Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:25:21.968Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of exposure in Blackface sheep with particular reference to the role of the fleece

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. M. Doney
J. M. Doney
Affiliation:
Hill Farming Research Organization, Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The effect of shelter from winter conditions was studied in terms of body-weight change of dry sheep individually fed a maintenance ration. In 2 years, one a mild and the other a hard winter, the exposed group lost weight relative to the sheltered group.

2. Within the treatments attempts were made to relate individual weight loss to a variety of fleece components. These results were not conclusive, but they suggest that such components as depth of wool and weight or volume of wool per unit area of skin have some effect in reducing weight loss under climatic stress conditions.

3. A method of measuring the insulation provided by the fleece in dry environmental conditions was developed. It was shown that exposure to moderate winds increased the heat flow by between three and five times. The results again suggested that significant differences in insulation could be found between sheep within a breed. It was not possible to demonstrate the overwhelming importance of any single fleece component.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , April 1963 , pp. 267 - 273
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1963

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

Alexander, G. (1958). Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod. 2, 10.Google Scholar
Alexander, G. (1961). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 12, 1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, G. (1962). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 13, 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L., Clapperton, J. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1960). J. Agric. Sci. 55, 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1959). Anim. Prod. 1, 1.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. McC. & Wainman, F. W. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burton, A. C. & Edholm, O. G. (1955). Man in a Cold Environment. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Cannon, P. & Keatinge, W. R. (1960). J. Physiol. 154, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, H. B., Turner, Helen N. & Hardy, Margaret H. (1958). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doney, J. M. (1955). Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod., p. 3.Google Scholar
Doney, J. M. & Smith, W. F. (1961). J. Agric. Sci. 56, 365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez-Jimenez, E. & Blaxter, K. L. (1962). Brit. J. Nutr. 16, 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, N. McC., Wainman, F. W., Blaxter, K. L. & Armstrong, D. G. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hatfield, H. S. & Wilkins, F. J. (1950). J. Sci. Inst. 27, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, J. C. D., Bennet, J. W. & Wodzicka-Tomaszewska, Mantra (1960). Proc. Aust. Soc. Prod. 3, 199.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, J. C. D. & Wodzicka-Tomaszewska, Manika (1961). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 29, 1.Google Scholar
Lentz, C. P. & Hart, J. S. (1960). Canad. J. Zool. 36, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholander, P. F., Walters, V., Hook, R. & Irving, L. (1950). Biol. Bull., Woods Hole, 99, 225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. G. (1931). J. R. Welsh Agric. Soc., p. 99.Google Scholar