CLf, CI, SGRbm, SGRci, RNA concentration of each tissue, DNA concentration of each tissue, RNA:DNA ratio of each tissue, liver protein concentration, liver protein:DNA ratio, and liver RNA:protein ratio were compared for the three feeding treatments using analysis of variance (ANOVA). All ratios were calculated as the quotient of the average protein, DNA, and/or RNA concentration for a particular tissue. RNA:protein ratios should reflect RNA content per cell, but only if protein:DNA ratios (as a measure of cellular protein content) are consistent among treatment groups. All data were tested for normality (using Shapiro-Wilk test) and homogeneity of variances (using Levene's test) prior to parametric analysis and transformed, if necessary, using a natural log, reciprocal, square root, square, reciprocal square, or reciprocal square root transformation. If transformation did not improve normality, data were tested using a Kruskal-Wallis test followed by pairwise Mann-Whitney tests with a Bonferroni adjustment for multiple comparisons. If ANOVA revealed a significant difference, pairwise comparisons were evaluated using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference post hoc test (if variances were equal) or Tamhane's T2 post hoc test (if variances were unequal). To evaluate repeatability of biochemical assays, coefficients of variation (C.V.) were determined for RNA and DNA concentrations in liver, heart, and blood and for protein concentration in liver. Spearman's rank correlation test was used to test the strength of the relationships among BMf, CLf, CI, SGRbm, SGRci, [RNA] in each tissue, [DNA] in each tissue, [RNA]: [DNA] in each tissue, liver [protein], liver [protein]: [DNA], and liver [RNA]: [protein]. Regression models for SGRbm and SGRcl were then developed using CI and biochemical indices as independent variables. Although body length has been correlated with RNA:DNA ratios in fish (e.g., Rooker et al. 1997), I did not include treatment group or any measure of total body size as independent