Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-p2v8j Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2024-05-28T08:42:20.124Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIII.—A Comparative Study of the Cytoplasmic Components during the Oogenesis of Dog, Cat, and Rabbit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2012

I. Zlotnik
I. Zlotnik
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Edinburgh
Get access

Extract

The present paper gives an account of the behaviour of the Golgi material, mitochondria, and nucleolar extrusions during the oogenesis of dog, cat, and rabbit. So far as the writer is aware there is no previous detailed work on the cytoplasmic components of the female germ-cells of the animals investigated.

R. Vander Stricht (1911) dealt with the oogenesis of the cat; O. Vander Stricht (1923) has made a comparative study of oogenesis of mammals, including the dog and the cat; P. del Rio Hortega (1913) described the behaviour of the Golgi material, and H. von Winiwarter (1900) studied the nuclear changes during oogenesis of the rabbit; H. von Winiwarter and G. Sainmont (1909) dealt with nuclear metamorphosis during the oogenesis of the cat; finally J. Nihoul (1926), in his paper on the rabbit, described the Golgi material during oogenesis. All the papers quoted, apart from those which deal with the nuclear changes, are either incomplete surveys, or the methods used are insufficiently delicate to reveal changes shown by modern techniques.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, Section B: Biological Sciences , Volume 63 , Issue 2 , 1948 , pp. 200 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1948

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 to Literature

Aykroyd, O. E., 1938. “The Cytoplasmic Inclusions in the Oogenesis of Man”, Zeits. Zellforsch. mikr. Anat., XXVN (5), 691–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beams, H. W., and King, R. L., 1938. “A Study of the Cytoplasmic Components and Inclusions of the Developing Guinea-Pig Egg”, Cytologia, VIII, 353–367.Google Scholar
Bhattacharya, D. R., Das, R. S., and Dutta, S. K., 1929. “On the Infiltration of Golgi Bodies from the Follicular Epithelium to the Egg”, Zeits. Zellforsch. mikr. Anat., VIII (3), 566–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhattacharya, P. R., 1931. “The Infiltration of Golgi Bodies from Follicular Epithelium to the Egg in Mammals”, All. Univ. Stud., VII, 1–8.Google Scholar
Bowen, R. H., 1926. “Studies on the Golgi Apparatus in Gland Cells”, Quart, fourn. Micr. Sci., LXX, 193–215 and 419–449.Google Scholar
Brambell, F. W. R., 1925. “The Oogenesis of Fowl”, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc, B, CCXIV, 113–151.Google Scholar
Branca, A., 1924. “Degenerescence fragmentaire et segmentation parthenogenetique dans l'ovaire des Mammifères”, La Cellule, XXXIV, 53–68.Google Scholar
Branca, A., 1925. “L'Ovocyte atresique et son involution”, Arch, de Biol., XXXV, 325–440.Google Scholar
Cattaneo, D., 1914. “Ricerche sulla structura dell'ovario dei mammiferi”, Arch. Ital. Anat. Embr., XII, 1–34.Google Scholar
Gatenby, J. B., and Woodger, J. H., 1920. “On the Relationship between the Formation of Yolk and the Mitochondria and Golgi Apparatus during Oogenesis”, Journ. Roy. Micr. Soc, 129–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gresson, R. A. R., 1933. “A Study of the Cytoplasmic Inclusions and Nuclear Phenomena during the Oogenesis of the Mouse”, Quart, fourn. Micr. Sci., LXXV, 697–721.Google Scholar
Henneguy, L. F., 1926. “Sur la situation de l'appareil de Golgi dans lea cellules folliculaires de l'ovaire De Cobaye”, C.R. Soc. de Biol., XCIV, 764.Google Scholar
Kirkman, H., and Severinghaus, A. E. 1938. “A Review of the Golgi Apparatus”, Anat. Rec, LXX, Part I, 413–433, Part II, 557–575; LXXI, Part III, 79–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kulesch, L., 1914. “Der Netzapparat von Golgi in den Zellen des Eierstockes”, Arch. f. mikr. Anat., LXXXIV, 142–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, K. B., 1931. “The Transference of Golgi Bodies from the Follicular Epithelium to the Egg in Certain Indian Snakes”, Alld. Univ. Stud., VII, 1–10.Google Scholar
MacBride, E. W., and Hewer, H. R., 1931. Recent Advances in Microscopy, London, 88–167.Google Scholar
Nihoul, J., 1926. “Recherches sur l'appareil endocellulaire de Golgi dans les premiers stades du developpement des Mammifères”, La Cellule, XXXVII, 23–40.Google Scholar
Nunes, J. P., 1927. “Le Corps Enigmatique de l'Ovocyte De La Lapine”, C.R. Soc. Biol. Paris (Soc. Portugaise de Biol), XCVll, 874.Google Scholar
Rio, Hortega P. Del 1913. “Details nouveaux sur la structure de l'ovaire”, Trab. Lab. Lnvest. Biol., XI, 163–175.Google Scholar
Singh, B. N., 1938. “The Cytoplasmic Bodies in the Oogenesis of the Vulture (Neophron percnopterus ginginianus) and the Effect of Ultra-centrifuging on the Oocytes of the Pigeon”, Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., XLV, B (2), 33–64.Google Scholar
Van Der Stricht, O., 1904. “La structure de l'œuf des Mammifères”, Arch, de Biol., XXI, 1–101.Google Scholar
Van Der Stricht, O., 1923. “Élitude comparee des ovules des Mammifères, aux differentes periodes de l'ovogenèse, d'apres les travaux du Laboratoire d'Histologie et d'Embryologie de l'Universite de Gand”, Arch, de Biol., XXXIII, 220–300.Google Scholar
Van Der Stricht, R., 1911. “Vitellogenese dans l'ovule de Chatte”, Arch, de Biol. XXVI, 365–481.Google Scholar
Winiwarter, H. Von, 1900. “Recherches sur l'ovogenèse et l'organogenèse de l'ovaire des Mammifères (Lapin et Homme)”, Arch, de Biol., XVII, 33–183.Google Scholar
Winiwarter, H. Von, and Sainmont, G., 1909. “Nouvelles recherches sur l'ovogenèse et l'organogènese de l'ovaire de Mammifères (Chat)”, Arch, de Biol., XXIV, 165–276.Google Scholar