MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2974023570 · doi:10.1139/cjas-2019-0055

Nutritional evaluation of seal by-products as an alternative protein source for use in monogastric animals

2019· article· en· W2974023570 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Derek Anderson, Gina Priest, Stephanie A. Collins, Janice MacIsaac

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Animal Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonogastricSeal (emblem)RuminantFood scienceFecesSilageFermentationBiologyAnimal scienceAnimal nutritionChemistryAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seal by-products (grey seal with the bone in, grey seal with the bone removed, and harp seal) were subjected to five different processing methods: high (100 °C) and low (45 °C) temperature oven-drying, freeze-drying (FD), silage by acid or natural fermentation. Growth performance of diets containing these seal by-products was evaluated in rats as a monogastric model species. With the exception of naturally fermented grey seal without bone, weight gains for rats fed the boneless grey seal products were highest of the seal products (24.65–30.04 g rat−1) and statistically similar to those of rats fed casein (32.15 g rat−1). An in vivo crude protein (CP) digestibility study was conducted using 12 adult white rats in metabolic cages that allowed separate collection of urine and feces. The 16% CP diets contained chromic oxide as an inert fecal marker at 0.5%. Total fecal and urine production, as well as feed and water intake, were recorded daily within the three experimental periods. Digestibility of CP was significantly higher for the naturally fermented grey seal without bone silage (94.0%) than casein (89.0%), whereas the other seal products were statistically similar (91.7%–92.7%). The CP content of FD grey seal was as high as 91.7% (FD). Seal by-products have the potential to be used as alternative high-protein feedstuffs in monogastric diets.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.281
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Animal Science→Same topicAnimal Nutrition and Physiology→French-language works237,207→