Strategies to increment in vivo and in vitro embryo production and transfer in cattle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge of follicular wave dynamics obtained through the use of real-time ultrasonography and the development of the means by which follicular wave dynamics can be controlled have provided practical approaches for the in vivo and in vitro production and transfer of embryos in cattle. The elective control of follicular wave emergence and ovulation has had a great impact on the application of on-farm embryo transfer, especially when large groups of donors need to be superstimulated at the same time. Although estradiol and progestins have been used for many years, practitioners in countries where estradiol cannot be used have turned to alternative treatments, such as mechanical follicle ablation or the administration of GnRH for the synchronization of follicle wave emergence. In vitro embryo production also benefits from the synchronization of follicle wave emergence prior to Cumulus Oocyte Complexes (COCs) recovery. As Bos indicus cattle have high antral follicle population, large numbers of oocytes can be obtained by ovum pick-up (OPU) without superstimulation. However, synchronization of follicular wave emergence and superstimulation is necessary to obtain high numbers of COCs by OPU and blastocysts following in vitro fertilization in Bos taurus donors. Finally, embryos can now be transferred in commercial beef or dairy herds using efficacious synchronization and resynchronization protocols that are easily implemented by farm personnel. These technologies can also be used to resolve reproductive problems such as the reduced fertility observed during summer heat stress and/or in repeat-breeder cows in commercial dairy herds.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".