294 SUPERSTIMULATION IN THE FIRST FOLLICULAR WAVE, WITHOUT THE USE OF ESTRADIOL IN BONSMARA CATTLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protocols that control follicular wave emergence and ovulation have had a great impact on the application of commercial on-farm embryo transfer because they permit the initiation of superstimulatory treatments at a self-appointed time. However, the most common approach for the synchronization of follicular wave emergence for superstimulation involves the use of estradiol or its esters that are not commercially available in many countries. Therefore, an experiment was designed to evaluate a protocol in which the superstimulation treatment began at the time of emergence of the first follicular wave without the use of estradiol. Bonsmara donors (29 cows and 41 heifers) were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups. Donor animals in the experimental group (first wave group) received an intravaginal progesterone releasing device (Cue-Mate, Bioniche Animal Health, ON, Canada) along with PGF (0.150 mg D + cloprostenol, Bioprost-D, Biotay, Argentina) at random stages of the estrous cycle. Cue-Mates were removed 10.5 d later and a second PGF was administered at the same time, followed by GnRH (0.050 mg Lecirelina, Biosin-OV, Biotay, Argentina) 36 h later. Ovulation was expected to occur within 30 h after GnRH (day 0). On day 0 (36 h after gonadotropin-releasing hormone) donors received a new Cue-Mate, and superstimulation treatment was initiated with a total dose of 200 to 260 mg (heifers) or 320 mg (cows) NIH-FSH-P1of Folltropin-V in twice daily decreasing doses over 5 d. The PGF was administered with the last two Folltropin-V injections, and Cue-Mate devices were removed with the last Folltropin-V injection. All donors received 12.5 mg pLH (Lutropin-V, Bioniche Animal Health) 24 h after Cue-Mate removal and were AI 12 and 24 h later. Embryos were collected 7 d after pLH treatment. Donors in the Control group received a Cue-Mate and 2 mg of estradiol benzoate (EB; Bioestradiol, Biotay) and 50 mg of progesterone (Lab. Rio de Janeiro, Argentina), and superstimulation treatments were initiated 4 d later with the same dosages used in the first wave group. The PGF administration, Cue-Mate removal, AI, and embryo collections were done as those in the first wave group. Data were analyzed by ANOVA, and results are shown in Table 1. It was not possible to pass the cervix with the collection catheter in two heifers in the control group, and they were excluded from the analysis. There were no significant effects of donor category (cows v. heifers) or treatment on superovulatory response and embryo quality (P > 0.20). In conlusion, superstimulation on a synchronized first follicular wave is as efficacious as superstimulation following synchronization of follicle wave emergence with estradiol benzoate in Bonsmara cattle. Table 1. Superovulatory response (means ± SEM) in Bonsmara cows and heifers treated with Folltropin-V during the first follicular wave or 4 d after estradiol administration Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, ON, Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".