MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stress and Dietary Factors Modify Boar Sperm for Processing

2011· review· en· W1527214080 on OpenAlexaff
Lenka Radomil, MJ Pettitt, KM Merkies, KD Hickey, MM Buhr

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction in Domestic Animals · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSperm and Testicular Function
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBOARSpermAndrologyStress (linguistics)Food scienceBiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews stresses boar sperm undergo during processing and presents preliminary results of dietary modification that minimize this damage. Processing for artificial insemination (AI) stresses boar sperm by osmotic effects; altering cell size, shape and membranes; intracellular ice formation; and production of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Sperm response to ROS is concentration-dependent, with low levels activating the ERK pathway to stimulate tyrosine phosphorylation (Tyr-P) and capacitation, but high concentrations or inappropriately timed onset of ROS pathways can harm sperm. Fresh boar sperm exposed to ROS increased intracellular hydrogen peroxide (H(2) O(2) ) phospholipase and lipid peroxidation, maintained viability but lost motility and underwent acrosome reactions (AR). Direct incorporation of lipids ± the antioxidant Vitamin E improves the survival of liquid- and frozen-stored semen. Boars fed dietary flaxseed for 8 weeks to increase n-3 fatty acids displayed improved sperm morphology (p < 0.05), increased membrane fluidity (p < 0.05) and better retention of motility and viability during 5-7 day storage (p < 0.05). Processes reducing oxidative damage to stored sperm should be evaluated.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction in Domestic AnimalsSame topicSperm and Testicular FunctionFrench-language works237,207