Effects of dietary xanthophylls/astaxanthin ratios on the growth and skin pigmentation of large yellow croaker <i>Larimichthys crocea</i> (Richardson, 1846)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An 8-week feeding trial was conducted to evaluate the effects of dietary xanthophylls/ astaxanthin ratio on the growth and skin color of large yellow croaker, Larimichthys crocea. Five pigment-supplemented diets were formulated to contain 75/0, 50/25, 37.5/37.5, 25/50 and 0/75 mg kg−1 of xanthophylls/astaxanthin. The xanthophylls contain 89.31% lutein and 6.12% zeaxanthin. A diet without pigment supplementation was used as the control. The large yellow croaker juveniles (13.80 ± 0.03 g) were randomly distributed in 18 sea cages (1.0 × 1.0 × 1.5 m) at a density of 45 fish per cage. Water temperature ranged from 21 to 31°C during the feeding trial. To obtain results, the survival rate, specific growth rate, feed conversion ratio, skin redness, skin yellowness, skin lightness, skin carotenoid content and skin melanin content were measured. The results showed that the survival rate, specific growth rate and feed conversion ratio were not significantly affected by dietary treatments (P > 0.05). The ventral skin lightness was also not affected by dietary treatments (P > 0.05); however, the dorsal skin lightness of fish fed with the control diet was significantly lower than those fed with pigment-supplemented diets (P < 0.05). The lowest values of yellowness and carotenoid content both in the ventral skin and dorsal skin were found in the control group. Yellowness and carotenoid content increased with an increasing proportion of dietary xanthophylls in both the ventral and dorsal skin. Higher redness values were found in the compound pigment groups, either in the dorsal skin or ventral skin. Fish fed with the control diet showed a higher melanin content in the dorsal skin than those fed with pigment-supplemented diets, although differences were not significant (P > 0.05). Lightness and yellowness were linearly related to skin carotenoid content. Meanwhile, skin yellowness and carotenoid content were linearly related to the proportion of xanthophylls in dietary pigments.
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) | 0.001 | 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".