231 SUPEROVULATORY RESPONSE AND EMBRYO YIELD OF SANTA INES EWES SUBMITTED TO FOLLICLE STIMULATING HORMONE TREATMENTS STARTED NEAR THE TIME OF EMERGENCE OF THE FIRST AND LAST FOLLICULAR WAVE OF A PROGESTERONE-BASED PROTOCOL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to investigate if the superovulatory response and embryo yield in Santa Ines ewes are influenced by the time that FSH treatments are inititiated: near the emergence of the first or last follicular wave of a progesterone-based (P4) protocol. Days of emergence of the follicular waves was defined in a previous study that evaluated follicular dynamics in oestrus synchronization treatments (Oliveira et al. 2011 Acta Sci. Vet.40). Twenty Santa Ines cyclic ewes were submitted to 2 superovulatory protocols according to the time that FSH treatments were initiated (G-first wave, n = 10 and G-last wave, n = 10). Thus, the FSH treatment started on Day 4 and 10 of protocol for G-first and G-last, respectively (Day 0 = onset of protocol). Ewes were treated with a P4 device (CIDR®; Pfizer-New Zealand) for 6 and 12 days for G-first and G-last, respectively. Additionally, in G-last, the CIDR was replaced by a new one on Day 7. All ewes received 2 injections of 37.5 µg of D-cloprostenol (Prolise®, Arsa-Argentina) on Day 0 and at CIDR removal. The superovulatory regimen consisted of 8 IM injections of pFSH (Folltropin®; Bioniche Animal Health, Belleville, Ontario, Canada) administrated twice daily (40, 40, 30, 30, 20, 20, 10 and 10 mg of porcine FSH). A single IM dose of 200 IU of eCG (Novormon®, Syntex, Buenos Aires, Argentina) was given concurrently with CIDR removal. Ewes were mated by a fertile ram. Embryo collections were accomplished 7 days after CIDR removal. The superovulatory response was classified in scores: (0) 4 or fewer corpora lutea (CL); (1) between 5 and 10 CL and (2) 11 or more CL. Means (± SD) were compared using Kruskal-Wallis test and percentages using Chi-square (P < 0.05). Most donors (70%, 7/10) from G-last had a superovulatory response classified as score 2 and the remainder (30%, 3/10) as score 1, whereas half of ewes from G-first were classified as score 2 and half as score 1 (P > 0.05).There was no effect between treatments (P > 0.05) for ovulation rate (G-first: 90.7 ± 10.2% vs G-last: 93.0 ± 7.2%), number of ovulations (G-first: 13.1 ± 7.3 vs G-last: 14.0 ± 5.8), or number of luteinized unovulated follicles (G-first: 1.4 ± 1.3 vs G-last: 0.9 ± 1.0). Furthermore, there was no effect between G-first and G-last (P > 0.05) in the rate of ova/embryos recovered (55.1 ± 27.1% vs 67.0 ± 19.4%), mean number of ova/embryos recovered (7.0 ± 5.5 vs 9.1 ± 3.8), number of viable embryos (3.9 ± 6.1 vs 5.7 ± 4.4), or viability rate (49.1 ± 43.7 vs 58.5 ± 34.6). In conclusion, superovulatory response and embryo yield did not differ between FSH treatments initiated during the first or last follicular wave of a progesterone-based treatment in Santa Ines ewes. Financial support of FAPESP is acknowledged.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".