MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7045858857

Comparative analysis of fatty acid composition of wild vs. farmed salmon

2018· other· en· W7045858857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioteca Digital do IPB (Instituto Politecnico De Braganca) · 2018
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFP7 Food, Agriculture and Fisheries, BiotechnologyFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsTransmethylationAquacultureExtraction (chemistry)Fish mealGas chromatographyFatty acidFish farmingDerivatization
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To respond to the increasing global demand for fish, nowadays, almost 50% of the global fish market comes from aquaculture production [1]. Thus, there is the need to assure a correct information, not only about the species, but also about the production method (farmed vs. wild) and the catch origin of fish. Salmon, a hightrophic- level carnivorous species with high economic value due to its popularity, is among the fish species that is frequently produced in aquaculture. Although the feed given to farm-raised salmon is designed to meet its nutritional requirements, it can present differences compared to the diet of wild salmon that can be reflected on the muscle composition of farmed versus wild salmons. Therefore, this work aims at comparing the fatty acid composition of salmon from aquaculture and caught in the wild. Salmon specimens caught in the wild (n = 25) and farm-raised (n = 25) were obtained from West of Vancouver Island and Campbell River (Canada), respectively. Two lipid extraction methods (Soxhlet extraction with n-hexane and an adaptation of the Bligh and Dyer extraction method) and two derivatization procedures (alkaline transmethylation using KOH and acid-catalyzed transmethylation using BF3/MEOH solution) were tested. Fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) were analyzed in a Shimadzu GC-2010 Plus gas chromatograph equipped with a Shimadzu AOC-20i auto-injector, a flame ionization detector and a CP-Sil 88 silica capillary column (50 x 0.25 mm i.d., 0.20 μm). The injector and detector temperatures were 250 and 270 °C, respectively. The compounds were identified by comparison with standards (FAME 37, Supelco). Based on the obtained results, the modified Bligh and Dyer method was chosen for lipid extraction since it allowed obtaining higher amounts of long chain unsaturated fatty acids, particularly of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Similar results were obtained for both tested derivatization methodologies. In general, the two groups of salmon samples showed different profiles, with wild samples presenting significantly higher contents of omega-3 fatty acids, in particular docosahexaenoic and eicosapentaenoic acids, while farmed salmon had higher amounts of oleic and linoleic acids.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0380.034
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioteca Digital do IPB (Instituto Politecnico De Braganca)French-language works237,207