Studies on Effects of Nutrient Supplements Fortified with Phagostimulants Formulation H1 on Growth and Development of Indoor Reared Antheraea assamensis Helfer (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A phagostimulant formulation H1 was fortified with different combinations of ascorbic acid, proline and SodiumCyclamate to study their effect on growth and development of Muga silkworm under indoor rearing. All thechemicals fortified with formulation H1 had positive effect on body tissue growth of Muga silkworm, the bestfortified combination being ascorbic acid-proline that gave highest average tissue growth of 2.8861 g against theaverage tissue growth of 2.55934 g in control. In larval survivability, the fortified nutrient combination ascorbicacid – proline and ascorbic acid – Na cyclamate had profound effect in all the instars. In respect of cocoonqualities, measured as cocoon weight, shell weight and silk ratio, all the nutrient combinations withphagostimulant formulation H1 were high in contrast to control. Leaf extract of Som plant has positive effect ifused in the spray solution as substitute of blank water.
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".