Los CDA de la materia seca y proteína fueron, para HP = 62.6% y 77.2%y para HVP = 58.6% y 75.5%. Los resultados indican que la harina de vísceras de pollo es una materia prima que puede sustituir la harina de pescado en dietas para cachama blanca.Palabras clave: Nutrición; proteína; cachama blanca; materia prima origen animal.Key words: nutrition; protein; cachama white; raw materials; animal origin.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".