Inclusion of camelina meal as a protein source in diets for farmed Atlantic cod<i>Gadus morhua</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Camelina meal Camelina sativa (CM) is a potential protein source in aquaculture feeds, because of its crude protein level (39%) and essential amino acids. Two feeding experiments were conducted with Atlantic cod Gadus morhua. Cod in Experiment I (19.4 g fish−1) were fed diets with 0%, 12% or 24% CM for 9.5 weeks at 10°C; and cod in Experiment II (14.4 g fish−1) were fed diets with 0%, 15%, 30% or 40% CM for 13 weeks at 10°C. Growth, lipid and amino acid tissue composition were compared amongst cod fed varying levels of CM. In Experiment I, cod could tolerate the highest level of CM inclusion (24%) without affecting growth compared to cod fed the control diet. In Experiment II, growth performance was significantly affected at 30% CM inclusion compared to the control treatment, and cod fed 15% CM displayed some signs of depressed growth (reduced feed intake and weight gain). Both treatment and duration were interacting factors (P = 0.015) that determined growth performance when comparing both experiments. Muscle tissue composition was relatively unaltered with less than 30% CM inclusion; however, multivariate statistics revealed significant differences in muscle tissue fatty acid composition between cod fed 40% CM and the control diet. The tissue amino acid profile was generally unaltered because the dietary amino acid profile was consistent after CM inclusion. A few antinutritive compounds in CM may have affected palatability in diets with greater than 30% CM inclusion, which may have resulted in reduced growth performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".