MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Maturation Status, Protein Synthesis and Developmental Competence of Oocytes Derived from Lambs and Ewes

2002· article· en· W1982427446 on OpenAlexafffund
H.P.S. Kochhar, Bin Wu, LHA Morris, BC Buckrell, JW Pollard, PK Basrur, WA King

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction in Domestic Animals · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsOocyteBlastocystBiologyEmbryoAndrologyHuman fertilizationEmbryogenesisIn vitro maturationMeiosisCleavage (geology)Cell biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficacy of oocyte selection for in vitro embryo production depends on the abundance and diameter of follicles, cumulus layers around the oocytes and subsequent fertilization. Application of 'ovum pick-up' technique allows us to utilize partially matured oocytes for embryo production even from juvenile subjects. To compare their developmental competence, oocytes derived from lambs and ewes and cultured in maturation medium for up to 26 h were assessed at 2 h intervals by confocal microscopy after chromatin and microtubulin-specific fluorochrome labelling. Lamb oocytes reached second meiotic metaphase (MII) at lower numbers at 24 h (60.0%) and 26 h (28.6%) whereas 85.7% of adult-derived oocytes attained MII status by 24 h of maturation. Radiolabelling of oocyte proteins revealed higher incorporation of [(35)S-]-methionine and [(35)S]-cysteine in adult-derived oocytes compared to lamb oocytes. Although the cleavage rate of lamb oocytes was similar to that of ewe oocytes, the proportion reaching blastocyst stage was significantly lower (p < 0.05) in the lamb-derived oocytes. However, blastocysts from both types of oocytes displayed similar cell lineage allocations to inner cell mass and trophectoderm.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.262
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations51
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction in Domestic AnimalsSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207