MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987881648 · doi:10.15381/rivep.v19i1.1175

EFECTO DE FRACCIONES DEL PLASMA SEMINAL, SEGÚN SU PESO MOLECULAR, SOBRE LA INDUCCIÓN DE LA OVULACIÓN EN LLAMAS (Lama glama).

2012· article· es· W1987881648 on OpenAlexaff
Martha Vásquez E., Wilfredo Huanca L., Teodosio Huanca M., Marcelo Ratto

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista de Investigaciones Veterinarias del Perú · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvulationCorpus luteumEndocrinologyInternal medicineAndrologyFollicleChemistryBiologyAnimal scienceOvaryMedicineHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study was conducted to evaluate the effect of different fractions of llama seminal plasma, based on the molecular weight (MW), on the ovulation. Fifty four female adult llamas without calf at foot and in good reproductive conditions were used. The animals were bearing a >7 mm dominant follicle determined by ultrasound diagnosis during a three consecutive days. Females were randomly distributed in six groups: A, fraction of seminal plasma with MW >30 kDa; B, fraction of seminal plasma with MW >10 and <30 kDa; C, fraction of seminal plasma with MW >5 and <10 kDa ; D, fraction of seminal plasma with MW <5 kDa; E, complete plasma seminal; and F, PBS. Animals were treated with a 1.5 ml solution of the corresponding fraction or placebo via i.m. Ovarian ultrasound was performed at day 2 and 9 post-treatment to determine the ovulation rate and the size of the corpora lutea. Ovulation rate was 100% in groups A and E, 11.1% in group B and 0% in the other groups. No statistical differences were observed between groups on the size of the corpus luteum. The results indicated that the plasma seminal fraction with molecular weight >30 kDa induce ovulation in llamas.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista de Investigaciones Veterinarias del PerúSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207