MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2258365975

Aquaculture of white shrimp Penaeus vannamei in Thailand.

2005· article· en· W2258365975 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Siri Tookwinas, Kanit Chiyakum, Sutheewat Somsueb

Bibliographic record

VenueSEAFDEC/AQD Repository (Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquatic life and conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPenaeusShrimpFisheryPenaeidaeAquacultureShellfishWhite (mutation)DecapodaLitopenaeusBiologyAquatic animalCrustaceanFish <Actinopterygii>
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aquaculture production in Thailand has been practiced for a long time. Thailand has a huge flood plain, long riverine stretches, natural lakes, reservoirs and brackish-water areas along the coastline. On the Gulf of Thailand and Andaman Sea there are approximately 2,600 kms of shoreline. Marine shrimp farming in Thailand has been part of the culture for the last 80 years (Tookwinas, 1994). However, the technology of intensive shrimp farming has expanded significantly along the coastal province in the last two decades. Presently, Thailand has become the leading country in shrimp production in the world market since 1991 (World Shrimp Farming, 2004) with a total production area of approximately 75,000 ha and 30,800 farmers and production of 330,000 tons in 2003. Recent statistics show that 37 percent of shrimp farmers are small operators utilizing a farming area less than 0.8 ha, the area between 0.8–1.6 ha of 28%, the area between 1.6–4.8 ha of 24% and the area over 4.8 ha of 11% (National Statistical Office, 2000). The farming species are Penaeus monodon and P. vannamei. More than 95 percent of marine farming production has been exported frozen, headless and with the shell on. The importing countries are United States, Japan, European Countries, Canada and etc.

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 score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSEAFDEC/AQD Repository (Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center)Same topicAquatic life and conservationFrench-language works237,207