Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T07:20:47.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on the fleeces of experimental sheep receiving daily doses of sodium fluoride

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

M. L. Ryder
M. L. Ryder
Affiliation:
Wool Industries Research Association, Leeds
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

An examination was made of wool and skin samples from sheep being dosed with sodium fluoride, and from other sheep acting as controls, from March 1953 to March 1954. It was evident that the sodium fluoride caused the wool to grow shorter, finer, less crimped and to become less lustrous; less wool grease was produced, and it seemed that in certain samples from one sheep tenderness of the fibres had been caused. There was a greater occurrence of capsules associated with follicles in skin samples from the dosed sheep, suggesting that the sodium fluoride might have been the cause of these. The number of capsules in one sample was large enough for the details of possible stages in their development to be described. There were apparently no other abnormalities in the skin and follicles, and follicle counts suggested that the sodium fluoride had not influenced the percentage of shedding fibres. Information was gained about the normal changes in the percentage of shedding fibres through the year.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 1956 , pp. 187 - 190
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

Auber, L. (1952). Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 62, 191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auber, L. & Ryder, M. L. (1955). Proc. 1st International Wool Textile Research Conference Australia.Google Scholar
Bennett, H. (1951). Anat. Rec. 110, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burns, M. (1953). J. Agric. Sci. 43, 422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Margolena, L. A. & Dolnick, E. H. (1951). Stain Tech. 26, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peart, J. N. & Ryder, M. L. (1954). J. Text. Inst. 45, T821.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ryder, M. L. (1956). J. Agric. Sci. 47, 129.Google Scholar
Ryder, M. L. & Auber, L. (1954). Nature, Lond., 174, 743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towers, K. G. (1956). Thesis, University of Liverpool.Google Scholar