ArticleVeterinary and animal science2024
Comparison of two methods of extracting bull epididymal spermatozoa.
Article in Veterinary and animal science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extraction of epididymal spermatozoa may be necessary to avoid losing valuable genetic material, for example, from individuals of rare breeds or endangered species, but the resulting sperm samples may be of poor quality. Two methods of extracting bull epididymal spermatozoa from slaughterhouse material were compared. The bulls were 16-23 months of age. Spermatozoa were extracted by making an incision one cm in length in the tail of the epididymis to allow the spermatozoa to flow out (method A), or by flushing the tail of epididymis (method B). The two methods were used for each bull, alternating between right and left epididymis, i.e. if method A was used for the left epididymis in Bull 1, it was used for the right epididymis in bull 2, etc. Sperm concentration in the extracted samples was adjusted to 69 × 10
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.