Sulfadimethoxine and Ormetoprim Residues in Three Species of Fish after Oral Dosing in Feed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus, summer flounder Paralichthys dentatus, and walleyes Sander vitreus were treated with Romet-30 (PHARMAQ AS, Oslo, Norway) via a medicated ration at 50 mg Romet-30 kg fish body weight(- 1) d(-1) for 10 d to compare the elimination kinetics of the test substance. This study was part of a larger effort to develop a species grouping concept for the labeling of therapeutic compounds for cultured fishes. The fish tests were conducted at the ideal water temperature for each species and at 5 degrees C lower than the ideal temperature except for summer flounder, which would not feed at the lower temperature of 15 degrees C. Test temperatures were 30 degrees C and 25 degrees C for Nile tilapia, 20 degrees C and 17 degrees C for summer flounder, and 25 degrees C and 20 degrees C for walleyes. Neither component of Romet-30 (sulfadimethoxine and ormetoprim) could be detected in samples of the edible portion of walleyes (muscle plus skin) collected at day 10 posttreatment or thereafter. In studies with summer flounder, only one fish had a detectable concentration of either component on day 21 or thereafter. Elimination of Romet-30 by Nile tilapia was extremely rapid. The limited number of Nile tilapia with detectable sulfadimethoxine or ormetoprim during the posttreatment period prevented the determination of elimination half-life or elimination in this species.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".