Morphometric developmental pattern of bovine handmade cloned concepti in late pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloning procedures often interfere with conceptus growth and life ex utero, in a set of symptoms known as abnormal offspring syndrome (AOS). The aim of the present study was to compare the developmental pattern of in vivo-derived (IVD), IVF-derived and handmade cloning-derived (NT-HMC) Day 225 bovine concepti using established procedures. Pregnancy diagnosis was performed on Day 30 following blastocyst transfer on Day 7. Conceptus morphometry was assessed by ultrasonography on Day 51, and on Day 225 pregnant cows were killed for morphological examination of concepti. Pregnancy outcome was similar between groups, with greater pregnancy losses in the first trimester (70.6%) and smaller fetuses on Day 51 in the NT-HMC group than in the IVD (14.3%) and IVF (20.0%) groups. However, NT-HMC-derived concepti were twofold larger on Day 225 of gestation than controls. A higher frequency (63.5%) of placentomes larger than the largest in the IVD group was observed in the NT-HMC group, which may be relevant to placental function. Conceptus traits in the IVF group were similar to the IVD controls, with only slight changes in placentome types. Morphological changes in cloned concepti likely affected placental function and metabolism, disrupting the placental constraining mechanism on fetal growth in mid- to late pregnancy.
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 | 0.001 | 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".