spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online December 10, 2003
Journal of Experimental Biology 207, 263-268 (2004)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2004
doi: 10.1242/jeb.00740
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Williams, T. D.
Right arrow Articles by Ames, C. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Williams, T. D.
Right arrow Articles by Ames, C. E.

Top-down regression of the avian oviduct during late oviposition in a small passerine bird

T. D. Williams* and C. E. Ames

Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University Drive, Burnaby, V5A 1S6, Canada



View larger version (15K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1. Variation in dry oviduct mass (mg) during the laying cycle in female zebra finches in relation to stage of ovarian development. 1st egg, day first egg was laid; F1 foll, one or more yolky follicles present; 0 foll, no remaining yolky follicles; ovid egg, oviductal egg present. Columns sharing the same letter are not significantly different (P>0.05).

 


View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2. Variation in dry mass of infundibulum/magnum (A), isthmus (B) and shell gland/vagina (C) during the laying cycle in female zebra finches in relation to stage of ovarian development (as for Fig 1). Columns sharing the same letter are not significantly different (P>0.05).

 





© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2004