Comparing efficiency of metabolizable energy utilization by rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) using factorial and multivariate approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study was conducted to compare utilization of ME for growth vs. maintenance in rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon. Fish were hand-fed to satiation one of four isoenergetic diets (DE = 20 MJ/kg, as-fed basis) with different digestible protein (DP) to DE ratios (24, 22, 20, and 18 g/MJ). Intake of ME (kJ/d), energy deposited as protein (PD, kJ/d), and energy deposited as lipid (LD, kJ/d) were determined by a comparative slaughter technique. Data were analyzed by a factorial approach or by multivariate analysis of PD and LD on ME. Maintenance energy requirements (ME(m)) and efficiency of ME utilization for PD (k(p)) and LD (k(f)) were estimated with both approaches. For the multivariate analysis, an additional parameter, the fraction of ME intake above maintenance used for PD (X) was defined as linear function of BW, with slope (d) and intercept (c) estimated simultaneously with the above parameters. Estimates were highly dependent on the approach and assumptions used. The ME(m) and k(p) values were higher and less accurate with the factorial approach than with multivariate analysis. The factorial approach estimated unrealistic k(f) values (k(f) > 1). With the multivariate analysis, ME(m) did not differ between species (20 kJ x d(-1) x kg(-0.8)). On the other hand, k(p) was significantly higher (e.g., 0.52 +/- 0.06 vs. 0.43 +/- 0.06; P < 0.05) for salmon than for trout and independent of diet, but k(f) was 0.81 (+/-0.13) regardless of species or diet. The ME intake above ME(m) used for PD (c) was higher in salmon than trout (57 vs. 55%; P < 0.05). The change in partitioning of ME for PD due to the change in BW was negative for trout (d = -0.18), but positive for salmon (d = 0.16). The d values agreed well with the increase of LD:PD ratio with BW for trout and the decrease of LD:PD with BW for salmon, which may have been related to the maturation status of this fish and the associated loss of body lipid observed by maturing salmon. In conclusion, ME(m) and cost of LD were similar for rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon, but the cost of PD was lower for salmon than for trout.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".