Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T08:10:35.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of three breeds of sheep wintered in four environments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

J. W. B. King  and
G. B. Young
J. W. B. King
Affiliation:
Animal Breeding Research Organization, Edinburgh
G. B. Young
Affiliation:
Animal Breeding Research Organization, Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A study has been made of the reactions of three breeds of sheep (Blackface, Cheviot and Wiltshire) to four different environments. Evidence was obtained that these breeds react differently to these different environments. No changes in rank occurred but the Blackfaces grew relatively faster on a good plane of nutrition than the other two breeds. Their wool production on a sample area was also relatively greater, due primarily to an increase in diameter of the non-medullated fibres. These differences indicate fundamental physiological differences in reaction to environment.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 45 , Issue 3 , February 1955 , pp. 331 - 338
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1955

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

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Australia (1952). Fourth Annual Report.Google Scholar
Coop, I. E. & Hart, D. S. (1953). Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 13, 113.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1952). Amer. Nat. 86, 293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, A. S. (1953). J. Genet. 51, 222.Google Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S. (1946). Ann. Eugen., Land., 13, 197.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (1932). Growth and Development of Mutton Qualities in the Sheep. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Kelly, R. B. (1949) Principles and Methods of Animal Breeding. Sydney: Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar
Lerner, I. M. (1950). Population Genetics and Livestock Improvement. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lush, J. L. (1951). J. Anim,. Sci. 10, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marston, H. R. (1946). Symposium on Fibrous Proteins, p. 207. Society of Dyers and Colourists, Leeds.Google Scholar
Marston, H. R., Pierce, A. W. & Carter, H. B. (1945). Quoted by Moule (1946).Google Scholar
Moule, G. R. (1946). Aust. vet. J. 22, 188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palsson, H. & Verges, J. B. (1951). J. Agric. Sci. 42, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, A. W. (1945). Quoted by Moule, G. R. (1946) in Aust. vet. J. 22, 188.Google Scholar
Van Wyk, C. M. & Nel, H. A. M. (1940). Onderstepoort J. vet. Sci. 15, 325.Google Scholar
Yates, F. (1937). The design and analysis of factorial experiments. Tech. Commun. Bur. Soil Sci., Harpenden, no. 35.Google Scholar
Young, G. B. (1953). J. Agric. Sci. 43, 218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar