MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1522706993 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab42

42 ANGIOGENESIS IN CLONED AND IVF-DERIVED BOVINE PREGNANCIES AT DAY 30 OF GESTATION

2004· article· en· W1522706993 on OpenAlexafffund
Kara A. Hoffert, Cynthia A. Batchelder, Marcelo Bertolini, Alice L. Moyer, G.B. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersInternational Council for Canadian StudiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTürkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma KurumuOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsBiologyEmbryoAndrologyPlacentationGestationPlacentaAngiogenesisEmbryogenesisEmbryo transferFetusPregnancyGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New and expanded microvascular networks in maternal and embryonic tissue are vital to development of a functional placenta. Typically a large proportion of bovine pregnancies derived from somatic cell nuclear transfer (NT) are lost between Days 25 and 45 of gestation. Several laboratories have noted aberrant placental development of NT embryos and fetuses; one factor that may contribute to these defects is faulty maternal or embryonic angiogenesis during placentation. The aim of this study was to determine if angiogenesis in maternal caruncular tissues differs in bovine NT- and IVF-derived pregnancies at the time of placentation. Cloned embryos were produced using cultured ear skin fibroblasts from a 15-year-old Hereford cow; in other experiments, these donor cells resulted in a term live calf and 67% of viable Day-30 embryos dying by Day 51 of gestation. For IVF-derived embryos, IVM oocytes were fertilized with semen from Hereford or Angus bulls. All embryos were cultured in vivo in ligated sheep oviducts, and at Day 8 blastocysts were transferred to synchronized recipient heifers. Whenever possible, one embryo was transferred to each uterine horn. A total of 41 NT and 41 IVF grade 1, 2 and 3 embryos were transferred to 48 recipients. Viable NT (n = 9; 22.0% of transferred) and IVF (n = 9; 22.0%) embryos were recovered at Day 30, and caruncular tissue adjacent to each embryo was sampled. Expression of genes implicated in angiogenesis was measured by real-time quantitative RT-PCR and normalized to histone 2A expression. In addition, paraformaldehyde-fixed sections were stained by the Periodic Acid-Schiffs method to identify blood vessels. Microvascular density was determined as percentage of total tissue area composed of blood vessels in the luminal caruncular stroma as measured by two observers. Data were analyzed by ANOVA using the GLM procedure of SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Quantification of gene expression revealed no differences between NT and IVF pregnancies for angiogenesis-promoting growth factors and their receptors: vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A), VEGF-C, placental growth factor, VEGF receptor-1 (VEGFR-1/flt-1), VEGFR-2 (flk-1/KDR), VEGFR-3 (flt-4), angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1), and Ang receptor-1 (tie-1). Likewise, NT and IVF pregnancies demonstrated similar mean microvascular densities in the caruncles; however, density differed between individual pregnancies across both groups (P < 0.05). For these experiments, the timing of NT and IVF, embryo transfer, and tissue collection on Day 30 was as consistent as possible. Despite these efforts, embryo morphology and developmental stage were highly variable even within the IVF group. It follows that the progress of placentation, and hence the signaling between each embryo and the maternal tissues, may have differed as well, accounting for the variation observed. Our results suggest that failure of maternal tissue to increase angiogenesis during placentation is not a primary cause of aberrant placental development in cloned cattle.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207