MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094565464 · doi:10.3390/ani10122196

Oocyte Selection for In Vitro Embryo Production in Bovine Species: Noninvasive Approaches for New Challenges of Oocyte Competence

2020· review· en· W3094565464 on OpenAlexaff
Luis Águila, F. Treulen, Jacinthe Therrien, Ricardo Felmer, Martha Valdivia, Lawrence C. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Biology and Fertility
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOocyteBiologyBlastocystIn vitro fertilisationIn vitro maturationZygoteHuman fertilizationEmbryoPolar bodyEmbryo qualityCell biologyAndrologyEmbryogenesisGeneticsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficiency of producing embryos using in vitro technologies in livestock species rarely exceeds the 30-40% threshold, indicating that the proportion of oocytes that fail to develop after in vitro fertilization and culture is considerably large. Considering that the intrinsic quality of the oocyte is one of the main factors affecting blastocyst yield, the precise identification of noninvasive cellular or molecular markers that predict oocyte competence is of major interest to research and practical applications. The aim of this review was to explore the current literature on different noninvasive markers associated with oocyte quality in the bovine model. Apart from some controversial findings, the presence of cycle-related structures in ovaries, a follicle size between 6 and 10 mm, large number of surrounding cumulus cells, slightly expanded investment without dark areas, large oocyte diameter (>120 microns), dark cytoplasm, and the presence of a round and smooth first polar body have been associated with better competence. In addition, the combination of oocyte and zygote selection via brilliant cresyl blue (BCB) test, spindle imaging, and the anti-Stokes Raman scattering microscopy together with studies decoding molecular cues in oocyte maturation have the potential to further optimize the identification of oocytes with better developmental competence for in-vitro-derived technologies in livestock 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.200
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.146 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations84
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicReproductive Biology and FertilityFrench-language works237,207