In 1779, John Hunter provided a written account of “Mr. Wright’s freemartin.” Hi
ID: 140482 • Letter: I
Question
In 1779, John Hunter provided a written account of “Mr. Wright’s freemartin.” His publication also included a precise drawing of the gonads and reproductive tract of an animal with this anomaly. The drawing depicts two (apparently undescended) testes, female external genitalia, a vagina, and a genital duct system that does not resemble a normal uterus and oviducts. Twentieth-century reproductive biologists who have examined this rendering agree that it is a representation of an anomaly of sexual differentiation, but assert that is not a freemartin in the sense that we use the term today. On what criteria is their skepticism based? What type of disorder might this actually be? Explain the basis of your answer in simple terms
Explanation / Answer
The skepticism that, mr. wright's freemartin is not a freemartin in the sense we use the term today because, the gonads of mr. wright's freemartin is clearly testicular in appearance and more than twenty times larger than the ovaria of the cow, nearly as large as the testicles of bull and in actual the gonads of true freemartins are small and atrophied. Moreover there was no history of co-twin to a bull in Mr.Wright's freemartin. So the reproductive biologists have drawn this skepticism on the basis of all these. The disorder might can be of intersexuality as the external parts had more of the cow than the bull, also the animal looks more like a spayed heifer or ox rather than either bull or cow. Also there the animal have both male male (testicles) and female parts.