MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2568806365

The effect of epidural administration of FSH in bovine superovulation protocol.

2015· article· en· W2568806365 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. Ochea, M Pascal, A. Șonea, A. Bîrțoiu

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Papers, Series D. Animal Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCloprostenolEstrous cycleMedicineAndrologyInternal medicineGynecologyEndocrinologyHormoneOvulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

FSH is an important component of superovulations programs in the cow, its administration being made routinely intramusculary, at 12 hours intervals for 4 days. The aim of the study was to evaluate the efficacity of singledose FSH administration on a mixed route (epidural and intramusculary). 6 cows (Holstein and Montbeliarde) were superovulated according to the following protocol: on day 0 – vaginal application of progesterone spiral (PRID ® , CEVA, France); day 7- administration of FSH (Folltropin-V ® , Bioniche, Canada) 200 mg epidurally and 200 mg intramusculary; day 9 – administration of 250 mg D- sodium cloprostenol (Prostol ® , Syva, Spain) and removal of PRID. Response monitorization was made by ultrasound exams of the ovaries on days 12 (during estrus) and 19 (the day of embrion collection). On average, 14 follicles (minimum 8, maximum 20) and 9 corpora lutea (minimum 6, maximum 12) were identified per donor compared to 15 follicles (min 8 max 22) and 9.5 corpora lutea (7 minimum, maximum 12) per donor in the routine protocols. The results show a very close efficacy to those obtained by classical protocol with daily intramuscular administration of FSH. Due to the epidural administration of FSH, deduction of stres for the donor and of the time of treatment, the method can be used in the protocols of embryotransfer in the cow.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Papers, Series D. Animal ScienceSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207