Effects of dietary fatty acids on the production and quality of eggs and larvae of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cultivated Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) entering their first year of gamete maturation were fed diets with different levels of arachidonic acid (ARA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) for 6.5 months prior to commencement of spawning. Gravid females were stripped three times: at the beginning, peak and end of spawning. Lipid composition and egg and larval quality of 34 family crosses were investigated. Results indicated that ARA uptake into eggs from broodstock diet was highly efficient achieving proportions of ARA up to 84% higher in eggs than in the diet. EPA was 42–76% higher, and DHA was 155–173% higher in eggs than in diets. Cod fed the diet with the lowest EPA/ARA ratio had the greatest egg production. Eggs from fish on a diet with high ARA level had significantly higher fertilization and hatching success than those fed low levels of ARA. This diet produced on average 71 viable eggs g−1 female compared with 32.5 and 4 eggs in diet B and C, respectively. Furthermore, larval survival until 8 days posthatch was higher in diets with lower ARA levels. The combined results showed that ARA dietary supplementation and low EPA/ARA ratio yielded a greater number of viable larvae kg−1 female.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".