Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T02:20:06.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A study of the composition of Clun Forest ewe's milk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

W. M. Ashton ,
J. B. Owen  and
Jean W. Ingleton
W. M. Ashton
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Biochemistry
J. B. Owen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
Jean W. Ingleton
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Husbandry, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Little information is available on the composition of the milk of British breeds of sheep under conditions prevailing in this country.

1. This paper presents results of the analysis of milk from 46 Clun Forest ewes suckling lambs during 1961 and 1962. Three groups of ewes were used, two of which grazed while a third was fed indoors. Milk samples were obtained by handmilking one quarter while the lamb sucked the other, after a period of 5 hours during which suckling was prevented by means of udder covers.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 63 , Issue 1 , August 1964 , pp. 85 - 90
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.)

References

Barnicoat, C. R., Logan, A. G. & Grant, A. I. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnicoat, C. R., Murray, P. F., Roberts, E. M. & Wilson, G. S. (1957). J. Agric. Sci. 48, 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonsma, F. N. (1939). Publ. Univ. Pretoria Agric. Series 1, No. 48.Google Scholar
British Standards Institute London (1960). Specifications for density hydrometers for use in milk. B.S. 734.Google Scholar
Davies, W. L. (1932). The Analyst, 57, 79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Sokkary, A. M., Sirry, I. & Hassan, H. A. (1949). J. Agric. Sci. 39, 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ely, F. & Peterson, W. E. (1941). J. Dairy Sci. 24, 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godden, W. & Puddy, C. A. (1935). J. Dairy Res. 6, 307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, W. C. (1950). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 1, 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, I. & Claesson, O. (1957). Progress in the Physiology of Farm Animals, 3, 1017. Ed. Hammond, J.. London: Butterworth's Scientific Publications.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1956 a). A Textbook of Dairy Chemistry, 2, 94. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1956 b). A Textbook of Dairy Chemistry, 1, 72. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1956 c). A Textbook of Dairy Chemistry, 1, 87. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1956 d). A Textbook of Dairy Chemistry, 1, 97. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R. (1956 e). A Textbook of Dairy Chemistry, 1, 50, 86. London: Chapman and Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
Ling, E. R., Kon, S. K. & Porter, J. W. G. (1961). Milk: The Mammary Gland and its Secretion, 2, 219. Ed. Kon, S. K. and Cowie, A. T.. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Macdonald, F. J. (1959). The Analyst, 84, 287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niedig, R. E. & Iddings, E. J. (1919). J. Agric. Res. 17, 19.Google Scholar
Nejim, H. T. (1963). J. Dairy Res. 30, 81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, J. B. (1957). J. Agric. Sci. 48, 387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, J. B. & Ingleton, J. W. (1963). J. Agric. Sci. 61, 329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peiece, A. W. (1934). Aust. J. Exp. Biol. Med. Sci. 12, 7.Google Scholar
Perrin, D. R. (1958). J. Dairy Res. 25, 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiting, F., Slen, S. B. & Bezeau, L. M. (1952). Sci. Agric. 32, 365.Google Scholar
Whittlestone, W. G. (1953). J. Dairy Res. 20, 146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar