MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006161497 · doi:10.3390/ani10020306

Comparison of Single, Fixed-Time Artificial Insemination in Gilts Using Two Different Protocols to Synchronize Ovulation

2020· article· en· W3006161497 on OpenAlexafffund
Rocio Amezcua, Glen Cassar, Terri L. O’Sullivan, Robert Friendship

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal Behavior and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersElanco Animal HealthMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsArtificial inseminationOvulationSynchronization (alternating current)InseminationComputer scienceAndrologyBiologyMedicinePregnancyComputer networkSpermGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to efficiently have a consistent supply of service-ready gilts available to incorporate into each batch of breeding sows, it is necessary to manipulate the timing of estrus and possibly the timing of ovulation of gilts. Estrus can be synchronized by the withdrawal of altrenogest after at least 14 days of treatment. It is possible that protocols developed to induce ovulation, and therefore allow fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI), can improve the predictability of gilt breeding. This study investigated the effect of two FTAI protocols in gilts on reproductive performance and timing of farrowing and piglet weaning weight compared to gilts bred based on signs of estrus after cessation of altrenogest. Puberty was induced in gilts, followed by treatment with altrenogest. Following altrenogest withdrawal, 180 gilts were assigned to one of three treatment groups. Group 1 gilts (LUT, n = 62) were treated with 600 IU equine chorionic gonadotropin 24 h after altrenogest withdrawal and 5 mg porcine luteinizing hormone (pLH) 80 h later, followed by a single FTAI 36 h after pLH. Group 2 gilts (TRI, n= 61) received 2 mL of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, triptorelin acetate, intravaginally 6 d after altrenogest withdrawal and were bred by a single FTAI 24 h later. Group 3 gilts (CON, n = 57) were observed for estrus and bred twice by AI, 24 h apart. LUT and TRI gilts farrowed closer together (2.4 ± 1.6 and 2.9 ± 1.2 d(days), respectively) compared to CON gilts (4.5 ± 3.3 d). Piglets in LUT were 80 g (p < 0.001) heavier and piglets in TRI were 64 g (p < 0.05) heavier at weaning than CON piglets, when controlling for birth weight. Results indicate that FTAI might be useful as a means of minimizing the time from the first to the last gilt farrowing in a breeding batch of gilts. However, modifications of the protocols may be required to ensure optimum farrowing rates and litter size.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.792
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.299
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicAnimal Behavior and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207