Coeficiente de digestibilidade de farinha de insetos na alimentação de alevinos de tilápia do nilo (Oreochromis niloticus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuous increase of human population as well as animal production raised the \nuse of products in diets formulations. That fact increased the demand and competition \nfor protein sources between human and animal nutrition. Thus, to find out alternative \nprotein ingredients is necessary. Taking this in consideration, insect meal becomes a \nvery promising alternative protein source. The objective of this study was to determine \nthe apparent digestibility coefficients (ADC) of five insect meals for Nile tilapia \nfingerlings. The experiment was carried out in the Fish Farming Sector of the \nDepartment of Animal Science of UFLA. A total of 900 fry, weighing 3g, were \nrandomly distributed in 18 tanks with 250L in a completely randomized design with 6 \ntreatments (control and Cinerea cockroach, Madagascar cockroach, Zophobas morio, \nTenebrio molitor and Cricket meals) and 3 replicates. Determination of the apparent \ndigestibility was performed using the indirect method, with chromium oxide (Cr2O3) as \ninert marker. After acclimatization period, animals were fed twice daily for 15 days. \nFeces were collected through Guelph modified method. It was observed higher dry \nmatter ADC for Tenebrio molitor meal however not different from Zophobas morio \nmeal (p < 0.05). The ADC of protein was higher for Tenebrio molitor and lower for \nCricket meal, where other treatments did not differ among themselves (p < 0.05). For \ncorrected protein, a higher ADC value was observed for Zophobas morio (81.19%) and \nTenebrio molitor (88.68%) and lower for Cricket (p < 0.05). There were no differences \nbetween the treatments for ether extract digestion (p > 0.05), but when corrected for \nether extract per unit in the diet, the highest ADC was observed for Madagascar \ncockroach and the lowest for Cinerea cockroach and Zophobas morio For chitin, a \nhigher CDA was observed for Common Tenebrio meal and lower for Madagascar \ncockroach and Cinerea cockroach meal which shown the lowest value of ADC among \nall the treatments (p < 0.05). For ash, high ADC was obtained for Tenebrio molitor, \nCinerea cockroach and Madagascar cockroach (p < 0.05). The ADC for Tenebrio \nmolitor and Zophobas morio were the highest for energy while Cricket and Madagascar \ncockroach had the lower and Cinerea cockroach did not differ from the last two \ntreatments (p < 0.05). In conclusion, the animals have a good usage of the five insect \nmeals evaluated, where Tenebrio molitor and Zophobas morio have shown more \npromising.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".