Pengaruh Perbedaan Aras Urea pada Amoniasi Pod Kakao terhadap Produksi "Volatile Fatty Acids" dan Konsentrasi Amonia secara In vilro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hormonal ovarian superstimulation has contributed to small ruminant reproduction around the world, impacting genetic improvement and zoosanitary programs, contributing to the conservation of endangered species, and supporting other related biotechnologies. Advanced knowledge surrounding the superovulatory treatments in sheep has resulted in enhanced control of influencing factors and improved the protocols currently used. However, in spite of minimization of some adverse factors, superovulatory responses in ewes still remain variable, preventing the more widespread use of superovulation in commercial embryo transfer programs and reproductive research in this species. Recent evidence demonstrates that changes in antral follicular populations and blood supply, and circulating concentrations of certain reproductive hormones determined at the specific time points just before or during the superovulatory treatment are associated with superovulation success in ewes. This review attempts to compile the data from available literature to identify ovarian and hormonal determinants of the superovulatory outcome in ewes, which can be used to substantially improve the existing protocols and to reduce the extra cost and unnecessary stress imposed on poorly responding animals. An overview of most commonly used and some recently developed, FSH-based ovarian stimulation protocols is given at the outset to highlight variation in the frequency and timing of gonadotropin injections, estrus synchronization methods, and follicular wave synchronization and/or ovulation induction techniques during the superovulatory treatments in ewes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".