Growth performance and feed utilization of Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (Linnaeus, 1758) and tilapia galilae Sarotherodon galilaeus (Linnaeus, 1758) fingerlings fed plant protein-based diets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to determine the effect of complete substitution of fish meal (FM) by three plant protein sources including extruded soybean meal (SBM), extruded full-fat soybean (FFSB) and corn gluten meal (CGM) on growth and feed utilization of Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus and tilapia galilae Sarothrodon galilaeus. Four isonitrogenous of crude protein (ca. 28.0%) and isocaloric (ca. 19 MJ kg−1) experimental diets were formulated. The control diet (diet 1) was prepared with FM as the main protein sources. Diets 2–4, each FM control diet, were completely substituted with SBM (diet 2), FFSB (diet 3) and CGM (diet 4). l-lysine and dl-methionine were added to plant protein diets to cover the nutritional requirements of tilapia. Each treatment was allocated to three net pens and fed for 17 weeks. Nile tilapia fed the control diet showed significantly higher (P≤0.05) values for final body weight (FBW), feed intake (FI), weight gain (WG) and specific growth rate (SGR), whereas fish fed the diet with CGM achieved the lowest values. Tilapia galilae fed SBM diet recorded the highest (P≤0.05) values for growth performance. Better feed conversion ratio (FCR) for both Oreochromis niloticus and Sarothrodon galilaeus was observed when fish were fed SBM diet, whereas the worse FCR was recorded for FFSB diet. Feed utilization parameters including protein productive value (PPV), fat retention (FR) and energy retention (ER) showed significant differences (P≤0.05) for both the species fed different dietary protein sources. The present results suggest that, for Nile tilapia, both SBM and FFSB supplemented with dl-methionine and l-lysine can completely replace dietary FM. Meanwhile, S. galilaeus fed SBM diet exhibited comparable growth and feed utilization with those fish fed a fish-meal-based diet.
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".