MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2804151519 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2017-0175

Effects of calcium, phosphorus, and vitamin D on growing mink (<i>Mustela vison</i>)

2018· article· en· W2804151519 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Guangyu Li, Jing Wang, Haihua Zhang, Xuelei Zhang, Yinan Xu, Rende Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgricultural Science and Technology Innovation ProgramChinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences
KeywordsMinkAnimal sciencePhosphorusCalciumMealBiologyChemistryEndocrinologyInternal medicineFood scienceMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study investigated the effects of dietary calcium (Ca), phosphorus (P), and vitamin D (VD) supplements on growth performance, Ca:P digestion and metabolism, and serum biochemical indexes of growing male mink (Mustela vison) under conditions of a fixed 2:1 ratio of Ca to P. About 135 dark male mink were randomly assigned to nine groups. The experiment was conducted with a 3 × 3 (Ca:P × VD) factorial design using a corn–fish meal-based diet that contained 2.3% Ca, 1.15% P, and 2100 IU kg −1 VD. The supplementary Ca and P levels were 0%:0%, 0.4%:0.2%, and 0.8%:0.4% of the diets, respectively, whereas supplementary VD levels were 0, 2000, and 4000 IU kg −1 . The Ca and P dosage had a significant effect on growth performance of the mink (P < 0.05). The appropriate VD level, which was 4100 IU kg −1 , significantly improved protein utilization and Ca and P digestibility of growing mink (P < 0.05). In addition, excreta pollution to the environment was also significantly reduced (P < 0.05). In conclusion, Ca:P (3.1%:1.55%) and VD (4100 IU kg −1 ) had an important effect on growth performance and protein utilization in growing mink and could reduce environmental pollution by improving protein and P utilization.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal Science→Same topicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth→French-language works237,207→