Update on Multiple Ovulations in Dairy Cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review updates the causal mechanisms and risk factors for multiple ovulations (MOV) in cattle. Clearly, MOV can lead to twin pregnancies, which negatively affects the health, production, and reproduction of cows. Therefore, a better understanding of the factors causing MOV may help to reduce twinning. Multiple ovulations occur after two or more follicles deviate and achieve codominance. The MOV rate is influenced by a complex network of hormones. For example, MOV is more common during periods of low progesterone (P4), that is, in anovulatory cattle or when luteolysis coincides with the selection of the future ovulatory follicle. There is also strong evidence for the luteinizing hormone (LH) being the primary factor leading to codominance, as high P4 concentrations suppress the transient LH surges and can reduce the ovulation rate in cattle or even inhibit deviation. Rates of MOV are increased in older and higher-producing dairy cows. Increased milk production and dry matter intake (DMI) increases hormone clearance, including P4; however, the association between milk yield and MOV has not been consistent. Additional risk factors for MOV include ovarian cysts, diet, season, and genetics.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
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".