Effect of Sperm Cryopreservation and Supplementing Semen Doses with Seminal Plasma on the Establishment of a Sperm Reservoir in Gilts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frozen-thawed (FT) boar sperm have a reduced fertile life, due in part to a capacitation-like status induced by cooling. Reversal of this cryocapacitation in vitro by exposure to boar seminal plasma (SP) has been demonstrated. The objective of these studies was to determine the effect of SP on the ability of FT sperm to create an oviductal sperm reservoir following artificial insemination (AI). In Experiment one, 35 pre-pubertal gilts were injected (IM) with 400 IU eCG plus 200 IU hCG to induce oestrus. At detection of oestrus, gilts were inseminated with 3 x 10(9) live sperm, either fresh (FS; n = 13), FT (n = 10), or FT supplemented with 10% v/v SP (n = 12). Gilts were killed 8 h later, their reproductive tracts recovered and the uterotubal junctions (UTJs) flushed to recover sperm. Fewer (p < 0.01) sperm were recovered following FT, compared to FS, inseminations, and there was no evident effect of SP. In Experiment two, 30 pre-pubertal gilts received IM injections of 1000 IU eCG followed by 5 mg pLH 80 h later to control time of ovulation. Gilts were inseminated with 3 x 10(9) live FS sperm (n = 6), FT sperm (n = 15) or FT sperm plus 10% SP (n = 9) at 12 h before ovulation and then sacrificed 8 h later. The UTJs were dissected and flushed for sperm recovery. Fewest (p < 0.001) sperm were recovered following FT insemination and there was no evident effect of SP. These data demonstrate that the size of the sperm reservoir is markedly reduced in gilts inseminated with FT sperm. However, the lack of effect of SP suggested that either it did not reverse cryocapacitation or that such a reversal does not impact the in vivo ability to create a sperm reservoir.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".