CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 148Human-Animal Interaction StudiesVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryVeterinary Equine Medical Research

Conformational risk factors of brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS) in pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs

Open access
Liu, Nai-Chieh, Troconis, Eileen L., Kalmar, Lajos, Price, David J., Wright, Hattie E., Adams, Vicki J., Sargan, David R., Ladlow, Jane F.·2017·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0181928PMC PMC5538678
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Extremely brachycephalic, or short-muzzled, dog breeds such as pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs are prone to the conformation-related respiratory disorder-brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome (BOAS). Affected dogs present with a wide range of clinical signs from snoring and exercise intolerance, to life-threatening events such as syncope. In this study, conformational risk factors for BOAS that could potentially aid in breeding away from BOAS were sought. Six hundred and four pugs, French bulldogs, and bulldogs were included in the study. Soft tape measurements of the head and body were used and the inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated. Breed-specific models were developed to assess the associations between the conformational factors and BOAS status based on functional grading. The models were further validated by means of a BOAS index, which is an objective measurement of respiratory function using whole-body barometric plethysmography. The final models have good predictive power for discriminating BOAS (-) and BOAS (+) phenotypes indicated by the area under the curve values of >80% on the receiver operating curves. When other factors were controlled, stenotic nostrils were associated with BOAS in all three breeds; pugs and bulldogs with higher body condition scores (BCS) had a higher risk of developing BOAS. Among the standardized conformational measurements (i.e. craniofacial ratio (CFR), eye width ratio (EWR), skull index (SI), neck girth ratio (NGR), and neck length ratio (NLR)), for pugs EWR and SI, for French bulldogs NGR and NLR, and for bulldogs SI and NGR showed significant associations with BOAS status. However, the NGR in bulldogs was the only significant predictor that also had satisfactory inter-observer reproducibility. A NGR higher than 0.71 in male bulldogs was predictive of BOAS with approximately 70% sensitivity and specificity. In conclusion, stenotic nostrils, BCS, and NGR were found to be valid, easily applicable predictors for BOAS (+).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0181928

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Breeding animals with severe skull and muzzle abnormalities leads to physical and physiological hardship and limits their natural behavior.

    “Breeding animals with this type of severe skull and muzzle abnormalities leads to physical and physiological hardship and limits their natural behavior [89,90].”

    From A One Health Perspective on the Human-Companion Animal Relationship with Emphasis on Zoonotic Aspects. (2020) · cites this paper as [89]

    The Introduction links breeding for extreme short skulls and muzzles in certain dog breeds to airway obstruction and describes serious respiratory and other physical effects in affected dogs. It also reports exercise intolerance, which supports a limit on activity. The paper does not establish effects on natural behavior more broadly or on animals beyond these dog breeds; no page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. [1]Knecht C. Upper airway obstruction in brachycephalic dogs. Comp Cont Educ Pract. 1979; 1: 25– 30.
  2. [5]Hendricks JC. Brachycephalic airway syndrome. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract. 1992; 22(5): 1145– 53. 1523786
  3. [8]Bateson P. Independent Inquiry into Dog Breeding. University of Cambridge. 2016. https://www.ourdogs.co.uk/special/final-dog-inquiry-120110.pdf
  4. [14]Koch D, Sturzenegger N. Veränderung des Schädels bei brachycephalen Hunden im Verlaufe der letzten 100 Jahre. Kurzmitteilungen. 2015; 157(3): 1– 3. 26753329
  5. [28]Liu NC, Adams VJ, Kalmar L, Ladlow JF, Sargan DR. Whole-body barometric plethysmography characterizes upper airway obstruction in 3 brachycephalic breeds of dogs. J Vet Intern Med. 2016; 30(3): 853– 65. doi: 10.1111/jvim.13933 27159898 PMC4913582 · DOI
  6. [29]Evans H. The Skeleton Miller's Anotomy of the Dog. 4th ed Philadelphia, USA: Saunders; 1993 p. 122– 218.
  7. [40]Hendricks J, Kline LR, Kovalski RJ, O'Brien J, Morrison A, Pack AI. The English bulldog: a natural model of sleep-disordered breathing. J Appl Physiol. 1987; 63: 1344– 50. 3693167

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liu, N.-C., Troconis, E. L., Kalmar, L., Price, D. J., Wright, H. E., Adams, V. J., Sargan, D. R., & Ladlow, J. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • Suffolk University Madrid (ES)
Corresponding author
Ladlow, Jane F.
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2017-08-01
Volume
12
Issue
8
Pages
e0181928
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0181928
PMC
PMC5538678
OpenAlex
W2740722812
Cited by
148
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7
FWCI
3.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • The Kennel Club Charitable Trust (RG71960)
  • Cambridge Overseas Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Veterinary Medicine and Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Equine › Veterinary Equine Medical Research
Keywords
brachycephalic obstructive airway syndrome, Pug, French bulldog, bulldogs, body condition score, barometric plethysmography, interobserver reproducibility, dog breeding
MeSH terms
Airway Obstruction, Animals, Breeding, Craniosynostoses, Dog Diseases, Dogs, Female, Male, Plethysmography, Whole Body, Regression Analysis, Risk Factors, Species Specificity, Syndrome, Reproducibility of Results, Observer Variation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review