Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T07:02:09.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The fertility of mice selected for large or small body size

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Ruth E. Fowler  and
R. G. Edwards
Ruth E. Fowler
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9
R. G. Edwards
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Genetics, Edinburgh, 9

Extract

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.

The fertility of two unrelated strains of mice (strains N and C) which had both been selected for large and small body size has been studied.

The fertility of pairs of mice in the large or small lines of strain C was unimpaired by selection. In strain N, some of the pairs in the large and small lines, but not in the control line, were sterile. Sterility in the large line was due to the low libido of the males, and not to female infertility. Sterility in the small line was probably due to hypo-functioning of the anterior pituitary of some females: the oestrous cycle was delayed or absent, some mice failed to ovulate after mating, and a high proportion of those mating had no implanted embryos at 12 days' gestation. Oestrus and ovulation could be induced in mice of the small line of strain N by exogenous gonadotrophins, and the proportion of mice with implanted embryos was considerably increased by progesterone supplements.

The number of eggs found after natural mating was considerably higher in large mice than in small mice, and was significantly correlated with body weight in the small line of strain C only. The egg-number/body-weight ratio was higher in the lines of strain C than in those of strain N, though the ratios were similar when carcass fat was subtracted from total body weight.

The amount of endogenous follicle-stimulating hormone secreted by the mice of the five lines was estimated by inducing ovulation with various amounts of exogenous gonadotrophins, and comparing the number of eggs found after each dose with the mean number ovulated after natural mating. Estimates of the amount of follicle-stimulating hormone secreted by mice of strain C were higher than those for mice of strain N.

Differences in the rates of growth and in the numbers of eggs ovulated after natural mating indicate a higher level of pituitary activity in strain C than in strain N.

Type
Research Article
Information
Genetics Research , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , November 1960 , pp. 393 - 407
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1960

References

REFERENCES

Baird, D. M., Nalbandov, A. V. & Norton, H. W. (1952). Some physiological causes of genetically different rates of growth in swine. J. Anim. Sci. 11, 292–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, J. C. & Roberts, R. C. (1958). Embryonic mortality in relation to ovulation rate in the house mouse. J. exp. Biol. 35, 138–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Comstock, R. E., Winters, L. M., Jordan, P. S. & Kiser, O. M. (1942). Measures of growth rate for use in swine selection. J. agric. Res. 65, 379–389.Google Scholar
Dickerson, G. E. & Grimes, J. C. (1947). The effectiveness of selection for efficiency of gain in Duroc swine. J. Anim. Sci. 6, 266–287.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1953). Selection for large and small size in mice. J. Genet. 51, 470–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1955). Patterns of response in selection experiments with mice. Cold Spr. Harb. Symp. quant. Biol. 20, 178–196.Google Scholar
Falconer, D. S. (1960). Selection of mice for growth on high and low planes of nutrition. Genet. Res. (Camb.), 1, 91–113.Google Scholar
Fortuyn, A. B. C. (1919). The involution of the placenta in the mouse after the death of the embryo. Arch. Biol., Paris, 30, 323–355.Google Scholar
Fowler, R. E. (1958). The growth and carcass composition of strains of mice selected for large and small body size. J. Agric. Sci. 51, 137–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, R. E. & Edwards, R. G. (1957). Induction of superovulation and pregnancy in mature mice by gonadotrophins. J. Endocrin. 15, 374–384.Google Scholar
Fowler, R. E. & Edwards, R. G. (1960). Effect of progesterone and oestrogen on pregnancy and embryonic mortality in adult mice following superovulation treatment. J. Endocrin. 20, 1–8.Google Scholar
Goodale, H. D. (1938). A study of the inheritance of body weight in the albino mouse by selection. J. Hered. 29, 101–112.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, A. L. & Mclean, P. (1953). Changes in body composition and respiratory quotient of adult female rats treated with purified growth hormone. J. Biochem. 54, 400–407.Google Scholar
Hertzer, H. O. & Brier, G. N. (1940). Extent to which type differences among swine affect litter size. Proc. Amer. Soc. Anim. Prod. 135–138.Google Scholar
Huggett, A. St. G. & Pritchard, J. J. (1944). Experimental foetal death: the surviving placenta. Proc. R. Soc. Med. 38, 261–266.Google Scholar
Krider, J. L., Fairbanks, B. W., Carroll, W. E. & Roberts, E. (1946). The effectiveness of selection for rapid and for slow growth rate in Hampshire swine. J. Anim. Sci. 5, 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladman, A. J. & Runner, M. N. (1959). Correlation of maternal pituitary weight with the number of uterine implantation sites in pregnant mice. Endocrinology, 65, 580–585.Google Scholar
Li, C. H. & Evans, H. M. (1948). The biochemistry of pituitary growth hormone. Recent Prog. Hormone Res. 3, 3–44.Google Scholar
Li, C. H. & Papkoff, H. (1956). Preparation and properties of growth hormone from human and monkey pituitary glands. Science, 124, 1293–1294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, C. H., Papkoff, H. & Jordan, C. W. (1959). Differences in biological behaviour between primate and beef or whale pituitary growth hormones. Proc. Soc. exp. Biol., N.Y., 100, 44–45.Google Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1944 a). Genetics of body size and related characters. I. Selecting small and large races of the laboratory mouse. Amer. Nat. 78, 142–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1944 b). Genetics of body size and related characters. II. Satellite characters associated with body size in mice. Amer. Nat. 78, 224–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. N. (1949). Selection for small and large body size in the house mouse. Genetics, 34, 194–209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noble, R. L., Rowlands, I. W., Warwick, M. H. & Williams, P. C. (1939). Comparative effects of certain gonadotrophic extracts on the ovaries of normal and hypophysectomised rats. J. Endocrin. 1, 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, R. N. & Zeller, J. H. (1943). Sexual development in small and large types of swine. Anat. Rec. 85, 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithberg, M. & Runner, M. N. (1956). The induction and maintenance of pregnancy in prepuberal mice. J. exp. Zool. 133, 441–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smithberg, M. & Runner, M. N. (1957). Pregnancy induced in genetically sterile mice. J. Hered. 48, 97–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar