Ovulation-Inducing Factor in the Seminal Plasma of Alpacas and Llamas1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies were conducted to document the existence of an ovulation-inducing factor in the seminal plasma of alpacas (experiment 1) and llamas (experiment 2) and to determine if the effect is mediated via the pituitary (experiment 3). In experiment 1, female alpacas (n = 14 per group) were given alpaca seminal plasma or saline intramuscularly or by intrauterine infusion. Only alpacas that were given seminal plasma i.m. ovulated (13/ 14, 93%; P < 0.01). In experiment 2, ovulation was detected in 9/10 (90%) llamas at a mean of 29.3 +/- 0.7 h after seminal plasma treatment. Plasma progesterone concentrations were maximal by Day 9 and were at nadir by Day 12 posttreatment. In experiment 3, female llamas were given llama seminal plasma, GnRH, or saline i.m., and ovulation was detected in 6/6, 5/ 6, and 0/6 llamas, respectively (P < 0.001). Treatment was followed by a surge (P < 0.01) in plasma LH concentration beginning 15 min and 75 min after treatment with GnRH and seminal plasma, respectively. Plasma LH remained elevated longer in the seminal plasma group (P < 0.05) and had not yet declined to pretreatment levels after 8 h. Compared with the GnRH group, corpus luteum tended to grow longer and to a greater diameter (P = 0.1) and plasma progesterone concentration was twice as high in the seminal plasma group (P < 0.01). Results document the existence of a potent factor in the seminal plasma of alpacas and llamas that elicited a surge in circulating concentrations of LH and induced an ovulatory and luteotropic response.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".