Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 2.
Published in final edited form as: J Reprod Fertil. 1965 Oct;10(2):227–240. doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0100227

Table 9.

(a) Interaction between Pyruvate and Lactate
Treatment Molar concentration
Day 1 Response
Day 2 Response
Mean angular response Response (%)
Pyruvate × 10−4M Lactate × 10−2M Drop number Drop number
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 5·0 5·0 8 4 10 10 9 9 9 7 56·45 68·75
2 5·0 2·5 8 5 8 5 8 9 7 11 53·44 63·54
3 5·0 0 5 5 7 6 5 7 4 6 43·19 46·88
4 2·5 5·0 10 8 9 8 6 7 7 9 54·99 66·67
5 2·5 2·5 8 8 8 8 8 8 9 7 54·75 66·67
6 2·5 0 5 8 6 6 6 5 6 3 43·14 46·88
7 0 5·0 7 5 5 9 7 5 2 8 44·88 50·00
8 0 2·5 4 2 4 3 3 5 3 4 32·53 29·17
9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8·30 0·00
(b) Analysis of variance
Source of variation d.f. m.s.

Between experiments 1 2·961
Drops within experiments 6 65·249
Between drops (7)
Between treatments (8)
 Pyruvate (P)
  linear (l) 1 6052·521*
  quadratic (q) 1 1993·623*
 Lactate (L)
  linear (l) 1 5073·797*
  quadratic (q) 1 413·106
Pl × Ll 1 1086·945*
Pl × Lq 1 14·338
Pq × Ll 1 455·466
Pq × Lq 1 2·940
Experiments × treatments 8 70·095
Error 50 49·931
Theoretical variance 75·3

Response is the number of normal blastocysts from twelve 2-cell ova after 3 days cultivation in vitro. Two-cell ova obtained 45 hr after HCG injection. The standard error for the difference of two means in this example is 4·339.

*

P< 0·001.

0·05 > P > 0·01.