Evaluation of muscle nutritional value and flavor quality between triploid and diploid blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala): Applications of breeding improvement in fish quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was to investigate the variances in muscles nutritional value and flavor quality between diploid (DBSB) and triploid blunt snout bream ( Megalobrama amblycephala ) (TBSB) muscles. Under the same culture conditions, the crude protein level, total and essential amino acids, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA, C20:5 n-3), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, C22:6 n-3), total polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) in muscle of TBSB were significantly ( p < 0.05) higher than those of DBSB. In addition, compared with DBSB, TBSB demonstrated significantly ( p < 0.05) higher equivalent umami concentration (EUC), sweeter and umami free amino acid and inosine monophosphate (IMP) content, and significantly ( p < 0.05) lower bitter free amino acid and hypoxanthine (Hx) content. Furthermore, the odor active compounds 3-methyl-1-butanol (sweet, flowery), 1-hexanol (fruity aroma), pentanal (sweet, wine), octanal (fruity, orange) and nonana (rose, citrus) in TBSB were significantly ( p < 0.05) higher than in DBSB, whereas dimethyl sulfide (pungent, stinky) and trimethylamine (fishy) were significantly. Taken together, TBSB was superior in both nutritional and flavor quality, providing a novel insight for fish quality improvement through polyploidy technology. • The nutritional value of TBSB were significantly ( p < 0.05) higher than DBSB. • TBSB demonstrated considerably ( p < 0.05) higher muscle taste. • The fishy in TBSB was significantly ( p < 0.05) lower than DBSB.
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) | 0.000 | 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".