Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:01:24.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Calcium metabolism in lactating ewes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

G. D. Braithwaite
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
R. F. Glascock
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
Sh. Riazuddin
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. A combination of balance and isotope techniques has been used to study calcium metabolism at different stages of lactation in six sheep and the results have been compared with those obtained from four of the sheep 1 month after the end of lactation.

2. At first the animals were in negative Ca balance but, as milk yields decreased, so the animals moved progressively into positive balance.

3. Ca absorption from the gut was significantly increased throughout the whole of lactation but not sufficiently to meet the initial high demands for Ca.

4. Most of the extra Ca was supplied by bone resorption which was high in early lactation and decreased to a very low value at the end.

5. The rate of bone accretion remained constant throughout the period and was 1.5 times as high as in the non-lactating animals.

6. In the later stages, a combination of factors, but in particular a low rate of resorption of bone, enabled the animals to replenish some of the Ca lost from the skeleton in early lactation.

7. A month after the end of lactation replenishment of skeletal stores of Ca was still continuing as shown by the excess of bone accretion over bone resorption.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1969

References

Agricultural Research Council (1965). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. 2. Ruminants. London: H.M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Aubert, J.-P., Bronner, F. & Richelle, L. J. (1963). J. clin. Invest. 42, 885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aubert, J.-P. & Milhaud, G. (1960). Biochim. biophys. Acta 39, 122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bronner, F. (1964). In Mineral Metabolism Vol. 2, Part A, Ch. 20. [Comar, C. L. and Bronner, F., editors.] New York and London: Academic Press Inc.Google Scholar
Cramer, C. F. & Dueck, J. (1962). Am. J. Physiol. 202, 161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duckworth, J. & Hill, R. (1954). J. Physiol., Lond., 123, 69P.Google Scholar
Feurzeig, W. & Tyler, S. A. (1950). Q. Rep. Argonne natn. Lab., ANL-4401, 14 (quoted by Robertson, 1957).Google Scholar
Harrison, H. E. & Harrison, H. C. (1966). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 121, 312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallfelz, F. A., Taylor, A. N. & Wasserman, R. H. (1967). Proc. Soc. exp. Biol. Med. 125, 54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, A. (1961). Roczn. Naukroln. Ser. B 78, 231.Google Scholar
Morag, M., Gibb, J. A. C. & Fox, S. (1967). J. Dairy Res. 34, 215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, D. H. (1968). Mathl Biosci. 2, 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, J. S. (1957). Physiol. Rev. 37, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, D., Dowdle, E. B. & Schenker, H. (1960). Am. J. Physiol. 198, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, D. & Rosen, S. M. (1959). Am. J. Physiol. 196, 357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, R. H. & McAllan, A. B. (1966). Br. J. Nutr. 20, 703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symonds, H. W., Manston, R., Payne, J. M. & Sansom, B. F. (1966). Br. Vet. J. 122, 196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, R. H. & Taylor, A. N. (1966). Science, N. Y. 152, 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, J. B. (1960 a). Spectrochim. Acta 16, 259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, J. B. (1960 b). Spectrochim. Acta 16, 273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, J. B. (1961). Analyt. Chem. 33, 556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, V. R., Luick, J. R. & Lofgreen, G. P. (1966). Br. J. Nutr. 20, 727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar