MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of feeding a high plant protein diet on growth and nutrient utilization to combined ‘all-fish’ growth-hormone transgenic diploid and triploid Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.)

2015· article· en· W310872838 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachid Ganga, Sean M. Tibbetts, Cheryl L. Wall, Debbie A. Plouffe, M.D. Bryenton, Anja Peters, C. Dawn Runighan, John T. Buchanan, Santosh P. Lall

Bibliographic record

VenueAquaculture · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAnimal Genetics and Reproduction
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersInnovation PEI
KeywordsBiologySalmoFish mealAnimal scienceFeed conversion ratioWeight gainMealFood scienceFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>EndocrinologyBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study assessed the capacity of non-transgenic (NTG) and growth-hormone transgenic (TG; gene construct EO-1α) Atlantic salmon ( Salmo salar L.), comprised of conventional diploid (DIP) and reproductively-sterile triploid (TRIP) fish, to utilize a diet containing relatively high amounts of plant protein (PP) concomitant with lower levels of fish meal (FM) protein. Triplicate groups of full-sibling NTG/DIP, NTG/TRIP, TG/DIP and TG/TRIP salmon (initial weight, 27–35 g) were held in freshwater and fed two experimental diets until they exceeded 400% growth. Two isonitrogenous (50% crude protein), isolipidic (21% lipid) and isoenergetic (22 MJ/kg gross energy) experimental diets were tested. The control diet (FM) contained 64 and 36%, while PP diet contained 32 and 68% of total dietary protein from FM and PP, respectively. TG and NTG fish achieved the target (> 150 g) weight in 89 and 206 days, respectively. TG fish exhibited significantly higher specific growth rates (SGR) (2.48 vs 0.7%/day) and thermal growth coefficient (TGC) (3.04 vs 0.79) than NTG, regardless of ploidy or diet. TG/TRIP fish had significantly lower growth rates than DIP due to lower feed intake, while no ploidy effect was observed within the NTG group. Feed conversion ratio (FCR) was significantly better in TG/DIP and TG/TRIP fish having achieved the same target weight with 20–25% less feed due to improved protein utilization and retention efficiency compared to NTG fish. NTG fish had higher digestibility of protein (93% vs 89%), lipid (95% vs 94%) and energy (89% vs 85%) relative to their TG siblings, and was similar between DIP and TRIP fish. Nutrients' digestibility was significantly lower in TG fish fed PP diet than those fed FM diet, regardless of ploidy. At the end of the study, TG fish had significantly lower whole-body protein (56% vs 59%) and higher lipid (36% vs 34%) and energy (2746 vs 2694 kJ/100 g) content than NTG fish. However, as a result of the rapid growth rate and efficient feed utilization, nutrient gain and retention efficiencies were significantly higher in TG than NTG fish. DIP and TRIP TG Atlantic salmon have the ability to maintain accelerated growth even when fed a high PP diet (68% of dietary protein), which may have important benefits for the production of growth hormone transgenic Atlantic salmon. Statement of relevance The results from the present study are innovative and may have important benefits for the optimization and production of growth hormone transgenic Atlantic salmon using sustainable feed ingredients.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquacultureSame topicAnimal Genetics and ReproductionFrench-language works237,207