Objectives—To determine whether associations exist between human-directed aggression and sex, neutering status, age of weaning, the presence of other pet pigs, or the presence of environmental enrichment objects in miniature pet pigs.
Study Population—Responses from 222 owners of miniature pet pigs.
Procedures—Pet pig owners were requested to complete a 48-item multiple-choice and short-answer Internet survey for each pig that they presently owned.
Results—Among 222 surveys that met enrollment criteria, human-directed aggression that occurred on at least 1 occasion was reported in 64% (n = 142) and aggression that occurred once or more per month was reported in 31% (69). No significant differences were found in the prevalence of human-directed aggression among castrated males, sexually intact females, and spayed females. Ages of weaning and neutering and the presence of objects intended to serve as environmental enrichment were not associated with frequency of aggression. A significant inverse association was detected between presence of other pigs in the same household and human-directed aggression, such that 21% (20/95) of pigs that lived with at least 1 conspecific were aggressive on a frequent basis, compared with 39% (49/126) of pigs that lived with no conspecific. A similar inverse association was evident regarding aggression that occurred on at least 1 occasion.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that human-directed aggression is a common problem in miniature pet pigs. The presence of a conspecific can be expected to reduce the likelihood of human-directed aggression.
Objective—To determine whether clomipramine differs
from fluoxetine in reducing feline urine marking;
whether reduction of marking continues in cats treated
> 8 weeks; whether recurrence of marking, after
abrupt drug withdrawal, is less in cats treated > 8
weeks; and whether cats that are successfully treated
but resume marking after drug withdrawal can be successfully
treated again with the same drug regimen.
Animals—22 neutered cats (2 females, 20 males) ≥ 1
year old with objectionable urine marking.
Procedure—Cats that marked vertically ≥ 3 times/wk
were treated with fluoxetine (1 mg/kg [0.45 mg/lb],
q 24 h, PO) or clomipramine (0.5 mg/kg [0.23 mg/lb], q
24 h, PO) for 16 weeks, and efficacy was compared.
Recurrence of marking was determined after abrupt
withdrawal of fluoxetine at 16 or 32 weeks. Reduction
in marking in cats treated with fluoxetine for 8 weeks
after returning to marking following drug withdrawal
was compared with the initial 8 weeks of successful
Results—Efficacy of fluoxetine and clomipramine
was similar. Treatment > 8 weeks revealed increasing
efficacy in reduction of marking. Return of marking
after termination of fluoxetine administration occurred
in most cats. Cats successfully treated initially with
fluoxetine responded similarly to repeated treatment.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Clomipramine
and fluoxetine were equivalent in treating urine marking.
Longer treatment increased efficacy. Most cats
return to marking after abrupt drug withdrawal. A second
course of treatment can be expected to be as
effective as the first. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:
Objective—To determine whether findings of urinalyses
could be used to reliably distinguish gonadectomized
cats with urine-marking behavior from those
with no problem urination.
Design—Case control study.
Animals—58 gonadectomized cats (47 males and 11
females) with urine-marking behavior (ie, marking of
vertical surfaces) and 39 (26 males and 13 females)
without problem urination or urinary tract-associated
Procedure—Urine was collected by cystocentesis
from all cats. Findings of urinalyses of cats with urinemarking
behavior were analyzed statistically for sexrelated
differences and differences between cats that
marked vertical surfaces only and those that marked
both vertical and horizontal surfaces; findings of urinalyses
of control cats were compared between
sexes. Subsequently, results of urinalyses of cats
with urine-marking behavior were compared with
those of control cats.
Results—With regard to variables measured via urinalysis,
there were no differences between male and
female cats within either group. Among cats with
urine-marking behavior, there were no differences
between those that only marked vertically and those
that marked vertically and horizontally. Analyses of
data from all cats with urine-marking behavior and
control cats revealed no differences that could be
associated with urine marking.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—These data
suggest that urine-marking behavior by gonadectomized
cats is an aspect of normal behavior. Clinicians
are advised to focus on behavioral history of house-soiling
cats to differentiate between urine-marking behavior
and inappropriate urination; for the latter, urinalysis
is appropriate to rule out lower urinary tract disorders.
(J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003;223:457–461)