Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T06:31:05.275Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The growth and carcass composition of strains of mice selected for large and small body size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

Ruth E. Fowler
Ruth E. Fowler
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, West Mains Road, Edinburgh 9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The growth and carcass composition of two strains of mice (N- and C-strain), which had both been selected for large and small body size by Falconer, have been studied.

Differences in body weight between mice of the N-strain and their controls were apparent at birth and were fully maintained up to 30 weeks of age. The patterns of growth were similar in all three lines, although the large line grew at a faster rate than the small line, the controls being intermediate. Differences in absolute and relative rates of growth between the three lines reach a maximum from 21 to 35 days of age and declined thereafter.

Growth in the large line of the N-strain from 14 to 40 days of age was largely due to an increase in body protein and water; after this age, increase in weight was caused mainly by fat deposition. In the small line of this strain, protein, water and fat were deposited at a more constant rate during the whole growing period. Differences in rates of growth may account for the differences in the percentage composition found between mice of the large and small lines of the N-strain at the same age.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 51 , Issue 2 , October 1958 , pp. 137 - 148
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1958

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

Behnke, A. R. (1953). Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 56, 1095.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, S. (1945). Bioenergetics and Growth. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
Cummings, J. N. & Winters, L. M. (1951). Tech. Bull. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 195.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E. (1947). Res. Bull. la. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 354, 489.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E. & Grimes, J. C. (1947). J. Anim. Sci. 6, 266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1948). Heredity, 2, 403.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1953). J. Genet. 51, 470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1955). Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 20, 178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & King, J. W. B. (1953). J. Genet. 51, 561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. & Robertson, A. (1956). Z. indukt. Abstamm.- u. VererbLehre, 87, 385.Google Scholar
Goodale, H. D. (1937). Genetics, 22, 193.Google Scholar
Goodale, H. D. (1938). J. Hered. 29, 101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodale, H. D. (1941). Science, 94, 442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregory, K. E. & Dickerson, G. E. (1952). Res. Bull. Univ. Miss. Coll. Agric. no. 493.Google Scholar
Kraybill, H. F., Bitter, H. L. & Hankins, O. G. (1952). J. Appl. Physiol. 4, 575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraybill, H. F., Hankins, O. G. & Bitter, H. L. (1951). J. Appl. Physiol. 3, 681.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krider, J. L., Fairbanks, B. W., Carroll, W. E. & Roberts, E. (1946). J. Anim. Sci. 5, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1944 a). Amer. Nat. 78, 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1944 b). Amer. Nat. 78, 224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1949). Genetics, 34, 194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montemurro, D. G. & Stevenson, J. A. (1956). Metabolism, 6, 161.Google Scholar
Palmer, L. S., Kennedy, C., Calverley, C. E., Lohn, C. & Weswig, P. H. (1946). Tech. Bull. Minn. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 176.Google Scholar
Reid, J. T., Balch, C. C. & Head, M. J. (1957). Nature, Lond., 179, 1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, F. W. (1955). Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 20, 166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Snedecor, G. N. (1956). Statistical Methods, 5th ed.Iowa: The Iowa State College Press, Ames.Google Scholar
Soberman, R. J., Brodie, B., Levy, B., Axelrod, J., Hollander, V. & Steele, J. (1949). J. Biol. Chem. 179, 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tribble, L. F., Pflander, W. H., Lasley, J. F., Zobrisky, S. E. & Brady, D. E. (1957). Res. Bull. Univ. Miss. Coll. Agric. no. 609.Google Scholar
Wellington, G. H., Reid, J. T., Bratzler, L. J. & Miller, J. I. (1956). J. Anim. Sci. 15, 76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteman, J. V., Hillier, J. C. & Whatley, J. A. (1951). J. Anim. Sci. 10, 638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winters, L. M., Sierk, C. F. & Cummings, J. N. (1949). J. Anim. Sci. 8, 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar