Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T15:16:56.722Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of divergent selection for body weight on bone length and diameter in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

A. C. B. Hooper
A. C. B. Hooper
Affiliation:
Department of Anatomy, University College, Dublin, Ireland
Get access

Summary

The length and diameter of the humerus, ulna, femur and tibia were studied at generations 10 and 14 in lines of mice selected for high and low body weight at 10 weeks of age.

Although some deviations from control were not significant, a general pattern of correlated responses was evident. The divergences of high and low line means for bone length and diameter were significant in the four bones, confirming the contribution of these parameters to genetically determined alterations in body weight. Maternal effects did not affect bone length and diameter and heterosis was not important in the genetic control of these parameters. Unlike bone length, bone diameter continued to diverge in response to the additional four generations of selection. There may therefore be differences in the quantitative genetic control of bone length and diameter and consequently in the control of endochondral and intramembranous ossification.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 1977 , pp. 77 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 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

REFERENCES

Byrne, I., Hooper, J. C. and McCarthy, J. C. 1973. Effects of selection for body size on the weight and cellular structure of seven mouse muscles. Anitn. Prod. 17: 187–196.Google Scholar
Clark, F. H. 1941. Correlation and body proportions in mature mice of the genus Peromyscus. Genetics, Princeton 26: 283–300.Google Scholar
Crary, D. D. and Sawin, P. B. 1949. Morphogenetic studies in the rabbit. VI. Genetic factors influencing the ossification pattern of the limbs. Genetics, Princeton 34: 508–523.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, N. J., Stephenson, S. K. and Fredline, D. K. 1972. Body composition of mice subjected to genetic selection for different body proportions. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 428:679–691.Google Scholar
Fabian, G. 1959. [Application of the principle of allometric growth to the analysis of body form.] Magy. tudom. Akad. biol. Csoporty. Kozl. 3: 121–140.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. 1973. Replicated selection for body weight in mice. Genet. Res. 22: 291–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanrahan, J. P., Hooper, A. C. and McCarthy, J. C. 1973. Effects of divergent selection for body weight on fibre number and diameter in two mouse muscles. Anim. Prod. 16: 7–16.Google Scholar
Jaap, R. G. 1941. Body form in growing chickens. J. agric. Res. 62: 431–443.Google Scholar
Kuhne, K. 1931. [The hereditary transmission of human vertebral variations.] Z. Morph. Anthrop. 30: 1–221.Google Scholar
Lerner, I. M. 1943. Inheritance of size in single-comb White Leghorns. J. agric. Res. 67: 447–457.Google Scholar
Promptoff, A. N. 1928. Inheritance of structural types in the dorsosacrum of domestic poultry. J. Genet. 20: 29–51.Google Scholar
Rutledge, J. J., Eisen, E. J. and Legates, J. E. 1974. Correlated response in skeletal traits and replicate variation in selected lines of mice. Theor. appl. Genet. 45: 26–31.Google Scholar
Sawin, P. B. 1937. Preliminary studies of hereditary variation in the axial skeleton of the rabbit. Anat. Rec. 69: 407–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuff, P. and Berge, S. 1936. [Hereditary transmission of vertebral number and body length in pigs.] Z. Züht. B35: 213–238.Google Scholar