Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use of different microbial probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita fingerlings: effects on growth, nutrient digestibility and retention, digestive enzyme activities and intestinal microflora: Use of probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita

Open access
MOHAPATRA, S., CHAKRABORTY, T., PRUSTY, A.K., DAS, P., PANIPRASAD, K., MOHANTA, K.N.·2012·Aquaculture Nutrition

Abstract

Six iso-nitrogenous (350 g protein kg−1) and iso-caloric (4100 kcal kg−1) diets with or without probiotics supplementation namely T1 (Basal feed (BF) without probiotics; control), T2 (BF + Bacillus subtilis and Lactococcus lactis), T3 (BF + L. lactis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae), T4 (BF + B. subtilis and S. cerevisiae), T5 (BF + B. subtilis, L. lactis and S. cerevisiae) and T6 (BF + heat-killed bacteria of B. subtilis, L. lactis and S. cerevisiae) were fed to Labeo rohita fingerlings (6.0 ± 0.06 g) for 60 days in triplicate tanks (30 fish per tank). In all probiotic-supplemented diets, the probiotic concentration was maintained at 1011 cfu kg−1 feed. After 60 days of culture, the fish fed combination of three probiotics at equal proportion (T5) had higher (P < 0.05) growth, protein efficiency ratio, nutrient retention and digestibility and lower (P > 0.05) feed conversion ratio over other treatment groups. Total heterotrophic bacterial population in intestine was drastically reduced on 15th and 30th days of sampling than the initial value (0 day of sampling) for T3, T4 and T5 groups. Except T6, the gut colonization of respective probiotics, which were supplemented through the diets, was also increased up to 30 days of culture of fish and thereafter remained constant.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2095.2011.00866.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
MOHAPATRA, S., CHAKRABORTY, T., PRUSTY, A. K., DAS, P., PANIPRASAD, K., & MOHANTA, K. N.
Venue
Aquaculture Nutrition
Published
2011-04-27
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
1-11
ISSN
1353-5773 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1894046116
Cited by
316
References
1
FWCI
4.79
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: Use of different microbial probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita fingerlings: effects on growth, nutrient digestibility and retention, digestive enzyme activities and intestinal microflora: Use of probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2095.2011.00866.x
The paper
MOHAPATRA, S., CHAKRABORTY, T., PRUSTY, A. K., DAS, P., PANIPRASAD, K., & MOHANTA, K. N. (2012). Use of different microbial probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita fingerlings: effects on growth, nutrient digestibility and retention, digestive enzyme activities and intestinal microflora: Use of probiotics in the diet of rohu, Labeo rohita. Aquaculture Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2095.2011.00866.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.