MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2596928169 · doi:10.1093/biolreprod/77.s1.220a

EFFECTS OF SUPRA-PHYSIOLOGICAL CONCENTRATIONS OF PROGESTERONE ON THE PATTERNS OF LH SECRETION AND OVARIAN ANTRAL FOLLICULAR WAVE DYNAMICS IN CYCLIC EWES

2007· article· en· W2596928169 on OpenAlexaff
Srinivas Seekallu, Behzad M. Toosi, N.C. Rawlings

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Reproduction · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEstrous cycleFollicular phaseInternal medicineEndocrinologyOvulationBiologyAntral follicleBlood samplingLuteinizing hormoneFollicleLuteal phaseHormoneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the ewe, ovarian antral follicles emerge or grow from a pool of 2–3 mm follicles in a wave like pattern, reaching ≥5mm in diameter before regression or ovulation. There are 3 or 4 such follicular waves during each estrous cycle. Each wave is preceded by a peak in serum FSH concentrations. LH is secreted in a pulsatile manner (1–6 pulses per 6h) but the role of pulsed LH secretion in follicle wave emergence and growth is unclear. Progesterone exerts a negative feedback action on LH secretion. The purpose of the present study was to examine the effect of supra-physiological concentrations of progesterone on LH secretion and antral follicular dynamics. Starting on day 4 of the estrous cycle, six ewes (treatment group) received subcutaneous progesterone-releasing implants for 10 days. Six ewes (control group) underwent sham surgery. Daily transrectal ovarian ultrasonography and blood sampling was performed on all ewes throughout the estrous cycle. Blood samples were also taken every 12 min for 6h on day 3, day 10 and day 16 of the estrous cycle to characterize the LH secretory pattern. Subcutaneous progesteronereleasing implants resulted in supra-physiological concentrations of progesterone in treatment ewes compared to control ewes (5.3 ± 0.4 vs. 2.6 ± 0.2; P<0.05). During the period of implant insertion, the number of LH pulses (0.50 ± 0.2 vs. 1.50 ± 0.2) was lower in treatment ewes compared to control ewes (P<0.05). There was no difference in the number of FSH peaks or the amplitude of the peaks between the treatment and control ewes (P>0.05). Mean serum estradiol and FSH concentrations did not differ between groups (P>0.05). All ewes had normal follicular wave emergence prior to and during implant insertion. There was no difference in the number of follicles 1-2mm, 2mm, 3mm, 4mm, and ≥5mm in diameter between treatment and control ewes (P>0.05). The estrous cycle length tended to be longer in treatment ewes compared to control ewes (19.3 ± 0.6 vs. 18.0 ± 0.4; P=0.1). There was no difference in the ovulation rate between the treatment and control ewes (P>0.05). We concluded that the subcutaneous progesterone releasing implants suppressed pulsatile LH secretion and tended to prolong the estrous cycle length, but did not affect FSH and ovarian antral follicular wave characteristics. Suppressing LH pulse frequency would not appear to affect ovarian antral follicular wave dynamics in cyclic ewes. (platform)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of ReproductionSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207