Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Some further data concerning the determination of the mesonephros

  • Kurze Mitteilungen
  • Published:
Experientia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Zusammenfassung

InAmblystoma besitzen die präsumtiven Urnierenanlagen starke Tendenzen zur Selbstdifferenzierung, während der induktive Einfluß von seiten des primären Harnleiters eine mehr untergeordnete Rolle spielt. Dieser Einfluß auf die Differenzierung der Urnierenanlagen wird erst nach dem Auswachsen des Harnleiters zur Kloake ausgeübt. Der Differenzierungsgrad der Anlagen zeigt jedoch eine gewisse Abhängigkeit vom funktionellen Zustande des Harnleiters. Nach Entfernung der Vorniere ist die Differenzierungszone der Urnierenanlagen in verschiedenen Fällen ziemlich stark kranialwärts verschoben, was einen hemmenden Einfluß der Vorniere auf die Differenzierung der Urnierenanlagen im kranialen Abschnitt des Rumpfes andeuten könnte.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  1. J. Van Geertruyden, Arch. Biol.57, 2, 145 (1947).

    Google Scholar 

  2. P. D. Nieuwkoop, Arch. Néerl. Zool.8, 1 (1947).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Stage V corresponds to the third phase of development distinguished byVan Geertruyden, 1947. Similarly, stages III and IV can be compared with his second, and stages I and II with his first phase of differentiation.

  4. R. W. Hall, Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. Harward Coll.45, 31 (1904).

    Google Scholar 

  5. The first three or four “primary” mesonephric rudiments show a uniform “segmental” arrangement, the position of the following ones, however, does not completely agree with that of the segments of the trunk. Cf.Hall 2, 1904, andGray 5, 1932.

  6. The operation has been performed on 18 animals; normally on theleft side with the exception of two animals marked (R).

  7. P. Gray, Quart. J. Micr. Sci.75, 425 (1932).

    Google Scholar 

  8. R. W. Hall, Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. Harvard Coll.45, 31 (1904).

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. J. O'Connor, J. Anat.74, 34, 301 (1939/40);75, 95 (1940).

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Van Geertruyden, Arch. Biol.57, 2, 145 (1947).

    Google Scholar 

  11. This fact may help us to explain the interesting observation ofVan Geertruyden 3 that the role of the Wolffian duct can be taken over by the spinal cord (a completely abnormal inductor) when it has direct contact with the mesonephros blastemata.

  12. R. R. Humphrey, Anat. Rec.40, 67 (1928).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. H. Machemer, Roux' Arch.118, 200 (1929).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. R. K. Burns, Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med. N.Y.39, 111 (1938).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. J. Holtfreter, Rev. Canad. Biol.3, 220 (1944).

    Google Scholar 

  16. R. J. O'Connor, J. Anat.74, 34, 301 (1939/40);75, 95 (1940).

    Google Scholar 

  17. A difference in the rate of differentiation between both sides, normally present inRana (Van Geertruyden, 19478) is unknown inAmblystoma.

  18. K. Miura, Jap. J. Med. Sci. Anat.2, 105 and 125 (1930).

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Van Geertruyden, Arch. Biol.57, 2, 145 (1947).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Zoological Laboratory, University of Utrecht, Holland

    P. D. Nieuwkoop

Authors
  1. P. D. Nieuwkoop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nieuwkoop, P.D. Some further data concerning the determination of the mesonephros. Experientia 4, 391–394 (1948). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02145199

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02145199

Keywords

Search

Navigation