Comparison of single, fixed-time artificial insemination in weaned sows using 2 different protocols to synchronize ovulation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study evaluated 2 fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI) techniques in sows in 2 herds. At weaning, sows were assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: Group 1 received intramuscular injections of 600 IU of equine chorionic gonadotropin followed 3 days later by 5 mg of porcine luteinizing hormone; Group 2 received a 200-μg intravaginal dose of triptorelin acetate 4 days post-weaning; and Group 3 were heat checked daily and double-mated when observed in heat. Groups 1 and 2 were bred once at a fixed-time independent of estrous behavior. Time of ovulation was monitored by ultrasound in a subset of sows from each group. Both FTAI techniques resulted in sows farrowing within short intervals, leading to the weaning of pigs that tended to be older and heavier compared with controls. The use of FTAI, however, was associated with a trend to reduced reproductive performance compared with controls in 1 herd.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".