Efficacy of Intraperitoneally and Orally Administered ProVale, a Yeast β-(1,3)/(1,6)-D-glucan Product, in Inhibiting Xenoma Formation by the Microsporidian <i>Loma salmonae</i> on Rainbow Trout Gills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The objectives of the research were to compare the efficacy of ProVale yeast beta-glucan (β-glucan) with that of a previously tested research-grade yeast β-glucan preparation when administered as an intraperitoneal (IP) injection and to also pilot test the effectiveness of ProVale yeast β-glucan as a feed additive for reducing Loma salmonae xenoma formation on the gills of rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Rainbow trout received IP injections of ProVale (4, 10, or 20 mg of ProVale/kg of fish) or Sigma β-glucan (4 mg/kg). Oral challenge with L. salmonae occurred 1 week after IP injection with the β-glucan products. For the second objective, 400 rainbow trout were separated into tanks and duplicate groups were treated with 0, 50, 100, and 200 g of ProVale/1,000 kg of feed. Starting at 3 weeks prior to challenge and continuing 2 weeks after challenge, rainbow trout were fed the various ProVale doses daily at a feeding rate of 1% of the fish biomass. Commencing at 4 weeks postchallenge, the fish in each trial were evaluated for the presence of xenomas on the first left gill arch. The most protective IP dose of commercial ProVale was 10 mg/kg when compared with the laboratory-grade IP dose of Sigma β-glucan (4 mg/kg). Both of these intraperitoneally administered β-glucan products were effective in reducing the mean xenoma count. ProVale used as a feed coating (200 g/1,000 kg) was able to reduce the mean xenoma count by 50%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".