Dietary carotenoid levels affect carotenoid and retinoid allocation in female Chinook salmon <i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the effect of dietary carotenoid availability on carotenoid and retinoid concentrations in the flesh, plasma, skin and eggs of female Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha. Carotenoid concentrations in all tissues were closely related to dietary availability. Early in the breeding season, carotenoids were stored primarily in the muscle, with a flesh carotenoid concentration of 9.9 microg g(-1) in fish fed a high carotenoid diet compared with 1.9 microg g(-1) in fish fed a low carotenoid diet. During the breeding season, carotenoid reserves were mobilized predominantly to the eggs and also to the skin. By the end of the breeding season, carotenoid concentrations in the eggs were 17.9 microg g(-1) in fish fed a high carotenoid diet and 3.9 microg g(-1) in fish fed a low carotenoid diet. Conversely, egg retinoid concentrations were only c. 20% lower in fish fed a low v. high carotenoid diet, which suggests that retinoid concentrations were not limited by the availability of carotenoid precursors. Egg carotenoid concentrations were not correlated with either skin carotenoid concentration or colouration, which suggests that female carotenoid displays are not a reliable signal that males can use to evaluate egg carotenoid resources.
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) | 0.002 | 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".