MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032102210 · doi:10.1071/rdv23n1ab207

207 OOCYTE RECOVERY RATES AND IN VITRO BLASTOCYST PRODUCTION IN CATTLE TREATED WITH A SINGLE INJECTION OF FOLLTROPIN-V DILUTED IN A SLOW-RELEASE FORMULATION

2010· article· en· W2032102210 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Felipe Ledur Ongaratto, A. Tríbulo, Martín Ramos, P. Rodriguez, G. A. Bó

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlastocystOocyteCloprostenolIn vitro maturationAndrologyFollicleFollicular phaseCrossbreedMedicineAnimal scienceBiologyEmbryoInternal medicineEmbryogenesisOvulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have previously shown that superstimulation of beef donors with a single intramuscular (IM) injection of Folltropin-V (Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, Ontario, Canada) diluted in a proprietary slow-release formulation (SRF; Bioniche Animal Health) results in in vivo embryo production comparable with the traditional twice-daily IM administration over 4 days (Tribulo et al. 2010 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 22, 367). Two experiments were designed to evaluate oocyte recovery and in vitro blastocyst production of oocyte donors superstimulated with Folltropin-V, administered in twice-daily injections or diluted in SRF and given by a single injection. In Experiment 1, crossbred beef cows (n = 11) and heifers (n = 5) were randomly allocated to 3 treatment groups in a crossover design (i.e. all animals were treated 3 times, and all treatments were represented in the 3 replicates). All donors had all follicles >8 mm in diameter ablated by ultrasound-guided follicle aspiration on Day 0, received 500 µg of cloprostenol (prostaglandin F2a, Ciclase, Syntex, Argentina), and were treated as follows: Group 1 (multiple FSH): 160 mg of Folltropin-V divided into 4 IM injections administered twice daily (i.e. Days 1 and 2); Group 2 (single FSH): 160 mg of Folltropin-V diluted in 4 mL of 25% SRF and given by a single IM injection in the neck on Day 1; Group 3 (control): no FSH treatment. On Day 4, oocytes were aspirated from all follicles >3 mm in diameter by ultrasound-guided follicular aspiration, classified, matured in TCM-199 supplemented with 0.4% BSA, fertilized in Fert medium, and in vitro cultured in SOF supplemented with 0.4% BSA under oil at 37°C, 5% CO2, 5% O2, 90% N2, and saturated humidity for 7 days. Data were analyzed by ANOVA. The mean (±SEM) numbers of follicles aspirated and oocytes recovered were higher (P < 0.05) in Groups 1 (multiple FSH, 13.6 ± 1.9 and 8.5 ± 1.0) and 2 (single FSH, 14.7 ± 1.7 and 9.4 ± 1.3) than in Group 3 (control, 8.7 ± 0.9 and 5.8 ± 1.0). The mean number of blastocysts after 7 days in culture was numerically higher (P = 0.2) in Groups 1 (2.1 ± 0.7) and 2 (2.6 ± 0.6) than in Group 3 (1.1 ± 0.4). In Experiment 2, lactating Holstein cows (n = 10) received 2.5 mg of estradiol benzoate and 50 mg of progesterone IM on Day 0. On Day 4, all cows received prostaglandin F2a and were randomly allocated to 2 treatment groups, to receive 200 mg of Folltropin-V divided into 4 twice-daily IM injections or 200 mg of Folltropin-V diluted in 25% SRF and given as a single IM injection. On Day 7, oocytes were collected and treated like those in Experiment 1. The mean (±SEM) numbers of follicles aspirated (21.2 ± 3.5 and 14.4 ± 2.9), oocytes recovered (10.2 ± 1.2 and 13.8 ± 2.9), and blastocysts produced (4.6 ± 0.7 and 6.0 ± 2.0) did not differ for Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.3). In conclusion, superstimulatory treatment increased the number of cumulus–oocyte complexes available for IVF compared with no treatment, and ovarian superstimulatory treatment may be simplified by the use of a single IM dose of a sustained-release product, compared with multiple doses of a conventional product, without a reduction in the recovery or quality of cumulus–oocyte complexes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207