MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1922312043 · doi:10.1071/rdv16n1ab63

63 INTERFERON-TAU EXPRESSION FROM PRIMARY TROPHECTODERM OUTGROWTHS OF BOVINE BLASTOCYSTS: COMPARISON BETWEEN IVP, NT, AND PARTHENOGENIC EMBRYOS

2004· article· en· W1922312043 on OpenAlexafffund
O.M. Ocon, Neil C. Talbot, Anne M. Powell, A. D. Ealy

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
KeywordsBlastocystAndrologyEmbryoBiologyEpiblastEmbryo cultureInner cell massTheriogenologyEmbryogenesisImmunologyCell biologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interferon-tau (IFN-tau) is expressed soon after bovine blastocyst formation and might be useful as a marker of appropriate biological function in embryos produced by nuclear transfer. To assess this possibility we have compared IFN-tau levels in the conditioned medium of primary trophectoderm cultures derived from IVP, nuclear transfer (NT), or parthenogenic bovine embryos. Embryos were produced from in vitro-matured cumulus-oocyte complexes processed from local slaughterhouse ovaries or obtained from Bomed, Inc. (Madison, WI, USA). In vitro fertilization, NT, and parthenogensis were as previously described (Talbot et al., 2000 Tissue and Cell, 32, 9–27) except that embryo culture was in G1/G2 medium in 5% oxygen (Lane et al., 2003 Theriogenology, 60, 407–419). Each 8–11-day embryo was cultured individually in a 4-well plate well (Nunc) with STO feeder cells using DMEM medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum as previously described (Talbot et al., 2000 Biol. Reprod. 62, 235–247). Any contaminating epiblast or endoderm was physically dissected and discarded so as to produce pure trophectoderm outgrowths. The success/failure ratio for colony formation was similar for IVP and NT embryos (IVP = 155/29; NT = 104/25), but was significantly different (P < 0.05) for parthenogenic embryos (54/43). Trophectoderm colonies reached diameters of 1 to 1.5 cm in 3–4 wk, and, at this time, 72-h-conditioned cell culture medium was harvested, frozen, and measured for IFN-tau anti-viral activity as previously described (Talbot et al., 2000 Biol. Reprod. 62, 235–247). From 313 observations, IFN-tau production was analyzed as a two-factor mixed linear model. Differences in IFN-tau production by type of embryo were statistically significant (F = 42.61; P < 0.0001; df = 2). Mean comparisons were done with Sidak adjusted P-values so that the experiment-wise error was 0.05. IFN-tau production means for IVP-, NT-, and parthenogenic-derived trophectoderm were 4311 IU mL-1 (n = 155), 626 IU mL-1 (n = 104), and 1595 IU mL-1 (n = 54), respectively. The results show that mean IFN-tau production from trophectoderm cultures derived from NT embryos is significantly reduced in comparison to IVP- and parthenogenote-derived cultures. Parthenogenote-derived cultures also produced significantly less IFN-tau than IVP embryos on average. IFN-tau production from trophectoderm outgrowths may be a useful measure of NT reprogramming success.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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