Ultrasonographic fetal well-being assessment, neonatal and postpartum findings of cloned pregnancies in cattle: a preliminary study on 10 fetuses and calves.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cloned pregnancies in cattle are considered to be at risk due to a variety of fetal or adnexal abnormalities. Data is lacking concerning the possibility of transabdominal ultrasonography in the assessment of these high risk pregnancies. Transabdominal ultrasonography has rarely been reported in the assessment of bovine cloned pregnancies. Ten Holstein heifers carrying 8-month-old cloned fetuses were assessed by transabdominal ultrasonographic examination during the 3rd trimester of pregnancy. Fetal heart rates (FHR), movements, adnexal appearance, and placentome size were recorded. The outcome of the pregnancies was also noted and potential indicators of fetal demise recorded. Survival rate 1 week after birth was 30%. Mean FHR was 113 beats per minute (range: 92 to 128 bpm) during the fetal ultrasonography. No correlation between FHR and fetal activity was found. Fetal hyperactivity and imaging of hyperechoic particles in both allantoic and amniotic fluids were possible signs of fetal distress. Despite the size of the fetus and the deep bovine abdomen, fetal transabdominal ultrasonography can be performed in cattle. This preliminary study points to the necessity of further larger studies for defining normal and abnormal findings in bovine late pregnancy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".