Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-8wtlm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T05:39:57.435Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Nutritional management of search and rescue dogs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2017

G. Vassalotti
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
N. Musco
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
P. Lombardi
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
S. Calabrò
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
R. Tudisco
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
V. Mastellone*
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
R. Grazioli
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
S. Bianchi
Affiliation:
Farmina Pet-food, Department of Research and Development, Nola, Napoli, Italy
M. I. Cutrignelli
Affiliation:
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Production, University of Naples Federico II, Napoli, Italy
*
* Corresponding author: V. Mastellone, email vincenzo.mastellone@unina.it

Abstract

Dogs used for search and rescue (SAR) may experience continuous micro-traumas that predispose them to skeletal disorders. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of diet on osteo-articular apparatus in healthy SAR dogs. A total of sixteen SAR dogs were divided into two groups (low supplementation (LS) and high supplementation (HS)) and were fed for 3 months with two experimental diets, characterised by the same protein and energy density, but different in n-3 PUFA (6·2 v. 8·4 % of metabolisable energy), chondroitin sulfate (219·8 v. 989·0 mg/kg DM) and glucosamine (769·2 v. 1318·7 mg/kg DM) in the LS and HS groups, respectively. At recruitment all dogs showed no joint inflammation signs, except four that showed mild symptoms. Haematology and serum biochemistry were performed every 30 d. Joint status was scored by physical and lameness evaluations. The sampling effect analysis showed potential beneficial effects by a decrease in a specific marker of membrane integrity (creatine kinase; CK). Comparing groups, glucose was significantly higher and CK was significantly lower in the HS group; however, in both cases the levels of these parameters fell in the normal range. At the end of the experiment, erythrocytes, Hb and packed cell volume were significantly higher in the HS compared with the LS group. These could result in an improvement in dogs’ performance, even if this aspect was not investigated in the present study. Concerning joint evaluation (pain on manipulation, lameness and range of motion), no statistically significant differences were detected between the groups and within the experimental period.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2017
Figure 0

Table 1. Main results of complete blood count and biochemistry parameters (n 16)

Figure 1

Fig. 1. Joint evaluation during the trial (n 16). (a) Low supplementation group (EPA + DHA: 6·2 % metabolisable energy; chondroitin sulfate: 219·8 mg/kg DM; glucosamine: 769·2 mg/kg DM); (b) high supplementation group (EPA + DHA: 8·4 % metabolisable energy; chondroitin sulfate: 989·0 mg/kg DM; glucosamine: 1318·7 mg/kg DM). Joint score: 0 (normal), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), 3 (severe). Values are means, with standard deviations represented by horizontal bars. Group effects P > 0·714, P > 0·949 and P > 0·709 for range of motion, pain of manipulation and lameness, respectively. Sampling effects P > 0·357, P > 0·491 and P > 0·354 for range of motion, pain of manipulation and lameness, respectively.

Supplementary material: File

Vassalotti et al supplementary material

Table S1

Download Vassalotti et al supplementary material(File)
File 34.8 KB