Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T00:33:13.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The production of living sheep eggs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. L. W. Averill
R. L. W. Averill
Affiliation:
A.R.C. Unit of Reproductive Physiology and Biochemistry, Cambridge, and Lincoln Agricultural College, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. In the 1954–5 and 1955–6 breeding seasons, 117 ewes of the Border Leicester, Welsh Mountain and Suffolk breeds were used in order to investigate the effects of PMS treatments on (a) the length of the dioestrous cycle, (b) the number of ovulations per ewe, (c) the proportion of eggs which were cleaved, uncleaved or abnormal when recovered, and (d) the ability of fertilized superovulated eggs to develop normally.

2. In the 1954 and 1955 anoestrous periods, ninety-four 2-tooth and mature ewes of mixed breeds were used in order to investigate (a) the proportion of ewes which could be induced to ovulate and exhibit oestrus as a result of treatment with progesterone and PMS, (b) the proportion of the mated ewes which had cleaved, uncleaved or abnormal eggs, and (c) the ability of fertilized eggs shed during anoestrum to develop normally up to the 21st day of pregnancy.

3. Dioestrous cycles in untreated ewes were significantly shorter for Welsh Mountain than for Border Leicester ewes, and their length was not affected by the year in which they were measured. The first and second cycles of the breeding season tended to be shorter than the third cycle.

4. The length of the dioestrous cycle was shortened by treatment of both Border Leicester and Welsh Mountain ewes with PMS. The average extent of this reduction was 0·6 days, and the effect was significant.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , February 1958 , pp. 17 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1958

