MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982178519 · doi:10.1071/rdv20n1ab20

20 ADMINISTRATION OF FOLLICLE-STIMULATING HORMONE AT CIDR REMOVAL DOES NOT AFFECT THE PREGNANCY RATE IN A CIDR-BASED, COSYNCH PROTOCOL IN LACTATING BEEF COWS

2007· article· en· W1982178519 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. A. Small, F. C. F. Dias, Luiz Francisco Machado Pfeifer, K. Lightfoot, M.G. Colazo, John P. Kastelic, R.J. Mapletoft

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstrous cyclePregnancyAnimal sciencePregnancy rateOvulationBeef cattleMedicineInternal medicineEndocrinologyBiologyHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In previous studies, giving eCG at CIDR removal significantly increased the pregnancy rate after timed-AI in beef cows. However, eCG is not universally available. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that giving pFSH at CIDR removal might improve the pregnancy rate in a CIDR-based, Cosynch protocol in postpartum, suckled Bos taurus beef cows; a secondary objective was to compare pregnancy rates when GnRH v . pLH was used to synchronize wave emergence and ovulation. This work was conducted as two experiments (separate locations). All cows were given a CIDR (containing 1.9 g progesterone; Pfizer Animal Health, Montreal, QC, Canada) on Day 0 (without regard to stage of estrous cycle or cyclicity). On Day 7, CIDRs were removed, all cows were concurrently given 25 mg PGF (Lutalyse; Pfizer Animal Health, Groton, CT, USA), half were given 20 mg pFSH (Folltropin-V; Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, ON, Canada), and all cows were timed-AI 54 h later (Day 9). In Experiment 1, 240 cows [94 ± 10.8 days postpartum; body condition score (BCS: 1 = emaciated, 9 = obese; mean ± SD): 5.8 ± 0.4] were used; at CIDR insertion and AI, cows were allocated to receive either 100 µg GnRH ( n = 160; Cystorelin, Merial Canada Inc., Victoriaville, QC, Canada) or 12.5 mg pLH ( n = 80; Lutropin-V, Bioniche Animal Health). In Experiment 2, 109 cows (59.2 ± 19.5 days postpartum; BCS: 5.6 ± 1.1) were used; all received 100 µg GnRH (Cystorelin) at CIDR insertion and AI. In Experiment 1, three cows that lost their CIDR were excluded; pregnancy rates after timed-AI (logistic regression, backward selection: parity, pFSH, synchronizing treatment, and their interactions) were not different between cows given pFSH v . control cows (64.7 v . 65.2%; P > 0.80), nor between cows given GnRH v . pLH (62.7 v . 69.6%; P = 0.91). However, there was an interaction ( P < 0.04) between parity and the synchronizing treatment; in primiparous cows, pregnancy rates were significantly lower in those given GnRH v . pLH (59.3 v . 83.3%). In Experiment 2, pregnancy rates after timed-AI (logistic regression, backward selection: parity, pFSH, and their interaction) were not different between cows given pFSH v . control cows (38.2 v . 42.6%; P > 0.6). In conclusion, our hypothesis was not supported; giving pFSH at CIDR removal did not significantly improve the pregnancy rate in a CIDR-based, Cosynch protocol in postpartum, suckled Bos taurus beef 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207