Coeficientes de digestibilidad aparente de tres ingredientes proteicos para capaz, Pimelodus grosskopfii
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study vas to determine the digestibility of dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), and gross energy (GE) of three ingredients in capaz (Pimelodus grosskopfii). Ninety specimens of capaz were used. They weighted and sized about 114 ± 15 g and 23 ± 0.5 cm respectively. In order to collect the feces a battery of three fiberglass tanks with a capacity of 200 L, and conical bottom (modified Guelph system) was used. The ADC of ingredients were calculated by indirect method using chromic oxide 0.5% as a marker. A semipurified diet was used as base. Three experimental diets were studied each with 30% of the ingredient to be analyzed. The ADC for DM did not show significant differences (P_0.05); it was observed in the values of the ADC of protein and energy for the different ingredients (P<0.05). The ADC of protein for fish meal was significantly higher (94.5%) compared with meat meal (59.6%). There was no significant difference between the blood meal and other ingredients (78.5%), in contrast, the ADC protein to energy showed some differences with meat meal. The results show that the capaz can digest protein and energy of animal ingredients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".