Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:17:02.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of dietary supplements of newly growing heather on the breeding of captive red grouse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2012

R. Moss ,
A. Watson ,
R. Parr  and
W. Glennie
R. Moss
Affiliation:
Nature Conservancy, Blackhall, Banchory, Kincardineshire
A. Watson
Affiliation:
Nature Conservancy, Blackhall, Banchory, Kincardineshire
R. Parr
Affiliation:
Nature Conservancy, Blackhall, Banchory, Kincardineshire
W. Glennie
Affiliation:
Nature Conservancy, Blackhall, Banchory, Kincardineshire
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. The effects of dietary supplements of heather at different stages of growth on the breeding of captive red grouse were studied.

2. A supplement of heather which was beginning to grow in spring stimulated captive red grouse to lay more eggs and to lay at a faster rate than birds given a supplement of dormant winter heather.

3. Although laying was stimulated, no significant effect on the date of laying, the hatchability of the eggs or the survival of the young was demonstrated; however, the possibility of such effects occurring in the wild is not ruled out.

4. The experimental effect occurred although the heather formed only a small proportion of a largely artificial diet, which provided a high plane of nutrition in terms of known nutrients.

5. The effect is attributed to an unidentified factor contained in the new growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , January 1971 , pp. 135 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1971

References

REFERENCES

Agricultural Research Council (1963). The Nutrient Requirements of Farm Livestock. No. I. Poultry. London: H. M. Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Eastman, D. S. (1964). A comparative study of the food of the red grouse Lagopus lagopus scoticus based on faecal analysis. MSc Thesis, University of Aberdeen.Google Scholar
Jenkins, D., Watson, A. & Miller, G. R. (1963). J. Anim. Ecol. 32, 317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D., Watson, A. & Miller, G. R. (1967). J. Anim. Ecol. 36, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, D., Watson, A. & Picozzi, N. (1965). Trans Congr. int. Union Game Biol. VI, p. 63.Google Scholar
Moss, R. (1967). In Secondary Productivity of Terrestrial Ecosystems Vol. 1, p. 369 [Petrusewicz, K., editor]. Warszawa and Krakow: Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1960). Publs natn. Res. Coun., Wash. no. 827.Google Scholar
Negus, N. C. & Pinter, A. J. (1966). J. Mammal. 47, 596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newsome, A. E. (1966). C.S.I.R.O. Wildl. Res. 11, 187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stodart, E. & Myers, K. (1966). C.S.I.R.O. Wildl. Res. 11, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E. A. (1911). In The Grouse in Health and in Disease, Being the Final Report of the Committee of Enquiry on Grouse Disease p. 67. London: Elder.Google Scholar