118 A comparison of intravaginal progesterone devices for fixed-time artificial insemination in beef cattle
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Intravaginal progesterone (P4) devices used for ovarian synchronization before fixed-time AI (FTAI) differ in drug release, which may influence fertility outcome. A 2 × 2 study was designed to determine the effects of different intravaginal devices (PRID Delta, 1.55 g of P4 vs. CIDR, 1.38 g of P4) and parity (heifers vs. cows) on follicular dynamics, expression of oestrus, and pregnancy per AI (P/AI). At random stages of the oestrous cycle, nulliparous beef heifers and lactating cows were given 100 µg of gonadorelin (gonadotrophin-releasing hormone, GnRH) intramuscularly (IM) and assigned randomly to either the PRID (n = 76 heifers, 76 multiparous, 27 primiparous) or CIDR (n = 76 heifers, 73 multiparous, 32 primiparous) group. Devices were removed 5 days later, an oestrus-detection patch was applied just cranial to the tail head, and 500 µg of cloprostenol was given IM at the time of device removal and again 24 h later. At 72 h after device removal, cattle were inseminated and given 100 µg of GnRH IM. Transrectal ultrasonography was used to determine the diameter of the largest follicle on the day of device removal and at FTAI, ovulation time, and pregnancy status 30 days after FTAI. A colour change of ≥50% of the oestrus-detection patch at FTAI was taken as expression of oestrus. Data were compared among groups by 2-way ANOVA using MIXED and GLIMMIX procedures. There were no interactions between P4 device and parity for any endpoint. The diameter of the largest follicle (mean ± s.e.m.) was not different between PRID and CIDR groups on either the day of device removal (10.6 ± 0.1 vs. 10.9 ± 0.1 mm) or the day of FTAI (13.7 ± 0.1 vs. 13.9 ± 0.1 mm). The proportion displaying oestrus did not differ between P4 device groups, but was greater in heifers than in cows [121/152 (79.6%) vs. 135/207 (65.2%); P < 0.01], and the interval from FTAI to ovulation was shorter in heifers than in cows (27.8 ± 1.2 vs. 32.0 ± 1.1 h; P = 0.01). The P/AI was not different between P4 device groups or parity groups (overall 67.0%, 238/355). However, among lactating cows, the P/AI tended to be greater in the PRID vs. CIDR group [75/102 (73.5%) vs. 64/105 (61.0%); P = 0.10], and was greater in multiparous vs. primiparous cows [106/148 (71.6%) vs. 33/59 (55.9%); P = 0.04]. Among cattle that displayed oestrus, the P/AI tended to be greater in the PRID vs. CIDR group [92/123 (74.8%) vs. 85/131 (64.9%); P = 0.09]. Among lactating cows that displayed oestrus, the P/AI was greater in multiparous vs. primiparous cows [74/94 (78.2%) vs. 24/42 (57.1%); P < 0.01]. In summary, follicular dynamics and expression of oestrus did not differ between PRID and CIDR groups, but the P/AI tended to be greater in PRID-treated lactating cows and in cattle that displayed oestrus. This research was supported by CEVA Animal Health, Saskatchewan ADF, Agriculture and Agri-Foods Canada, and Rockway Inc.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».