Effects of Artemia replacement by maggot meal in the larval rearing of Clarias gariepinus in Benin (West Africa)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to reduce the high cost of aquaculture feed, domestic fly larvae (maggots) have been transformed into maggot meal (FA) for the replacement of Artemia in the larval rearing of Clarias gariepinus . Larvae of Clarias gariepinus with an initial average weight of 3 ± 0.05 mg were obtained 5 days after artificial propagation. One control and four experimental regimens of 100%, 75%, 50%, 25% and 0% of Artemia (58.1 ± 0.5% isoprotein) were administered in this study. Three days after artificial propagation, the larvae were acclimatized alternately with artemia and AF every 1 h for 1 day. Then, they were divided into 15 basins each containing 300 larvae per 100L of water and subjected to a ration of 50% of their total biomass distributed in five daily meals for 24 days. At the end of the experiments, the growth parameters (final average weight and weight gain) were better at the control diet (T1) followed respectively by T2 (25% Artemia) and T3 (50% Artemia) regimes.). All diets have guaranteed good larval survival. The protein and ash content of the larval carcasses decreased with increasing levels of maggot meal in diets while those with the lowest lipid content were recorded in larvae fed 25% and 50% FA and the highest in larvae fed 75% and 100% AF. The results revealed that the substitution of Artemia for AF had no adverse effects on the larvae and that the best rates of Artemia substitution by FA in the larvae were 25% and 50%, respectively. These rates made it possible to make the largest profit margins.
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".