Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:26:41.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compensatory growth and sexual maturity in mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

L. S. Monteiro  and
D. S. Falconer
L. S. Monteiro
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh
D. S. Falconer
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, University of Edinburgh
Get access

Extract

The effects of environmental factors in the pre-weaning period on the subsequent growth of mice were studied. The variance caused by maternal effects, i.e. by environmental factors common to litter-mates, increased from birth to 4 weeks of age (1 week after weaning) and then decreased by about 60% between 4 and 8 weeks. Furthermore, a high litter weight at 4 weeks was followed by low subsequent growth and vice versa. The occurrence of compensatory growth from 4 weeks onwards was thus established. In contrast, the genetically determined variation of body weight did not show any reduction during the period of compensation, but increased up to 8 weeks of age.

The modification of the growth curve, by which compensation was achieved, was then studied. It was found that the inflexion point separating the initial phase of exponential growth from the subsequent phase of asymptotic growth corresponded closely with the attainment of sexual maturity in females, as judged by the opening of the vagina. Sexual maturity was reached at approximately the same weight in all litters, but at widely different ages. Thus, litters with rapid early growth as a result of a good maternal environment reached sexual maturity and consequently entered the asymptotic phase early, while litters with slow early growth entered the asymptotic phase late. Compensatory growth was therefore achieved through curtailment or prolongation of the exponential phase of growth.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 8 , Issue 2 , June 1966 , pp. 179 - 192
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1966

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

Brody, S., 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Brumby, P., 1960. The influence of maternal environment on growth in mice. Heredity, 14: 14–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cox, D. F., Legates, J. E., & Cockerham, C. C., 1959. Maternal influences in body weight. J. Anim. Sci., 18: 18–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crichton, J. A., Aitken, J. N., & Boyne, A. W., 1959, 1960. The effect of the plane of nutrition during rearing on growth, production, reproduction and health of dairy cattle. I. Growth to 24 months. Anim. Prod., 1: 1–145. II. Growth to maturity. Anim. Prod., 2: 2–45.Google Scholar
Dickinson, A. G., 1960. Some genetic implications of maternal effects—an hypothesis of mammalian growth. J. agric. Sci., 54: 54–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S., 1960. Introduction to Quantitative Genetics. Oliver & Boyd, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Joubert, D. M., 1963. Puberty in female farm animals. Anim. Breed. Abstr., 31: 31–295.Google Scholar
Nair, K. R., 1954. The fitting of growth curves. In Statistics and Mathematics in Biology, ed. Kempthorne, O.. Iowa State College Press, Ames, pp. 119–132.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. C., 1965. Some contributions of the laboratory mouse to animal breeding research. Part 1. Anim. Breed. Abstr., 33: 33–339.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W., 1959. Gene environment interaction in relation to the nutrition and growth of Drosophila. Biol. Contr. Univ. Texas, Pub. No. 5914, 89–98.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W., 1960a. The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. I. Body size and development time on different diets. Genet. Res., 1: 1–288.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W., 1960b. The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 3. Growth and competitive ability of strains selected on different diets. Genet. Res., 1: 1–333.Google Scholar
Robertson, F. W., 1963. The ecological genetics of growth in Drosophila. 6. The genetic correlation between the duration of the larval period and body size in relation to larval diet. Genet. Res., 4: 4–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, St. C. S., 1962. Identical twins and developmental stability. Anim. Prod., 4: 4–144.Google Scholar
Waddington, C. H., 1957. Strategy of the Genes. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Warren, E. P., & Bogart, R., 1952. Effect of selection for age at time of puberty on reproductive performance in the rat. Sta. Tech. Bull. Ore. agric. Exp. Sta., no. 25.Google Scholar
Widdowson, E. M., & McCance, R. A., 1960. Some effects of accelerating growth. I. General somatic development. Proc. Roy. Soc. B., 152: 152–188.Google ScholarPubMed
Wilson, P. N., & Osbourn, D. F., 1960. Compensatory growth after undernutrition in mammals and birds. Biol. Rev., 35: 35–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, C. W., & Legates, J. E., 1960. Genetic and lactational influences on growth and maternal traits. J. Anim. Sci., 19: 19–1230.Google Scholar