The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of full-fat and defatted maggot meals in the feeding of clariid catfish Clarias gariepinus fingerlings: Nutritional implication of processed maggot meals
Open accessAbstract
The nutritional implication of processed maggot meals, hydrolysed, defatted, full-fat, sun-dried and oven-dried, in the diets of Clarias gariepinus fingerlings were evaluated. The nutrient density, proximate composition, gross energy and mineral constituents of the maggot meals were determined. Five isonitrogenous and isocaloric diets were formulated to provide 40% crude protein in which fish meal in the reference diet was completely replaced by any of the following processed maggot meals: oven-dried full-fat (ODM), sun-dried full-fat (SDM), defatted oven-dried (DODM) and defatted sun-dried (DSDM) maggot meals respectively. Fish were fed ad libitum in triplicate treatments for 56 days in glass tanks. Biological evaluations of the fish were based on growth performance and nutrient utilization indices. The result of the nutrient composition analysis showed that processing methods of defattening and drying influenced the nutrient density of maggot meal, with crude protein content ranging between 43.30% and 46.70% for full-fat sun-dried and hydrolysed/defatted oven-dried maggot meals respectively. The result showed that growth performance and nutrient utilization of fish fed DODM and DSDM dietary inclusions were not significantly different and similar to fish fed the fish meal-based diet. However, fish fed the diet containing SDM exhibited lower daily weight gain, protein efficiency ratio and specific growth. Generally, fish performed better when fed diets containing defatted maggot meals than full-fat maggot meal, and compared favourably with fish fed the fish meal-based diet.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
State of the art on use of insects as animal feed.
Makkar, H. P. S., Tran, G., Heuzé, V., & Ankers, P. (2014) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.07.008 · Cited by 1,846
The use of fly larvae for organic waste treatment
Čičková, H., Newton, G. L., Lacy, R. C., & Kozánek, M. (2015) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.09.026 · Cited by 624
Edible insects are the future?
van Huis, A. (2016) · Proceedings of the Nutrition Society · doi:10.1017/s0029665116000069 · Cited by 363
Insect meals in fish nutrition
Nogales‐Mérida, S., Gobbi, P., Józefiak, D., Mazurkiewicz, J., Dudek, K., Rawski, M., Kierończyk, B., & Józefiak, A. (2019) · Reviews in Aquaculture · doi:10.1111/raq.12281 · Cited by 361
Cummins, V. C., Rawles, S. D., Thompson, K. R., Velasquez, A., Kobayashi, Y., Hager, J., & Webster, C. D. (2017) · Aquaculture · doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.02.022 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- Fasakin, E. A., Balogun, A. M., & Ajayi, O. O.
- Venue
- Aquaculture Research
- Publisher
- Hindawi Limited
- Published
- 2003-07-03
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 733-738
- ISSN
- 1355-557X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2117204430
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of full-fat and defatted maggot meals in the feeding of clariid catfish Clarias gariepinus fingerlings: Nutritional implication of processed maggot meals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2109.2003.00876.x
- The paper
- Fasakin, E. A., Balogun, A. M., & Ajayi, O. O. (2003). Evaluation of full-fat and defatted maggot meals in the feeding of clariid catfish Clarias gariepinus fingerlings: Nutritional implication of processed maggot meals. Aquaculture Research. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2109.2003.00876.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.