Response of African Catfish, <i>Clarias gariepinus </i>(Burchell, 1822), to Diets of Pigeon Pea, <i>Cajanus cajan</i>, Subjected to Different Processing Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Raw undehulled pigeon pea, Cajanus cajan , seeds were processed by toasting, boiling, and soaking before milling to produce pigeon pea meals (PPMs). African catfish, Clarias gariepinus , were fed eight diets formulated with these meals at two dietary inclusion levels of 600 and 650 g/kg in combination with fish waste meal levels of 350 and 330 g/kg, respectively, to yield a protein and energy contents of 35.96 ± 2.1% dry matter and 18.04 ± 0.2 kJ/g. Fish (mean weight 0.46 g) were weighed and distributed to 24 experimental tanks (seven fish per tank). Triplicate fish groups were fed restricted ration (5% of biomass) per day in two portions for 56 d in static water. Results showed that fish groups fed raw PPM diets had low body weight gain (BWG), inferior specific growth rate (SGR), and high feed conversion ratio (FCR) when compared to other feeding groups. The hematocrit, hemoglobin concentration, and red blood cell and white blood cell counts decreased significantly ( P < 0.05) with raw PPM diets. Slight decrease also was recorded among groups fed diets of other processing methods when compared with initial fish. However, soaking for 16 h enhanced best fish BWG, SGR, FCR, and hematological values and can be recommended as a good processing method of PPM for African catfish diets.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".