Influence of Nutrient-Rich Waters on Length and Weight of the Body of Indian Major Carp Labeo rohita (Hamilton)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth is a fundamental biological process influenced by various environmental and nutritional factors. Environmental factors, specifically water quality and nutrient availability, significantly impact the growth performance of Labeo rohita (Rohu), a species of freshwater fish commonly cultivated in India. This study examines how the growth rate of Labeo rohita at three developmental stages—fry, fingerling, and adult—is affected by various nutrient-based water sources, including canal water, bore water, and mixed water (bore water mixed with black cotton soil). Over a specified period, growth was measured regarding wet weight gained (WWG%) and total length gained (TLG%). According to the results, mixed water significantly accelerated growth at every stage: TLG increased by 30% in fry, 32% in fingerlings, and 7.5% in adults. In contrast, bore water showed significantly negative deviations in TLG% and the least growth across all stages. The improved performance in mixed water indicates that adding black cotton soil enhances the nutrient content, potentially adding organic matter and vital minerals that support fish growth. Despite being widely used in aquaculture, bore water may not contain these nutrients, limiting the growth potential. Furthermore, the study aligns with nutritional principles, indicating that proteins and fats are the primary energy sources for fish, while carbohydrates play a minimal role when the former are sufficiently available.Overall, this study highlights how crucial it is to optimize the nutrient composition and water quality in aquaculture systems to increase fish productivity. Incorporating soil-based amendments, like black cotton soil, into water sources could enhance carp farming growth results and, eventually, promote sustainable aquaculture methods.
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".