Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-wlffp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-02T09:13:09.720Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some liver enzyme levels in the late pregnant and early parturient ewe and the effect of dietary restriction in late pregnancy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

D. S. P. Patterson
D. S. P. Patterson
Affiliation:
Central Veterinary Laboratory, Weybridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The effect of undernutrition on the levels of five enzyme activities has been observed in liver biopsy specimens taken from Suffolk-cross ewes in late pregnancy.

2. There was no significant effect on the levels of three important NADPH2-generating enzymes (i.e. glucose-6-phosphate, 6-phosphogluconate and tsocitrate dehydrogenases) when comparisons were made between groups of animals at the same stage of pregnancy. However, the proportion of very low 6-phosphogluconate dehydrogenase levels assayed in livers of the undernourished ewes was significantly increased as parturition approached.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 62 , Issue 2 , April 1964 , pp. 245 - 252
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1964

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adler, J. H. & Wertheimer, E. (1962). Bull. Res. Coun. Israel (Sect. E), 10E, 97.Google Scholar
Annison, E. F. & Lewis, D. (1959). In Metabolism in the Rumen. London: Methuen and Co.Google Scholar
Ashmore, J. & Weber, G. (1959). Vitamins and Hormones, 17, 91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beisenherz, G., Bolt, H. J., Bücher, Th., Czok, R., Gabbade, K. H., Meyer-Arendt, E. & Pfleiderer, G. (1953). Z. Naturforsch. 8b, 555.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brruns, F. (1954). Biochem. Z. 325, 156.Google Scholar
Ciotti, M. & Kaplan, N. O. (1951). Methods in Enzymology, 3, 890.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, E. J. H. (1962). J. Agric. Sci. 59, 67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glock, G. E.McLean, P. (1953). Biochem. J. 55, 400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glock, G. E. & McLean, P. (1955). Biochem. J. 61, 390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marinello, E., Gioannini, P. & Verme, G. (1963). Chem. Abstrs, 57, 2756b.Google Scholar
Passmore, R. (1961). Lancet, i, 839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. S. P. (1963). Nature, Lond., (199, 402).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, D. S. P., Burns, K. N., Cunningham, N. F., Hebert, C. N. & Saba, N. (1964). J. Agric. Sci. 62, 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, V. R. & Niemeyer, H. (1959). In Ciba Symp.: ‘Regulation of Cell Metabolism’ (Wolstfinholme, G. E. W., and O'Connor, C. M., eds.) London: J. and A. Churchill Ltd.Google Scholar
Raggi, F., Hansson, E., Simesen, M. G., Kronfeld, D. S. & Luick, J. R. (1961). Res. Vet. Sci. 2, 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, E. (1961). In Biochemist's Handbook (King, E. J., & Sperry, W. M., eds.) London: E. and F. N. Spon Ltd.Google Scholar
Tombs, M. P., Souter, F. & Maclagan, N. F. (1959). Biochem. J. 73, 167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wakil, S. J. (1961). J. Lipid. Res. 2, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinhouse, S. (1952). Brookhaven Symp. Quant. Biol. 5, 162.Google Scholar