Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-03T18:28:10.473Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The histology of the bovine muzzle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

A. M. Mackie  and
A. Myfanwy Nisbet
A. M. Mackie
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Services and Animal Industry, Uganda
A. Myfanwy Nisbet
Affiliation:
The Hannah Dairy Research Institute, Kirkhill, Ayr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. The structure of the muzzle of the cow, its blood supply and the histochemistry of its glands have been studied.

2. The nasolabial glands are multilobular compound tubulo-acinar glands similar in structure to salivary glands. They secrete a watery mucincontaining fluid. It is suggested that they may be sweat gland homologues.

3. Arterio-venous anastomoses are present in the muzzle. Their possible function is discussed.

4. Although this investigation has shown how much the muzzle differs from the rest of the integument no particular function can be ascribed to it on the basis of the findings described.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , June 1959 , pp. 376 - 379
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1959

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

Bligh, J. (1957 a). J. Physiol. 135, 48P.Google Scholar
Bligh, J. (1957 b). J. Physiol. 136, 413.Google Scholar
Chiffelle, T. L. & Putt, F. A. (1951). Stain Tech. 26, 51.Google Scholar
Ellenberger, W. (1911). Handbuch der vergleichenden mikroskopischen Anatomie der Haustiere, 1st ed. vol. 3, 45. Berlin: Parey.Google Scholar
Ellenberger, W. & Baum, H. (1926). Handbuch der vergleichenden Anatomie der Haustiere, 16th ed., p. 383. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Findlay, J. D. & Yang, S. H. (1950). J. Agric. Sci. 40, 126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodall, A. M. (1955). J. Anat., Lond., 87, 66.Google Scholar
Goodall, A. M. & Yang, S. H. (1954). J. Agric. Sci. 44, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hotchkiss, R. D. (1948). Arch. Biochem. 16, 131.Google Scholar
Lendrum, A. C. (1947). In D. C. Dykes Recent Advances in Clinical Pathology, 1st ed., p. 452. London: Churchill.Google Scholar
Lendrum, A. C. & McFarlane, D. (1940). J. Path. Bact. 50, 381.Google Scholar
Lennox, B., Pearse, A. G. E. & Symmers, W. St C. (1952). Brit. J. Cancer, 6. 363.Google Scholar
Mallory, F. B. (1900). J. Exp. Med. 5, 15.Google Scholar
Nisbet, A. M. (1955). J. Physiol. 130, 3P.Google Scholar
Nisbet, A. M. (1956). Nature, Lond., 178, 1477.Google Scholar
Prichard, M. M. L. & Daniel, P. M. (1953). J. Anat., Lond., 87, 66.Google Scholar
Prichard, M. M. L. & Daniel, P. M. (1954). Amer. J. Anat. 95, 203.Google Scholar
Trautmann, A. & Fiebiger, J. (1949). Lehrbuch der Histologie und vergleichenden mikroskopischen Anatomie der Haustiere, 8th and 9th edn, pp. 137, 311. Berlin: Parey.Google Scholar