MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111415345 · doi:10.1071/rd11918

Treatments for the synchronisation of bovine recipients for fixed-time embryo transfer and improvement of pregnancy rates

2011· review· en· W2111415345 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsEmbryo transferPregnancyEmbryoOvulationPregnancy rateFollicular phaseEstrous cycleAndrologyMedicineObstetricsBiologyGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although embryo transfer technology has been used commercially in cattle for many years, the inefficiency of oestrus detection, especially in recipients, has limited the widespread application of this technology. The most useful alternative to increase the number of recipients utilised in an embryo transfer program is the use of protocols that allow for embryo transfer without the need for oestrus detection, usually called fixed-time embryo transfer (FTET). Most current FTET protocols are based on progestin-releasing devices combined with oestradiol or GnRH, which control and synchronise follicular wave dynamics and ovulation. Conception rates to a single FTET have been reported to be similar to those after detection of oestrus, but pregnancy rates are higher because these treatments have increased the proportion of recipients that receive an embryo. Recent changes to treatments for FTET, such as the administration of eCG, have resulted in increased pregnancy rates and provide opportunities to make these treatments easier to perform on farm.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.213 · 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