MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396651485 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae102.411

PSIV-A-8 Effects of meal frequency on heart rate in horses

2024· article· en· W4396651485 on OpenAlexaff
A Brown, E.R. Share, N.R. Liburt, Jessica K Suagee Bedore, Patricia Harris, S.L. Mastellar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsMaRS
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMealHeart rateAnimal scienceCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineBiologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In humans, meal size has been shown to affect heart function with meal ingestion being associated with an increase in heart rate (HR) and cardiac output lasting significantly longer when larger meals are consumed. In horses, HR spikes at the sight of feed due to anticipation, but no studies have specifically evaluated the effect of meal frequency or size on HR. Heart rate has also been used as a measure both positive and negative stress. Domesticated horses are often meal fed, with small frequent meals requiring more labor than large infrequent meals. Fewer larger meals may have negative welfare implications for a grazing species. As part of a larger project investigating the effects of meal frequency on the behavior and metabolism of horses, the objective of this study was to evaluate equine HR in response to feeding frequencies commonly practiced in the field [once (1x), twice (2x), or thrice (3x) per day]. Feeding times were at 0800 (1x, 2x, and 3x), 1300 (3x), and 1800 (2x and 3x) h. The 12 adult clinically healthy horses [average ± SD; 14 ± 6 yr and 572 ± 32 kg body weight (BW)] were separated into two equal groups before completing a 14-d acclimation period to the diet during which they were fed 2x. The diet was provided at 2% BW on a dry matter (DM) basis (1.55% BW grass hay in a slow feed hay net plus 0.45% BW complementary fortified feed). During the study the same diet was fed but the meal frequency, and therefore meal size, differed between the treatments. The order of treatments, lasting 1 wk each, was decided at random for each group. On d 6 of each treatment HR was measured using individual H10 Polar HR monitors, which recorded every second from 0700 to 1900 h yielding 1,514,799 data points. During this time the aisleways housing the stalled horses were blocked off to minimize exposure to human presence other than at feeding time(s). After removing outliers, the mode was calculated for HR of each horse, which was considered to be the resting HR for that horse and ranged from 31 to 46 beats/min. The percentage of data above, below, or at the mode was calculated for each horse over the 12 h period and evaluated using Chi Square tests for statistical significance. The proportion of HR values above, below, or at the mode differed between treatments (P = 0.02). When fed 1x, 69 ± 14% of the HR readings were above the mode on average, as compared with 42 ± 18% and 44 ± 18% for 2x and 3x, respectively. These results suggest that the increase in HR was more than anticipatory and that there may be sustained stress when horses are fed at fewer frequency, such as once daily.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207