Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T02:07:08.410Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of severe nutritional deprivation in early post-natal life on tissue and cellular responses during subsequent growth of lambs to the age of 4 months

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. M. Tulloh ,
Helen Brimblecombe  and
Carolyn Dennis
N. M. Tulloh
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3052, Australia
Helen Brimblecombe
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3052, Australia
Carolyn Dennis
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Melbourne, Parkville 3052, Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The growth of 16 ram lambs was severely restricted for the first 6 weeks of post-natal life. Subsequently, these lambs (group R) were fed ad libitum. The diet was based on reconstituted cows' whole milk and lucerne chaff. A control (group C) of 16 similar lambs was fed ad libitum on the same diet from birth.

Lambs were weighed regularly and, in group C, four lambs were killed at the age of 1 day and then two at each of the following body weights: 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 kg. In group R, five lambs were killed at the commencement of ad libitum feeding (age 43 days) and two each at the same body weights as in group C, except that only one lamb was available at 20 kg. After slaughter, the brain, liver, kidneys and the semitendinosus and gastrocnemius muscles were removed, weighed, stored and, with the exception of the liver, were analysed later for the following components: DNA, RNA and protein. Carcass weight and the weight of the kidney and channel (KC) fat were recorded. The femurs and metacarpals were removed from each carcass and cleaned, weighed and measured.

During the 6 weeks of restricted feeding, group R gained 0·9 kg while the ad libitum group C gained 13·5 kg. However, during recovery, group R grew faster than group C (0·37 ν 0·34 kg/day), reducing the weight for age difference near the end to 29 days at mean body weights of 30 kg.

Because of the design of the experiment, at the same age all measurements on group R animals, after the commencement of ad libitum feeding, were smaller than in group C. For this reason, the interpretation of the results has been based on differences between regression equations relating the various measurements to empty-body weight or to one another.

At the start of ad libitum feeding, brain weight, carcass weight, femur weight and femur length were bigger, while liver weight and KC fat weight were smaller in group R than in group C. At the end of the experiment, there were no significant differences between treatments for these measurements. Metacarpal shape differed between groups, the bone being relatively longer and narrower in group R than in group C, throughout the period of ad libitum feeding.

There were no significant differences between treatments in the relationships between DNA and corresponding tissue weights. However, the RNA was significantly less in both muscles in group R than in group C at the beginning of ad libitum feeding, but this difference had disappeared by the end of the experiment.

The brain protein: DNA and the brain weight: DNA ratios did not differ between treatments nor did they change significantly during the experiment. The semitendinosus was the only other tissue for which protein content was available and the protein: DNA ratio for this muscle differed between treatments, reflecting an acceleration of division by cell nuclei during the recovery period. The other tissue weight: DNA relationships did not differ between treatments and all ratios increased to values similar to those reported elsewhere. RNA:DNA ratios differed between treatments for both muscles, suggesting that high rates of protein synthesis occurred in group R during the recovery period.

In spite of the apparent normality of group R when measurements were related to EBW or tissue weights at the end of the experiment, only a long-term investigation would determine whether the weight-for-age difference of the type reported here would persist in adult life.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 106 , Issue 2 , April 1986 , pp. 341 - 350
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

Allden, W. G. (1970). The effects of nutritional deprivation on the subsequent productivity of sheep and cattle. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 40, 1167–1184.Google ScholarPubMed
Berg, R. T. & Butterfield, R. M. (1976). New Concepts of Cattle Growth. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Boivin, A., Vendrely, R. & Vendrely, C. (1948). L'acide désoxyribonucléique du noyau cellulaire, dépositaire des caractėres héréditaires: arguments d'ordre analytique. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences 226, 1061–1063.Google Scholar
Dickerson, J. W. T. & McAnulty, P. A. (1975). The response of hind-limb muscles of the weanling rat to undemutrition and subsequent rehabilitation. British Journal of Nutrition 33, 171–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enesco, M. & Leblond, C. P. (1962). Increase in cell number as a factor in the growth of the organs and tissues of the young male rat. Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology 10, 530–562.Google Scholar
Hammond, J. (1932). Growth and Development of Mutton Qualities in the Sheep, p. 152. London: Oliver and Boyd.Google Scholar
Hopkins, D. L. & Tulloh, N. M. (1985). Effects of a severe nutritional check in early post-natal life on the subsequent growth of sheep to the age of 12–14 months. Changes in body weight, wool and skeletal growth, and effects at the cellular level. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 105, 551–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howarth, R. E. & Baldwin, R. L. (1971). Synthesis and accumulation of protein and nucleic acid in rat gastroonemiua muscle during normal growth, restricted growth and recovery from restricted growth. Journal of Nutrition 101, 477–484.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huxley, J. S. (1932). Problems of Relative Growth. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Johns, J. T. & Bergen, W. G. (1976). Growth in sheep. Pre- and post-weaning hormone changes and muscle and liver development. Journal of Animal Science 43, 192–200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lerner, I. M. (1938). Growth ratio of the fowl's tarsometatarsus. 1. Variations with respect to body weight. Growth 2, 135–140.Google Scholar
Lister, D. & McCance, R. A. (1967). Severe undernutrition in growing and adult animals. 17. The ultimate results of rehabilitation: pigs. British Journal of Nutrition 21, 787–799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCance, R. A. & Widdowson, E. M. (1962). Nutrition and growth. Proceedings of the Royal Society 156 B, 326–337.Google Scholar
Martin, R. F., Donohue, D. C. & Finch, L. R. (1972). New analytical procedure for the estimation of Dna with ρ-nitrophenylhydrazine. Analytical Biochemistry 47, 562–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masters, C. J. (1963). Nucleic acids and protein stores in the Merino sheep. Australian Journal of Biological Science 16, 192–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauro, A. (1961). Satellite cells of skeletal muscle fibres. Journal of Biophysical and Biochemical Cytology 2, 493–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sands, J., Dobbing, J. & Gratrix, C. A. (1979). Cell number and cell size: organ growth and development and the control of catch-up growth in rats. Lancet 2, 503–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trenkle, A., Dewitt, D. L. & Topel, D. G. (1978). Influence of age, nutrition and genotype on carcass traits and cellular development of the M. longissimus of cattle. Journal of Animal Science 46, 1597–1603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulloh, N. M. & Romberg, B. (1963). An effect of gravity on bone development in lambs. Nature, London 200, 438–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winick, M. & Noble, A. (1965). Quantitative changes in Dna, Rna and protein during prenatal and postnatal growth in the rat. Developmental Biology 12, 451–466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winick, M. & Noble, A. (1966). Cellular response in rats during malnutrition at various ages. Journal of Nutrition 89, 300–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed