MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892930424 · doi:10.1063/1.5055500

Potential of protein and lipid productions from black soldier fly larvae fed with mixture of waste coconut endosperm and soybean curd residue

2018· article· en· W2892930424 on OpenAlexaff
Siti-Nuraini Mohd-Noor, Jun Wei Lim, Mah-Tazam-Azuri Mah-Hussin, Anita Ramli, Thiam Leng Chew, Mohammed J.K. Bashir, Wen‐Nee Tan, J.J.A. Beniers

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Utilization and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndospermResidue (chemistry)Food wasteFood scienceChemistryFermentationSoybean mealRaw materialBiologyBiochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prime objective of this study was to simultaneously enhance the lipid and protein yields from black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) fed with mixture of waste coconut endosperm and soybean curd residue. The waste coconut endosperm that loss nutrient content during milk extraction was fortified to increase the nutritive value via self-fermentation process within 4 weeks before mixing it with soybean curd residue. The following six feed mixtures of waste coconut endosperm: soybean curd residue (C:S) were formulated: 5:0, 4:l, 3:2, 2:3, l:4 and 0:5. The results showed peak lipid content was attained from 3:2 feed mixtures. Using this feed mixture mediums, the BSFL prepupae could accumulate 58% and 2l% of its biomass weight with lipid and protein respectively. Tn considering of organic waste treatment, 3:2 feed mixture showed an efficiency of conversion of digested food (ECD) of 0.20l. Therefore, mix ratio of 3:2 was concluded as an optimum to produce ideal mixture feed medium for BSFL in enhancing the simultaneous lipid and protein yields.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicInsect Utilization and EffectsFrench-language works237,207