Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Comparision of Brain Volumes

  1. #1

    Default Comparision of Brain Volumes

    I saw this peer reviewed article mentioned on Facebook and thought Cavalier Chat members might be interested.

    http://www.actavetscand.com/content/...0147-56-30.pdf

    As someone on Facebook said are bigger brains in smaller skulls not considered a factor in SM anymore.

  2. #2

    Default

    Steve, that's a riveting article. I don't think though that it's saying 'bigger brains in smaller skulls' aren't considered a factor, I think it's saying that body weight has to be factored in, and they're not talking about fat either! I shall have to read it again (and again, and probably again) ...

    As an aside, it is SO IRRITATING that just when I think I might have a tenuous grasp on SM something comes along and knocks the perch out from under ... sigh. I shall persevere. Now another thing we need to know is why the dural bands become thickened ...
    Last edited by Madam Grump; 05-20-2014 at 03:43 PM.
    Sheena Stevens

  3. #3

    Default

    i n t e r e s t i n g . . . . but MY brain hurts reading it!

    Jane

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Llandrindod Wells
    Posts
    991

    Default

    Personally very glad this condition is being looked at with fresh eyes.
    "Conclusion
    It is important to realize that an influence of body weight exist in dogs, which can be sufficiently large to render conclusions on the difference in volumes
    of the brain and skull unsafe unless some account of the body weight is taken in the analysis. Future studies comparing volumes of brain parts and skull compartments in dogs and especially in the CKCS should use thoroughly weight matched groups. Also considering possible influence of other non-allometric factors, control groups should only comprise dog breeds whose physiognomy, growth features, and selection pressure on cognitive abilities is comparable to the CKCS."

    Based on our results we challenge the importance of overcrowding for the development of CLM and SM in CKCSs.

    The way I read it is unless research has been conducted with comparable dogs and not those cherry picked to fit a theory, then it is fundamentally flawed.
    Bridgette Evans
    Svena CKCS

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Llandrindod Wells
    Posts
    991

    Default

    and I think this is priceless

    Competing interests
    None of the authors has a financial or personal relationship with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence or bias the content of the paper
    Bridgette Evans
    Svena CKCS

  6. #6

    Default

    Shucks Bridge, you're such a cynic and I can't for the life of me think why!

    One of the things it seems to me is that it takes us back to ventricles again ... I still think they're important.
    Sheena Stevens

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Llandrindod Wells
    Posts
    991

    Default

    Lol

    I too think ventricles are important and can not for the life of me think what on earth made "them" remove that information from the certification process. Actually wrote to the BVA to ask to have them added, that was ages ago. Never happened and I won't use the scheme until they do. Don't hold your breath.
    Bridgette Evans
    Svena CKCS

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chicago suburb, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bridgette View Post
    and I think this is priceless

    Competing interests
    None of the authors has a financial or personal relationship with other people or organisations that could inappropriately influence or bias the content of the paper
    Speechless. Never thought I'd see something like this in print. Hope really does spring eternal!
    Sue

    Susan Shidler
    AKC Breeder of Merit
    SevenWoods Cavaliers
    Mettawa, IL USA

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •