Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-pfhbr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T10:31:07.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of stage of gestation and litter size on prenatal growth in the mouse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2010

Ling-Jung Koong  and
G. E. Bradford
Ling-Jung Koong
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, California 95616, USA
G. E. Bradford
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, California 95616, USA
Get access

Summary

A theoretical equation is proposed which describes the dynamics of foetal growth in mice. The equation is basically of exponential form and takes into account the effects of stage of gestation (T) and number of foetuses (N) on the instantaneous relative growth rate. The model was tested against experimental data by using a stepwise regression technique. Both stage of gestation and number of foetuses had significant effects (P < 0·01) on the instantaneous growth rate. When the model was tested against another set of data 44 out of a total of 52 comparisons had a prediction error less than 15 %. As a result, the following equation is proposed to describe the foetal growth of mice

W = e-14·34Ne(1·302–0·0276T–0·00059)T

An equation of this form could be useful in interpreting prenatal growth data for other species. Other factors which may influence the dynamics of foetal growth, such as maternal age or weight, could also be incorporated into the equation.

Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Production , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , April 1976 , pp. 225 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1976

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

Boyd, J. D. and Hamilton, W. J. 1952. Cleavage, early development and implantation of the egg. In Marshall's Physiology of Reproduction (ed. Parkes, A. S.). 3rd ed. Vol. 2, p. 11. Longmans, London.Google Scholar
Bradford, G. E. 1968. Selection for litter size in mice in the presence and absence of gonadotropin treatment. Genetics, Austin, Tex. 58: 283–295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brody, S. 1927. Growth and development, with special reference to domestic animals. IV. Growth rates during self-accelerating phase of growth. Res. Bull. Mo. agric. Exp. Stn, No. 98.Google Scholar
Brody, S. 1945. Bioenergetics and Growth. Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
Crozier, W. J. 1940. On the relation between birth weight and litter size in mice. J. gen. Physiol. 23: 309–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dixon, W. J. 1970. Biomedical Computer Programs. Univ. Calif. Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Laird, A. K., Tyler, S. A. and Barton, A. D. 1965. Dynamics of normal growth. Growth 29: 233–248.Google ScholarPubMed
Langlands, J. P. and Sutherland, H. A. M. 1968. An estimate of the nutrients utilized for pregnancy by Merino sheep. Br. J. Nutr. 22: 217–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pomeroy, R. W. 1960. Infertility and neonatal mortality in the sow. III. Neonatal mortality and foetal development. J. agric. Sci., Camb. 54: 31–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rattray, P. V., Garrett, W. N., East, N. E. and Hinman, N. 1974. Growth, development and composition of the ovine conceptus and mammary gland during pregnancy. J. Anim. Sci. 38: 613–626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weinbach, A. P. 1941. The human growth curve. I. Prenatal. Growth 5: 217–233.Google Scholar