MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414831411 · doi:10.1093/jas/skaf300.142

75 Re-evaluating recommendations for Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) for adult dogs: A dose-response study on antioxidant status.

2025· article· en· W4414831411 on OpenAlexaff
Lindsey M Rummell, Sydney Banton, Pawanpreet Singh, Janelle Kelly, Jennifer Saunders-Blades, David W.L., James R Templeman, Lindsay E. Robinson, Anna K. Shoveller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicFatty Acid Research and Health
Canadian institutionsPetro-CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocosahexaenoic acidAntioxidantEicosapentaenoic acidOxidative stressLipid peroxidationLipid metabolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are two common and beneficial n-3 fatty acids for dogs. The minimum required dose for adult dogs at maintenance has not been established, but the National Research Council (NRC) provides a combined recommended allowance (RA) for EPA+DHA of 0.03 g/kg body weight (BW)⁰·⁷⁵ and safe upper limit (SUL) of 0.37 g/BW⁰·⁷⁵. The SUL is based on findings in geriatric Beagles (9.5–11.5 years old), where supplementation at 0.45 g/BW⁰·⁷⁵ EPA+DHA resulted in lower α-tocopherol concentrations and higher lipid peroxidation. However, similar studies have not been conducted in healthy adult dogs, nor has a broader evaluation of oxidative balance been performed. To address this gap, an 8-week dose-response study was conducted to evaluate how feeding graded inclusions of dietary EPA+DHA may impact lipid metabolism of healthy, adult dogs. We hypothesized the RA minimizes lipid peroxidation and antioxidant depletion but may not fully maximize potential anti-inflammatory benefits, while higher doses may enhance immune benefits but may also increase oxidative stress and antioxidant depletion. Twenty-seven client-owned dogs (25 Siberian Huskies and 2 Alaskan Huskies) participated, consisting of 13 females (4 intact, 9 spayed) and 14 males (3 intact, 11 neutered), aged 1-12 years with a mean age of 6.9 ± 5.8 years and a mean BW of 21.5 ± 6.8 kg (mean ± SD). Following a 4-week acclimation with once-daily feeding at 15:00 with a commercial extruded diet, dogs were blocked by age and BW before random assignment to one of three dietary groups. All dogs were fed the same low-fat experimental diet (39.8% crude protein, 13.8% crude fat, 3.0% crude fibre). The diet was supplemented with fish oil (containing 0.53g EPA and 0.38g DHA per mL) to achieve daily EPA+DHA intakes of 0.03 g/BW⁰·⁷⁵ (LOW), 0.45 g/BW⁰·⁷⁵ (MOD), and 0.71 g/BW⁰·⁷⁵ (HIGH). Feed intake was adjusted to maintain BW throughout the study period. Fasted blood samples were collected at weeks 0, 4, and 8 to assess serum fatty acid profile, lipid fractions, inflammatory cytokines, α-tocopherol, and malondialdehyde (MDA). Data were analyzed using PROC GLIMMIX in SAS, where dog was treated as a random effect, week as a repeated measure, and dose of EPA+DHA as a fixed effect. Statistical significance was declared at P≤0.05. Serum α-tocopherol concentrations were comparable across all groups at week 0 and increased similarly among groups at week 4 (p< 0.01). Dogs fed HIGH had lower α-tocopherol concentrations than LOW group (p< 0.05) but did not differ from MOD group (p=0.42) at week 8, indicating EPA+DHA intake is related to antioxidant depletion. These findings offer valuable insights into the impact of EPA and DHA supplementation on oxidative balance and may help refine current NRC recommendations and inform best practices for dietary inclusion.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.370 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicFatty Acid Research and Health→French-language works237,207→