Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T02:12:20.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Note on motility and fertility of colchicine-treated bull and rabbit sperm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

R. A. Beatty  and
L. E. A. Rowson
R. A. Beatty
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh
L. E. A. Rowson
Affiliation:
Unit of Animal Reproduction, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1939, Pinous & Waddington reported tetraploid early cleavage stages of the rabbit after colchicine treatment of fertilized eggs in vitro. Chang (1944) inseminated rabbit does with sperm suspended in 1/1000 colchicine in 0·9% NaCl and noted a few abnormal young in the resulting litters. No chromosome counts were made, but Chang considered the possibility that colchicine had entered the egg and caused polyploidy. Using the same technique as Chang, Swedish workers have claimed the production of two adult triploid rabbits and one adult triploid pig (Häggqvist & Bane, 1950a, b, c, 1951; Melander, 1950, 1951). This Swedish work has been criticized (Beatty, 1951; Beatty & Fischberg, 1950; Becker, 1952–3; Hertwig, 1951; Nachtsheim, 1950; Rostand, 1951; Venge, 1953). Nevertheless, the technique is ingenious and the claim of great interest. The present note records preliminary attempts to extend the technique to cattle and to confirm the results in rabbits.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 45 , Issue 2 , December 1954 , pp. 254 - 256
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1954

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

Anderson, J. (1945). Tech. Commun. Bur. Anim. Br., Edinb., no. 6.Google Scholar
Beatty, R. A. (1951). Heteroploidy in mammals. Anim. Breed. Abstr. 19, 283.Google Scholar
Beatty, R. A. & Fischberg, M. (1950). Nature, Lond., 166, 238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, H. W. (1952–1953). Wiss. Z. Martin-Luther-Univ. 2, 127.Google Scholar
Chang, M. C. (1944). Nature, Lond., 154, 150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, M. C. (1951). Nature, Lond., 168, 697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, R. G. (1954). Nature, Lond., 174, 276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emmens, C. W. (1947). J. Physiol. 106, 471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häggqvist, G. & Bane, A. (1950 a). Nature, Lond., 165, 841.Google Scholar
Häggqvist, G. & Bane, A. (1950 b). K. svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl. 1, 1.Google Scholar
Häggqvist, G. & Bane, A. (1950 c). Hereditas, Lund, 36, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Häggqvist, G. & Bane, A. (1951). K. svenska Vetensk-Akad. Handl. 3, 14.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. & Marshall, F. H. A. (1925). Reproduction in the Rabbit. Edinburgh and London: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Hertwig, G. (1951). Anat. Anz. (Verh. anat. Ges.), 98, 53.Google Scholar
Melander, Y. (1950). Hereditas, Lund, 36, 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melander, Y. (1951). Hereditas, Lund, 37, 288.Google Scholar
Melander, Y. & Knudsen, O. (1953). Hereditas, Lund, 39, 505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nachtsheim, H. (1950). Dtsch. Kleintier Züchter, no. 23, 2; and no. 24, 6.Google Scholar
Pincus, G. & Waddington, C. H. (1939). J. Hexed. 30, 515.Google Scholar
Rostand, J. (1951). Sci. et vie, 79, 55.Google Scholar
Venge, O. (1953). K. Lantbruks. Ann. 19, 233.Google Scholar
Walton, A. (1945). Notes on the Technique of Artificial Insemination. The Holborn Surgical Instrument Co. Ltd., London.Google Scholar