Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T11:28:45.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of high and low planes of nutrition on the haematology of monozygous twin calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. A. Greig  and
A. W. Boynea
W. A. Greig
Affiliation:
Rowelt Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeenshire
A. W. Boynea
Affiliation:
Rowelt Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeenshire
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. In an experiment conducted with eight pairs of monozygous twin heifer calves aged from 7 to 9 months, it was shown that the mean haemoglobin concentration of those reared on a high plane of nutrition was higher than the corresponding value of those reared on low-plane rations.

2. The relative anaemia of the low-plane animals was microcytic but normochromic in type. Its cause must await further investigation, but these features would not be inconsistent with a deficiency of iron.

3. For this type of haematological study, monozygous twins proved more efficient than unrelated animals, as shown by the smaller variability within than between pairs.

4. Day-to-day variation in the same animal must be considered an important possible source of sampling error.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 1956 , pp. 150 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1956

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

Boyne, A. W. & Greig, W. A. (1956). J. Agric. Sci. 47, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crichton, J. A. (1953). Vet. Rec. 65, 832.Google Scholar
Crichton, J. A. & Aitken, J. N. (1954). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 13, 10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dacie, J. V. (1950). Practical Haematology. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Greig, W. A. (1952). Banham's The Veterinary Surgeon's Vade Mecum, 8th ed.London: Bailliere, Tindall and Cox.Google Scholar
Guest, G. M. & Brown, E. W. (1936). Amer. J. Dis. Child. 52, 616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J. (1901). J. Physiol. 26, 497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hancock, J. (1952). N.Z. J. Sci. Tech. A, 34, 131.Google Scholar
Heller, V. G. & Paul, H. (1934). J. Lab. Clin. Med. 19, 777.Google Scholar
Holman, H. H. (1944). J. Comp. Path. Therap. 54, 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holman, H. H. (1950). In Boddie G. F., Diagnostic Methods in Veterinary Medicine, 3rd ed.Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
New Zealand Department of Agriculture (1950). Ann. Rep. Anim. Res. Div. (1948–1949).Google Scholar
Parsons, L. G. (1938). Lancet, 1, 65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, L. G., Hickmans, E. M. & Finch, E. (1937). Arch. Dis. Child. 12, 369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, I. G. (1951). Aust. Vet. J. 27, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wintrobe, M. M. (1951). Clinical Hematology, 3rd ed.London: Henry Kimpton.Google Scholar