MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association Analysis Between Variants in Bovine Progesterone Receptor Gene and Superovulation Traits in Chinese Holstein Cows

2011· article· en· W1926871482 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wen‐Chin Yang, K Q Tang, SJ Li, L. G. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction in Domestic Animals · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsBiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenotypeGenePolymorphism (computer science)EndocrinologyInternal medicineLocus (genetics)GeneticsAndrologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to identify a predictor to forecast superovulation response on the basis of associations between superovulation performance and gene polymorphism. The PCR-RFLP method was applied to detect two reported single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of G59752C and T81637C (rs41614030) located in introns 3 and 4 of the bovine progesterone receptor (PGR) gene in 171 Chinese Holstein cows treated for superovulation and evaluate its associations with superovulation traits. In polymorphic locus 81637, all cows without superovulation response were g.81637TC and g.81637TT genotypes. Association analysis showed that these two SNPs had significant effects on the total number of ova (TNO) (p<0.05), and the T81637C polymorphism was significantly associated with the number of transferable embryos (p<0.05). In addition, significant additive effects (p<0.05) on TNO were detected in the polymorphisms of G59752C and T81637C. These results showed for the first time that the G59752C and T81637C polymorphisms in PGR gene were associated with superovulation traits and indicated that PGR gene can be used as a predictor for superovulation in Chinese Holstein cows.

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 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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction in Domestic AnimalsSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207