MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2460881416 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsw092

Assessing feeding history and health status through analysis of fatty acids and fat content in golden mullet<i>Liza aurata</i>

2016· article· en· W2460881416 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Daniel González‐Silvera, Laura Martínez-Rubio, M. E. Abad Mateo, Rubén Rabadán-Ros, Julián Jiménez, Francisco Javier Martínez López

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAVUniversity of WarwickMcMaster University
KeywordsFleshAquacultureBiologyFood scienceFatty acidFish <Actinopterygii>Animal scienceFisheryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to check the suitability of using fatty acids of vegetable origin as biomarkers of aquafeed consumption in fish that aggregate around off-shore fish farms, analysing their different accumulation patterns and their persistence in different tissues in juveniles of Liza aurata (Risso, 1810). Their natural diet was replaced by a commercial feed, followed by a return to the natural diet (wash-out period). The fatty acid profiles of flesh, liver, and brain were modified after 2 months of commercial feed consumption, while 2 months of the wash- out period were not sufficient to return to original values, the brain being particularly resilient in this respect. Histological examination of the liver showed no alterations of the lipid droplet distribution or fat content. The combined use of flesh and brain for fatty acid analysis can be recommended for tracking aquaculture waste intake in the form of lost pellets by wild fish.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207