Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:01:34.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The feeding and breeding of laboratory animals. VI. The breeding of mice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

H. M. Bruce
H. M. Bruce
Affiliation:
National Institute for Medical Research, Hampstead, N.W. 3
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

1. The total reproductive performance of two groups each of twenty-four mice over a period of one year under two different systems of mating has been recorded.

2. In the first system (monogamous pairs) the male was kept continuously with the female; in 78% of cases the females became pregnant again at post-partum oestrus and were thus subjected for the most part to unbroken intensive breeding.

3. In the second system (polygynous groups) several females were kept with one male and were removed to individual cages for the birth and rearing of the litters and were returned to the male again only after the litter had been weaned.

4. Under the first system 1149 young were successfully reared to weaning in one year by the twenty-four females; under the second system 559 young were weaned during the same period.

5. Mortality of breeding females, litter size, weight of young at weaning, the effect of parity, loss of litters and of young between birth and weaning and the sex-ratio of the young weaned were alike for both methods of mating.

6. The interaction of concurrent gestation and lactation upon the length of the gestation period is discussed, and regression lines showing the relation between the number of young suckled, the number of young in the uterus and the length of the gestation period are given.

My best thanks are due to Dr A. S. Parkes, F.R.S., for advice during the course of the work and for help in the preparation of the manuscript. I should also like to thank Dr C. W. Emmens for the statistical analyses and the calculation of the regression lines.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , December 1947 , pp. 420 - 430
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1947

References

REFERENCES

Bittner, J. J. (1936). Jackson Mem. Lab. Nutr. Bull. 1, 3.Google Scholar
Brambell, F. W. R. (1937). Amer. J. Obstet. Gynaec. 33, 942.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crew, F. A. E. & Mirskaia, L. (1930). Quart. J. Exp. Physiol. 20, 263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crozier, W. J. (1939–1940). J. Gen. Physiol. 23, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crozier, W. J. & Enzmann, E. V. (1935–1936). J. Gen. Physiol. 19, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, H. H. (1924). The Rat. Philadelphia: The Wistar Institute.Google Scholar
Enzmann, E. V. (1933). Anat. Rec. 56, 345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enzmann, E. V. & Cbozier, W. J. (1934–1935). J. Gen. Physiol. 18, 791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, H. D. (1916–1917). Anat. Rec. 11, 269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lataste, (1887). Recherches de Zooèthique sur les Mammifères de l'ordre des Rongeurs. Bordeaux.Google Scholar
Lauŕie, E. M. O. (1946). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 133, 248.Google Scholar
Morris, H. P. (1944). J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 5, 115.Google Scholar
Parkes, A. S. (1924). Brit. J. Exp. Biol. 2, 21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkes, A. S. (1926). Ann. Appl. Biol. 13, 374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkes, A. S. (1927–1928). J. Physiol. 64, 388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Staff, Roscoe B. Jackson Memorial Laboratory (1941). Biology of the Laboratory Mouse. Philadelphia: Blakiston.Google Scholar
Theiss, O. (1944). Zbl. Bakt. Orig., 151, 468.Google Scholar