MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997848660 · doi:10.1111/raq.12013

Sustainability issues related to feeding salmonids: a <scp>C</scp>anadian perspective

2013· article· en· W1997848660 on OpenAlexaff
Pallab K. Sarker, Dominique Bureau, Katheline Hua, Murray D. Drew, Ian Forster, Keith Were, Brad Hicks, Grant W. Vandenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Aquaculture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquacultureSustainabilityFisheryFish mealFish <Actinopterygii>BusinessFish farmingFish oilProduction (economics)BiologyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The issue of sustainability of salmonid culture has been the focus of considerable media coverage and debate between environmental activists and aquaculture industry stakeholders, particularly regarding the use of ingredients derived from wild fisheries (fishmeal and fish oil) in salmonid feeds. This study attempts to summarize recent data and to calculate the conversion efficiency of feed resources by Canadian farmed salmon in order objectively to assess the sustainability of this industry in this regard. Using updated information regarding domestic aquafeeds this review reports advances that have been made in diet formulation, fish in–fish out (FIFO) and feed conversion ratios (FCR) and demonstrates that production efficiency of farmed salmonids has significantly improved over time due to continued innovations in the aquafeed sector. The results suggest that the Canadian salmon aquaculture industry efficiently converts wild fish resources into high‐value fish products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in AquacultureSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207