Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-03T18:23:13.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Seasonal fluctuations in the sexual activity of Awassi, German Mutton Merino, Corriedale, Border-Leicester and Dorset Horn rams:IV. Seasonal changes in the spermatogenic activity of Awassi rams and their relationship to the fructose and citric acid contents of semen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. Amir  and
R. Volcani
D. Amir
Affiliation:
The National and University Institute of Agriculture, Rehovot, Israel
R. Volcani
Affiliation:
The National and University Institute of Agriculture, Rehovot, Israel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Exhaustion tests were carried out with two Awassi rams 4 times a year for 2 years. The maximum sperm number was obtained in October and the minimum in January. If we consider that the time needed for one spermatogenic cycle and for the migration of the sperm cells through the epid i dymal canal is over 2 months, we may assume that the spermatogenic activity changes with the length of day and reaches its maximum and minimum values during the longest and shortest days, respectively, whereas its androgenic activity is delayed by 3–4 months after the length of daylight changes.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 64 , Issue 1 , February 1965 , pp. 131 - 134
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1965

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

Almquist, J. O.& Amann, B. T. (1961). J. Dairy Sci. 44, 1668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amir, D.& VoiGani, R. (1965). J. Agric. Sci. 64, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafez, E. S. E. (1952). J. Agric. Sci. 42, 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hammond, J. (1947). Biol. Rev. 22, 195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hay, M. F., Lindner, H. R.& Mann, T. (1961). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 154, 433.Google Scholar
Humphrey, G. F.& Mann, T. (1949). Biochem. J. 44, 97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kammlade, W. G. Jr, Welch, J. A., Nalbandov, A. V.& Morton, H. W. (1952). J. Anirn. Sci. 11, 646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, T.& Pabsons, U. (1947). Nature, Lond., 160, 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maqsood, M. (1951). Vet. Rec. 63, 597.Google Scholar
Marshall, F. H. A. (1937). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 122, 413.Google Scholar
Ortavant, B. (1958). Thése Doot. Sci. Univora. Paris.Google Scholar
Ortavant, R. (1961). Proc. IV Int. Gongr. Anim. Repr., Hague, p. 236.Google Scholar
Ortavant, R.& Thibault, C. (1956). C.R. Soc. Biol., Paris, 150, 358.Google Scholar
Phillips, R. W.& Mckenzie, F. F. (1934). Res. Bull. Mo. Agric. Exp. Sta. no. 217.Google Scholar
Radulesctt, A. (1933). Ann. Nat. Zooteckn. Roum. 2, 152.Google Scholar
Volcani, R. (1953). Bull. Res. Counc. Israel, 3, 123.Google Scholar
Yeates, N. T. M. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar