A Cytogenetic Study of Breeding Boars in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chromosome abnormalities are well known for their negative impact on the reproductive performance of carriers. Such abnormalities could have severe effect on animal industries which rely heavily on efficient reproduction. We conducted a cytogenetic survey of breeder pigs from 4 different Canadian farms to investigate the frequency of chromosome abnormalities and to assess their reproductive impact on pig populations. Our study revealed that 50% of the 'hypoprolific' boars and 2.5% of the young boars raised for service in artificial insemination were carriers of chromosome anomalies while no chromosome defect was noted in any of the 'proven' breeder boars. G-banding technique to determine the type of abnormalities detected 3 previously unreported translocations involving chromosomes 1 and 6, chromosomes 10 and 13 and chromosomes 9 and 14. The reciprocal nature of these translocations was confirmed either using fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) technique or immunostaining for synaptonemal complex delineation and were named rcp(1;6)(p22,q12), rcp(10;13), and rcp(9;14) (p24;q27), respectively. Prolificacy of 1/6 and 10/13 translocation carriers was noted to be reduced by more than 40% compared to their normal counterparts while it was reduced by 26% in carriers of the 9/14 translocation. Carriers of 1/6 and 9/14 translocations displayed a higher repeat breeding tendency, compared to their herd average (5 and 16%, respectively). While for the 9/14 translocation the prevalence of stillbirths was lower than that in their herd [8.7 vs. 10.4% (p < 0.001)]. The present results, albeit based on a relatively small number of pigs, indicate that the prevalence of chromosome abnormalities could be much higher in Canadian pigs compared to that reported in European pigs and underline the urgent need to initiate cytogenetic screening programs as one of the effective ways to reduce reproductive problems in Canadian pig populations.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".