MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103394869 · doi:10.4172/2155-9546.1000234

Fish Nutrition and Current Issues in Aquaculture: The Balance in Providing Safe and Nutritious Seafood, in an Environmentally Sustainable Manner

2014· article· en· W2103394869 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefanie M. Hixson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aquaculture Research & Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsAquacultureSustainabilityBusinessFood securityBiotechnologyProduction (economics)Fish mealFish farmingFood processingNatural resource economicsFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryBiologyAgricultureEcologyFood scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global aquaculture production has increased in recent years and it is predicted that aquaculture will provide the most reliable supply of seafood in the future.However, there are many controversial issues in aquaculture regarding food safety, nutrition, and sustainability; many of which are directly related to the nutrition and feeds for farmed fish.These nutrition-related issues must be considered in order to achieve balance in safe and nutritious food production and sustainability in aquaculture.This review highlights recent studies and discusses new and innovative aspects in fish nutrition.Some issues in the area of fish nutrition require consideration and improvement, such as: feed and nutrient efficiency, overfeeding and waste, fish meal and fish oil replacements, fish health, biotechnology, and human health concerns.The findings reviewed in this manuscript demonstrate promise toward improvement of the aquaculture industry through nutrition.This review is an update in fish nutrition research, and provides insight on the progression and evolution of this field in order to meet the needs of the industry with the purpose to achieve a balance in seafood production and environmental sustainability.The outcome of this review encourages the use of biotechnology as a tool to meet seafood production and environmental sustainability, in order to ensure global food security in the future and to improve our resource use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations157
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aquaculture Research & DevelopmentSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207