Fertility Following CIDR Based Synchronization Regimens in Anoestrous Nili‐Ravi Buffaloes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare oestrus expression and fertility rate in used and new controlled internal drug releasing (CIDR) device treated anoestrous buffaloes. Furthermore, to determine the timing of ovulation, and fertility rate in estradiol benzoate (EB) and GnRH-administered CIDR-treated anoestrous Nili-Ravi buffaloes. In experiment 1, buffaloes received either a used CIDR (UCIDR, n = 35) or a new CIDR (NCIDR, n = 36) for 7 day and PGF2α on day 6. Oestrous expression was similar (p > 0.05) between UCIDR (88.5%) and NCIDR (96.6%) buffaloes. The pregnancy rate did not differ (p > 0.05) because of treatment (37.1% in UCIDR vs 36.6% in NCIDR). In experiment 2, buffaloes (n = 55) received CIDR device for 7 days and PGF2α, on day 6 and randomly assigned into three treatment groups: (i) CIDR-EB (n = 17) received EB on day 8, (ii) CIDR-GnRH (n = 18) received GnRH on day 9 and (iii) control (n = 20) received no further treatment. Mean interval from CIDR removal to ovulation in CIDR-EB, CIDR-GnRH and CIDR group were 61.3 ± 0.8, 64.9 ± 1.8 and 65.1 ± 16.7 h, respectively. However, the buffaloes in the CIDR-EB and CIDR-GnRH group had lesser variability in the timing of ovulation compared to control. The pregnancy rate of both CIDR-EB group (58%) and CIDR-GnRH group (61%) were tended to be higher (p < 0.1) than control (30%). In conclusion, compared to NCIDR devices, previously UCIDR devices are equally effective to induce oestrus in anoestrous buffaloes resulting optimal pregnancy rate. Administration of EB and GnRH after CIDR removal results in tighter synchrony (less variability) and improved fertility in anoestrous buffaloes. CIDR based synchronization regimens have great potential in fertility improvement in anoestrous buffaloes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".