Comparative proximate body composition of Atlantic salmon with emphasis on parr from fluvial and lacustrine habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nutritional status of Atlantic salmon Salmo salar parr was assessed by examining how proximate body composition and energy content (kJ g−1) were associated with the habitat rearing origin of parr utilizing fluvial or lacustrine areas. Comparisons were made among sampling sites within the two habitats, as well as between the two major habitat types applying both fixed effect and random effect models. Mean protein concentration varied from 13·87 to 15·67% among fluvial sites, and from 14·96 to 16·38% among lacustrine sampling locations. Mean fat concentration ranged from 1·71 to 3·32% and from 2·22 to 4·29% among fluvial and lacustrine locations, respectively, with energy concentration, on average, c. 11% higher in lacustrine parr. Interpretation of results of comparisons between habitats was dependent upon the statistical model used. Benefits associated with lacustrine rearing, such as greater body size and nutritional status, have implications for overwintering survival in fresh water as well as subsequent survival during initial sea entrance as smolts.
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 | 0.001 | 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".