Dietary Administration of Green Macroalgae ( <i>Ulva intestinalis</i> ) on Growth Performance, Serum Immune Parameters, and Gene Expression in Common Carp ( <i>Cyprinus carpio)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The purpose of this experiment was to assess the effects of the green macroalgae ( Ulva intestinalis ) on growth performance, immune parameters of serum and mucus, liver enzymes and the expression of genes related to growth (GH and IGF-1), and immunity (IL1-β and LYZ) in common carp ( Cyprinus carpio ). The test was carried out in eight weeks with the treatments supplemented with 0 (control), 0.25%, 0.5%, and 1% macroalgae and three replications for each group. At the end of the course, growth indices, serum and mucus total protein, total immunoglobulin, lysozyme, and liver enzymes including alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alkaline phosphatase were evaluated. Additionally, the expression of growth (GH and IGF-1) and immunity (IL1-β and LYZ) genes was evaluated using real-time PCR in the brain, liver, and intestine. Based on the results, a significant difference was observed in the levels of total protein, total immunoglobulin, and mucus lysozyme in the fish that received 1% U. intestinalis compared to the control group (P<0.05). In addition, the amount of total protein, total immunoglobulin, and lysozyme in the control group and the other treatments represented a significant difference (P<0.05). Although the initial weight did not show a significant difference among the treatments (P>0.05), the final growth parameters significantly varied in different treatments, with the highest final weight observed in fish fed with 0.25% algae (P<0.05). The results of the expression of immune genes lysozyme (LYZ) and interleukin-1 (IL-1) indicated a significant difference with the control group (P<0.05), representing an increasing pattern with the rising percentage of macroalgae (P<0.05). The supplement was also found effective in promoting the expression of growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) compared to the control fish (P<0.05), revealing an increasing pattern for the IGF-1 gene with the elevated level of the supplement. In general, according to the results of the present study, U. intestinalis can be recommended in carp aquaculture, most preferably at the level of 1% of daily feed, as it could significantly enhance the growth and innate immunity of fish.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".