Replacement of Fish Meal with Crustacean Meals in Diets for Long-Snouted Seahorse, Hippocampus guttulatus: Digestibility and Growth Performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effect of partially replacing fish meal with krill and copepod meals in inert diets co-fed with shrimp on the growth and nutrient digestibility of long-snout seahorses (Hippocampus guttulatus). A control diet (Diet 1) using raw starch and four experimental diets with similar protein (≈44.8%) and energy (≈15.1 MJ/kg) levels were tested. Diet 2 used fish meal as the sole protein source, while in Diets 3–5, krill and copepod meals replaced 44% of the fish meal. Seahorses fed shrimp + Diets 2–5 showed significantly higher growth rates (p < 0.05) than those fed shrimp + Diet 1, though there were no significant growth differences among Diets 2–5. Digestibility of dry matter (46.1% to 72.2%), lipids (73.3% to 85.5%), crude protein (89.8% to 95.8%), energy (82% to 92.2%), and phosphorus (28.7% to 64.4%) varied with diet, being consistently lower in seahorses fed shrimp + Diet 1. As an agastric species, H. guttulatus did not exhibit impaired digestibility for any of the tested nutrients, minerals, or energy. This study suggests that crustacean meals can effectively substitute fish meal in inert diets for this species, contributing to the sustainability and optimization of captive seahorse husbandry practices.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".