Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T23:15:26.471Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal fluctuations in the sexual activity of Awassi, German Mutton Merino, Corriedale, Border-Leicester and Dorset Horn rams:II. Seasonal changes in semen characteristics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. Amir  and
R. Volcani
D. Amir
Affiliation:
The National and University Institute of Agriculture, Behovot, Israel
R. Volcani
Affiliation:
The National and University Institute of Agriculture, Behovot, Israel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Semen characteristics of local and imported rams were studied over a period of 2 years.

Awassi and Border-Leicester rams with regular Awassi and Border-Leicester rams with regular semen collections throughout the year showed definite seasonal variations in the volume and number of sperms in their ejaculates: maximum levels during the autumn and minimum during the spring months. The sperm density reached its maximum during the spring and its minimum during the autumn as a result of the opposite changes of the semen volume. In the rams without regular semen collections, as those kept in the flock, these seasonal changes were not distinct. In the imported rams from breeds without a

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 64 , Issue 1 , February 1965 , pp. 121 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

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

Amir, D. & Schindler, H. (1961). Proc. Con}. Univ. N.S. Wales, p. 138.Google Scholar
Amir, D. & Volcani, R. (1965). J. Aqric. Sci. 64, 115.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. (1945). J. Agric. Sci. 35, 184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogart, R. & Mayer, D. T. (1946). Amer. J. Physiol. 147, 320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comstock, R. E., Green, W. W., Winters, L. M. & Nordskog, A. W. (1943). Bull. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sla. no. 162.Google Scholar
Cupps, P. T., McGowan, B., Rahlmann, D. F., Reddon, A. R.& Weir, W. C. (1960). J. Anim. Sci. 19, 208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutt, B. & Bush, L. F. (1955). J. Anim. Sci. 14, 885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunn, R. M. C, Sanders, R. N.& Granger, W. (1942) Bull. Gounc. Sci. Ind. Res., Aust., no. 148.Google Scholar
Hafez, E. S. E., Badreldin, A. L. & Darwish, Y. H. (1955). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, T. & Lutwak-Mann, C. (1955). Arch. Sci. biol. 39, 578.Google Scholar
Mann, T. & Parsons, U. (1947). Nature, Land., 160, 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maqsood, M. (1951). Vet. Rec. 63, 597.Google Scholar
Mckenzie, F. F. & Berliner, V. (1937). Res. Bull. Univ. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 265.Google Scholar
Phillips, R. W. & McKenzie, F. F. (1934). Res. Bull. Univ. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sla. no. 217.Google Scholar
Phillips, R. W., Sohott, R. G., Eaton, O. N. & Simmons, U. L. (1943). Cornell Vet. 33, 227.Google Scholar
Salamon, S. & Robinson, T. J. (1961). Proc. Conf. Univ. N.S. Wales, p. 134.Google Scholar
Sapsford, C. S. (1951). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 2, 331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schindler, H. & Amir, D. (1961). J. Agric. Sci. 56, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, R. H. (1952). Pastoral Rev. 62, 824. (A.B.A. 21, 272.)Google Scholar
Webster, W. M. (1952). Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. IIth Ann. Conf. 1951, p. 62. (A.B.A. 20, 1136.)Google Scholar