A study of the factors affecting embryo yields and quality in superovulated Morada Nova ewes that underwent non‐surgical uterine flushing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present study compared the outcomes of in vivo embryo production in Morada Nova ewes subjected to either 9‐day (G‐9 SOV , n = 21) or 12‐day (G‐12 SOV , n = 21) progesterone (P 4 )‐based estruses synchronization protocol coupled with superovulatory treatment with decreasing doses of porcine follicle‐stimulating hormone (133 mg of pFSH given over 3 days). Non‐surgical embryo recovery (NSER) was performed 6–7 days after the onset of oestrus. Total antral follicle count doubled from the first to the sixth pFSH dose in both groups ( p < .05). Oestrus responses did not vary between the two groups of animals (95.2%). Corpora lutea (CL) were detected in 85.0% and 60.0% of ewes that previously manifested oestrus behaviour in G‐9 SOV and G‐12 SOV respectively. NSER was successfully completed in 86.2% of ewes that had CL ( p > .05). The mean number of CL per ewe/successfully flushed donor ewe was greater ( p < .05) in G‐12 SOV (12.3 ± 1.7/12.1 ± 1.9) than in G‐9 SOV (7.9 ± 1.4/8.2 ± 1.6). Mean numbers of retrieved blastocysts and viable embryos were greater ( p > .05) in G‐12 SOV (5.8 ± 1.9 and 3.7 ± 1.7) than G‐9 SOV (3.5 ± 1.1 and 0.8 ± 0.3 respectively). The total follicle count (all follicles ≥2 mm in diameter) at the sixth pFSH dose (at P 4 ‐device removal) was positively correlated ( p < .05) with the number of CL ( r = .95) and viable embryos ( r = .91) in G‐12 SOV . The ewes with ≥10 Cl (48% of all flushed donors) yielded 80.5% of viable embryos. In summary: (a) Morada Nova ewes from G‐12 SOV group had better superovulatory responses compared with G‐9 SOV group; (b) total follicle count at the last pFSH dose was a good predictor of superovulatory responses only in the ewes primed with P 4 for 12 days; and (c) animals with ≥10 ovulations are main contributors to viable embryo production in Morada Nova ewes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".