LH and FSH secretion, follicle development and oestradiol in sows ovulating or failing to ovulate in an intermittent suckling regimen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper describes LH and FSH secretion, follicle development and ovulation in sows that were subjected to a limited nursing regimen. From Day 14 of lactation, 32 sows were separated from their piglets for 12 h every day (intermittent suckling; IS). Half the sows had boar contact during separation. Nine of 32 sows ovulated spontaneously within 14 days from initiation of IS. The frequency of LH pulses on the first day of IS tended to be higher in anovulatory sows (6.3 v. 4.2 pulses per 12 h; P < 0.10); other characteristics of LH secretion were similar to sows that ovulated. The characteristics of FSH secretion did not differ over the 8-h sampling period. Boar contact did not influence either LH and FSH secretion or the number of sows that ovulated. Up to 58% of anovulatory sows showed an increase in follicle size after initiation of IS and, 4 days after the initiation of IS, one-third still had follicles similar in size to those in ovulatory sows. However, the oestradiol concentration in anovulatory sows did not increase. We conclude that FSH and LH stimulation in anovulatory sows is not limiting for normal follicle development, but that ovarian follicles are not responsive to increased LH secretion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".