Use of Fish Hydrolysates and Fish Meal Byproducts of the Alaskan Fishing Industry in Diets for Pacific White Shrimp <i>Litopenaeus vannamei</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We determined the suitability of four fish hydrolysates and two fish meals (Pacific halibut Hippoglossus stenolepus and arrowtooth flounder Atheresthes stomias; all derived from byproducts of the Alaskan fishing industry) as replacements for menhaden fish meal in shrimp diets. A control diet (30% crude protein; 8.5% crude lipid) was produced with menhaden meal (13% of diet). Experimental diets were manufactured by using each hydrolysate or fish meal to replace 50% of the menhaden meal on an isonitrogenous basis. Each diet was fed to Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei in an outdoor, zero-water-exchange system for 8 weeks. Final weight, survival, feed efficiency, and growth rate were compared among treatments by analysis of variance. The final weights and growth of Pacific white shrimp fed two of the hydrolysates (one acidified to pH 3.8 and left in a liquid state; the other acidified, then neutralized to pH 6.5 and drum-dried) and the two fish meals were not different from those of shrimp fed the control diet. Shrimp that were given the other two hydrolysates (one acidified to pH 3.8 and then drum-dried; the other hydrolyzed [but not acidified] and then drum-dried) had lower final weights and growth than shrimp fed the control diet. These data indicate that the two fish meals and two of the hydrolysates in this trial can replace 50% of menhaden meal in diets for shrimp, although there is some loss of growth potential in some cases. The lack of a diet effect on feed efficiency indicates that the growth differences were mostly the result of differences in feed intake rather than nutritional quality.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".