MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1553810281 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab103

103 A NEW PAPER CONTAINER FOR THE VITRIFICATION OF BOVINE EMBRYOS

2004· article· en· W1553810281 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKorea Science and Engineering Foundation
KeywordsCryopreservationVitrificationBiologyBlastocystAndrologyReproductive technologyStrawZona pellucidaExtenderTheriogenologyEmbryo transferEmbryo cultureEmbryoAnatomyOocyteChemistryEmbryogenesisCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vitrification has been used to eliminate ice crystal formation during the cryopreservation of mammalian embryos. However, this method may introduce some problems such as loss of eggs during cryopreservation (EM grid) and damage to the zona pellucida. This study examined an alternative container (paper) for the vitrification of in vitro-produced bovine blastocysts. Bovine oocytes were aspirated from slaughterhouse ovaries and cultured in TCM-199 supplemented with 25 mM NaHCO3, 10% (v:v) FBS, 0.22 mM sodium pyruvate, 25 mM gentamycin sulfate, 10 µg mL-1 FSH (Follitropin V; Vetrepharm, Canada) and 1 µg mL-1 estradiol-17ß for 24 h. Matured oocytes were co-cultured with sperm (1–106 mL-1) treated by percoll gradient for 42–44 h. Cleaved embryos were cultured in 50 µL CR1aa medium containing 0.4% BSA for 5 days. Blastocysts were exposed to 5.5 M ethylene glycol in CR1aa medium for 20 s. The blastocyst suspensions were vitrified by one of three methods: 1) aspiration into a 0.25-mL plastic straw (10 embryos/straw), heat sealing and immediate plunging into LN2; 2) transfer of a (~5 µL) drop containing 10 blastocysts onto a EM grid and immediate plunging into LN2; or 3) transfer of a (~5 µL) drop containing 10 blastocysts onto a piece of weighing paper (5 mm by 5 mm; VWR, West Chester, PA, USA) and immediate plunging into LN2. Straws were thawed by holding in air for 10 s and then transfer into 37°C water. The embryos were recovered from the straw and transferred into a solution of 0.5 M sucrose in CR1aa at 25°C for 1 min. EM grids and paper containers were warmed by transfer into 3 mL of a solution of 0.5 M sucrose in CR1aa medium at 25°C for 1 min. Embryos were then diluted serially by transfer into 0.25 and then 0.125 M sucrose solutions (1-min steps), and then rinsed and cultured in CR1aa medium supplemented with 10% FBS. After thawing, the recovery rates of embryos from EM grids, straws and paper containers were not significantly different (Table 1). Broken zonae pellucidae were observed after thawing of embryos recovered from straws and EM grids, but not from the paper container. The survival rates of blastocysts cryopreserved on EM grids and paper containers (respectively, 78.1 and 77.1%) were significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that of straws (52.1%). The in vivo developmental potential of blastocysts vitrified on EM grids and paper containers was assessed by the transfer of, respectively, 102 and 3 thawed embryos into recipient cows. Pregnancy rates were, as anticipated, 28 and 67%. These results suggest that paper may be an inexpensive and useful container for the cryopreservation of mammalian embryos. Table 1 The viability of vitrifield-thawed bovine embryos using various containers

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.772
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.244 · 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