In Vitro Production and Transfer of Buffalo Embryos (Bubalus bubalis) in Argentina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate different hormonal stimulation protocols over follicular development, oocyte quality, embryo production, and embryo transfer outcome. Methods and Materials: This study was performed in Argentina. Fifty-three non-pregnant females with proven fertility and good body condition were selected to produce embryos in vitro. Three ovarian stimulation protocols were tested: On Day 0, animals received a progesterone intravaginal device plus Estradiol Benzoate. On Day 4: TRT1 did not receive any treatment, TRT2 FSH (Folltropin-V®), TRT3 recombinant eCG (FoliRec®) TRT 4 serum eCG (Ecegon®), on day 7 oocyte retrieval was performed using ultrasonography. Embryos were produced, vitrified, and transferred to synchronized recipients using standard protocols. The number and quality of oocytes, number and size of follicles, embryo production, pregnancy rates, and Antimullerian hormone (AMH) levels were determined. Quantitative variables were compared, and an α level of 5% was considered significant. Results: The total number of oocytes, follicles, and zygotes did not differ across the treatments. Better oocytes were obtained in TRT2 and TRT4 (p<0.05). Embryo production was highest in TRT2 (1.5 embryos/buffalo/OPU), and cleavage was higher in TRT3 (p<0.05). Forty-two embryos were transferred, and 12 live births were obtained. All were males. Conclusions: The stimulation protocols used before OPU don’t improve the number of ovarian follicles; some treatments produce higher-quality oocytes and embryo production. AMH dosage can help in selecting animals to increase the efficiency of IVEP. Reasonable results were obtained from the transfer of vitrified embryos, and the subsequent birth of live animals demonstrates the viability of this technique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".