Comparison of expression levels of candidate genes in endometrium of dairy heifers and lactating dairy cows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pretheeban, T., Gordon, M. B., Singh, R. and Rajamahendran, R. 2011. Comparison of expression levels of candidate genes in endometrium of dairy heifers and lactating dairy cows. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 91: 255–264. Pregnancy rates (PR) in high-producing lactating dairy cows have declined drastically over the past several decades, but those of heifers have remained constant. Reduced PR could be due to multiple causes, and the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms are still unclear. A compromised maternal uterine environment could be one of factors that could affect the PR. This study was performed to compare the nature of the uterine environment in dairy heifers and lactating dairy cows (2nd/3rd parity) by analyzing the expression levels of selected endometrial genes. Estrus was synchronized in heifers (n=5) and lactating dairy cows (n=5) and endometrial biopsies were performed during the mid luteal phase (day 11) of the estrous cycle. Real-time polymerase chain reaction (Q-RT PCR) and immunohistochemistry were performed to analyse the mRNA and protein levels of genes respectively. Relative abundance of BCL2, HSPA1A, IL1A, TNF, IGF1, FGF2 and SERPINA14 transcripts and the protein expression of IL1A, TNF and FGF2 were significantly higher in heifers in comparison with lactating dairy cows. Our findings suggest an altered endometrial environment in lactating dairy cows compared with heifers. However, whether these differences play a role in pregnancy outcomes should be further investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".