Reproductive Characteristics of Buffaloes: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in buffalo breeding has increased, due to certain advantages in relation to cattle breeding. The objective of this article was to review the reproductive biological characteristics of buffaloes. Buffaloes have their peculiarities regarding the reproductive characteristics, the females are seasonal polyestrous breeders of short days, the puberty’s buffalo is reached in ages more than in the bovine, the detection of the estrus is more difficult because of the estrus it happens at dawn and the females of buffalo have few physiological changes producers have difficulty detecting estrus. The gestation period varies between 300 and 320 days. Males have smaller external reproductive organs and less intense sexual behavior in relation to cattle. Buffalo females exhibit reproductive differences such as the hyperpigmented vulva and smaller and lighter, more rigid and tortuously inner structures with more muscle tone. There are some advantages in the creation of buffaloes were evidenced, such as their rusticity and adaptation to areas that would be unsuitableto cattle production, besides counting on products such as milk and meat of good quality. Several protocols of oestrus and ovulation synchronization have been adopted, to improve reproductive efficiency. These protocols have resulted in a pregnancy rates increase of 30% to 50%. It is concluded that buffalo breeding has space within the animal production system, especially in areas that would be suitable for the breeding of other ruminant species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".