J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J. Anim Sci. 2007. 85:1634-1639. doi:10.2527/jas.2006-737
© 2007 American Society of Animal Science

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jas.2006-737v1
85/7/1634    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peiró, R.
Right arrow Articles by Blasco, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peiró, R.
Right arrow Articles by Blasco, A.

ANIMAL GENETICS

Early embryonic survival and embryo development in two lines of rabbits divergently selected for uterine capacity1

R. Peiró2, M. A. Santacreu, Á. Climent and A. Blasco

Departamento de Ciencia Animal, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, PO Box 22012, 46071 Valencia, Spain


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
The aim of this work is to study early embryo survival and development in 2 lines divergently selected for high and low uterine capacity throughout 10 generations. A total of 162 female rabbits from the high line and 133 from the low line were slaughtered at 25, 48, or 62 h of gestation. There were no differences in ovulation rate and fertilization rate between lines in any of the 3 stages of gestation. Embryo survival, estimated as the number of normal embryos recovered at a constant ovulation rate, was similar in both lines at 25 and 48 h. Embryo survival was greater in the high line [D (posterior mean of the difference between the high and low lines) = 0.57 embryos] at 62 h of gestation. There was no difference in embryonic stage of development at 25 h, but at 48 and 62 h of gestation, the high line, compared with the low line, had a greater percentage of early morulae (83 vs. 72%) and compacted morulae (55 vs. 38%). Divergent selection for uterine capacity appeared to modify embryo development, at least from 48 h of gestation, and embryo survival from 62 h.

Key Words: uterine capacity • selection • early embryo survival • embryo development • rabbit


    INTRODUCTION
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
Little is known about the effect of selection for uterine capacity, or the prenatal survival that depends on the female, on fetal survival through gestation. In rabbits, a difference of 2.35 kits was found between 2 lines divergently selected for high and low uterine capacity through 10 generations (Santacreu et al., 2005Go). These lines had similar ovulation (Mocé et al., 2004Go) and fertilization rate (Santacreu et al., 1996Go) but different numbers of implanted embryos (Santacreu et al., 2005Go) and numbers of embryos at 72 to 75 h of gestation (Mocé et al., 2004Go). The high line also had a more advanced embryonic stage of development. In mice, Ribeiro et al. (1996)Go observed greater embryo survival (ES) until the sixth day after mating, when the selection for uterine capacity was performed. In the same experiment, when selecting for uterine capacity, Al-Shorepy et al. (1992)Go observed increased embryo development and homogeneity before implantation.

In mice and rabbits, a large part of the difference in prenatal survival occurs in the early stages of gestation, when embryos are in the oviduct. The oviduct has been commonly considered as a passive tissue, but Killian (2004)Go and Buhi et al. (2000)Go found reasons to believe the oviduct is a biologically active tissue, providing an optimum environment for the developing embryo, as well as synthesizing and releasing proteins.

The aim of this work was to study the time at which differences in ES appear due to selection for uterine capacity, which is a characteristic of the female.


    MATERIALS AND METHODS
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
Animals
All experimental procedures involving animals were approved by the UPV Research Ethics Committee.

Animals belonged to a divergent selection experiment for uterine capacity. Selection was performed on the high and low lines through 10 generations (Argente et al., 1997Go). After 10 generations, selection was relaxed until the 18th generation. Uterine capacity was estimated as litter size in unilaterally ovariectomized does. Does were housed at the experimental farm of the Universidad Politécnica de Valencia in individual cages. Animals were fed with a commercial diet, and the photo-period used was 16-h light:8-h dark.

A total of 295 intact females (with both functional ovaries) belonging to high and low lines were slaughtered at several stages of gestation. All females came from the 18th generation. At 25 h of gestation, 69 high and 58 low females were slaughtered, whereas at 48 and 62 h of gestation, 50 and 43 females belonging to the high line and 39 and 36 females belonging to the low line, respectively, were slaughtered.

Embryo Recovery and Classification.
The ovulation rate (OR) was estimated as the number of corpora hemorrhagica in both ovaries. To recover embryos and oocytes, the oviduct and the first one-third of the uterine horn were flushed with 5 mL of Dulbecco’s phosphate buffered saline (DPBS, Sigma, Alcobendas, Madrid, Spain) supplemented with 0.132 g/L of calcium chloride, 0.2% BSA (Cod. A-3111, Sigma) and 0.2 mL of antibiotic (Penivet 1, Divasa Farmavic, Barcelona, Spain) at room temperature. At 25 h of gestation, 2 recovery techniques were used: tube or plate. All embryos and oocytes recovered were classified as no cleavage, 2-cell, or 4-cell stages. No cleavage was either an oocyte or a 1-cell embryo. To differentiate between the 2 cell types, they were dyed with Hoestch 33342 (B-2261, Sigma), 2 to 3% citrate sodium, and absolute ethanol (Cod. 131086, Panreac, Castellar del Valles, Barcelona, Spain) and evaluated by fluorescence microscopy. No cleavage embryos were classified as embryos of 1-cell stage when male and female pronuclei, 2 polar bodies, or spermatozoa in the periviteline space were observed. At 48 h of gestation, embryos were classified as abnormal embryos, 8- to 16-cell stages, or early morulae. At 62 h of gestation, embryos were classified morphologically as abnormal embryos, early morulae, or compacted morulae. Abnormal embryos were degenerated embryos or embryos with a stage of development not corresponding to that expected. No degenerated embryos or unexpected development embryos were found at 24 h of gestation, so this category was not included in the analysis for this gestation time. Embryo classification was always carried out by the same operator.

Traits
The following traits were recorded: OR estimated as number of corpora hemorrhagica, number of oocytes recovered (OOR), number of normal embryos recovered (ER), number of abnormal embryos recovered (AR), total recovered (TR = OOR + ER + AR), and BW at slaughter. The trait ES was analyzed as the number of normal embryos recovered fitting OR as a covariate. Traits calculated were: fertilization rate (FR) = [(ER + AR)/TR] x 100, percentage of 1-cell embryos [% 1-cell = (number of 1-cell embryos/ER) x 100], percentage of 2-cell embryos [% 2-cell = (number of 2-cell embryos/ER) x 100]; percentage of 4-cell embryos [% 4-cell = (number of 4-cell embryos/ER) x 100]; percentage of abnormal embryos {% AE = [AR/(AR+ER)] x 100}; percentage of normal embryos {% NE = [ER/(AR+ER)] x 100}; percentage of 8- to 16-cell embryos [% 8–16 cell = (number of 8–16 cell embryos/ER) x 100], percentage of early morulae [% EM = (number of early morulae/ER) x 100], and percentage of compacted morulae [% CM = (number of compacted morulae/ER) x 100].

Statistical Analyses
The analysis was based on Bayesian methods. Bounded uniform priors were used for all unknowns, and the data were assumed to be normally distributed. The following model was assumed for OR, FR, and embryonic stage of development:


Formula

where Li is the effect of the line (high and low line) and LACTj is the effect of lactation status (lactating or nonlactating doe).

The following model was assumed for ER:


Formula

where RECk is the effect of recovery method (tube or plate).

The model assumed for ES was the same as for ER but using OR as the covariate:


Formula

At 25 h, all the effects were considered, but at 48 and 62 h, lactation and recovery effects were not considered because all females were nulliparous and the recoveries were in the plate. Marginal posterior distributions of all unknowns were estimated by Gibbs Sampling (Sorensen and Gianola, 2002Go). After some exploratory analyses, we used 1 chain of 100,000 samples, discarding the first 20,000 and saving every 10 thereafter. Convergence was tested using the Z criterion of Geweke. The Monte Carlo SE (MCse) was estimated as described by Sorensen and Gianola (2002)Go.


    RESULTS
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
Means and coefficients of variation are presented in Table 1Go. Fertilization rate was high (98%) in all gestation stages. The percentage of abnormal embryos was small in both lines at 48 and 62 h of gestation. The majority of embryos at 25 and 48 h were in the 2-cell stage (79%) and early morulae (75%) respectively. At 62 h of gestation, 46% of the embryos were compacted morulae. After the 2-cell stage, embryo development demonstrated high variability.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 1. Raw means and coefficients of variation (in parentheses) for traits at 25, 48, or 62 h of gestation
 
Features of the estimated marginal posterior distributions of the differences (D) between high and low lines at 25 h of gestation are presented in Table 2Go. All MCse were very small, and lack of convergence was not detected by the Geweke test. Marginal posterior distributions were approximately normal; thus mode, mean, and median were similar, and only the posterior mean of the difference is given in the tables. An advantage of the Bayesian approach through MCMC procedures is the ease of computation of confidence intervals and probabilities (see review by Blasco, 2005Go). Thus, it is possible to calculate the shortest interval containing the true value with a probability of 95% (HPD95%). In our case, we are interested in estimating differences between lines, thus we can calculate not only the probability of this difference being greater than zero, P(D>0), but also the probability of this difference being economically or biologically relevant, P(D>b) when b is this relevant value.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 2. Features of the estimated marginal posterior distributions of the differences between high and low lines at 25 h of gestation1
 
Considering that 1 ova per female is a relevant difference (b = 1), the estimated difference between lines in OR at 25 h was irrelevant with the probability of OR being between 1 and –1 is 97%, which means that the probability of the difference in OR being greater or less than 1 is very low (3%; Table 2Go). Bayesian methods posterior probabilities, a measure of the uncertainty for the estimated parameter, and not a significance test or P-value.

Ovulation rate was greater for lactating than for non-lactating females (D = 1.38 ova; Pr = 97%). No relevant differences were found between lactation status for FR, ER, and embryo developmental stages. Ovulation rate and BW at 25 h of gestation were greater than at 48 and 62 h of gestation. The difference in OR disappeared when using the variable BW as covariate.

In order to establish relevant differences for FR we considered that a difference of 1 embryo corresponds to 7% in FR. The high line had a greater FR than the low line, P(D > 0%) = 95%, but this difference between lines, although it exists, was not relevant (Pr = 0%, Table 2Go).

A difference of 0.5 embryos could be considered as a relevant difference for ER and ES. Although the high line had a greater number of embryos recovered than the low line (D = 0.57), when ES was analyzed this difference decreased to 0.27 embryos (Pr = 24%).

Differences between lines in percentage of 1-cell, 2-cell, and 4-cell stages were low and irrelevant (1.43, 1.51, and 2.94%, respectively). Using the same argument as was previously used for FR, the probability of a relevant difference in percentage of 1-cell, 2-cell, and 4-cell stages were 14, 16, and 9% respectively. Thus, both lines had a similar embryonic stage of development.

Features of the estimated marginal posterior distributions of the differences between high and low lines are presented in Tables 3Go and 4Go at 48 and 62 h of gestation, respectively. As in the previous analyses, all MCse were very small; lack of convergence was not detected by the Geweke test; and marginal posterior distributions were approximately normal. The assumed values for relevant differences were the same as in the analyses at 25 h of gestation. We did not find any relevant difference between high and low lines in OR. As in the previous analysis at 25 h, no relevant difference for FR was found between lines, either at 48 or at 62 h.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 3. Features of the estimated marginal posterior distributions of the differences between high and low lines at 48 h of gestation1
 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

 
Table 4. Features of the estimated marginal posterior distributions of the differences between high and low lines at 62 h of gestation1
 
At 48 h, we did not find enough evidence for a difference in ER, P(D>0) is 68%. The same result applied to ES.

