MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055709455 · doi:10.1071/rdv25n1ab310

310 DOES PROGESTERONE OR EQUINE CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN IMPROVE THE SUPEROVULATORY RESPONSE AND EMBRYO QUALITY IN WOOD BISON DURING THE ANOVULATORY SEASON?

2012· article· en· W2055709455 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. M. Palomino, R.J. Mapletoft, M. Anzar, Murray R. Woodbury, M. P. Cervantes, Gregory P. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquine chorionic gonadotropinOvulationFollicular phaseBiologySeasonal breederEmbryo qualityHuman chorionic gonadotropinEmbryoBison bisonInternal medicineAndrologyAnimal scienceEndocrinologyMedicineEmbryogenesisHormoneZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Superovulation protocols are being developed in wood bison (Bison bison athabascae), a threatened Canadian species. In initial studies, 2 doses of FSH diluted in hyaluronan given 48 h apart were successful for inducing ovarian superstimulation in wood bison, and ovulation rate was improved by final treatment with hCG instead of LH (Palomino et al. 2012 Reprod. Fertil. Dev. 24, 226). In that study, exogenous progesterone had no effect on the number of ovulations, but embryo quality could not be evaluated because of the low number of embryos collected. In beef cattle, replacement of the final doses of FSH with eCG has resulted in the recovery of a greater number of ova/embryos. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effect of exogenous progesterone (PRID) on embryo quality and to determine if the addition of eCG increases the ovulation rate in superstimulated wood bison. Follicular ablation was done to synchronize follicular wave emergence in 26 wood bison cows during the anovulatory season (May). Cows were assigned randomly to 3 groups: PRID/no eCG (n = 8), PRID/eCG (n = 9), and no PRID/eCG (n = 9). A PRID was inserted on the day of follicular ablation (Day –1) in respective groups. In all bison, FSH diluted in hyaluronan (5 mg mL–1, MAP-5, Bioniche Animal Health Inc., Belleville, Ontario, Canada) was given intramuscularly on Day 0 (300 mg) and Day 2 (100 mg). On Day 3, a single dose of 450 IU of eCG (Pregnecol, Bioniche Animal Health Inc.) was given intramuscularly and the PRID were removed in the corresponding groups. On Day 5, all bison were given 2500 IU of hCG (Chorulon, Merck, Whitehouse Station, NJ, USA) intramuscularly to induce ovulation. Bison were inseminated with chilled semen 12 and 24 h later. Nonsurgical embryo collection was performed on Day 14. Transrectal ultrasonography was done to record the ovarian response, ovulation rate, and number of corpora lutea (CL). Results were compared by ANOVA and Chi-squared test (Table 1). The number of ovulatory-sized follicles (=9 mm) on Day 5 did not differ among groups. Ovulation rate was lowest in bison treated with both a PRID and eCG (P < 0.05). There were no differences among groups in the number of CL on Day 14, the number of ova/embryos collected, or the number of transferable embryos. The superovulatory response and embryo collection rate in the present study were higher than in any previous reports in bison. The ovulation rate was not improved by the addition of eCG treatment, and exogenous progesterone had no effect on embryo quality. Table 1. Response of superstimulated wood bison (mean ± SEM) to treatment with exogenous progesterone (PRID) and/or eCG

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
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)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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