Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T19:32:41.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of daylength on the growth of lambs. 5. Skeletal long photoperiod

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

B. R. Brinklow ,
R. Jones  and
J. M. Forbes
B. R. Brinklow
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
R. Jones
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
J. M. Forbes
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
Get access

Abstract

Four experiments were carried out, with a total of 98 Suffolk-cross lambs fed at a restricted level, to study the effects of skeletal long photoperiod (7 h light: 10 h dark: 1 h light: 6 h dark) compared with short photoperiod (8 h light: 16 h dark) on growth and blood levels of hormones. The experiments started when the lambs were from 2 to 10 months of age and continued for 9 to 14 weeks.

In the first experiment, the weight gains of both females and castrated males were significantly increased by skeletal long photoperiod. Plasma prolactin was increased and cortisol decreased by skeletal long photoperiod.

Experiment 2 included females and castrated males; prolactin was stimulated by skeletal long photoperiod and there was a significant positive correlation between live-weight gain and prolactin.

The weight gains and carcass characteristics of the female lambs used in the third experiment were not affected by photoperiod. Live-weight gain was negatively related to plasma cortisol.

In experiment 4, there were 12 intact males and 12 castrated males. The intact animals grew significantly faster; skeletal long photoperiod caused a depression in testosterone levels in plasma even though it tended to increase live-weight gain.

When the data from all four experiments were pooled, it was found that skeletal long photoperiod gave a significant increase in live-weight gain in animals whose pineal gland was intact (40 per photoperiod; 138 v. 113 g/day); there was no effect on gut fill at slaughter and the increase in carcass weight (0·5 kg) was not significant.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , June 1984 , pp. 455 - 461
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1984

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

Brinklow, B. R. 1983. The effect of photoperiod on the growth of lambs. Involvement of hormones and the pineal organ. Ph.D. Thesis, Univ. Leeds.Google Scholar
Brinklow, B. R. and Forbes, J. M. 1984. Effect of pinealectomy on the plasma concentrations of prolactin, cortisol and testosterone in sheep in short and skeleton long photoperiods. J. Endocr. 100: 287–294.Google Scholar
Bunning, E. 1964. The Physiological Clock. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, J. M., Brown, Wendy B., Al-banna, A. G. M. and Jones, R. 1981. The effect of on the growth of lambs. 3. Level of feeding, age lamb and speed of gut-fill response. Anim. Prod. 32: 23–28.Google Scholar
Forbes, J. M., Driver, P. M., El Shahat, A. A., Boaz, T. G. and Scanes, C. G. 1975. The effect daylength and level of feeding on serum prolactin growing lambs. J. Endocr. 64: 549–554.Google Scholar
Forbes, J. M., El Shahat, A. A., Jones, R., Duncan, J. G. S. and Boaz, T. G. 1979. The effect daylength on the growth of lambs. 1. Comparison sex, level of feeding, shearing and breed of sire.Anim. Prod. 29: 33–42.Google Scholar
Nie, N. H., Hull, C. H., Jenkins, J., Steinbrenner, K. and Bent, D. A. 1975.SPSS. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. 2nd. McGraw Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Ohlson, D. L., Spicer, L. J. and Davis, S. L. 1981. Use of active immunization against prolactin to the influence of prolactin on growth and reproduction i n the ram. J. Anim. Sci. 52: 1350–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, R. R., Chapin, L. T., Emery, R. S. and Ravault, J. P. and Ortavant, R. 1977. Light of prolactin in sheep. Evidence for a photo-inducible phase during diurnal rhythm. Annls Biol. anim Biochim. Biophys. 17: 1–16.Google Scholar
Roche, J. F. and Dziuk, P. J. 1969. A technique pinealectomy in the ewe. Am. J. vet. Res. 30: 2031–2035.Google Scholar
Schanbacher, B. D. and Crouse, J. D. 1980. Growth and performance of growing-finishing lambs exposed long or short photoperiods. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 943–948CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schanbacher, B. D. and Crouse, J. D. 1981. Photoperiodic regulation of growth. A photosensitive phase during the light dark cycle. Am. J. Physiol. E1–E5.Google ScholarPubMed
Schanbacher, B. D., Crouse, J. D. and Ferrell, C. L. 1980. Testosterone influences on growth, performance, carcass characteristics and composition young market lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 51: 685–691.Google Scholar