Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-16T13:12:59.925Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The pre-natal development of skin follicles in Mouflon (Ovis musimon) × Soay, Soay and Shetland sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. L. Ryder
M. L. Ryder
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Animal Breeding Research Organisation, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Skin was examined from a total of 70 lambs obtained at the foetal age of 75, 90, 100, 120 and 135 days. The rate of follicle development was not greatly dissimilar from that previously described in improved breeds. The Shetland showed least difference from improved breeds, and the Mouflon x Soay was most retarded, but the pure Soay foetuses were closer to the Shetlands than to the Mouflon cross-breds.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 88 , Issue 2 , April 1977 , pp. 471 - 475
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

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

Hardy, M. H. & Lyne, A. G. (1956). The pre-natal development of wool follicles in Merino sheep. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 9, 423–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, M. L. (1956). The pre-natal development of follicle population in the Romney lamb. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 47, 6—11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, M. L. (1970). Post-natal development in some primitive sheep and crosses. Zeitschrift filr Tierzüchtung und Züchtungsbiologie 86, 372–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, M. L. & Stephenson, S. K. (1968). Wool Growth. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wildman, A. B. (1932). Coat and fibre development in some British sheep. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1932, 257–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar