Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-qks25 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-09T01:53:46.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ovulation rate of lines of mice selected for testis weight

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

A. B. M. Mafizul Islam ,
W. G. Hill  and
R. B. Land
A. B. M. Mafizul Islam
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh EH9 3JN
W. G. Hill
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh EH9 3JN
R. B. Land
Affiliation:
ARC Animal Breeding Research Organisation, Edinburgh EH9 3JQ

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Selection was practised in two replicates for both high and low testis weight in the mouse. Typically 7 males were selected out of 30 recorded for a total of 5 generations. From an initial average of 191 mg the mean divergence between high and low lines reached 112 mg, with a realized heritability of 0·52. The ovulation rate of the lines changed in the same direction as that of selection, the mean divergence was 2·0 eggs in primiparous females in generation 4 and 1·6 in nulliparous females in generation 5. Correlated changes in the body weight of both sexes also occurred but were inadequate to account for the observed change in ovulation rate. The genetic regressions of ovulation rate on testis weight were estimated to be 2·9 and 14 eggs/100 mg in primiparous and nulliparous females, respectively, which, along with data from other experiments, correspond to genetic correlations between testis weight and ovulation rate of 0·50 and 0·25 respectively. There were no correlated changes in litter size. The possibility of using male testis size in breeding programmes to improve female reproductive performance is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 1976 , pp. 23 - 32
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

References

REFERENCES

Bradford, G. E. (1972). Genetic control of litter size in sheep. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility, Suppl. 15, 23–41.Google ScholarPubMed
Cole, H. H. (1969). Physiological characterization of gonadotrophins. In Reproduction in Domestic Animals, 2nd ed. (ed. Cole, H. H. and Cupps, P. T.), pp. 17–45. New York, London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1973). Replicated selection for body weight in mice. Genetical Research 22, 291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haywood, P. & Shire, J. G. M. (1975). y-chromosome effect on adult testis size. Nature 250, 499.Google Scholar
Hill, W. G. (1971). Design and efficiency of selection experiments for estimating genetic parameters. Biometrics 27, 293–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hill, W. G. (1972). Estimation of realised heritabilities from selection experiments. Biometrics 28, 747–765.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, R. B. (1970). Genetic and phenotypic relationships between ovulation rate and body weight in the mouse. Genetical Research 15, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, R. B. (1973). The expression of female sex limited characters in the male. Nature 241, 208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, R. B. (1974). Physiological studies and genetic selection for sheep fertility. Animal Breeding Abstracts 42, 155–158.Google Scholar
Land, R. B. (1976). Selection among males for the genetic improvement of female fertility. Journal of Animal Science (in the Press).Google Scholar
Land, R. B. & Falconer, D. S. (1969). Genetic studies of ovulation rate in the mouse. Genetical Research 13, 25–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Land, R. B. & Carr, W. R. (1975). Testis growth and plasma LH concentration following hemicastration and its relation with female prolificacy in sheep. Journal of Reproduction and Fertility 45, 495–501.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortavant, R. & Thibault, C. (1970). Pourquoi et comment chercher á obtenir des naissances gémellaires chez les bovine. Annales de Biologie animale, Biochimie, Biophysique 10, Suppl. 1, 1–19.Google Scholar