Oocyte and ovary morphological observation of gray wolf (Canis lupus)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present study was carried out to describe the reproductive system of a single adult female wolf, including the uterine horns, cervix, ovaries and follicles. The cumulus oocytes complexes (COCs) and oocytes were also examined. The results showed that the size of each ovary was about 9 × 6 mm with an average of weight of 461.3 mg. The uterus was Y-shaped, and the length of each uterine horn was 14 cm. The distance from the cervix to the bifurcation of the uterine horns was also 14 cm. The left ovary had two large follicles on the surface with a diameter more than 4 mm, while the right ovary had no protuberant follicles. The ovaries were covered with a lot of fat, and were well developed. The COCs derived from the antral follicles were dark, and the nuded oocytes had a dark cytoplasm. The diameter of the oocytes removed from the antral follicles was 116.8 μm on average. The ovaries had a smooth surface and all the follicles were under the surface except for two big follicles on the left ovary. Histological examination of the ovaries by haematoxylin and eosin staining demonstrated that the primordial, primary, preantral and antral follicles were scattered in the cortex, the medulla was abundant with blood vessels. This study preliminarily reveals the features of the wolf reproductive system and the structure of its oocytes and ovaries, which might be indicative for further study and the protection of the species.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".