Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author or Editor: Christina J. Choate x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association


Objective—To compare guaranteed and measured concentrations of nutrients in commercial pet foods.

Design—Cross-sectional study.

Sample Population—Annual inspection reports of pet food analyses from 5 states.

Procedures—Guaranteed and measured concentrations of crude protein (CP), crude fat (CF), crude fiber (CFb), moisture, and ash in pet foods were compared. The concentration difference for each nutrient was compared among types of food, target species, target life stages, manufacturers, and laboratories.

Results—The guaranteed and measured concentrations of nutrients were significantly different. For all foods, mean concentration differences were as follows: CP, 1.5%; CF, 1.0%; CFb, −0.7%; moisture, −4.0%; and ash, −0.5%. Crude protein difference for treats was significantly larger than differences for dry and canned foods. Crude fat difference for dry foods was significantly less than differences for canned foods and treats. Crude fiber and moisture differences for canned foods were significantly less than the corresponding differences for dry foods and treats. Only CFb differences differed among target species, life stages, manufacturers, or laboratories.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Addition of 1.5% and 1% to the guaranteed minimums for CP and CF, respectively; subtraction of 0.7%, 4%, and 0.5% from the guaranteed maximums for CFb, moisture, and ash, respectively; and addition of 0.23 kcal/g to the asfed metabolizable energy value calculated by use of modified Atwater factors from guaranteed analyses provides a more accurate estimate of the nutrient and metabolizable energy content of commercial pet foods. Nevertheless, the actual composition of a food should be determined whenever possible.

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association


Objective—To determine mechanical properties of various prosthetic materials secured to cadaveric canine femurs via various methods and to compare results with those for isolated loops of prosthetic material.

Sample—80 femurs obtained from cadavers of skeletally mature large-breed dogs.

Procedures—10 femoral constructs in each of 8 groups (single circumfabellar loop of polyethylene cord, double loop of polyethylene tape secured via a bone anchor [BAPT], single or double circumfabellar loops of nylon leader material [CNL] or polyethylene tape [CPT], or single or double loops of polyethylene tape secured via a toggle placed through a bone tunnel [BTPT]) and 10 isolated loops of prosthetic material in each corresponding configuration were tested. Stress relaxation, creep, elongation, load at 3 mm of displacement, stiffness, and peak load at failure were determined.

Results—5 single CNL constructs failed before completion of testing. Double CNL and single circumfabellar polyethylene cord constructs had the lowest loads at 3 mm of displacement. Single and double CPT constructs had the highest stiffness. Double BTPT and CPT constructs had the highest peak loads at failure. Double BTPT, double CPT, and BAPT constructs were mechanically superior on the basis of lower creep and stress relaxation and higher stiffness and load at 3 mm of displacement versus other constructs. Stiffness of femoral constructs was 28% to 69% that of corresponding isolated prosthetic loops.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Double BTPT, double CPT, and BAPT constructs were mechanically superior to other constucts. Mechanical properties and methods of anchorage and securing of free ends of prostheses contributed to mechanical properties of constructs.

Full access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research