Interest is increasing regarding use of Cannabidiol (CBD) in companion animals due to anecdotal evidence of beneficial behavioral and health effects. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the influence of CBD on behavioral responses to fear-inducing stimuli in dogs. Sixteen dogs (18.1 ± 0.2 kg) were utilized in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square design experiment with treatments arranged in a 2 × 2 factorial, consisting of control, 25 mg CBD, trazodone (100 mg for 10-20 kg BW, 200 mg for 20.1-40 kg BW), and the combination of CBD and trazodone. A fireworks model of noise-induced fear was used to assess CBD effectiveness after 7 d of supplementation. Each test lasted a total of 6 min and consisted of a 3 min environmental habituation phase with no noise and a 3 min noise phase with a fireworks track. Plasma was collected 1 h before, immediately after, and 1 h following testing for cortisol analysis. Behaviors in each 3 min block were video recorded, and heart rate (HR) sensors were fitted for collection of HR and HR variability parameters. Research personnel administering treats and analyzing behavioral data were blinded as to the treatments administered. Data were tested for normality using the UNIVARIATE procedure in SAS, then differences examined using the MIXED procedure with fixed effects of treatment, period, time, and treatment x time interaction. Inactivity duration and HR increased during the first minute of the fireworks track compared with 1 min prior (P < 0.001 and P = 0.011, respectively), indicating the fireworks model successfully generated a fear response. Trazodone lowered plasma cortisol (P < 0.001), which was unaffected by CBD (P = 0.104) or the combination with CBD (P = 0.238). Neither CBD nor trazodone affected the duration of inactivity (P = 0.918 and 0.329, respectively). Trazodone increased time spent with tail relaxed (P = 0.001). CBD tended to increase HR (P = 0.093) and decreased the peak of low-and high-frequency bands (LF and HF, P = 0.011 and 0.022, respectively). These results do not support an anxiolytic effect of CBD in dogs given 1.4 mg CBD/kg BW/d.

This study’s objective was to determine seasonal and diurnal vs. nocturnal home range size, as well as predation for free-ranging farm cats at a livestock unit in Northwest Georgia. Seven adult cats were tracked with attached GPS units for up to two weeks for one spring and two summer seasons from May 2010 through August 2011. Three and five cats were tracked for up to two weeks during the fall and winter seasons, respectively. Feline scat was collected during this entire period. Cats were fed a commercial cat food daily. There was no seasonal effect (P > 0.05) on overall (95% KDE and 90% KDE) or core home range size (50% KDE). Male cats tended (P = 0.08) to have larger diurnal and nocturnal core home ranges (1.09 ha) compared to female cats (0.64 ha). Reproductively intact cats (n = 2) had larger (P < 0.0001) diurnal and nocturnal home ranges as compared to altered cats. Feline scat processing separated scat into prey parts, and of the 210 feline scats collected during the study, 75.24% contained hair. Of these 158 scat samples, 86 contained non-cat hair and 72 contained only cat hair. Other prey components included fragments of bone in 21.43% of scat and teeth in 12.86% of scat. Teeth were used to identify mammalian prey hunted by these cats, of which the Hispid cotton rat (Sigmodon hispidus) was the primary rodent. Other targeted mammals were Peromyscus sp., Sylvilagus sp. and Microtus sp. Invertebrates and birds were less important as prey, but all mammalian prey identified in this study consisted of native animals. While the free-ranging farm cats in this study did not adjust their home range seasonally, sex and reproductive status did increase diurnal and nocturnal home range size. Ultimately, larger home ranges of free-ranging cats could negatively impact native wildlife.

Growing public interest in the use of cannabidiol (CBD) for companion animals has amplified the need to elucidate potential impacts. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the influence of CBD on the daily activity of adult dogs. Twenty-four dogs (18.0 ± 3.4 kg, 9 months−4 years old) of various mixed breeds were utilized in a randomized complete block design with treatments targeted at 0 and 2.5 mg (LOW) and at 5.0 mg (HIGH) CBD/kg body weight (BW) per day split between two treats administered after twice-daily exercise (0700–0900 and 1,700–1,900 h). Four hours each day [1,000–1,200 h (a.m.) and 1,330–1,530 h (p.m.)] were designated as times when no people entered the kennels, with 2 h designated as Quiet time and the other 2 h as Music time, when calming music played over speakers. Quiet and Music sessions were randomly allotted to daily a.m. or p.m. times. Activity monitors were fitted to dogs' collars for continuous collection of activity data. Data were collected over a 14-day baseline period to establish the activity patterns and block dogs by activity level (high or low) before randomly assigning dogs within each block to treatments. After 7 days of treatment acclimation, activity data were collected for 14 days. Data were examined for differences using the MIXED procedure in SAS including effects of treatment, day, session (Quiet or Music), time of day (a.m. or p.m.), and accompanying interactions. CBD (LOW and HIGH) did not alter the total daily activity points (P = 0.985) or activity duration (P = 0.882). CBD tended (P = 0.071) to reduce total daily scratching compared with the control. Dogs were more active in p.m. sessions than in a.m. sessions (P &lt; 0.001). During the p.m. session, dogs receiving HIGH tended (P = 0.091) to be less active than the control (CON). During the a.m. and p.m. sessions, CBD reduced scratching compared with CON (P = 0.030). CBD did not affect the activity duration during exercise periods (P = 0.143). These results indicate that, when supplemented with up to 4.5 mg CBD/kg BW/day, CBD does not impact the daily activity of adult dogs, but may exert an antipruritic effect.

BackgroundLeptospirosis is a widespread zoonotic disease that causes reproductive losses and/or hepatorenal failure in a number of animal species. Wild reservoirs of the disease, such as rodents, harbor the causative bacterium, Leptospira spp., in their kidneys and contaminate the environment by excreting infected urine. In this study, we tested small wild mammals, environmental water, and livestock in the Cumberland Gap region of southeastern Appalachia for the presence of pathogenic Leptospira or leptospiral antibodies.

Domestic cats are estimated to kill billions of small mammals and birds each year. In certain areas of the world, it is not uncommon for either feral or free-ranging cats to have high population densities, creating concern regarding their level of hunting. Many cats are considered to be subsidized predators, as they receive care and food from humans. Arguments abound regarding the presence of cats in the habitats of native small mammals and birds and whether or not local ecosystems can sustain this predator-prey relationship. The effects of cats on native wildlife can depend on several factors, including cat classification (feral vs. free ranging vs. indoor-outdoor), geographical location (islands vs. mainland), and type of habitat (rural vs. suburban vs. urban). Feral and free-ranging cats may have a greater impact on native species on islands because habitat is severely limited. Continued urbanization and development of rural areas also creates fragmented habitats, and native species may struggle to survive with the added pressure of hunting by domestic cats. Additionally, cats in rural areas are frequently fed by humans, which can support high population densities and intensify pressure on native species. Species targeted by cats may also vary based on prey availability in different areas, but small mammals are generally preferred over birds, reptiles, or invertebrates. Domestic cats certainly have the potential to roam and hunt in very large areas inhabited by native species and loss of biodiversity is a major concern. Therefore, it is possible that ecosystems may not be able to sustain hunting by domestic cats. Because this predator-prey relationship is probably not sustainable, it is necessary to responsibly manage outdoor domestic cats.