MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902716732 · doi:10.1071/rdv31n1ab101

101 Assessment of semen traits in servals (Leptailurus serval) and Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis)

2018· article· en· W2902716732 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raquel González, Anneke Moresco, Amy G. Miller, Helen L. Bateman, L. M. Vansandt, Daniel P. Dembiec, A. Ista, William F. Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueReproduction Fertility and Development · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemenSpermExtenderElectroejaculationBiologySemen cryopreservationInseminationReproductive biologyAnimal scienceAndrologyFisheryMedicineSperm motilityAnatomyChemistryBotanyEmbryo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Servals and Canada lynx are managed by species survival plans in North American zoos, but current populations are not sustainable. Increased knowledge of their reproductive biology would benefit breeding management and development of assisted reproductive techniques. The aims of our study were to (1) evaluate effectiveness of urethral catheterization and electroejaculation (EEJ) for semen collection; (2) characterise basal seminal traits; and (3) compare effectiveness of semen cryopreservation methods. Semen was collected from 6 servals and 9 Canada lynx via a urinary catheter (3.5 Fr × 22 cm, inserted 15 cm into the urethra), followed by EEJ under dexmedetomidine-ketamine anaesthesia. To assess the effect of seasonality on lynx seminal traits, semen was collected before (late January), during (mid-February to mid-March), and after (early April) the peak breeding season. Serval and lynx semen were frozen by conventional slow freezing (i.e. in 0.25-mL straws cooled to 4°C for 2 h and frozen in LN vapor) in a soy lecithin-based (SOY) or egg yolk-based (TEY) extender with 4% glycerol and by ultra-rapid freezing (URF; direct pelleting into LN at ˜104 °C/min) in SOY medium with 0.2 M sucrose. To evaluate post-thaw sperm function in servals, heterologous IVF of domestic cat oocytes was performed, with cleavage rate assessed at 48 h post-insemination. Data were analysed by one-way or repeated-measures ANOVA. Data are mean ± standard deviation. Sperm recovery by urethral catheterization was negligible in both species, but EEJ allowed sperm collection in all males. Lynx seminal traits were similar during breeding and nonbreeding seasons. Testicular volume (4.81 ± 1.17 cm3) and sperm quality (13 ± 11 × 106 sperm/ejaculate; 49 ± 14% motility; 29 ± 12% normal morphology; 74 ± 13% acrosome integrity) were consistent with previous findings in the lynx genus. Post-thaw sperm quality in lynx has not yet been evaluated. In servals, testes volume was 6.56 ± 2.11 cm3 with good sperm quality for most males (46 ± 36 × 106 sperm/ejaculate; 75 ± 20% motility; 56 ± 36% normal morphology; 84 ± 7% acrosome integrity). Post-thaw, serval sperm acrosome integrity (31 ± 15, 21 ± 13, 24 ± 13% at 0 h for TEY, SOY, and URF, respectively; P > 0.05) and motility (40 ± 21% at 0 h, 20 ± 11% at 6 h for TEY; 24 ± 19% at 0 h, 6 ± 4% at 6 h for SOY; 21 ± 16% at 0 h, 3 ± 2% at 6 h for URF; treatment: P > 0.05; time: P < 0.05; interaction: P > 0.05) declined substantially. However, thawed sperm could fertilize domestic cat oocytes with no difference among treatments in cleavage success (53 ± 6, 47 ± 4, or 49 ± 14%; TEY, SOY, and URF, respectively; P > 0.05), indicating that standard freezing methods are effective in servals. Our findings provide zoos with valuable information about normative reproductive traits in both species. Supported by IMLS and the Roger & Kathy Gross Post-doctoral Fellowship.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReproduction Fertility and DevelopmentSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207