Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-qxsvm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-07T04:56:17.151Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The population, morphology and evolutionary trends of the apocrine glands of African indigenous cattle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

C. A. Walker
C. A. Walker
Affiliation:
Central Research Station, Mazabuka, northern Rhodesia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

An examination of the population density and morphology of the apocrine glands of four ‘races’ including fourteen breeds of African indigenous cattle has been completed.

Two types of gland were found, the club-shaped and the sac-like, and it is suggested that the former is the more primitive form.

Considerable differences in gland density and volume were found. In the thoracic-humped African Zebu both of these were similar to figures given for B. indicus sui generis.

Gland volume was found to be closely correlated to heat toleration, but it is suggested that secretory rate is probably of high importance in view of the fact that despite differences in gland volume, there were only small differences in heat toleration coefficient.

It is suggested that the heat toleration coefficient as presently defined may not be a reliable indication of the animals tolerance of prolonged high temperatures.

A suggestion is made regarding the mechanism of heat control by sweating in cattle.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 55 , Issue 1 , August 1960 , pp. 123 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

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

Benezra, M. V. (1953). A New Index for Measuring the Adaptability of Cattle to tropical Conditions. Cent. Univ. Venezuela Publication.Google Scholar
Carter, H. B. & Dowling, D. F. (1954). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 15, 745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dowling, D. F. & Ferguson, K. A. (1955). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 6, 640.Google Scholar
Ellenburger, W. (1906). Anatomie der Haustiere, vol. I. Berlin: Parey.Google Scholar
Faulkner, D. E. & Epstein, H. (1957). The indigenous cattle of British Dependent Territories in Africa. Colonial Adv. Coun. Publ. no. 5. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Nay, T. & Hayman, R. H. (1956). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 7, 482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nay, T. & Dowling, D. F. (1957). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 8, 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nay, T. (1959). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 10, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhoad, A. O. (1944). Tropical Agric. 21, 216.Google Scholar
Walker, C. A. (1957). J. Agric. Sci. 49, 212.Google Scholar