MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042276695 · doi:10.1071/rdv27n1ab353

353 FOLLICULAR POPULATION STATUS AT THE FIRST FOLLICLE-STIMULATING HORMONE INJECTION IN EWES SUPERSTIMULATED NEAR THE FIRST FOLLICULAR WAVE OF CIDR PROTOCOL

2014· article· en· W2042276695 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maria Emília Franco Oliveira, Marcus Antônio Rossi Feliciano, Luís Guilherme de Oliveira, J. F. da Fonseca, W. R. R. Vicente

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFollicular phaseCloprostenolPopulationInternal medicineFollicleEndocrinologyBiologyOvulationAnimal scienceAndrologyHormoneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was designed to evaluate the follicular status at the 1st FSH injection in ewes superstimulated near the 1st follicular wave of the CIDR protocol during nonbreeding (NB), transition (T), and breeding (B) season, and thus to correlate them with the superovulatory response (SR). On Day 0, all females (30 Santa Ines ewes; n = 10 per season) received a progesterone (P4) device (CIDR®; Zoetis, Brazil) and 37.5 µg of d-cloprostenol. The superestimulation (ST) was initiated on Day 4, 4, and 6 of protocol in the NB, T, and B season, respectively. These follicular wave emergence days were defined in a previous study that evaluated the follicular dynamic in P4 protocol (Oliveira et al. 2011 Acta Scientiae Veterinariae, 38, 361). The ST consisted of 8 injections of pFSH administrated twice a day in descending order (40/30/20/ and 10 mg of pFSH; Folltropin-V, Bioniche, Canada). The P4 device was removed 2 days after the beginning of the FSH treatment and all ewes received another injection of 37.5 µg of d-cloprostenol and a dose of 200 IU of eCG at the same time. B-mode ultrasound of ovaries was performed immediately before the 1st FSH injection. The follicles were classified according to their diameters into categories based on physiological dynamics: (C1) 2–4.25 mm, representative of the population before dominance phase; (C2) 4.5–5 mm, initial dominance phase; (C3) 5.25–5.75 mm, middle dominance phase; and (C4) 6 mm, preovulatory phase. Data were analysed by GLIMMIX using SAS comparing mean values (± s.e.m.) between seasons (P < 0.05) and Pearson correlation was made. All ewes had small follicles (C1) at the beginning the ST; however, only one female had solely C1 follicles. The number of C1 follicles did not differ between seasons (12.9 ± 0.9, 12.8 ± 0.8, and 12.1 ± 0.5 follicles for the NB, T, and B season, respectively). One-half of the animals from NB and T seasons had no C3 and C4 follicles, whereas 40% of females in B season showed the same follicular status. The percentage of ewes that had no C4 follicles was 80, 100, and 50% for the NB, T, and B season, respectively. There were no difference between season in number of C2 follicles (1.8 ± 0.5, 1.7 ± 0.4, and 1.7 ± 0.4) and C3 follicles (0.3 ± 0.1, 0.6 ± 0.2, 0.1 ± 0.1) for NB, T, and B seasons, respectively. However, the number of C4 follicles was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in the NB (0.2 ± 0.13) and B (0.6 ± 0.2) season than T period, which had no follicles in this category. The SR did not differ between seasons (12.4 ± 0.9, 13.1 ± 2.3, and 17.0 ± 2.3 for the NB, T, and B season, respectively) and had no correlation to any follicular category. In conclusion, the ST started on a day when there was a large population of small follicles, regardless of the season, confirming proximity to follicular wave emergence. However, the ovarian population was not restricted to this category. Therefore, it is possible that wave emergence has already started in some ewes before the initiation of the ST. Financial support is from FAPESP and CNPq.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.243
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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