Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T04:10:22.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The fleece of the Scottish Blackface sheep I. Seasonal changes in wool production and fleece structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

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

Extract

1. Seasonal changes in wool production per unit area of unstretched skin, number of fibres of each type per unit area, ratio of fibre types, mean fibre weights, lengths and diameters and degree of medullation are given. The production cycle shows a peak in August and September and a trough in February and March, the weight of wool produced in the latter period being only 16% of that in the former. Approximately 80% of the fleece is produced in the 6 months from June to November (lambing ewes). Other components show similar trends.

2. The production cycle does not entirely coincide with the nutritional cycle as estimated from bodyweight changes before late pregnancy. Whilst bodyweight increases from September to November wool production declines by about 25%.

3. The winter drop in wool production per unit area is caused partly by a decrease in the mean weight of each fibre type (in turn made up of a decrease in both length and diameter) and partly by a 50% reduction in the number of active fine fibre follicles and a 100% reduction in active kemp follicles. There is no apparent change in the number of active coarse fibre follicles. The degree of medullation of both coarse and fine fibres declines substantially between December and May.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , June 1961 , pp. 365 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1961

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, R. L. & Bancroft, I. A. (1952). Statistical Theory in Research. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. G., Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. Mc. & Wainman, F. W. (1959). Animal Production, 1, 1.Google Scholar
Barker, A. F. (1922). J. Text. Inst. 13, T40.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. Mc., Wainman, F. W. & Armstrong, D. G. (1959 a). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blaxter, K. L., Graham, N. Mc. & Wainman, F. W. (1959 b). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, R. H. & Miller, W. C. (1931). J. Text. Inst. 22, T547.Google Scholar
Burns, M. (1953). J. Agric. Sci. 43, 422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carter, H. B. (1955). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 23, 101.Google Scholar
Carter, H. B., Turner, Helen N. & Hardy, Margaret H. (1958). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coop, I. E. (1953). J. Agric. Sci. 43, 456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darling, F. F. (1932). Z. Zücht. B, 24 (3), 359.Google Scholar
Doney, J. M. (1955). Proc. Brit. Soc. Anim. Prod. p. 3.Google Scholar
Doney, J. M. & Weiler, H. (1959). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 10, 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, K. A., Carter, H. B. & Hardy, M. H. (1949). Aust. J. Sci. Res. B, 2, 42.Google Scholar
Graham, N. Mc., Wainman, F. W., Blaxter, K. L. & Armstrong, D. G. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 52, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peart, J. N. & Ryder, M. L. (1954). J. Text. Inst. 45, T821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. F. (1926 a). J. Text. Inst. 17, T274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. F. (1926 b). J. Text. Inst. 17, T171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, M. L. (1956). J. Agric. Sci. 47, 129.Google Scholar
Short, B. F., Fraser, A. S. & Carter, H. B. (1958). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 9, 229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Story, L. F. & Ross, D. A. (1960). N. Z. J. Agric. Res. 3, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tibbitts, Janet P. (1959). J. Agric. Sci. 53, 358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Helen N. (1956). Anim. Breed. Abstr. 24, 87.Google Scholar
Turner, Helen N., Hayman, R. H., Riches, J. H., Roberts, N. F. & Wilson, L. T. (1953). C.S.I.R.O. Aust. Div. Anim. Health Prod. Rep. no. 4.Google Scholar
Weiler, H., Chapman, R. E. & Doney, J. M. (1960). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 11, 628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. G. (1931). J. R. Welsh Agric. Soc. p. 99.Google Scholar
Wildman, A. B. (1944). Wool Ind. Res. Ass. Special Publ. no. 5.Google Scholar
Wildman, A. B. (1954). The Microscopy of Animal Textile Fibres. Leeds: W.I.R.A.Google Scholar
Wildman, A. B. (1957). Nature, Lond., 180, 296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, G. LI. (1954). Agriculture, Lond., 61, 62.Google Scholar
Wodzicka, Manika (1960). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 11, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar