Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:03:57.796Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of environmental temperature and humidity on the respiration rate of Ayrshire calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. R. Beakley  and
J. D. Findlay
W. R. Beakley
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
J. D. Findlay
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The respiration rates of three 4-month old Ayrshire bull calves were measured in individual 6 hr. daily exposures to 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40° C. dry bulb temperatures at 17 mg./l. absolute humidity and at 7 mg./l. saturation deficit at temperatures of 30, 35 and 40° C. in a planned sequence of environmental temperature. The schedule of experiments on each animal lasted 45 days consisting of five replications of these nine environmental conditions. Throughout the experimental programme the respiration rates of these three animals and of three control animals were measured in a holding room just before the experimental animal of each pair was transferred to the hot room.

2. The frequency of respiration of all the calves increased with increasing environmental temperature and humidity.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , April 1955 , pp. 452 - 460
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

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

Anrep, G. V. & Hammouda, M. (1933). J. Physiol. 77, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beakley, W. R., Bligh, J. & Nisbet, W. (1953). J. Physiol. 121, 40P.Google Scholar
Beakley, W. R. & Findlay, J. D. (1955 a). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beakley, W. R. & Findlay, J. D. (1955 b). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beakley, W. R. & Findlay, J. D. (1955 c). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beakley, W. R. & Findlay, J. D. (1955 d). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bianca, W. (1955). J. Agric. Sci. 45, 428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Findlay, J. D. (1950). Bull. Hannah Dairy Inst. no. 9.Google Scholar
Findlay, J. D. (1954). Met. Monogr. 2, 8.Google Scholar
Forster, R. E. & Ferguson, T. B. (1952). Amer. J. Physiol. 169, 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaalaas, R. F. (1945). J. Dairy Sci. 28, 555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammouda, M. (1933). J. Physiol. 77, 319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kibler, H. H. & Brody, S. (1953). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 522.Google Scholar
Kleiber, M. & Regan, W. (1935). Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol., N.Y., 33, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell, R. E., Lee, D. H. K., Fohrman, M. H. & Anderson, R. S. (1953). J. Anim. Sci. 12, 573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rieck, R. E. & Lee, D. H. K. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar