Replacing Fish Meal with Rendered Animal Protein Ingredients in Diets for Malabar Grouper, <i>Epinephelus malabaricus</i>, Reared in Net Pens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The potential of using rendered animal protein ingredients, poultry by‐products meal (PBM), meat and bone meal (MBM), and feather meal (FM), to replace fish meal in diets for malabar grouper, Epinephelus malabaricus, was evaluated in a 10‐week net pen experiment. Triplicate groups of fish (initial body weight 50.2 g) were fed eight isonitrogenous and isocaloric diets formulated to contain 52% crude protein and 9% crude lipid. The control diet contained 50% herring meal, whereas in the remaining seven diets, PBM was incorporated at 11.9 (PM1), 23.8 (PM2), and 35.7% (PM3) to replace 25, 50, and 75% of the fish meal; MBM was incorporated at 14.5 (MM1) and 29.0% (MM2) to replace 25 and 50% of the fish meal; and FM was incorporated at 9.4 (FM1) and 18.8% (FM2) to replace 25 and 50% of the fish meal. A raw fish (RF) diet was used as comparison to assess growth performance of fish fed the formulated diets. Feed intake was lower in fish fed the diets PM3 and FM2 than fish fed the control diet. There were no significant differences in weight gain (WG), final body weight (FBW), nitrogen retention efficiency (NRE), energy retention efficiency (ERE), and total nitrogen waste output (TNW) between fish fed the control diet and the diets PM1, PM2, PM3, MM1, MM2, and FM1. Fish fed the diet FM2 had lower WG, FBW, NRE, and ERE but higher TNW than that of fish fed the control diet. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was higher in fish fed the diets MM2, FM1, and FM2 than fish fed the control diet. At the end of the experiment, there were no significant differences in whole‐body content of moisture, crude protein, and crude lipid among fish fed the formulated diets. WG, FBW, and TNW of fish fed the diet RF were higher, while FCR and NRE were lower than that of fish fed the control diet. No significant differences were found in feed intake, ERE, and whole‐body composition between fish fed the diet RF and the control diet. Results of the present study suggest that dietary fish meal level for malabar grouper can be lowered from 50 to 38% by incorporating PBM, MBM, or FM.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".