Effect of Chilling Duration on Post‐Thaw Characteristics of Sperm from the<scp>N</scp>orth<scp>A</scp>merican bison (<i><scp>B</scp>ison bison</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine the duration for which sperm from the North American bison (Bison bison) could be chilled prior to being cryopreserved, without compromising post- thaw sperm quality. This would permit transport of samples collected remotely, to the laboratory (at 4°C) for cryopreservation. Epididymal sperm from plains bison (n = 11) and ejaculated sperm from wood bison (n = 3) were collected, extended and held at 4°C for extended periods of time. At intervals, an aliquot was cryopreserved. Post-thaw sperm motion characteristics were evaluated by computer assisted sperm analysis. Representative plains bison sperm samples (n = 3) were evaluated for their in vitro fertilizing ability in a heterologous system using bovine oocytes. There was no statistical difference in total and progressive motility of plains bison epididymal sperm when cryopreserved after chilling for 24, 48 or 72 h. For wood bison ejaculated sperm, there was no difference in total and progressive motility for sperm cryopreserved following 24 or 48 h of chilling. However, one of the three bulls showed significantly poorer fertilization (based on cleavage rate) with sperm chilled for 72 compared to 24 and 48 h prior to freezing. In conclusion, plains bison epididymal sperm can be chilled for 72 h and wood bison ejaculated sperm can be chilled for at least 48 h prior to cryopreservation without compromising post-thaw sperm motility, while heterologous in vitro fertilization (IVF) assay indicated a between-bull variation in the in vitro fertilizing ability of sperm chilled for an extended duration before cryopreservation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".