In this issue – June 2011

Computer model predictions and field observations of anthelmintic resistance in sheep · Dangers of off‐label use of barium selenate · Elbow luxation in dogs and cats · Prognosis of joint infections in adult horses · Omentalisation for mediastinal abscess in a dog · Adenoviruses in lizards     

Comparison of invasive and oscillometric blood pressure measurement techniques in anesthetized sheep,goats, and cattle

ObjectiveTo determine the level of agreement between an oscillometric (O-NIBP) and an invasive method (IBP) of monitoring arterial blood pressure (ABP) in anesthetized sheep, goats, and cattle.Study designProspective clinical study.AnimalsTwenty sheep and goats, 20 cattle weighing <150 kg body weight, and 20 cattle weighing >150 kg body weight.MethodsAnimals were anesthetized and systolic ABP (SABP), mean ABP (MABP), and diastolic ABP (DABP) were measured using IBP and O-NIBP. Differences between IBP and O-NIBP, and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) between SABP, MABP, and DABP values were assessed by the Bland–Altman method.ResultsMean difference ± standard deviation (range) between SABP, DABP, and MABP measurements in sheep and goats was 0 ± 16 (-57 to 38) mmHg, 13 ± 16 (-37 to 70) mmHg, and 8 ± 13 (-34 to 54) mmHg, respectively. Mean difference between SABP, DABP, and MABP measurements in small cattle was 0 ± 19 (-37 to 37) mmHg, 6 ± 18 (-77 to 48) mmHg, and 4 ± 16 (-73 to 48) mmHg, respectively. Mean difference between SABP, DABP, and MABP measurements in large cattle was -18 ± 32 (-107 to 71) mmHg, 7 ± 29 (-112 to 63) mmHg, and -5 ± 28 (-110 to 60) mmHg, respectively. The 95% LOAs for SABP, DABP, and MABP were -31 to +31, -19 to +44, and -19 to +34 mmHg, respectively in sheep and goats; were -37 to +37, -19 to +44, and -19 to +34 mmHg, respectively in small cattle; and were -81 to +45, -50 to +63, and -59 to +50 mmHg, respectively in large cattle.ConclusionsAgreement was poor between O-NIBP and IBP monitoring techniques.Clinical relevanceArterial BP should be monitored in anesthetized sheep, goats, and cattle using IBP.     

Genetic analysis of absolute growth measurements, relative growth rate and restricted selection indices in red Angus cattle

Performance records on 41,184 Red Angus cattle were analyzed and estimates of parameters calculated for absolute growth rate, relative growth rate and restricted selection indices. Heritability estimates for birth weight, 205-d weight, 365-d weight and postweaning gain were .46 +/- .02, .39 +/- .02, .40 +/- .02 and .36 +/- .02, respectively. Heritability estimates for preweaning, postweaning and postnatal relative growth rates were identical (.33 +/- .02). Heritability estimates for restricted selection indices were .31 +/- .02, .33 +/- .02 and .31 +/- .02 for weaning index, yearling index and postweaning index, respectively. The genetic correlation between preweaning and postweaning absolute growth rate was .15. The genetic correlation between consecutive measurements of relative growth rate (RGR) was -.33. Genetic correlations of birth weight with preweaning RGR and postnatal RGR were -.68 and -.71, respectively. Correlations among measures of relative growth rate using simulated data were similar to correlations of actual data, indicating that these relationships are the result of numerator/denominator relationships and not biological causes. The genetic correlation between weaning and postweaning indices was near zero. Small genetic coefficients of variation for preweaning and postnatal relative growth rates indicate further problems with the expression of growth in this manner. Restricted selection indices exhibited much larger genetic coefficients of variation than measurements of RGR. Genetic standard deviations were 7.8%, 7.2% and 13.7% of the means for weaning, yearling and postweaning indices, respectively.