Production of Donor-Derived Offspring from Cryopreserved Ovarian Tissue in Japanese Quail (Coturnix japonica)1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cryopreservation of avian ova and embryos is challenging because of the yolky structure of the egg. As an alternative, with the development of effective cryopreservation protocols, ovarian tissue cryopreservation could be used for cryobanking for birds. Pieces of ovarian tissue of week-old Japanese quail (Coturnix japonica) were frozen at 0.5 degrees C/min in a programmable freezer or vitrified by immersion in liquid nitrogen. Straws containing slow-frozen samples were thawed in ice water, and vitrified samples were removed from the vials and transferred into sucrose, with the concentration lowered in sequence at room temperature. Cell viability of tissue was estimated by trypan blue assay, and tissue histology was examined by light microscopy. Frozen-thawed or vitrified-warmed tissue from WB (recessive plumage color) chicks was transplanted into week-old ovariectomized QO (wild-type plumage) chicks, with some chicks receiving fresh tissue as a control group. At sexual maturity, QO recipients were mated to WB males, and the production of WB offspring demonstrated successful cryopreservation and transplantation. Donor-derived offspring were obtained from the ovarian tissue that had been cryopreserved by either slow-freezing or vitrification. The vitrification protocol used in this study showed better outcomes at each level of evaluation. This study demonstrated that the function of ovarian tissue in avian species can be successfully preserved at subzero temperatures and recovered by transplantation. The vitrification protocol is recommended because of high efficiency and overall simplicity.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".