MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143755214 · doi:10.1071/rdv27n1ab348

348 ANTI-MÜLLERIAN HORMONE AND SUPEROVULATORY RESPONSE IN DONOR COWS MANAGED IN 2 SEMIARID ENVIRONMENTS IN NORTHWEST MEXICO

2014· article· en· W2143755214 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Juan Francisco Merino-Torres, G. A. Bó, Mark Thomas, Fernando Lares, C. R. Garcia de la Pena

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnti-Müllerian hormoneBreedArtificial inseminationEmbryo transferEstrous cycleInseminationFollicular phaseHormoneAnimal scienceInternal medicineEmbryoEndocrinologyBiologyMedicineAndrologyPregnancySperm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An embryo transfer program in cows relies on the superovulatory (SPO) response after receiving a hormonal treatment. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) has been proposed as an endocrine marker associated to superovulation; however, the SPO response of donors has also been influenced by the environment. Thus, objective herein was to evaluate effects of serum AMH levels on number of ovarian follicles (NOF), corpora lutea (CL), and transferable embryos (TE) in superovulated donor cows managed under summer or winter conditions in northwest Mexico. Fifty-two cows in a random stage of the oestrous cycle were used in this study. All cows received an Eazi-Breed CIDR cattle insert (1.384 g of progesterone; Zoetis, USA), and 2.76 mg of oestradiol benzoate (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) plus 50 mg of progesterone (Vetoquinol, Canada) given i.m. to synchronize follicular wave emergence (Day 0). The SPO treatment started on Day 4 with decreasing doses (120, 80, 40, and 20 mg) of Folltropin-V (Vetoquinol, Canada) injected twice daily until Day 7. Artificial insemination was performed on days 8 p.m. and 9 a.m. and ova/embryos were collected on Day 15. Transrectal ultrasonography was done on Days 8 and 15 to determine the number of follicles >9 mm in diameter on Day 8 and CL on Day 15, respectively. Blood samples were collected on the first day of SPO treatment (Day 4) to measure serum AMH concentrations, which served to classify cows as high- (>400; n = 29) and normal-AMH donors (100–400 pg mL–1; n = 23). A mixed effects model was used to analyse SPO response in cattle including level of AMH and season as fixed effects, age as covariate, and sire as random. Level of AMH, season, and their interaction resulted as significant (P < 0.05) sources of variation. Pearson correlations were determined between serum AMH concentrations and SPO response for summer and winter. Average serum levels of AMH were 471.5 ± 70.4 and 1194.2 ± 57.3 pg mL–1 during summer and winter, respectively. The SPO response differed in high- and normal-AMH donor cows (P < 0.05). Mean (± s.e.m.) NOF, CL, and TE were 19.8 ± 1.0, 12.8 ± 0.6, and 7.3 ± 0.5 for high-AMH donors, and 10.9 ± 1.6, 6.5 ± 1.9, and 3.8 ± 1.1 for normal-AMH donor cows, respectively. Environment of donor cows also influenced SPO response as NOF, CL, and TE increased 42, 50, and 45%, respectively, during winter compared with summer (P < 0.05). Correlations among NOF, CL, and TE with serum AMH levels were moderate for donor cows managed during winter (0.657, 0.523, and 0.431, respectively; P < 0.01), and low in cows managed during summer (0.309, 0.195, and 0.085, respectively; P > 0.05). Results from this study indicated that SPO response in donor cows is associated with serum concentrations of AMH; however, the relationship among these variables appears to be affected in the summer when drought and severe heat stress are common. We concluded that under winter conditions of northwest Mexico, the serum levels of AMH should be considered as an endocrine marker associated with ovarian traits indicative of the SPO response in donor cows.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207