Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of the one-way analysis of covariance and pairwise t-tests of inter breed comparison

From: Comparison of the endocranial- and brain volumes in brachycephalic dogs, mesaticephalic dogs and Cavalier King Charles spaniels in relation to their body weight

Variable

Group

Adjusted means (at body weight = 10 kg)

Equality of the adjusted means (p-value)

Global regression coefficient

Equalitiy of slopes

Estimate

P-value

Estimates

P-value

Total brain volume

CKCS:

81.07 cm3 ± 1.03

0.0011

47.13 ± 2.96

< 0.001

35.31 ± 7.67

0.009

brachycephalic:

84.30 cm3 ± 1.41

mesaticephalic:

77.18 cm3 ± 1.41

56.75 ± 4.82

42.39 ± 4.44

0.026

Cerebral volume

CKCS:

70.98 cm3 ± 1.15

0.041

39.18 ± 2.83

< 0.001

27.75 ± 7.99

0.23

brachycephalic:

69.83 cm3 ± 1.51

mesaticephalic:

65.70 cm3 ± 1.57

43.80 ± 4.77

38.21 ± 4.00

Metencephalic volume

CKCS:

11.6 cm3 ± 0.11

0.0015

6.34 ± 0.40

< 0.001

7.57 ± 0.87

0.015

brachycephalic:

11.79 cm3 ± 0.2

mesaticephalic:

10.91 cm3 ± 0.20

7.21 ± 0.68

5.39 ± 0.64

Total endocranial volume

CKCS:

83.93 cm3 ± 7.13

0.0015

52.55 ± 3.10

< 0.001

35.04 ± 8.14

 

brachycephalic:

85.83 cm3 ± 7.67

mesaticephalic:

81.53 cm3 ± 8.65

61.47 ± 4.79

0.024

49.65 ± 4.76

0.009

Rostral and middle cranial fossa volume

CKCS:

69.84 cm3 ± 1.31

0.21

41.06 ± 3.17

< 0.001

32.46 ± 8.51

0.15

brachycephalic:

72.94 cm3 ± 1.66

mesaticephalic:

70.08 cm3 ± 1.71

43.52 ± 5.98

43.02 ± 4.22

Caudal cranial fossa volume

CKCS:

12.51 cm3 ± 0.21

0.28

8.01 ± 0.53

< 0.001

8.38 ± 1.18

0.76

brachycephalic:

12.90 cm3 ± 0.28

mesaticephalic:

12.20 cm3 ± 0.29

8.45 ± 1.10

7.63 ± 0.78

Subarachnoid space

CKCS:

4.67 cm3 ± 0.08

0.63

6.09 ± 0.41

< 0.001

6.52 ± 0.67

0.009

brachycephalic:

4.54 cm3 ± 0.11

mesaticephalic:

4.44 cm3 ± 0.29

4.73 ± 0.38

 

7.05 ± 0.92

0.023

Caudal fossa parenchyma percentage §

CKCS:

0.89 ± 0.001

< 0.0001

-0.00287 ± 0.00021

< 0.001

-0.0046 ± 0.00048

 

brachycephalic:

0.91 ± 0.003

mesaticephalic:

0.86 ± 0.004

-0.0056 ± 0.00058

< 0.001

-0.0024 ± 0.00027

< 0.001

  1. §For the analysis of CFPP body weight was not transformed by logarithm.
  2. The table presents results of the comparison of the equality of regression coefficients (slopes) on the logarithm of the body weight and the equality of adjusted means at BW = 10 kg between the different groups. Significantly different estimates and p-values are bold-typed and represent the result of the pairwise comparison. Normal typed estimates and p-values are not significantly different and represent the result of the global comparison.
Back to article page

Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica

ISSN: 1751-0147