Morphology, membrane integrity, and mitochondrial function in sperm of crossbred beef bulls selected for residual feed intake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to compare morphology, plasma and acrosome membrane integrities, and mitochondrial function in sperm of bulls selected for low- vs. high-residual feed intake (RFI). Semen samples obtained from 10 low- and 8 high-RFI yearling crossbred beef bulls were evaluated. Assessment of sperm morphology was performed by microscopy, and sperm membrane integrity and mitochondrial membrane potential (MMP) were evaluated by flow cytometry. Parameters of sperm morphology evaluated did not differ between low- and high-RFI bulls. Compared with high-RFI bulls, low-RFI bulls had an increased proportion (least square mean ± standard error) of sperm with actively respiring mitochondria (54.2% ± 2.9% vs. 43.6% ± 3.3%, P = 0.03). However, a greater proportion of sperm from low-RFI bulls had low MMP (34.4% ± 4.2% vs. 19.0% ± 4.7%, P = 0.03). Results indicate that selection for improved feed efficiency does not compromise bull sperm morphology and viability. However, despite greater mitochondrial activity, the increased proportion of mitochondria with low membrane potential in sperm of low-RFI bulls warrants further investigation to rule out any potential negative effects on fertility.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".