Effect of Dominant Follicle Size and GnRH Administration at Fixed-Time Artificial Insemination on Pregnancy Rates in Female Buffaloes on Marajó Island, Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to verify the effect of GnRH at the time of artificial insemination and Dominant follicle (DF) diameter on the Pregnancy rate (PR). 384 multiparous upgraded Murrah breed buffalo within 30 to 60 days postpartum with a body condition score of 3.4±0.6 were used. The synchronization protocol consisted of a day 0 (D0) intravaginal device of 1g of P4, application of 2.0mg of BE, and administration of 10 ml of injectable mineral supplementation at 4 pm. On D9, at 4 pm, the device was removed, and injected 0.265 mg of PGF2α and 300 IU of eCG Intramuscular (IM). On day 11, females were categorized based on the size of their dominant follicles. Females with ≥ 13 mm DF were divided into two groups: group 1 received GnRH, while group 2 did not. Similarly, females with < 13 mm DF were split into Group 3, which received GnRH, and Group 4, which did not. At 4 pm, 0.1 mg of GnRH was administered IM according to their groups. On D12, 16 hours after the injection of GnRH (at 8 am), Fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI) was performed. The pregnancy was diagnosed after 30 days of FTAI by ultrasound. The overall PR was 53.9% (207/384). No significant difference was observed between the groups and follicular size. More pregnancies were observed when the follicle size was around 13mm. It was concluded the administration of GnRH could enhance the efficiency of FTAI in buffaloes.
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".