Estimating diets of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) using fatty acid signature analyses; validation with controlled feeding studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diets incorporating homogeneous binary mixtures of herring or krill oil were fed to Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar ) for 22 weeks, and belly flap and muscle tissues were then analyzed for fatty acid (FA) composition. Quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) was able to estimate proportions of major dietary components within ∼10% of actual values, but the accuracy of the estimates depended on the FA set and calibration coefficients (CC) used in the modelling. FAs present at low levels had little influence on estimates, despite having only dietary sources; the FA set used in the modelling must incorporate the major FAs in tissues to ensure accurate estimates of diet. CC, which reflect modifications that consumers make to dietary FAs, were similar in the two tissues but varied with diet. When CC were applied to correct for fish metabolism, QFASA tended to overestimate the dietary component that had been fed to determine the CC. Diet estimates were most accurate when CC that had been developed from feeding the krill oil-based diet were applied. This first application of QFASA to fish therefore establishes a set of FAs and CC to begin to investigate diets of salmonids.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".