Effects of different ligands on the bioaccumulation and subsequent depuration of dietary Cu and Zn in juvenile rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of different ligands on the bioavailability of dietary copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn) to fish have not been thoroughly investigated. We therefore exposed juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss; ~200 mg body weight) to control food or to food supplemented with different Cu (~400 µg·g 1 food) or Zn (~1000 µg·g 1 food) compounds. Tissue metal accumulation was compared among groups. Fish fed CuO showed no differences in tissue Cu concentrations relative to control fish, suggesting that Cu was not readily available for uptake in this form. In contrast, Cu in the form of CuSO 4 , Cu-proteinate, or Cu-lysine was much more available for uptake, resulting in substantial increases in liver, gut tissue, and whole-body Cu concentrations during the loading phase and decreases during depuration, although liver and whole-body levels remained elevated after 2 weeks. We found no differences in tissue Cu accumulation among these three complexes. There were no effects on growth. For Zn, we found no differences among any of the treatments, including controls, in Zn accumulation or growth. Overall, there was homeostasis of whole-body and tissue-specific Zn concentrations despite the large differences in dietary Zn loads.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".