MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797421831 · doi:10.1530/rep-18-0008

40 years of bovine IVF in the new genomic selection context

2018· review· en· W2797421831 on OpenAlexaff
Marc‐André Sirard

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGameteContext (archaeology)In vitro fertilisationReproductive technologyBiologySexingEvolutionary biologySelection (genetic algorithm)Human fertilizationEmbryoZoologyGeneticsCryopreservationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

environment for oocytes, spermatozoa and early embryos. At the same time, individual species characteristics such as gamete physiology and gamete interaction are recently evolved traits and must be analysed within the context of each species. In the last 40 years since the birth of Louise Brown, IVF techniques progressed and are now used in multiple domestic and non-domestic animal species around the world. This does not mean that the technology is completely matured or satisfactory; a number of problems remain to be solved and several procedures still need to be optimized. The development of IVF in cattle is particularly interesting since agriculture practices permitted the commercial development of the procedure and it is now used at a scale comparable to human IVF (millions of newborns). The genomic selection of young animals or even embryos combined with sexing and freezing technologies is driving a new era of IVF in the dairy sector. The time has come for a retrospective analysis of the success and pitfalls of the last 40 years of bovine IVF and for the description of the challenges to overcome in the years to come.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations108
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproductionSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207