Backcross breeding between TGGG hybrid grouper (Epinephelus fuscoguttatus E. lanceolatus) and giant grouper (E. lanceolatus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports on the first successful backcross breeding between TGGG hybrid grouper and GG in captivity. To establish a seed production technique for this new backcross grouper, eggs and larval development were observed. Three successful spawning was observed in November 2018, September 2019 and November 2019. The eggs were collected using stripping methods and the sperms were collected using sperms collector. About 1.2 to 1.3 litres of eggs were collected in each spawning. Eggs and larval development of backcross TGGG hybrid and GG were almost similar to its parental species and other Epinephelus species. Fertilized eggs were measured 0.860 to 0.915 mm in diameter, with oil globule 0.190 to 0.214 mm in diameter. Fertilization and hatching rate were in between 80 to 90 %. Newly hatched larvae range from 1.64 to 1.99 mm and commenced feeding at 60 d AH. Larval dorsal and pelvic spines started to develop from 9 d AH and fins were formed on 21 d AH. By the age of 30 d AH, the fish entered juvenile stage. At 60 d AH, the fry’s body shape and colour resembled those of the adult. After more than 300 d AH, the fish reached 1 kg in weight. The backcross between female TGGG and male GG is expected to perform even better growth and survival rate than TGGG because the backcross carries more genetic material from the GG, which would be ideal for mass production in the aquaculture industry.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".