The effects of breed, age, sex, and body weight on electrocardiographic parameters in military working dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the effects of breed, sex, age, and body weight on different electrocardiographic parameters in military working dogs (Labrador Retriever and German Shepherd).Electrocardiographic recordings (paper speed = 25 mm/s and calibration = 10 mm/mV) were performed to obtain all the standard bipolar limb leads (leads I, II, and III) and unipolar augmented limb leads (leads aVR, aVL, and aVF). A total of 16 Labrador Retrievers and 14 German Shepherds were restrained manually in the right lateral recumbency without any tranquilizer or anesthetic drug. Amplitude and duration of P, QRS, and T wave, PR and QT interval, mean electrical axis, and heart rate were measured in each recording.There was no significant difference in electrocardiographic parameters across breed and sex. However, QRS duration tended to alter by breed (p<0.1) in Labrador Retrievers (0.04±0.005 s), which is lower than German Shepherds (0.05±0.005 s). PR interval was influenced by sex (p<0.1). PR interval was higher in females (0.13±0.005 s) than males (0.11±0.008 s). In addition, electrocardiographic values were not significantly affected by age and body weight, except that the amplitude of R wave was statistically affected by age (p<0.05). A correlation was found between the decrease in R wave amplitude and increase in age of dogs.Different electrocardiographic parameters were within the normal range. A significant effect of age was seen on amplitude of R wave. However, the effect of breed, sex, and body weight was not significant on different electrocardiographic parameters in Labrador Retriever and German Shepherd dogs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".