At 62 h of gestation, the high line had a greater ER [P(D>0) is 77%] and a greater ES [P(D>0) is 99%] than the low line. After fitting by ovulation rate (ES), the high line had 0.57 embryos more, although the estimate had low precision; the HPD95% is large, from 0.15 to 1.12 embryos, and the probability of a relevant difference in favor of the high line was only 57%. Nevertheless, the interval [k, {infty}) of the marginal posterior distribution containing 80, 85, and 95% of the probability shows that the minimum values that the difference has with these probabilities are at least 0.40, 0.36, and 0.20 embryos in favor of the low line, respectively.

At 48 h of gestation, the high line had 9.94% (1.42 embryos) more early morulae than the low line. Although HPD95% included zero, the high line had a greater percentage of compacted morulae [P(D > 0) = 97%], which is the more advanced stage of development. The probability of a relevant difference was high [P(D > b) = 70%] and always in favor of the high line.

At 62 h of gestation, the high line had 16.45% (2.35 embryos) more compacted morulae than the low line. As at 48 h, the HPD95% included zero, but the probability of a relevant difference was high [P(D > b) is 85%] and always in favor of the high line. Moreover, the probability of a relevant difference in favor of the high line was greater than this probability at 48 h. Taken together, these results indicate that the difference between lines in ES appears between 48 and 62 h of gestation, whereas the difference in the embryonic stage of development appears between 25 and 48 h, and increased at 62 h of gestation.


    DISCUSSION
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
The results of this study show that mean values of OR and FR at 25, 48, and 62 h of gestation were within the range of those obtained in the literature. At 25 h, OR was similar to the values obtained by other authors in multiparous females selected by reproductive traits (13 to 14 ova per female; Blasco et al., 1993Go). Nulliparous females (at 48 and 62 h) had a lower OR and BW than multiparous. Similar results were obtained by Hulot and Matheron (1980)Go. Fertilization rate was high, near 100%, in agreement with results obtained by other authors in lines selected for reproductive traits in rabbits (Torres et al., 1987bGo; Garcia-Ximenez and Vicente, 1992Go; Bolet and Theau-Clement, 1994Go) and in pigs (Chang, 1969Go, Wrathall, 1977Go; Polge, 1978Go). At 48 and 62 h of gestation, both lines presented a high percentage of normal embryos (97 and 95%, respectively) when compared with other authors. For example, Viudes de Castro et al. (1995)Go obtained a lower percentage of normal embryos (85 to 90%) at 64 to 66 h of gestation in 3 lines selected by different criteria but more than 40% of their females had ovarian anomalies. Lavara et al. (2005)Go also found a similar percentage of normal embryos in these lines at 76 to 78 h. The percentage of each embryonic stage of development was similar to the results obtained by Ménézo and Renard (1991)Go and Garcia-Ximenez and Vicente (1992)Go in maternal rabbit lines: the majority of the embryos were 2-cell stages at 25 h and early morulae at 48 h of gestation.

When comparing the high and low line, we found that at 25 and 48 h of gestation both lines had similar ES, but the high line showed a more advanced embryonic stage of development at 48 h. Fourteen hours later, the difference in the percentage of compacted morulae was greater in the high line (16.45 vs. 9.94). At this moment of gestation, the difference of ES was relevant (0.57 embryos), and the probability of a relevant difference in favor of the high line was moderate-high (57%). Mocé et al. (2004)Go reported concordant results at 72 h of gestation; the high line had around 1 embryo more than the low line and a more advanced embryonic stage of development. All these results might indicate that the first step related to early survival is the embryonic stage of development. Thus, we observed that a greater embryonic stage of development took place at least at 48 h and later, with an increase in ES. Divergent selection for uterine capacity seems to have modified embryo development at least from 48 h of gestation and ES at least from 62 h.

There are few published reports about the effect of selection for uterine capacity, litter size, or its components on ES. In mice, Ribeiro et al. (1996)Go and Al-Shorepy et al. (1992)Go studied ES at 6 and 3.5 d of gestation, respectively, in 3 lines selected for 21 generations for different criteria. At 6 d, when embryos are implanted, a positive effect on ES was found in the line selected for litter size and in the line selected with an index on ovulation rate and ova success, with respect to the control line. In the line selected by uterine capacity, they did not find any relevant effect on ES. Contrary to our results, at 3.5 d of gestation, when embryos were in the uterus, Al-Shorepy et al. (1992)Go did not find differences in ES. However, the 3 lines selected showed a greater frequency of blastocyst vs. morulae, in agreement with our results. Durrant et al. (1980)Go also showed a greater percentage of embryos developed beyond the 8-cell stage at 2 d of gestation in a line selected for litter size. Likewise, Moler et al. (1981)Go studied the effect of selection on embryo development at 3.5 d of gestation in a line selected for high ES and another selected for small litter size. The number of embryos recovered was greater in the line selected for high ES. Moreover, this line had a more advanced embryonic stage of development, having a greater percentage of blastocyst (83 vs. 44%) and a lower percentage of morulae (10 vs. 36%) and degenerating embryos (10 vs. 20%). All these results demonstrate that it is possible to modify the embryonic stage of development and ES in the early gestation period by selection, although it is not clear which mechanisms are modified.

Previous studies with rabbits and pigs showed a relation between the stage of embryo development and ES. In rabbits, Torres et al. (1987b)Go found that the difference in prolificacy between 2 lines was due to embryonic loss before 96 h. Also, the line with lower prolificacy showed a greater percentage of unfertilized and delayed embryos. Torres et al. (1987a)Go found that larger blastocysts showed greater survival than small blastocysts at 27 d of gestation, after transferring embryos of different size in each horn of the female at 4 d of gestation.

Some authors proposed that differences in the embryonic stage of development could mainly be due to timing of ovulation and composition of oviductal and uterine fluid (Hunter et al., 2004Go). In our case, because the embryonic stage of development at 25 h of gestation are similar in both lines, the differences at 48 and 62 h could be due to changes in the composition of oviductal fluid. During fertilization and early cleavage-stage development of the embryos, the oviduct undergoes specific biochemical modifications, which contribute to an optimization of the microenvironment.

In conclusion, divergent selection for uterine capacity seems to modify embryo development and ES in the early stages of gestation. Wider knowledge of the pattern of oviductal fluids in these lines will provide an insight into the physiological events that regulate embryo development and ES.


    Footnotes
 
1 This experiment was supported by the Comisión Interministerial de Ciencia y Tecnología (CICYT- AGL2001-3068-C03-01). Back

2 Corresponding author: ropeibar{at}dca.upv.es

Received for publication November 7, 2006. Accepted for publication February 27, 2007.


    LITERATURE CITED
 Top
 Abstract
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 


Al-Shorepy, S. A., A. C. Clutter, R. M. Blair, and M. K. Nielsen. 1992. Effects of three methods of selection for litter size in mice on pre-implantation embryonic development. Biol. Reprod. 46:958–963.[Abstract]

Argente, M. J., M. A. Santacreu, A. Climent, G. Bolet, and A. Blasco. 1997. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. J. Anim. Sci. 75:2350–2354.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Blasco, A. 2005. The use of Bayesian statistics in meat quality analyses: A review. Meat Sci. 69:115–122.[CrossRef]

Blasco, A., J. P. Bidanel, G. Bolet, C. S. Haley, and M. A. Santacreu. 1993. Genetic variability in prenatal survival of politocous species. A review. Livest. Prod. Sci. 37:1–21.[CrossRef]

Bolet, G., and A. Theau-Clement. 1994. Fertilization rate and preimplantation embryonic development in two rabbit strains of different fecundity, in purebreeding and crossbreeding. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 36:153–162.[CrossRef]

Buhi, W. C., I. M. Alvarez, and A. J. Kouba. 2000. Secreted proteins of the oviduct. Cells Tissues Organs 166:165–179.[CrossRef][Medline]

Chang, M. Z. 1969. Development of transferred ferret eggs in relation to the age of corpora lutea. J. Exp. Zool. 171:459–464.[CrossRef][Medline]

