MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137526790 · doi:10.5376/ija.2015.05.0022

Intensive Cage Culture of Nile tilapia in River Nile Systems Canals in Egypt

2015· article· en· W2137526790 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
El-Saidy D. M. S. D.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Aquaculture · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFish Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNile tilapiaNile deltaCageFisheryBiologyZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceWater resource managementMathematicsOreochromis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 28-week rearing trial was conducted in twelve one cubic meter cages with (30.2 ± 3.2 g/fish) Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus mono sex males fingerlings, to test the feasibility of rearing Nile tilapia mono sex in floating cages placed in the River Nile systems, to find out the optimum stocking density per m 3 that could give maximum yield of market-size fish, also, the weight and length of fish at stocking and to determine the physico-chemical characteristics of the water of El-Bagoria canals at El-Hamoul, Menoufiya governate. Fish were fed a least cost diet containing 30.2% crude protein and 4600 kcal /kg diet. The results revealed that Nile tilapia average weight 30.2 g/fish with 150 fish /m 3 as stocking density were adequate for rearing. These fish gave the best both of average weight gain of 117 g/fish and total production of 22.1 kg/m 3 . The artificial food supplied with a crude protein content of 30.2 % is adequate for rearing Nile tilapia in running water systems. The physico-chemical property of the water of El-Bagoria canals was found to be adequate for rearing of Nile tilapia in cages.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of AquacultureSame topicFish Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207