Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:05:01.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Observations on the corpora albicantia in the ovaries of normal and infertile dairy cows

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

F. L. M. Dawson
F. L. M. Dawson
Affiliation:
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ovaries from 251 cattle with known histories were dissected, and this work was linked with clinical and histopathological studies. In almost 20% of the cattle, resorption of corpora albicantia appeared to have taken place, beginning usually, after the fourth pregnancy. In 10% of cattle more corpora albicantia were found than corresponded with the normal pregnancies. Most such cases appeared to be associated with unrecognized ‘temporary pregnancies’, but normal pregnancy associated with two corpora lutea, as in the camel, may occur, though rarely. A scheme with correction factors, for allocating random samples to age categories, has been prepared. In 110 cattle, or 44%, miniature as well as full-sized corpora albicantia were recovered. Evidence from their histories is brought forward that the miniature corpora correspond to ‘temporary pregnancies’ of perhaps 2–5 months duration. This is cross-checked and confirmed, both from the histories of 112 cows yielding no miniature corpora, and also by correlation with the histopathological findings from the genitalia.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , May 1958 , pp. 322 - 330
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1958

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

Amoroso, E. C., Hancock, J. L. & Rowlands, I. W. (1948). Nature, Land., 161, 355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asdell, S. A., de Alba, J. & Roberts, S. J. (1949). Cornell Vet. 39, 389.Google Scholar
Benesch, F. & Wright, J. G. (1950). Veterinary Obstetrics, p. 14. London.Google Scholar
Brambell, F. W. (1956). Marshall's Physiology of Reproduction, 3rd edition. London.Google Scholar
Buch, N. C. (1956). Quoted L. E. Casida, IIIrd Int. Congr. Anim. Prod. Plenary Papers, p. 19.Google Scholar
Carman, A. (1955). J. Anim. Sci. 14, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, F. L. M. (1958). Brit. Vet. J. 114, 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donald, H. P. (1944). Vet. Rec. 56, 352–353.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (1927). Reproduction in the Cow, p. 37. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Harrison, R. J. (1949). J. Anat., Lond., 83, 238.Google Scholar
Hignett, S. L. (1954). Address to Essex Veterinary Society, 30 09.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Küpfer, M. (1920). Vjschp. naturf. Ges. Zurich. 65, 377.Google Scholar
Küst, P. & Schaetz, E. (1953). Fortpfl. Storungen den Haustiere, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Mackintosh, N. A. (1946). Biol. Rev. 21, 60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, L. E., McNutt, S. H. & Nichols, R. E. (1954). Amer. J. Vet. Res. 15, 22.Google Scholar
Murray, J. G. (1943). Vet. Rec. 55, 323.Google Scholar
Perry, J. S. (1951). J. Endocrin. 7, no. 4. Proc.Google Scholar
Tayes, M. A. F. (1948). Vet. J. 104, 179.Google Scholar
Withers, F. W. (1955). Vet. Rec. 67, 605.Google Scholar