MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091115579 · doi:10.1071/rdv20n1ab143

143 IMPROVEMENT OF A SUPERSTIMULATORY PROTOCOL IN NELORE COWS: REPLACING THE LAST TWO DOSES OF pFSH BY eCG

2007· article· en· W2091115579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. M. Barros, A. C. Z. Barcelos, Lucas Gouvêa, Melissa Meneghel, Denise Corrêa Barcelos, L. N. Barcelos, Luzia A. Trinca

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnimal scienceCloprostenolTheriogenologyEstrous cycleOvulationBiologyEstradiol benzoateFollicular phaseEmbryo cultureInternal medicineAndrologyEmbryoEndocrinologyMedicineEstrogenEmbryogenesisHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, the superstimulatory protocol coined P-36 (Nogueira et al . 2007 Theriogenology 67, 655–660) was modified in order to test if replacement of pFSH by eCG in the last day of superstimulatory treatment would improve follicular growth, ovulation rate, and embryo yield. Nelore cows ( n = 20) were randomly allocated to two groups: P-36/LH48 and P-36/LH48/eCG. Each female received both treatments in a cross-over design; the first experimental period was in October (Spring 2006, both groups) and the second in February (Summer 2007, both groups). At a random stage of the estrous cycle (D0), animals received a progesterone intravaginal device (DIB®, 1.0 g; Syntex S.A., Buenos Aires, Argentina) plus estradiol benzoate (EB, Estrogin®, 2.5 mg IM; Farmavet, Sao Paulo, Brazil). The animals were superstimulated with pFSH (Folltropin-V®, Bioniche Animal Health, Ontario, Canada), administered twice daily in decreasing doses of 53.2, 39.9, 26.6, and 13.3 mg (total dose = 133 mg), from Day 5 to Day 8, except the P-36/LH48/eCG group, where the last two doses of pFSH were replaced by two doses (200 IU) of eCG (Novormon®, Syntex, Buenos Aires, Argentina). All cows were treated with D-cloprostenol (150 µg IM;Veteglan®, Calier, Barcelona, Spain) on Day 7 at 7:00 h, and DIBs® were removed 36 h after PGF2alpha administration. On Day 9, ovulation was induced by pLH administration (Lutropin®, 12.5 mg IM; Bioniche Animal Health) at 7:00 h. The animals were inseminated at 12 and 24 h after pLH administration, without estrus detection. Embryos were recovered on Day 16 or 17. Data were analyzed by ANOVA (Proc Mixed, SAS; SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA), and the difference was considered significant when P < 0.05 or not significant (NS). Results for animals from groups P-36/LH48 and P-36/LH48/eCG were compared and are reported in this order. The number of follicles with diameter larger than 6 mm at the time of pLH administration (15.25 ± 2.06 and 21.05 ± 2.76; P < 0.01), the ovulation rate observed up to 48 h after pLH administration (77.7 ± 5.6 and 83.9 ± 2.6; NS), the total number of oocytes/embryos recovered (6.65 ± 1.18 and 10.0 ± 1.48; P < 0.03), the number of embryos recovered (6.05 ± 1.24 and 8.35 ± 1.30; NS), and the number of viable embryos (5.10 ± 1.10 and 7.30 ± 1.20; NS) are reported. The embryo quality (excellent, good, fair, and poor) was NS among groups P-36/LH48 and P-36/LH48/eCG. It is concluded that replacement of pFSH by eCG, on the last day of the superstimulatory protocol P-36, was beneficial since there was a significant increase in the number of follicles (>6 mm at the time of pLH administration) and the total number of structures recovered. Experiments are in progress to confirm these beneficial effects of eCG on the P-36 protocol. This work was supported by FAPESP (Sao Paulo, Brazil). A. C. Z. Barcelos received a fellowship from CAPES (Brazil) .

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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