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

Adams, C. E. (1953). Mammalian Germ Cells. London: Churchill, p. 198.Google Scholar
Adams, C. E. (1955). J. Endocrin. 13, 296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, C. R. (1956). Exp. Cell. Res. 10, 533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, C. R. & Braden, A. W. H. (1956). J. Exp. Biol. 33, 358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Averill, R. L. W. (1955). Studies on Fertility, VII, 139.Google Scholar
Averill, R. L. W. (1956). Proc. IIIrd Internal. Cong. Anim. Reprod., Cambridge.Google Scholar
Braden, A. W. H. (1956). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Braden, A. W. H. & Austin, C. R. (1954). Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 7, 179.Google Scholar
Casida, L. E., Warwick, E. J. & Meyer, R. K. (1944). J. Anim. Sci. 3, 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, M. C. (1951). Ann. Ostet. Ginecol. no. 7, 918.Google Scholar
Chang, M. C. (1952). J. Exp. Zool. 121, 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, & Pincus, G. (1951). Physiol. Rev. 3, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. T. (1934 a). Anat. Rec. 60, 125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, R. T. (1934 b). Anat. Rec. 60, 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cole, H. H. & Miller, R. F. (1933). Amer. J. Physiol. 104, 165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauzier, L., Ortavant, R., Thibault, C. & Wintenberger, S. (1954). Ann. Zootech. 6, 99.Google Scholar
Dauzier, L., Thibault, C. & Wintenberger, S. (1953). Ann. de l'I.N.R.A. No. 2, p. 189.Google Scholar
Dauzier, L. & Wintenberger, S. (1952). Ann. Zootech. 4, 49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutt, R. H. (1952). J. Anim. Sci. 11, proc. 792.Google Scholar
Dutt, R. H. (1953). J. Anim. Sci. 12, 513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutt, R. H. (1954). J. Anim. Sci. 13, 464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutt, R. H. & Casida, L. E. (1948). Endocrinology, 43, 208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, H. M. & Simpson, M. E. (1940). Endocrinology, 27, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fekete, E. (1947). Anat. Rec. 98, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, J. F. D. (1955). J. Embryol. Exp. Morphol. 3, 13.Google Scholar
Gordon, I. (1954). Personal communication.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, I. (1955). Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod. p. 55.Google Scholar
Gordon, I. & Averill, R. L. W. (1956). Unpublished data.Google Scholar
Hadek, R. (1954). Vet. Rec. 66, 632.Google Scholar
Hafez, E. S. E. (1952). J. Agric. Sci. 42, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J. (1934). Harper Adams Util. Poult. J. 19, 557.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (1956). Personal communication.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (Jnr). (1944). J. Agric. Sci. 34, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J. (Jnr)., Hammond, J. & Parkes, A. S. (1942). J. Agric. Sci. 32, 308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harter, B. T. (1948). Anat. Rec. 100, 672.Google Scholar
Harris, G. W. (1949). J. Endocrin. 6, proc. xvii.Google Scholar
Huber, G. C.(1915). Mem. Wistar Inst. Anat. Biol. no. 5.Google Scholar
Hunter, G. L. (1954). J. Endocrin. 10, proc. xii.Google Scholar
Hunter, G. L., Adams, C. E. & Rowson, L. E. A. (1954). Nature, Lond., 174, 890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, G. L., Adams, C. E. & Rowson, L. E. A. (1955). J. Agric. Sci. 46, 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammlade, W. G., Welch, J. A., Nalbandov, A. V. & Norton, H. W. (1952). J. Anim. Sci. 11, 647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laing, J. A. (1948). J. Comp. Path. 59, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laplaud, M. M. & Thibault, C. (1947). C.R. Acad. Agric. 33, 516.Google Scholar
Lewis, W. H. & Wright, E. S. (1935). Contr. Embryol. 25, 118.Google Scholar
Lopyrin, A. I., Longinova, N. V. & Karpov, P. L. (1950). Soviet. Zootekh, 8, 50.Google Scholar
Lutwak-Mann, C. (1955). J. Endocrin. 13, 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, F. F. & Terrill, C. E. (1937). Univ. Mo. Agric. Exp. Stat. Res. Bull. no. 264.Google Scholar
Marden, W. G. R. & Chang, M. C. (1952). Science, 115, 705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markee, J. E. (1951). Ann. Rev. Physiol. 13, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphree, R. L., Warwick, E. J., Casida, L. E. & McShan, W. H. (1944). J. Anim. Sci. 3, 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Mary, C. C., Pope, A. L. & Casida, L. E. (1950). J. Anim. Sci. 9, 680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkes, A. S. (1943). J. Endocrin. 3, 268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkes, A. S. & Hammond, J. (1940). Proc. Roy. Soc. Med. 33, 483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, T. J. (1950). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, T. J. (1951 a). Biol. Rev. 26, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, T. J. (1951 b). J. Agric. Sci. 41, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, T. J. (1954). Endocrinology, 55, 403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, T. J. (1955). J. Agric. Sci. 46, 37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robson, J. M. (1947). Recent Advances in Sex and Re-productive Physiology. 3rd ed.Churchill, London.Google Scholar
Rothschild, Lord (1949). Nature, Lond., 163, 358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowson, L. E. A. (1951). J. Endocrin. 7, 260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Savery, H. P. & Berry, R. O. (1953). J. Anim. Sci. 12, 953.Google Scholar
Schinckel, P. G. (1954). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 5, 465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, A. U. (1949). Nature, Lond., 164, 1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spalding, J. F. & Berry, R. O. (1952). J. Anim. Sci. 11, 801.Google Scholar
Squires, C. D., Dickerson, G. E. & Mayer, D. T. (1952). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. 494, 40.Google Scholar
Thibault, C., Laplaud, M. & Ortavant, R. (1948). C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, 34, 151.Google Scholar
Wallace, L. R. (1948). J. Agric. Sci. 38, 93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, L. R. (1954). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warbritton, V., McKenzie, F. F., Berliner, V. & Andrews, F. N. (1937). Proc. Amer. Soc. Anim. Prod. p. 142.Google Scholar
Warwick, E. J. & Casida, L. E. (1943). Endocrinology, 33, 169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Washburn, W. W. (1951). Archiv Biol. 62, 439.Google Scholar
Whitney, R. & Burdick, H. O. (1938). Endocrinology, 22, 639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willett, E. L. (1953). Iowa St. Coll. J. Sci. 28, 83.Google Scholar
Winters, L. M. & Feuffel, G. (1936). Tech. Bull. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 118.Google Scholar