Cladocera as a substitute for Artemiaas live feed in aquaculture practices: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rearing larval forms of fishes is a crucial and critical step in aquaculture practices. Proper nurturing of juvenile forms is important to ensure their survival and growth. Supplementary feeds have been used since long to augment growth and productivity of fishes throughout the world. Despite, availability of a variety of advanced artificial feeds; zooplanktons have been preferred over artificial feeds for their qualities like: better digestibility, nutritional levels, preference by fish larvae and economic feasibility, especially for rearing young fin and shell fish species. Conventionally, Artemiasp. (brine shrimps) has been preferred among live feed organisms for rearing of fish larvae, but, applicability of cladocerans has been less explored despite their several beneficial features. Studies have reported most cladocerans species (esp., Moinasp. and Daphnia sp.) are nutritionally rich comprising of a variety of essential fatty acids, amino acids, digestive enzymes and micronutrients etc. Being an important component of trophic structure in water bodies, they form a link between different trophic levels through food chain relationships, ensuring nutrient dynamics. Their small size and jerky movements make them attractive to larval fish forms. Moreover, their cost effective culture process can be an efficient, feasible, economical and sustainable alternative to comparatively costlier and less abundant Artemiafeed. This article endeavours to review and highlight theefficiency of cladocerans over Artemiafeed for providing a viable and sustainable diet in commercial aquaculture practice.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".