Effects of repeated exposure to an estrus synchronization protocol on reproductive parameters in dairy goats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repeated exposure to estrus synchronization (ES) protocol might have detrimental effects on reproductive function. Therefore, we examined the effects of repeated exposure to a gonadotropin-based ES protocol on hormonal profiles in 47 female Xinong Saanen dairy goats. Goats were randomly assigned to receive an ES protocol either three consecutive times with 14 d interval between each protocol (3 × ES group), or once (1 × ES group) starting concurrently with the third protocol of the 3 × ES group. The estradiol concentrations in 1 × ES group were significantly lesser than those of 3 × ES group at 0, 24, 36, 60 h after controlled internal drug release withdrawal. The progesterone, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations did not differ between 1 × ES and 3 × ES groups. No differences (P > 0.05) were observed in the estrus interval, estrus duration, gestation length, birth weight of kids, and the incidences of estrus, pregnancy, single birth, twinning birth, triplet birth between 1 × ES and 3 × ES groups. Litter size was smaller in goats of the 3 × ES group than in 1 × ES goats, and there were more female offspring in 3 × ES group than 1 × ES group (P < 0.05). The differences in reproductive parameters warrant further investigation in a larger population of goats subjected repeated ES.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".