MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Lipid Source and Concentration on Somatic Growth of Juvenile Green Sea Urchins, <i>Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis</i>

2007· article· en· W2070737380 on OpenAlexafffund
Edward J. Kennedy, Shawn Robinson, G. J. Parsons, John D. Castell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the World Aquaculture Society · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEchinoderm biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsStrongylocentrotus droebachiensisBiologyKelpSea urchinJuvenileLaminariaFisheryAnimal scienceKelp forestAquacultureStrongylocentrotus purpuratusNutrientEcologyAlgaeFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Supplying juvenile sea urchins with an abundant supply of resources and essential nutrients for growth will facilitate somatic growth and, hence, improve the success of the sea urchin aquaculture industry. Lipids are essential in physical processes such as membrane production and are a concentrated source of energy. This study, using prepared diets, tested the effects of lipid sources containing different major fatty acids (i.e., n‐3 and/or n‐6) (Part 1) and lipid concentration (i.e., 1, 3, 7, and 10%) (Part 2) on the somatic (i.e., test or shell) growth of two size cohorts (7.0‐ and 15.3‐mm average initial test diameter [TD]) of juvenile green sea urchins, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis . The growth of the sea urchins fed prepared diets was compared to the growth of sea urchins fed a kelp reference diet, Laminaria longicruris . After both feeding trials, the kelp‐fed sea urchins had superior test growth and were more similar in physical appearance to wild sea urchins (i.e., test color, spine length, and gonad color). The sea urchins fed the prepared diets had pale test color, short, stubby spines, and large, pale‐colored gonads compared to wild sea urchins. The smaller cohort of sea urchins grew at a faster rate, but growth patterns for both cohorts were similar. The juveniles fed the prepared diets (in both feeding trials) had high initial growth rates that decreased after approximately 100 d compared to the kelp‐fed juveniles. Differences in test growth were not shown to be affected by sea urchin size (i.e., similar results for both cohorts) or by differences in dietary lipid sources (i.e., the presence of n‐3 and/or n‐6 fatty acids). However, the sea urchins fed diets with lower lipid concentration (≤3%) had larger average TDs than those fed diets with higher lipid concentrations (≥7%). Differences in test growth and physical appearance among those fed the prepared diets and kelp may have been because of nutritional deficiencies in the prepared 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations32
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the World Aquaculture SocietySame topicEchinoderm biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207