Estimation of energy expenditure using the oral <sup>13</sup>C‐bicarbonate technique in privately owned adult and senior dogs of three different body sizes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Knowledge about energy requirements (ER) of dogs is important in order to provide dogs with an appropriate energy supply. In this study, the oral 13C‐bicarbonate technique (o13CBT) was used to estimate energy expenditure (EE) in 50 privately owned dogs of different body sizes (small: Danish–Swedish Farmdog (DSF, n = 16), medium: Beagle (n = 15), large: Labrador Retriever (n = 19)), of different ages (adult: 2–7 years (n = 33), senior: ≥8 years (n = 17)). The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of the method in the field and to get more information about ER of dogs. All dogs were measured twice, on two separate days under standardized, resting conditions. The dogs were fasted overnight prior to measurements, which were carried out in home environment. Only measurements of dogs resting calmly were included in the statistical analyses. No significant difference (p > 0.05) in EE was found between days of measurements. The EE measured in Labrador Retrievers (405 kJ (97 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day) was significantly lower (p < 0.001) than of Beagles (530 kJ (127 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day) and DSF (497 kJ (119 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day), the difference between Beagles and DSF being non‐significant. Senior dogs had significantly lower (p < 0.001) EE values than adult dogs with least square means (LSM) of 441 kJ (105 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day and 513 kJ (123 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day respectively. Analysed within breeds, EE of senior Labrador Retrievers (370 kJ (88 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day)) was significantly lower (p < 0.01) than adults (439 kJ (105 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day), as well as in DSF (453 kJ (108 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day and 541 kJ (129 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day for senior and adult dogs respectively). However, the EE was not significantly different (p > 0.05) between adult (548 kJ (131 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day) and senior (499 kJ (119 kcal)/kg BW0.75/day) Beagles. This study suggests that when measured under standardized resting conditions, the o13CBT can provide reliable results of EE and be a helpful tool to get more knowledge about ER of dogs of different sizes, breeds and ages.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".