Equine blastocyst production under different incubation temperatures and different CO2 concentrations during early cleavage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some basic parameters for equine invitro embryo production have not yet been established, including the optimum temperature for maturation and embryo culture, and the optimum CO2 concentration and pH during early embryo development. To explore this, we first performed cultures in incubators set at 37.2°C, 37.7°C or 38.2°C. At these temperatures, the corresponding maturation rates were 33%, 38% and 42%; cleavage rates were 84%, 86% and 88%; and blastocyst rates were 35%, 44% and 44% per injected oocyte. These rates did not differ significantly (P>0.2). We then evaluated three different CO2 concentrations (6%, 6.5% or 7% CO2) in 5% O2 for culture over Days 0-5 after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, using a commercial human embryo medium with added serum, at 38.2°C. The pH values of these media were 7.36, 7.33 and 7.29 respectively. In the presence of 6%, 6.5% or 7% CO2, cleavage rates were 68%, 80% and 70% respectively, and blastocyst rates per injected oocyte were 42%, 54% and 27% respectively. The blastocyst rate for the 7% CO2 treatment was significantly lower than that for the 6.5% CO2 treatment (P<0.05). We conclude that equine invitro embryo production is equally effective within the range of 37.2-38.2°C, but that equine early cleavage stage development is sensitive to small changes in CO2 atmosphere and/or medium pH.
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) | 0.000 | 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".