MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772481117 · doi:10.1071/rdv30n1ab88

88 Effect of Follicular Ablation and GnRH on Recipient Synchrony in Holstein Heifers

2017· article· en· W2772481117 on OpenAlexaff
J. M. Palomino, François‐Xavier Grand, Christian Vigneault, Patrick Blondin, Marc‐André Sirard

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicReproductive Physiology in Livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalL'Alliance BoviteqCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvulationCorpus luteumFollicular phaseEstrous cycleMedicineCloprostenolFollicleEquine chorionic gonadotropinEmbryo transferInternal medicineAndrologyEndocrinologyPregnancyHormoneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Holstein heifer recipients that are synchronized with a single dose of prostaglandin F2a (PGF2a), only 65% (on average) are eligible to receive an IVF embryo 7 ± 1 days after oestrus. The high variability in time to onset of oestrus after PGF2a treatment and the small size of the corpus luteum (CL) on the day of embryo transfer (ET) may explain these results. Synchronizing ovulation might decrease the variability of the interval from treatment to ovulation and maximize the size of the CL. For this purpose, Holstein heifers were randomly allocated (using the lottery method of sampling) to 3 groups: (1) Control (n = 88), a single dose of PGF2a (500 µg of cloprostenol, Merck, Darmstadt, Germany; Day 0) and transrectal ultrasonography of the ovaries on Day 0 to determine the diameter of the largest follicle, on Days 2, 3, 4, and 5 to determine occurrence of ovulation, and on Day 10 to determine presence and diameter of the CL; (2) follicular aspiration (n = 15), ultrasound-guided follicular aspiration (FA) 4 days before PGF2a administration and ovarian evaluation as described above; and (3) FA + GnRH (n = 19), FA at Day –4, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH, 100 µg of gonadorelin acetate, Vetoquinol USA, Fort Worth, TX, USA) on Day 2, and ovarian examination as described in the control group. Data were analysed by one-way ANOVA and proportions by Chi-squared. The interval (days) from PGF2a treatment to ovulation was not different among groups (3.2 ± 0.4, 3.1 ± 0.2, 3.0 ± 0.1, respectively). However, the variability (residuals) in the FA + GnRH group was the smallest (P < 0.05; high degree of synchrony) in the study (0.1 ± 0.1). Likewise, the FA group (0.5 ± 0.1) had a smaller interval (P < 0.05) compared with the Control group (0.8 ± 0.1). Interestingly, 86% of heifers from FA + GnRH group ovulated in a single day (Day 3; P < 0.05) compared with the FA and Control groups (55% and 53%, respectively). Considering the day of ovulation (only recipients that ovulated 2 to 4 days after PGF2a treatment) and CL diameter (>20 mm; Nogueira et al. 2012 R. Bras. Zootec. 1, 2129-2133; Yoshida et al. 2012 Anim. Sci. J. 83, 207-212), heifers in the FA and FA + GnRH groups had higher proportion (P < 0.05) of animals selected to be transferred at Day 10 compared with the Control group (93%, 95%, and 67%, respectively). In conclusion, FA induced a more synchronous ovulation and increased the number of recipients ready to be transferred at Day 10 (7 ± 1 days after ovulation). These effects were further improved with the administration of GnRH.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicReproductive Physiology in LivestockFrench-language works237,207