Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T08:08:47.737Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

424. A study of lactation as affected by heredity and environment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

L. C. Sikka
L. C. Sikka
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. A study has been made of the interrelationships between persistency and maximum yield as components of the lactation curve, and of the importance of environment and heredity in determining the shape of the lactation curve of Ayrshire cows.

2. Persistency was defined as the linear constant of the exponential curve expressed as a percentage, maximum yield as the highest 30-day yield as calculated from the records, and total yield as the yield of milk from 15 days to 8½ months after calving.

3. The study was based on milk records computed by the official method of the Scottish Milk Records Association. The data used in much of the work was obtained from five herds of Ayrshire cows and involved 2392 lactations during the period 1920–39.

4. In an exploratory test involving 100 lactations it was found that the exponential curve fitted ninety-five of the lactation curves and that the fit was improved in forty-eight of these ninety-five curves by using the parabolic exponential curve. Five of the lactations were too erratic to be fitted by any simple mathematical curve.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Dairy Research , Volume 17 , Issue 3 , October 1950 , pp. 231 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1950

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

(1)Fisher, B. A. (1930). The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2)Sturtevant, A. H. (1886). 5th Ann. Hep., N.Y. St. agric. Exp. Sta. pp. 21–3.Google Scholar
(3)Brody, S., Ragsdale, A. C. & Turner, C. W. (1922). J. gen. Physiol. 5, 441–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(4)Turner, C. W., Brody, S. & Ragsdale, A. C. (1923). J. Dairy Sci. 6, 527–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(5)Johannsen, K. I. (1939). Private communication to the author.Google Scholar
(6)Fisher, R. A. (1938). Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 7th ed. pp. 27–30. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
(7)Fisher, R. A. (1948). Statistical Methods for Research Workers, 10th ed. pp. 24–9. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
(8)Brody, S. (1927). Res. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Sta. no. 97, p. 70.Google Scholar
(9)Pontecorvo, G. (1940). J. Dairy Res. 11, 113–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(10)Gavin, W. F. (1913). J. agric. Sci. 5, 309–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(11)Sanders, H. G. (1923). J. agric. Sci. 13, 169–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(12)Sanders, H. G. (1927). J. agric. Sci. 17, 502–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(13)Galnes, W. L. (1926). J. gen. Physiol. 9, 325–32.Google Scholar
(14)Østergaaed, P. S. (1931). 9th International Dairy Congress, pp. 49–59.Google Scholar
(15)Kartha, K. P. R. (1934). Indian J. vet. Sci. 4, 124–47.Google Scholar
(16)Turner, C. W. (1939). Private communication.Google Scholar
(17)Robb, R. A. (1940). Private communication.Google Scholar
(18)Watson, S. J. (1939). The Science and Practice of Conservation: Grass and Forage Crops, 1. London: The Fertilizer and Feeding Stuffs Journal.Google Scholar
(19)Turner, C. W. (1927). J. Dairy Sci. 10, 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(20)Sanders, H. G. (1930). J. agric. Sci. 20, 145–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(21)Tocher, F. (1928). Biometrika. 20 B, 105–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(22)Kay, R. R. & McCandlish, A. C. (1929). J. agric. Sci. 19, 342–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(23)Glen, J. & McCandlish, A. C. (1930). J. agric. Sci. 20, 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(24)Gaines, W. L. (1927). Bull. Ill. agric. Exp. Sta. no. 288.Google Scholar
(25)Gooch, M. (1935). J. agric. Sci. 25, 71–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(26)Wright, S. (1921). Genetics, 6, 111–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(27)Weight, S. (1920). Proc. not. Acad. Sci., Wash., 6, 320–32.Google Scholar
(28)Gaines, W. L. (1931). 9th International Dairy Congress, pp. 140–9.Google Scholar
(29)von Patow, C. (1930). Z. Zucht. B, 17, 3–159.Google Scholar
(30)Lush, J. L. (1936). J. Hered. 27, 201–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(31)Plum, M. (1933). Proc. Amer. Soc. Anim. Prod. pp. 53–7.Google Scholar
(32)Babcock, E. B. – Clausen, R. E. (1927). Genetics in Relation to Agriculture. New York and London: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc.Google Scholar
(33)Lush, J. L. (1939). Methods of Measuring the Heritability of Individual Differences among Farm Animals, pp. 34–6. Paper read at the International Genetics Congress, Edinburgh, Section D.Google Scholar