Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:48:24.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A comparison of vaginal, cervical and intrauterine insemination of sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. M. C. Maxwell  and
L. J. Hewitt
W. M. C. Maxwell
Affiliation:
Animal Breeding and Research Institute, Katanning, W.A., Australia
L. J. Hewitt
Affiliation:
Australian Merino Society, Jonlorrie, York, W.A., Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Practical systems for the artificial insemination of sheep have been available for many years (reviewed by Maxwell, 1984). The traditional method is to separate from the flock ewes exhibiting a natural oestrus as identified by ‘teaser’ rams, and inseminate these ewes with freshly collected and diluted semen. The ewes are generally inseminated by suspension of the hindquarters over an elevated rail and deposition of the semen within the first fold of the cervix using a plastic pipette, speculum and headlamp (the cervical insemination method, Salamon, 1976).

Type
Short Note
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 106 , Issue 1 , February 1986 , pp. 191 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

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

Fairnie, I. J. & Wales, R. G. (1982). Using genetically superior rams efficiently by artificial insemination. Proceedings of the World Congress on Sheep and Beef Cattle Breeding, vol. II (ed. Barton, R. A. and Smith, W. C.), pp. 311–320. Palmerston North, New Zealand: The Dunmore Press Limited.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. G. & Wilkins, J. F. (1982). An evaluation of real time ultrasonic scanners for use in identifying litter number in pregnant ewes. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 14, 491–494.Google Scholar
Kerton, D. J., Mcphee, S. R., Davis, I. F., White, M. B., Banfield, J. C. & Cahill, L. P. (1984). Acomparison of insemination techniques in Corriedale ewes. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 15, 701.Google Scholar
Maxwell, W. M. C. (1984). Current problems and future potential of artificial insemination programmes. In Reproduction in Sheep (ed. Lindsay, D. R. and Pearce, D. T.), pp. 291–298. Canberra, A.C.T.: Australian Academy of Science and Australian Wool Corporation.Google Scholar
Maxwell, W. M. C, Butler, L. G. & Wilson, H. R. (1984). Intra-uterine insemination of ewes with frozen semen. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 102, 233–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, W. M. C, Curnock, R. M., Logue, D. N. & Reed, H. C. B. (1980). Fertility of ewes following artificial insemination with semen frozen in pellets or straws, a preliminary report. Theriogenology 14, 83–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salamon, S. (1976). Artificial Insemination of Sheep. Chippendale, N.S.W.: Publicity Press Limited.Google Scholar
Visser, D. & Salamon, S. (1973). Fertility of ram spermatozoa frozen in a Tris-based diluent. Australian Journal of Biological Sciences 26, 513–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar