Cited by 37Aquaculture disease management and microbiotaAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthCrustacean biology and ecology

Evaluation of the productive and physiological responses of Litopenaeus vannamei infected with WSSV and fed diets enriched with Dunaliella sp

Medina-Félix, Diana, López-Elías, José A., Martínez-Córdova, Luis R., López-Torres, Marco A., Hernández-López, Jorge, Rivas-Vega, Martha E., Mendoza-Cano, Fernando·2014·Journal of Invertebrate Pathology

Abstract

An experimental investigation was performed to evaluate the productive and physiological responses of Litopenaeus vannamei that were infected with WSSV and fed diets enriched with Dunaliella sp., which had a high β-carotene content induced by nitrogen reduction in the culture medium. A basal diet containing 35% crude protein and experimental diets T1 and T2, which included 1% and 2% microalgae meal, respectively, were evaluated. Positive (infected juveniles) and negative (non-infected) controls were also evaluated. Survival was significantly higher (80%) in the two treatment groups compared to the positive control group (56%). In the negative control group, survival was 100%. Some variation was recorded for hemolymph metabolites among treatments and at distinct times post-infection; although the tendencies were not clear, some metabolites (glucose and triglycerides) appeared to decrease on the last days of the trial, probably due to their use as energy for the shrimp to thrive despite the infection. The results of the study suggest a positive effect of the dietary inclusion of Dunaliella meal on shrimp survival and an unclear effect on hemolymph metabolites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jip.2013.12.004

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The survival rate of L. vannamei shrimp increased when 1-2% of its feed was supplemented with Dunaliella salina.

    “The survival rate of L. vannamei shrimp increased when 1-2% of its feed was supplemented with Dunaliella salina (Medina-Félix et al., 2014).”

    From Potential of microalgae as a sustainable feed ingredient for aquaculture (2021) · cites this paper as Medina-Félix et al., 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 30 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Medina-Félix, D., López-Elías, J. A., Martínez-Córdova, L. R., López-Torres, M. A., Hernández-López, J., Rivas-Vega, M. E., & Mendoza-Cano, F.
Affiliations
Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste S.C. (MX)
Venue
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-03
Volume
117
Pages
9-12
ISSN
0022-2011 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2055004774
Cited by
37
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Invertebrate Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Aquaculture disease management and microbiota
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Aquaculture Nutrition and Growth
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Crustacean biology and ecology
Keywords
Litopenaeus vannamei, white spot syndrome virus, Dunaliella, shrimp survival, hemolymph metabolites, beta-carotene, shrimp aquaculture, dietary supplementation
MeSH terms
Cyanobacteria, Animals, Hemolymph, beta Carotene, Penaeidae, White spot syndrome virus 1

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review