Durrant, B. S., E. J. Eisen, and L. C. Ulberg. 1980. Ovulation rate, embryo survival and ovarian sensitivity to gonadotrophins in mice selected for litter size and body weight. J. Reprod. Fertil. 59:329–339.[Abstract]

Garcia-Ximenez, F., and J. S. Vicente. 1992. Effect of ovarian cystic or haemorrhagic follicles on embryo recovery and survival after transfer in HCG ovulated rabbits. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 32:143–149.[Medline]

Hulot, F., and G. Matheron. 1980. Comparaison de la reproduction de lapins de deux genotypes effects de l’age et de la saison. Pages 293–302 in Proc. 2nd World Rabbit Congr., Barcelona, Spain.

Hunter, M. G., R. S. Robinson, G. E. Mann, and R. Webb. 2004. Endocrine and paracrine control of follicular development and ovulation rate in farm species. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 83:461–477.[CrossRef]

Killian, G. J. 2004. Evidence for the role of oviduct secretions in sperm function, fertilization and embryo development. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 82:141–153.[CrossRef][Medline]

Lavara, R., M. P. Viudes de Castro, G. M. K. Mellasen, and J. S. Vicente. 2005. Eficiencia de la recuperación "in vivo" de embriones de conejo por laparoscopia. ITEA 26:398–400.

Ménézo, Y., and J. P. Renard. 1991. La vie de l’œuf avant l’implantation. Pages 339–358 in La Reproduction chez les Mammifères et l’Home. M.C. Thibault, Ed. INRA, France.

Mocé, M. L., M. A. Santacreu, A. Climent, and A. Blasco. 2004. The effect of divergent selection for uterine capacity on prenatal survival in rabbits: Maternal and embryonic genetic effects. J. Anim. Sci. 82:68–73.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Moler, T. L., S. E. Donahue, G. B. Anderson, and G. E. Bradford. 1981. Effects of maternal and embryonic genotype on prenatal survival in two selected mouse lines. J. Anim. Sci. 51:300–303.

Polge, C. 1978. Fertilization in the pig and horse. J. Reprod. Fertil. 54:461–470.[Medline]

Ribeiro, E. L. A., M. A. van Engelen, and M. K. Nielsen. 1996. Embryonal survival to 6 days in mice selected on different criteria for litter size. J. Anim. Sci. 74:610–615.[Abstract]

Santacreu, M. A., A. Climent, M. Gallego, L. Fayos, and A. Blasco. 1996. Fertilization rate and early embryo development in two rabbit lines selected on uterine capacity. Pages 355–357 in Proc. 6th World Rabbit Congr., Toulouse, France.

Santacreu, M. A., M. L. Mocé, A. Climent, and A. Blasco. 2005. Divergent selection for uterine capacity in rabbits. II. Correlated response on litter size and its components estimated with a cryo-preserved control population. J. Anim. Sci. 83:2303–2307.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Sorensen, D., and D. Gianola. 2002. Likelihood, Bayesian and MCMC methods in quantitative genetics. Springer, New York, NY.

Torres, S., F. Hulot, M. Meunier, and C. Sevellec. 1987a. Comparative study of preimplantation development and embryonic loss in two rabbit strains. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 27:707–714.[Medline]

Torres, S., F. Hulot, and C. Sevellec. 1987b. Early stages of embryonic development in two rabbit genotypes. Reprod. Nutr. Dev. 27:715–719.[Medline]

Viudes de Castro, M. P., F. Garcia-Ximenez, and J. S. Vicente. 1995. Embryo recovery from eliminating does of three selected rabbits strains for an embryo bank. Investigación Agraria 10:145–151.

Wrathall, A. E. 1977. Reproductive failure in the pig: Diagnosis and control. Vet. Rec. 100:230–237.[Abstract]



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
jas.2006-737v1
85/7/1634    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Peiró, R.
Right arrow Articles by Blasco, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Peiró, R.
Right arrow Articles by Blasco, A.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS