MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965790382 · doi:10.1071/rdv23n1ab242

242 EFFECTS OF TWO COMMERCIAL BOVINE SEMEN EXTENDERS FOR SHORT-TERM STORAGE ON MOTILITY PATTERN OF CHILLED BISON SEMEN

2010· article· en· W1965790382 on OpenAlexaffabout
Behzad M. Toosi, G. Gratton, Carl Lessard, Gregory P. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemenExtenderSpermArtificial inseminationAnimal scienceElectroejaculationAndrologySperm motilityBiologyInseminationAnatomyChemistryMedicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Difficulties of adequate cryopreservation of bison semen has limited the success of artificial insemination and in-vitro embryo production in bison. We evaluated the effects of short-term cooling on motility of bison sperm using two commercial semen extenders (Triladyl® and Andromed®; Minitube, Ingersoll, ON, Canada). Semen was collected by electroejaculation of mature wood bison (n = 3) and plains bison (n = 3) twice a week for 2 wk. Upon collection, the ejaculate was divided into 3 equal aliquots, which were then diluted 1:2 (vol/vol) in Triladyl or Andromed, or were not extended (n = 24 samples per treatment). Samples were maintained at 37°C until transfer to the laboratory (=2 h). One millilitre of each sample was then placed into a test tube (15 mL, BD Falcon, BD Biosciences, San Jose, CA, USA) and were kept in water bath set at 5°C inside a walk-in refrigerator (4°C). Characteristics of sperm motility were evaluated before cooling (Day 0) and every 24 h after cooling for 5 days using a computer-assisted semen analyzer. Total motility (TM), progressive motility (PM), velocity curved line (VCL), velocity average path (VAP), and velocity straight line (VSL) were compared among treatments by ANOVA for repeated-measures. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. After collection, the PM of the raw semen and semen extended in Triladyl or Andromed were not significantly different (63.1 ± 4.4%, 63.3 ± 3.1%, and 56.9 ± 4.5%, respectively). Cooling semen for a period of 24 h resulted in a decrease (P < 0.05) in PM in all 3 groups (4.4 ± 2.0%, 22.7 ± 2.9%, and 28.7 ± 4.3%, respectively). The PM of semen extended in Tryladyl or Andromed was greater than that of raw semen on Day 1 (P < 0.05). Semen extended in Triladyl and Andromed maintained PM on Day 2 (24.7 ± 3.3% and 21.8 ± 3.8%, respectively), but PM declined progressively to 1.1 ± 0.6% and 6.3 ± 2.1% by Day 5. A similar pattern was observed for the TM. The VCL, VAP, and VSL parameters for semen extended with Triladyl and Andromed decreased gradually between Day 0 and Day 5 (P < 0.05). From Day 1 to 4 after cooling, these velocity parameters were not significantly different between semen extended with Triladyl or Andromed; however, they were greater than those of raw semen (P < 0.05). All sperm velocity parameters for the raw semen declined by more than 60% between Days 0 and 2 (P < 0.05). On Day 0, VCL for semen extended with Andromed (152.2 ± 4.3) was greater than that of semen extended with Triladyl and raw semen (P < 0.05; 122.5 ± 7.0 and 122.4 ± 6.6, respectively). The VCL then decreased to 98.9 ± 12.9, 100.5 ± 10.8, and 18.6 ± 6.8 in Andromed, Triladyl and raw groups respectively on Day 2 (P < 0.05), followed by a further decline to 51.8 ± 14.3, 19.9 ± 10.0, and 9.0 ± 5.0, respectively, observed on Day 5. In conclusion, both Triladyl and Andromed improved characteristics of sperm motility of chilled bison semen. Despite an initial decrease within the first 24 h, bison sperm extended with Triladyl or Andromed maintained an acceptable degree of motility for up to 2 days after chilling to 5°C. Supported by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Agriculture and Development Fund, and Canadian Animal Genetic Resources program.

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)0.002
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 score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.847

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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