ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026
One Embryology: impactful connections between human- and wildlife-assisted reproduction.
Review in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAssisted reproductive technologies (ART) in humans have evolved from early experimental work into a globally established clinical field, with animal research providing the foundation for their development and continuous refinement. This review examines the reciprocal relationship between human and animal ART and considers how a broader "One Embryology" framework may benefit both reproductive medicine and wildlife conservation.
methodsThe historical and contemporary connections between human, domestic animal, and wildlife ART are reviewed, with particular consideration of comparative reproductive physiology, cryopreservation, reproductive biobanking, conservation science, genomics, training, and emerging laboratory technologies.
resultsHuman IVF remains deeply rooted in animal physiology, while advances in livestock reproduction established the practical foundations of semen cryopreservation, informing human fertility treatment, wildlife conservation, and reproductive biobanking. These similarities emphasise the unifi ed nature of reproductive science, in which human and animal ART continue to inform one another. While reproductive effi ciency has driven human and domestic animal ART, wildlife conservation has adopted ART to preserve reproductive potential where biology, logistics, or ethics limit intervention. The diversity of reproductive strategies across the animal kingdom offers important opportunities for innovation and highlights the value of comparative approaches, particularly as modern embryology training places less emphasis on comparative animal physiology. Human IVF also faces growing challenges, including workforce shortages, increasing laboratory complexity, and growing automation, raising questions regarding professional identity, training, and workforce sustainability. Conservation ART provides not only a translational testing ground but also an opportunity to reinvigorate scientific engagement.
conclusionsGreater integration of conservation science, genomics, and biobanking within the clinical ART community may strengthen both human reproductive medicine and global biodiversity conservation through abroader "One Embryology" framework.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42853361What 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.