Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:36:38.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XXI.—The Restoration and Regeneration of the Epithelium and Endometrium of the Uterus of Cavia Post Partum in Non-pregnant Animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

William J. Hamilton
William J. Hamilton
Affiliation:
Lecturer in Anatomy, University of Glasgow.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the species Cavia the female passes into a condition of heat immediately, or almost immediately, after the birth of a litter, and pregnancy can be repeated without any interval. The new blastocysts reach the uterine cavity on the fifth day after parturition, and during the first seven days of pregnancy extensive reparative changes take place. These changes involve not only the healing of the placental site but a shedding and restoration of the epithelial lining of the uterus. As this process does not seem to have been investigated in detail in the guinea-pig, it is proposed in this paper to describe briefly the histological changes occurring in uteri at different times post partum in non-pregnant animals. It will be necessary, however, before describing the histological details of these post-partum changes to give a brief summary of the observations of other investigators on the ante-partum changes associated with the implantation of the blastocyst, the subsequent obliteration of the uterine cavity, the formation of the decidua capsularis, and the reappearance of the uterine lumen.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , 1933 , pp. 593 - 600
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1933

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

(1) Maclaren, Norman H. W., 1926. “Development of Cavia: Implantation,” Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. lv, pt. 1 (No. 5).Google Scholar
(2) von Spee, Graf, 1901. “Die Implantation des Meerschweincheneies in die Uteruswand,” Zeitschr.f. Morphol. u. Anthropol., Bd. iii, p. 132.Google Scholar
(3) Sansom, G. S., and Hill, J. P., 1931. “Observations on the Structure and Mode of Implantation of the Blastocyst of Cavia,” Trans. Zool. Soc. of London, vol. xxi, pt. 3.Google Scholar
(4) Emrys-Roberts, E., 1910. “The Embedding of the Embryo Guinea-pig in the Uterine Wall and its Nutrition at that Stage of Development,” Journal of Anatomy, vol. xliv.Google Scholar
(5) Duval, M., 1891. “Le Placenta des Rongeurs,” Journ. de P Anatomie et de la Physiologie, vol. xxvii.Google Scholar
(6) Pytler, R., and Strasser, H., 1925. “Die Vorgänge in Meerschweinchenuterus von der Inokulation des Eies bis zur Bildung des Placentardistens,” Zeitschr. f. Anat. u. Entwicklungs, Bd. 1xxvi.Google Scholar
(7) Stockard, C. R., and Papinacolaou, C. N., 1917. “The Existence of a Typical Œstrous Cycle in the Guinea-pig, with a Study of its Histological and Physiological Changes,” American Journal of Anatomy, vol. xxii.Google Scholar