The Effect of Two Commercial and On-farm Made Aquafeeds on Growth and Survival Rate of <i>Oreochromis niloticus</i> (Nile Tilapia) Reared in Hapa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment was conducted for 12 weeks to determine the effect of two commercial and on-farm made aqua feeds on the growth and survival rate of Oreochromis niloticus reared in 2×4 hapas mounted in a concrete sided pond. A total of 90 fish with stocking rates of 15 fish (average wt 10.5g/fish) per hapa were used, replicated twice. Feeds with 30% crude protein were administered to the fish twice per day at 5% of biomass determined at the previous sampling. Growth of fish was monitored fortnightly. Body weights and lengths were measured after 24 hours of fasting. Results indicated that total body length and specific growth rate increased with advancement of the experimental period, while weight gain/day and length values were almost similar in all the groups. However, all the tested growth parameters favoured those fed on Diet 3 compared to those given Diets 2 and 1 respectively. A similar pattern was equally observed on final mean weights and survival rates, which ranged from: 29.2g and 93% for fish fed Diet 3, 22.9g and 87% for fish fed Diet 2 and 21.6g and 78% for fish given Diet 1, across all treatments. The highest mean daily and cumulative feed intake was observed in a treatment with mean growth of 29.2g/fish. This study has therefore, proved without doubt that Diet 3 had enhanced the overall growth performance and survival rate of Oreochromis niloticus .
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".