Breed-specific factors influence embryonic lipid composition: comparison between Jersey and Holstein
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some embryos exhibit better survival potential to cryopreservation than others. The cause of such a phenotype is still unclear and may be due to cell damage during cryopreservation, resulting from overaccumulation and composition of lipids. In cattle embryos, in vitro culture conditions have been shown to impact the number of lipid droplets within blastomeres. Thus far, the impact of breed on embryonic lipid content has not been studied. In the present study were compared the colour, lipid droplet abundance, lipid composition, mitochondrial activity and gene expression of in vivo-collected Jersey breed embryos, which are known to display poor performance post-freezing, with those of in vivo Holstein embryos, which have good cryotolerance. Even when housed and fed under the same conditions, Jersey embryos were found to be darker and contain more lipid droplets than Holstein embryos, and this was correlated with lower mitochondrial activity. Differential expression of genes associated with lipid metabolism and differences in lipid composition were found. These results show genetic background can impact embryonic lipid metabolism and storage.
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".