Microalgae and phytase dietary supplementation improved growth and gut microbiota in juvenile European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fishmeal and fish oil have been the main sources of protein and fatty acid for aquaculture fish. However, their increasing price and low sustainability have led the aquafeed industry to seek sustainable alternative feedstuffs to meet the nutritional requirements of fish and improve their health and performance. Plant proteins have been successfully used to replace fishery derivatives in aquafeeds, but the presence of anti-nutritional substances is a potential drawback of this approach. Thus, it has been reported that phytate breakdown can be caused by feed supplementation with exogenous phytase. The inclusion of microalgae has been proposed to improve gut functionality in fish fed diets with a high vegetable protein content. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect on the growth and gut microbiota of European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) juveniles of a diet containing a blend of microalgae (Arthrospira platensis and Nannochloropsis gaditana) and different concentrations of phytase. An 83-day feeding trial was conducted, comprising four experimental diets with 2.5% microalgae and 500, 1,000, 2,000, or 10,000 phytase units (FTU)/kg feed and a microalgae- and phytase-free control diet. At the end of the trial, a significantly increased body weight was observed in fish fed the diet with the highest phytase concentration (10,000 FTU/kg) versus controls, although the gut bacterial composition did not differ from controls in alpha or beta diversity with either majority (Weighted UniFrac) or minority bacterial strains (Unweighted UniFrac). In comparison to the control group, the groups fed diets with 1,000 or 2,000 FTU/kg diets had a lower alpha diversity (Shannon's diversity index), while those fed diets with 500 FTU/kg or 1,000 FTU/kg showed distinct clusters in beta diversity (involving minority ASVs). According to these findings, the diet containing the 2.5% microalgae blend with 10,000 FTU/kg may be useful to increase the aquafeed quality and sustain the growth performance of juvenile European seabass.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".