MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806426481 · doi:10.1017/s1751731118001167

Review: Testicular vascular cone development and its association with scrotal thermoregulation, semen quality and sperm production in bulls

2018· review· en· W2806426481 on OpenAlexaff
John P. Kastelic, Guilherme Rizzoto, Jacob C. Thundathil

Bibliographic record

Venueanimal · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyTesticular arterySpermSpermatogenesisBlood flowScrotumSemen qualityAndrologyAnatomySemenInternal medicineEndocrinologyArteryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several structural and functional features keep bull testes 2°C to 6°C below body temperature, essential for the production of morphologically normal, motile and fertile sperm. The testicular vascular cone (TVC), located above the testis, consists of a highly coiled testicular artery surrounded by a complex network of small veins (pampiniform plexus). The TVC functions as a counter-current heat exchanger to transfer heat from the testicular artery to the testicular vein, cooling blood before it enters the testis. Bulls with increased TVC diameter or decreased distance between arterial and venous blood, have a greater percentage of morphologically normal sperm. Both the scrotum and testes are warmest at the origin of their blood supply (top of scrotum and bottom of testis), but they are cooler distal to that point. In situ, these opposing temperature gradients result in a nearly uniform testicular temperature (top to bottom), cooler than body temperature. The major source of testicular heat is blood flow, not testicular metabolism. High ambient temperatures have less deleterious effects on spermatogenesis in Bos indicus v. Bos taurus bulls; differences in TVC morphology in B. indicus bulls confer a better testicular blood supply and promote heat transfer. There is a long-standing paradigm that testes operate on the brink of hypoxia, increased testicular temperature does not increase blood flow, and the resulting hypoxia reduces morphologically normal and motile sperm following testicular hyperthermia. However, in recent studies in rams, either systemic hypoxia or increased testicular temperature increased testicular blood flow and there were sufficient increases in oxygen uptake to prevent tissue hypoxia. Therefore, effects of increased testicular temperature were attributed to testicular temperature per se and not to secondary hypoxia. There are many causes of increased testicular temperature, including high ambient temperatures, fever, increased recumbency, high-energy diets, or experimental insulation of the scrotum or the scrotal neck. It is well known that increased testicular temperatures have adverse effects on spermatogenesis. Heat affects all germ cells and all stages of spermatogenesis, with substantial increases in temperature and/or extended intervals of increased testicular temperature having the most profound effects. Increased testicular temperature has adverse effects on percentages of motile, live and morphologically normal sperm. In particular, increased testicular temperature increases the percentage of sperm with abnormal morphology, particularly head defects. Despite differences among bulls in the kind and percentage of abnormal sperm, the interval from increased testicular temperature to the emergence of specific sperm defects is consistent and predictable. Scrotal surface temperatures and structural characteristics of the testis and TVC can be assessed with IR thermography and ultrasonography, respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations72
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueanimalSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207