Epididymal tail solid-surface vitrification as an effective method for domestic cat sperm cryobanking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to describe the viability of domestic feline spermatozoa after epididymal tail vitrification. For this, 10 pairs of testis-epididymis complexes were used. The epididymal tails were vitrified using the solid-surface vitrification (SSV) method, in which two vitrification media containing ethylene glycol (EG) 40% or glycerol (GLY) 40% were tested. Vitrification with the presence of EG resulted in better results for all sperm motility parameters (motility, vigour and CASA) compared with GLY (P < 0.05). There were no statistical differences for sperm viability and acrosome integrity, plasma membrane integrity, or overall health of morphologically normal sperm before or after vitrification among experimental groups. In conclusion, epididymal tail vitrification appears to be a suitable method for long-term storage of cat sperm, especially if the procedure is performed with EG as the cryoprotectant.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".