MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075152500 · doi:10.1071/rdv18n2ab362

362 EFFECT OF TIME OF REMOVAL OF A PROGESTERONE RELEASING DEVICE AND GnRH TREATMENT ON THE INTERVAL TO AND DISTRIBUTION OF OVULATIONS IN SUPERSTIMULATED BEEF COWS

2005· article· en· W2075152500 on OpenAlex
P. Chesta, D. Maraña, L. Peres, G. A. Bó

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceMorningCloprostenolBeef cattleMedicineInternal medicineBiologyOvulationHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experiment was designed to evaluate the effect of the time of removal of an intravaginal progesterone (P4) releasing device and GnRH treatment on the interval to and the distribution of ovulations in beef cows superstimulated with Folltropin-V (Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, Ontario, Canada). Red Angus donors (22 cows and 12 heifers) with a body condition score between 2.5 to 3.5 out of 5 were blocked by parity and randomly assigned to one of four treatment groups in a 2 × 2 factorial design. On Day 0, all donors received an i.m. DIB vaginal device (Syntex, Argentina) plus 2.5 mg estradiol-17ß and 50 mg P4 (Laboritorio Rio de Janeiro, Argentina). Superstimulatory treatments were initiated on Day 4, with a total dose of 320 mg (cows) or 200 mg (heifers) NIH-FSH-P1 (Folltropin-V; Bioniche Animal Health, Inc., Belleville, Ontario, Canada) in twice daily i.m. injections over 4 days. All cows received PGF treatment (150 µD(+)cloprostenol: Ciclase; Syntex) in the morning and afternoon of Day 6 and were randomly divided to have DIB devices removed at the time of the second PGF treatment (Day 6.5) or 12 h later (Day 7). On Day 8, donors were further subdivided to receive GnRH (0.050 mg Lecirelina, Gonasyn; Syntex) or no further treatment, and all cows were fixed-time AI either 60 and 72 h after the first PGF injection (0 h). All cows and heifers were examined by ultrasonography every 8 h for a period of 120 h commencing at the time of DIB removal, to determine the time and distribution of ovulations. For each cow, mean time of ovulation was used for the statistical analysis. The distributions of ovulations were compared among groups by Levene's test, and then by ANOVA (equal variances) or Friedman two-way non-parametric ANOVA (unequal variances). No significant differences were detected between cows and heifers (P > 0.13) for the parameters evaluated, and data were combined. There was no effect (P > 0.22) of treatment on the number of ovulations (GnRH: 12.6 ± 1.6 vs. no GnRH: 15.1 ± 1.1 and Day 6.5: 13.7 ± 1.3 vs. Day 7: 14.3 ± 1.5), or numbers of transferable embryos (GnRH: 5.1 ± 1.1 vs. no GnRH: 3.1 ± 0.8 and Day 6.5: 3.5 ± 0.8 vs. Day 7: 4.81 ± 0.1). However, there was a significant effect of GnRH treatment and a GnRH-by-time-of-DIB-removal interaction on the distribution of ovulations (P < 0.05; Table 1). The administration of GnRH in a superstimulatory protocol using P4 releasing devices results in earlier and more synchronous ovulations than when GnRH is not used. Table 1. Distribution of ovulations (hours after the first PGF) in superstimulated Red Angus donors treated with progesterone-releasing devices (DIB) for 6.5 or 7 days with and without GnRH treatment on Day 8

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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