Effect of Dietary Garlic Source on Feed Utilization, Growth and Histopathology of the African Catfish (Clarias gariepinus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of garlic on the growth, survival and histology of Clarias gariepinus were examined during the period of eight weeks. One hundred and eighty (180) fingerlings with initial mean weight of 3.90 ± 0.02 were stocked at 15 fish per net happa (0.8 cm x 0.6 cm x 0.4 cm) suspended in an earthen pond of (12 m x 12 m x 1.5 m). Triplicate groups of fish with garlic feed inclusion were fed at 3% body weight with four Iso-nitrogenous diet (40% crude protein) in Treatment Diet1 (TD1) (control), Treatment Diet2 (TD2) 10%, Treatment Diet3 (TD3) 20% and Treatment Diet4 (TD4) 30% respectively. At the end of the experiment, mean weight gain (MWG), Feed conversion ratio (FCR), specific growth rate (SGR), protein efficiency ratio (PER) and total protein consumed (TPC) were statistically close among the Treatments. The highest MWG (53.63 ± 0.63) was recorded in fish fed with T4 while the lowest was recorded in fish fed T1 (41.73 ± 0.63). Specific growth ratio (SGR) was high in fish fed T4 (3.04 ± 0.06) and low in T3 (2.32 ± 0.04). The Treatment with the highest Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was T3 (2.57 ± 0.03) and the lowest was in T1 (2.11 ± 0.05). The overall best Treatment was Treatment 4 with 30% inclusion level of garlic source. The histological examinations show no visible lesion in the liver and gut of all the Treatments except Treatment 3 with diffuse vacuolar degeneration of the hepatocytes, the gills in Treatment 4 has the epithelial cells of the secondary lamellae fused and proliferated. Result obtained in this study indicated that 30% garlic inclusion rate in a compounded feed helps in feed utilization and growth Performance with no negative effect to the tissues.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".