MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076673237 · doi:10.5376/ijms.2014.04.0019

Comparative Study on Growth, Feed Consumption and Survival of Spiral Babylon <i>Babylonia spirata</i> Linnaeus, 1758 (Mollusca: Gastropoda) Fed with Formulated Diets

2014· article· en· W2076673237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. Chelladurai, J. Mohanraj

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Marine Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGastropodaMolluscaBiologyZoologyAnimal scienceAnatomyFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growth trial was conducted to determine the effects of the dietary protein level on growth, feed utilization and survival of Babylonia spirata . The triplicate groups of 50 animals (with an initial average weight of 49.24 +0.8 g) were stocked in 50-l tanks and fed to apparent satiation twice daily for three months with two experimental diets of 30% and 40% protein content and control diet of fresh meat clam. The growth of snails that were fed with natural food was not significantly (P 0.05) in growth and FCR between snails that were fed with experimental diets. The result of the present study indicates that a diet containing 30% and 40% of protein content may be recommended for the growth of B. spirata .

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207