Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T05:48:29.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Serum phosphatase in the domestic fowl1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. H. Common
R. H. Common
Affiliation:
(Chemical Research Division of the Ministry of Agriculture for Northern Ireland, and the Queen's University of Belfast)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Some observations on the serum phosphatase of the domestic fowl are described. Laying hens, held to be normal birds, had higher and more variable serum phosphatase than cocks. No great difference in serum phosphatase could be found between laying hens and hens in a period of suspended egg production. Pullets from another source and which had never laid gave values comparable with the value for cocks.

2. The serum phosphatase of chicks shows a rapid increase to a maximum at about 10–12 days after hatching, followed by an equally sharp fall to a lower level at 3 weeks. Thereafter, the values for male birds fall regularly until maturity. The values for female birds correspond closely with the values for male birds until the onset of laying, when they increase again, but to a varying degree in different individuals.

3. An attempt to reduce the range of variation of serum phosphatase in laying birds by administration of 1 ml. per bird per diem radiostol B.D.H. (3000 international units vitamin D per ml.) was not successful.

4. Serum phosphatase showed a much greater increase during laying in pullets receiving a low calcium ration (0·37 per cent. CaO) than in pullets receiving the same ration supplemented with calcium carbonate (3·10 per cent. CaO).

5. Serum phosphatase is greatly increased in chicks suffering from rickets.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 26 , Issue 3 , July 1936 , pp. 492 - 508
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1936

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

REFERENCES

(1), Auchinachie and , Emslie. Biochem. J. (1933), 27, 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2), Auchinachie and , Emslie. Biochem. J. (1934), 28, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(3), Bodansky. J. biol. Chem. (1932–3), 99, 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4), Bodansky. J.biol. Chem. (1933), 101, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5), Bodansky. J. biol. Chem. (1934), 104, 473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(6), Carver, , Robertson, , Brazie, , Johnson and , St John. Bull. Wash. agric. Exp. Sta. (1934), No. 299.Google Scholar
(7), Charles and , Hogben. Quart. J. exp. Physiol. (1933), 23, 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(8), Clark and , Collip. J. biol. Chem. (1925), 63, 461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(9), Common. J. agric. Sci. (1932), 22, 576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10), Common. J agric. Sci. (1933), 23, 555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11), Common. Nature, Lond. (1934), 133, 572.Google Scholar
(12), Harshaw, , Fritz and , Titus. J. agric. Res. (1934), 48, 997.Google Scholar
(13)Kay, H. D.J. biol. Chem. (1930), 89, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(14), Knowles, , Hart and , Halpin. Poult. Sci. (1935), 14, 83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(15), MaCowan. Quart. J. exp. Physiol. (1932), 21, 383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(16), McGowan and , Emslie. Biochem. J. (1934), 28, 1503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(17), Murphy and , Knandel. Bull. Pa agric. Exp. Sta. (1934), No. 303.Google Scholar
(18), Russell, , Taylor and , Willcox. J. biol. Chem. (1934), 107, 735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar