No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Effect of an odor eliminator on feline litter box behavior
Abstract
Decreasing litter box odor may be an important treatment component in addressing feline inappropriate elimination. A three-phase study was conducted to determine if the use of Zero Odor litter box spray increases the preference of litter boxes to cats, presumably by its odor-eliminating quality. In the first phase, cats were given a litter box preference test between a litter box sprayed with Zero Odor and one without. In the second phase, the number of occurrences of behaviors indicative of a cat's dissatisfaction with the litter box (scratching at the sides of the box, floor or wall, hesitating when entering the litter box, balancing on the side of the box and eliminating outside of the litter box) was compared before and after the use of Zero Odor. Last, the frequency of eliminations that occurred outside the litter box was measured during a baseline phase and a test phase, in which Zero Odor was sprayed into all litter boxes in the home. Significantly fewer behaviors associated with feline litter box dissatisfaction and fewer undesirable eliminations were observed in phases 2 and 3, respectively. These findings suggest that use of Zero Odor litter box spray appears to decrease litter box odor and increases the attractiveness of litter box to cats.
... Sung (2001) developed a basic ethogram (cover, dig, paw, and sniff) and looked for relationships in these macrobehaviors (as well as some factors related to the cat and the litter box) between cats with or without known elimination behavior problems. Cottam and Dodman (2007) presented a list of seven micro-behaviors they classified as "dissatisfied" litter box behaviors (e.g., scratching at the side of the litter box, or raising a paw on the side of the litter box while eliminating). The classification of the behaviors in this list was based on evidence in peer reviewed experimental studies. ...
... Cats instead would waffle in an out of the litter box and it was more common for them to keep one paw out of the box while eliminating. This is in agreement with the behaviors previously described by Cottam and Dodman (2007) who noted that cats may approach a litter box, hesitate to enter and walk away or jump in and immediately jump out if they were somehow dissatisfied with the litter box. Thus, although seemingly counterintuitive, a relatively brief elimination sequence may be indicative of a more positive litter box experience. ...
... Thus, it seems that in the clinic-like environment, where cats did not have sufficient litter substrate to either prepare a location for elimination or to cover their waste post-elimination, they redirected their pawing behavior to any surface available. These observations also align with criteria that Cottam and Dodman (2007) defined for cats being dissatisfied with their litter box environment: namely, that cats would scratch the sides of their litter box or the floor or wall near their litter box. Anecdotally, cat owners who use hooded litter boxes often complain about "box banging" behavior where their cats repeatedly paw at the side of the box. ...
Few studies have sought to describe cat elimination behavior in detail and much of the information presently available focuses on factors that potentially cause cats to reject a litter box. Thus, the ethograms published in the current veterinary and scientific literature largely focus on macro behaviors (e.g., enter box, dig, squat, cover, and exit box) and lack the detail necessary to make distinctions between types of litter box experiences for cats. To facilitate our understanding of what positive and negative litter box experiences look like for cats, we observed cats eliminating in both an enriched (“positive”) and in a clinic-like (“restricted”) environment. Our results reveal that cat elimination behavior is complex and may include up to 39 different behaviors expressed during urination and defecation events. We further evaluated each event, examining the behaviors occurring pre-, during, and post-elimination as a means to better understand the behaviors associated with the appetitive, consummatory, and post-consummatory phases of the reward cycle around elimination. In doing so, we found clear differences in behavior at different stages of the elimination sequence between our two environments. In general, the elimination sequence was prolonged in the clinic-like environment compared to the enriched environment (P < 0.005) and most of the extra time was spent interacting with the box post-elimination (P < 0.005). In the clinic-like environment cats were hesitant to enter the box, spent a considerable amount of time pawing at surfaces other than the litter (P < 0.02) and spent a great deal of time sniffing eliminations post-elimination (P < 0.005). In addition, cats in the clinic-like environment had less frequent urination events and their events were longer in duration than when in the enriched environment (P < 0.0039). Thus, although seemingly counterintuitive, a relatively brief elimination sequence may be indicative of a more positive litter box experience. In addition, when given the opportunity cats will utilize a large amount of space during their elimination sequence. Despite popular perception that cats will immediately turn to out-of-box elimination if they are dissatisfied with their litter box environment, we discovered that cats will continue to use a box (and not eliminate outside the box) even when their behavior is indicative of frustration.
... Thus, we expected to see reduced dig and cover behaviours in the beginning of the transition period. As cats prefer to dig prior to using the litter box and then cover their eliminations after, failure to perform these behaviours has been associated with cats being dissatisfied with their litter box environments [10,25]. Dig and cover behaviours are presumably inhibited to escape the litter box area as quickly as possibly [10,25,26]. ...
... As cats prefer to dig prior to using the litter box and then cover their eliminations after, failure to perform these behaviours has been associated with cats being dissatisfied with their litter box environments [10,25]. Dig and cover behaviours are presumably inhibited to escape the litter box area as quickly as possibly [10,25,26]. We hypothesized, therefore, that sniffing behaviours would be greater during the 6-day period of transitioning the cats from CLAY to PLANT (period 1) compared to the period following transition (period 2). ...
Current guidelines recommend transitioning cats from one litter product to another over 6 days to minimize stress. The study objective was therefore to test these guidelines using 16 adult domestic cats (2 cohorts of 8) by observing behavioural changes associated with elimination throughout the litter transition. Cats were transitioned from a clay-based litter (CLAY) to a plant-based litter product (PLANT) over 6 days (period 1) via an incremental replacement of CLAY with PLANT. All cats then remained on PLANT for 8 days (period 2). This same transition process was executed for both cohorts, and litter box behaviours were observed via remote recording. Urination, defecation, cover, and dig behaviours were not different between periods 1 and 2 (p > 0.05). Sniffing frequency was greater in period 2 than period 1 (p < 0.05); however, during the litter transition (period 1), cats sniffed the litter boxes being transitioned from CLAY to PLANT more often and for longer than they did for the boxes consisting of only PLANT (p < 0.05). These data suggest that 6 days may be an adequate amount of time to transition a cat to a new litter, although successful transition may also be specific to the types of litters investigated.
... In a series of studies Neilson found a carbon enhanced litter was preferred to a regular clumping litter or one enhanced with baking soda (Neilson, 2007(Neilson, , 2008b. Additionally, Cottam and Dodman (2007) found that the frequency of behaviors associated with dissatisfaction and outof-box elimination decreased when Zero Odor litter box spray (an odor elimination product) is used. It is assumed, that if aversive litter box factors can be reduced, and preferred litter box factors can be increased, inappropriate toilet behavior will diminish or cease altogether. ...
... The lack of relationship between urine and fecal odor and litter box preferences also suggests that cats, contrary to the findings of Neilson (2007Neilson ( , 2008b and Cottam and Dodman (2007), may not be deterred by malodor. However, there was evidence that the presence of physical/visual obstructions in the litter box did have an effect on litter box preferences. ...
... For domestic cats, however, there is no illustrated and nearly complete ethogram. Consequently, many researchers in the past have developed their own specialized partial behavioural catalogue relevant to the context being explored [6,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. The lack of a comprehensive ethogram for domestic cats that addresses the entire spectrum rather than just partial aspects of the behavioural repertoire complicates several issues related to animal welfare, particularly in the areas of behavioural detection, care and protection; without a standardised inventory, an appropriate assessment of stress and suffering in relation to defined behaviours in a healthy animal cannot be made. ...
The existing domestic cat literature predominantly contains lists detailing its behaviour. However, these lists are neither specific enough for domestic cats nor general enough for all behaviours on a macro level of the domestic cat. Furthermore, the majority of studies lack illustrations. Therefore, we have developed a comprehensive ethogram of the domestic cat and scalable schematic representations of the behaviour units. We evaluated observational data from free-roaming cats and cats from private households using ad libitum and focal animal sampling (video material 55.31 h, n = 170 animals). In addition, we used the leading literature and detailed anatomical studies to create systematic categories and morphologically correct drawings. A total of 117 discrete behaviours were recorded and divided into 12 categories. The description of each behaviour includes a name, a word definition, an ethological classification and a schematic illustration (excluding the category devoted to vocalisations). An ethogram is needed to better understand the behavioural repertoire of healthy domestic cats and to facilitate the design phase of further investigations. This document can help to better distinguish species-appropriate behaviours and body postures from those behaviours and poses that indicate chronic pain, stress or discomfort.
... Comprehensive studies, such as the detailed ethogram presented by McGowan et al. (2017), highlight 39 behaviors associated with positive and negative experiences in elimination behavior in litter boxes, emphasizing that the quality of the litter box environment is crucial for the well-being and possibly the urinary tract health of cats. On the other hand, findings regarding the necessary care for the litter box of cats from Cottam and Dodman (2007) emphasize the importance of odor signals in feline behavior towards the litter box. These studies also underscore the need for a more comprehensive approach when considering cat elimination behavior, going beyond the simple action of burying feces or not.). ...
Olfactory communication is an important means of chemocommunication among animals, particularly in relation to reproduction. This study investigated the elimination behavior patterns of defecation and urination in
female cats (Felis catus) from different age and reproductive status groups, including kittens, young adults, non-receptive adults, and nursing adults. Special attention was given to the number of movements (using the forelimbs) made during excreta concealment and the time (in seconds) spent on this process. Comparisons were
conducted separately for feces and urine between the age groups. Significant differences (P <0.05) were
observed in urine processing among non-receptive and nursing females, as well as kittens. Non-receptive females
consistently made fewer movements to cover their urine, and less time was dedicated to this process. Comparisons between feces and urine within the same age group also revealed significant behavioral differences (P
<0.05). Feces required a greater number of movements and more time compared to urine. These findings
emphasize how different phases of a cat’s life cycle influence the behavior of burying excretions (feces and
urine), underscoring the importance of these excreta in olfactory communication.
... In hospital cages, resources should also be spread out, for example, the resting and hiding areas should be separated from the feeding area (189). Moreover, the management of litter boxes in cats with FIC should consider the boxes' cleanness, size and style, as well as litter type (193,194). Cats prefer cleaned toileting area, so the litter should be scooped at least once daily and replaced completely once per week (194). Many researchers suggest a larger size of litter boxes is better for cats (17,156,194). ...
Feline idiopathic cystitis is a widespread disease in small animal clinics, which mainly presents with urinary signs like dysuria, stranguria, hematuria, pollakiuria, and periuria. The etiopathogenesis of the disease may involve interactions between the environmental stressors, neuroendocrine system and bladder of affected cats. Diagnostic biomarkers have not been tested in clinical studies though they are theoretically feasible, and since the clinical signs of the disease assemble those of other feline lower urinary diseases, its diagnosis is a procedure of exclusion. The primary treatment of the disease is long-term multimodal environmental modification (or enrichment) while anti-anxiety drugs and nutritional supplements are recommended for chronic recurrent cases. Still, many medicines need to be evaluated for their efficacy and safety. This review aims to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of feline idiopathic cystitis by summarizing and updating studies concerning the prevalence, risk factors, etiological hypotheses, diagnostic procedures, possible treatments, and prognosis of the disease.
... Sharing the same litter box can lead to inappropriate elimination behaviour because the urine and faeces in the litter box are from an unfamiliar individual 33 . One study reported the relationship between urine and faecal odour and litter box preferences 34 . However, another study demonstrated that cats were not averse to sharing a litter box 35 . ...
Feline lower urinary tract disease (FLUTD) is a common problem in cats. The objectives of the study were to determine the prevalence, clinical signs, and causes of FLUTD and the risk factors for FLUTD. The medical records of 3486 cats visiting Chiang Mai University Small Animal Veterinary Teaching Hospital (VTH) between November 2016 and October 2017 were reviewed. An age-matched case-control study was performed to determine the risk factors for FLUTD by comparing 78 cats with FLUTD and 78 clinically normal age-matched cats. For each animal, potential risk data were obtained from medical records and cat owner interviews; these were analysed for associations with FLUTD. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the odds ratios and to adjust for expected confounding factors. The prevalence of FLUTD in cats visiting the Chiang Mai University Veterinary Teaching Hospital was 2.2%. The most common clinical signs identified were urethral obstruction (55.1%) and haematuria (23.1%). The most common diagnoses were feline idiopathic cystitis (FIC) (57.7%) and urolithiasis (struvite) (18%). The multivariable logistic regression analysis results indicated that FLUTD was most likely to be diagnosed in castrated male cats. FIC and urolithiasis were the most common diagnoses in cats with FLUTD, and male sex and castration increased the risk of FLUTD.
... To date, a limited number of studies (<30) have investigated the ability of a litter product to reduce aversion, promote litter box attractiveness and/or increase litter box usage. Cottam and Dodman [20] found that owners reported a significant decrease in the number of eliminations outside of the litter box when using a commercially available cat urine deodoriser to remove the smells of the litter box. Studies have historically focused on adding spray onto the litter to make the litter box more attractive to the cats. ...
Urination and/or defecation outside a designated location has been reported as the most common behavioural reason for surrendering a cat and comprises approximately 30% of cat intakes to shelters. The objective of this study was to determine whether cats would increase in-box elimination when provided a plant-based litter product with attractant (ATTRACT) compared to the same plant-based litter product without attractant (PLANT). Sixteen cats were split into two equal cohorts based on availability from the shelter and group-housed in an enriched room with eight identical litter boxes arranged in a circular pattern equidistant from each other. Following a two-week room acclimation and transition period from clay litter to PLANT litter, boxes were designated either PLANT or ATTRACT litter, balancing for cats’ prior box location preferences. For 14 days following litter allocation, cat behaviours such as sniffing, digging, covering, urinating, and defecating were video recorded for 12 h daily. The cats urinated more often in the ATTRACT litter, suggesting that they preferred the ATTRACT litter for urination more than the PLANT litter (p < 0.05). The most significant differences observed were between genders, with males spending significantly more time sniffing and performing urination behaviours (p < 0.05). These results suggest that litter with an attractant may be more effective in eliciting usage for urination, as compared to a litter without the additive.
... To date, a limited number of studies (<30) have investigated the ability of a litter product to reduce aversion, promote litter box attractiveness and/or increase litter box usage. Cottam and Dodman [20] found that owners reported a significant decrease in the number of eliminations outside of the litter box when using a commercially available cat urine deodoriser to remove the smells of the litter box. Studies have historically focused on adding spray onto the litter to make the litter box more attractive to the cats. ...
Urination and/or defecation outside a designated location, or inappropriate elimination, is reported as the most common behaviour reason for surrendering a cat. Despite proper litter box maintenance, some cats inappropriately eliminate, leading to owner and cat frustration. The objective of this study was to determine whether cats increase in-box elimination when provided a newly innovated plant/herb-based litter product with attractant (ATTRACT) compared to a regular plant/herb-based litter product without attractant (PLANT). Sixteen cats (7 neutered males, 9 spayed females; 1–5 years; mean = 2.25 ± 0.36) were used. Cats were split into two equal cohorts based on availability from the shelter. Cohort 1 included 3 males and 5 females, and Cohort 2 an even split between sexes. Cats were group-housed in an enriched room with eight identical litter boxes arranged in a circular pattern equidistant from each other. Following a two-week acclimation, the cats were gradually transitioned over six days from clay-based litter to PLANT litter. On Day 6, all litter boxes contained PLANT litter. On Day 15, all litter boxes were cleaned fully and ranked from most to least used based on analyses of video-recordings of usage. Boxes were then designated either PLANT or ATTRACT litter based on cats’ prior preferences. For 14 d following litter allocation, cat behaviour was video-recorded for 12 h a day (08:00 h – 21:00 h). Behaviours, including duration and frequency of sniffing litter, as well as urinating and defecating in litter boxes, were recorded. Cats urinated and defecated more frequently in the ATTRACT litter compared to the PLANT litter (P < 0.05). These results provide preliminary indication of the efficacy of the attractant. Future studies should investigate the impacts of adding the attractant to plant-based litter to increase litter usage and decrease incidence of inappropriate elimination in cats.
... L'aumento di gatti sottoposti a visita comportamentale può essere dovuto a una crescente attenzione da parte dei proprietari verso le manifestazioni comportamentali del proprio gatto. Inoltre, come presente in letteratura, il problema per il quale viene più frequentemente richiesta una visita comportamentale specialistica, è un disturbo eliminatorio 2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 . ...
Objects - Evaluation of most frequent feline behavioural problems and in particular of house soiling. Material and methods - Evaluation of Behavioural Clinic data in the period between November 1998 and October 2007. Results - 48% of cats was affected by house soiling, 35% by aggression behaviours and 17% by other problems. About house soiling, 69% was inappropriate elimination, 19% was marking and 12% both. The principal causes could be environmental changes, addition of a new cat and social conflicts due to multiple cat households. Discussion - Before behavioural examination it's necessary to exclude primary medical diseases. A detailed behavioural history helps to identify the kind of problem and its causes. If household cats or unfamiliar cats are present, their relationships must be closely examined. This permits to administer a correct behavioural treatment.
Dogs and cats are popular companion animals that live together with humans. This special issue provides topics about the scents and olfaction of dogs and cats from the viewpoint of ethology. The first half introduces the significance of odors of feces, urine, and body, which is easily perceived as unpleasant odors, and how to deal with them. The second half mainly introduces the olfactory ability, the application of “Nosework” to animal welfare, and the effects of the owner’s body odor on the attachment behavior, in dogs and cats.
Objectives
Malodors stemming from soiled cat litter are a major frustration for cat owners, despite the widespread use of absorbent litters with claims of odor control. Technologies for effective litter odor control have not been rigorously evaluated. Here, we report on the effectiveness of a novel litter formulation of 1-monochlorodimethylhydantoin (MCDMH)-modified clinoptilolite zeolite (MCDMH-Z) to control the odors of 3-mercapto-3-methylbutanol (3M3MB) and ammonia, the principal products generated by the enzymatic breakdown of felinine and urea, respectively.
Methods
The efficacy of MCDMH-Z for the odor control of 3M3MB was determined by solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatography mass spectrometry analysis, colorimetric analysis and a sensory panel. Enzyme inhibition was monitored by a colorimetric coupled assay for ammonia. The antimicrobial properties were measured by a reduction in colony-forming units (CFUs).
Results
3M3MB proved highly susceptible to modification by MCDMH-Z granules. Headspace above litter exposed to MCDMH-Z showed no detectable 3M3MB; levels >59 ng were detected in commercially available products. Urease activity decreased by >97% after incubation with MCDMH-Z to 0.14 mg/ml. Cat litter F showed comparable inhibition (0.13 mg/ml); others showed less inhibition, producing up to 4.8 mg/ml of ammonia. MCDMH-Z reduced the CFUs of Proteus vulgaris by six log reduction values in 30 mins; in the same amount of time, no reduction was seen with commercial products tested. The odor control capability of the MCDMH-Z granules was further supported by a sensory panel scoring 3M3MB-spiked litters.
Conclusions and relevance
Samples of commercially available litter products showed an effect on malodor, or inhibition of urease, or contained antimicrobial activity; no samples were capable of accomplishing these concurrently. In contrast, MCDMH-Z granules were effective in all three test categories. Control of felinine-derived odors, in particular, has the potential to improve cat owner satisfaction, and may beneficially affect cat behaviors provoked by pheromonally active sulfurous metabolites deposited in the litter.
Problemem, z który boryka się wielu opiekunów kotów, jest nieprawidłowe korzystanie zwierząt z kuwety. Mikcja i defekacja poza kuwetą są jednymi z częściej podawanych zachowań przyczyniających się do oddawania kotów do schronisk. Podstawowymi cechami kuwety wymagającymi uwagi są: wielkość, konstrukcja, lokalizacja, dostępność, zapach, czystość i materiał, którym wypełniona jest kuweta. Rynek zoologiczny oferuje wiele rodzajów żwirku, jednak nie każdy wydaje się być odpowiedni. Celem pracy była próba oszacowania preferencji kotów względem dwóch rodzajów podłoża. Obserwacje przeprowadzono w schronisku dla zwierząt na dwóch grupach kotów (wykastrowane i niewykastrowane), podczas dwóch sesji dziennych i dwóch sesji nocnych. Rejestrowano liczbę mikcji i defekacji w kuwetach różniących się rodzajem zastosowanego podłoża. Średnia liczba mikcji i defekacji zrealizowanych w kuwetach o podłożu bentonitowym była większa niż w przypadku podłoża z drewnianego pelletu i dotyczyła obu grup kotów.
Untreated house soiling presents a severe risk to the human–animal bond. Despite being one of the most common behavior problems reported to veterinarians, a majority of veterinarians surveyed reported a lack of confidence in their ability to diagnose nonmedical inappropriate elimination. Successful resolution depends on an appropriate diagnosis, which is arrived at by a thorough medical and behavioral history, once medical problems have been ruled out. A systematic approach to collecting history, noting clinical signs and ruling out differentials, is most likely to yield positive results in the shortest time.
It is commonly assumed that cats actively avoid eliminated materials (especially in multi-cat homes), suggesting regular litter box cleaning as the best defense against out-of-box elimination. The relationship between previous use and litter box appeal to familiar subsequent users is currently unknown. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between previous litter box use and the identity of the previous user, type of elimination, odor, and presence of physical/visual obstructions in a multi-cat household scenario. Cats preferred a clean litter box to a dirty one, but the identity of the previous user had no impact on preferences. While the presence of odor from urine and/or feces did not impact litter box preferences, the presence of odorless faux-urine and/or feces did – with the presence of faux-feces being preferred over faux-urine. Results suggest neither malodor nor chemical communication play a role in litter box preferences, and instead emphasize the importance of regular removal of physical/visual obstructions as the key factor in promoting proper litter box use.
Feline inappropriate elimination is the number one behavioral reason for relinquishment of cats to shelters and has historically been the most commonly reported feline problem addressed by behavior professionals. Veterinarians are hence challenged to uncover the underlying motivation for this behavior so that an accurate diagnosis can be made and an effective treatment plan implemented. Before a behavioral diagnosis can be made, underlying medical disease must be addressed, making a comprehensive physical evaluation imperative. After all medical issues have been addressed, a behavior diagnoses list is made based on detailed historical information obtained from the cat owner. A distinction is first established between marking and inappropriate toileting, according to elimination postures described by the owner and the social relevance of the sites of inappropriate eliminations. Next, inadequacies of the litter box management are identified and subsequent aversions and preferences, including litter box aversion, substrate aversion, location aversion, substrate preference, and location preference, can be diagnosed. The practitioner should be cognizant of the fact that anxiety from the environment and social conflict may play a major role in both marking and inappropriate toileting behaviors. Once both the medical and behavioral diagnoses are established, a treatment plan catered to the individual cat, owner, and household environment can be formulated. This should include acceptable forms of marking when indicated, appropriate litter box management and hygiene, reduction of environmental stressors, including resolution of social conflict in multicat households, proper treatment and restricted access to soiled areas, pheromone application, and, when indicated, anxiolytic drug therapy.
To identify feline and household characteristics associated with relinquishment of a pet cat to an animal shelter.
Case-control study.
Households that relinquished cats for adoption (case households) and a random sample of current cat-owning households in the same community (control households).
Potentially modifiable risk factors with the highest population attributable risk for relinquishment were owners having specific expectations about the cat's role in the household, allowing the cat outdoors, owning a sexually intact cat, never having read a book about cat behavior, cats having daily or weekly inappropriate elimination, and inappropriate care expectations. Frequency of inappropriate elimination and aggression toward people were not associated with declaw status, but these behaviors were more common among sexually intact cats, compared with sterilized cats. Owners of cats in case households were more likely than owners in control households to cite cost of sterilization as a reason a cat was sexually intact. Cats found as strays and cats acquired with minimal planning were at decreased risk of relinquishment.
The identified risk factors can be modified by cat owners and veterinarians to decrease the estimated 4 million cats euthanatized annually in animal shelters. Owner education programs are needed as well as increased awareness on the part of cat owners and veterinarians of the importance of resolving feline inappropriate elimination problems.
TO evaluate the effects of a synthetic feline facial pheromone (FFP) on behavior and food intake of healthy versus clinically ill cats.
Original study.
20 cats were used in each of 2 studies. In each study, 7 cats were considered healthy, and 13 cats were determined to be clinically ill.
In study 1, cats were assigned either to exposure to FFP (treated group; 4 healthy, 6 ill cats) or to exposure to the vehicle (70% ethanol solution; control group; 3 healthy, 7 ill cats). Cats were placed in a cage containing a small cotton towel that had been sprayed with FFP or vehicle 30 minutes previously. Cats were then videotaped for 125 minutes, and food intake was measured during this period. Videotapes were scored at 5-minute intervals for various behaviors. In study 2, cats were categorized in 1 of 2 groups; group 1 (2 healthy, 8 ill cats) had a cat carrier placed in their cages, and group 2 (5 healthy, 5 ill cats) did not. All cats were exposed to FFP, and 24-hour food intake was measured.
Differences between behaviors of healthy versus clinically ill cats were not identified. In the first study, significant increases in grooming and interest in food were found in cats exposed to FFP compared with vehicle. For all cats, significant positive correlations were detected between grooming and facial rubbing, walking and facial rubbing, interest in food and facial rubbing, eating and facial rubbing, grooming and interest in food, and grooming and eating. In the second study, 24-hour food intake was significantly greater in cats exposed to FFP and the cat carrier, compared with cats exposed to FFP alone.
Results suggest that exposure to FFP may be useful to increase food intake of hospitalized cats.
To evaluate effects of environmental management alone on marking frequency in cats with urine marking and to obtain demographic data on cats with urine marking and data on owner-perceived factors that contributed to urine marking behavior.
Single-intervention study.
40 neutered male and 7 spayed female cats.
During a 2-week baseline phase, owners maintained a daily record of the number of urine marks. This phase was followed by a 2-week environmental management phase during which owners cleaned recently deposited urine marks daily, scooped waste from the litter box daily, and changed the litter and cleaned the litter box weekly while continuing to record urine marks.
Male cats and cats from multicat households were significantly overrepresented, compared with the general pet cat population in California. The most commonly mentioned causative factors for urine marking were agonistic interactions with other cats outside or inside the home. Environmental management procedures resulted in an overall reduction in urine marking frequency. Among cats that marked > or = 6 times during the baseline phase, females were significantly more likely to respond to treatment (> or = 50% reduction in marking frequency) than were males.
Results suggest that male cats and cats from multicat households are more likely to exhibit urine marking behavior than females and cats from single-cat households. Results also suggest that attention to environmental and litter box hygiene can reduce marking frequency in cats, regardless of sex or household status of the cats, and may come close to resolving the marking problem in some cats.
Feline inappropriate elimination is a widespread behavioral complaint of pet owners. This study looked at data collected on 100 housesoiling cats from the referral behavioral practice of the author. These cats were referred for depositing urine, stool, urine and stool or spraying in the home. The information was contrasted and compared to similar information collected on 44 cats that did not have a history of persistent housesoiling. Litter type, litter pan type, household disruption, number of cats in the home, history of urinary tract disorders and elimination of covering behaviors were evaluated for both groups. Chi-squared analyses revealed that scented litter type (P < 0.01), history of urinary tract disorders (P < 0.05), and covering behaviors (P < 0.01) differed significantly between housesoiling and non-housesoiling cats.
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Georgia, 1998. Directed by Sharon L. Crowell-Davis. Includes bibliographical references.
This article focuses on behavior problems for which pathophysiologic causes have been ruled out. General discussions of marking, urination, and defecation, the specific postures used for each behavior, and procedures for diagnosis and treatment are discussed briefly. New information is provided about cat's preferences for different types of litter materials.
Cat and dog owners appear to be equally attached to their pets, engage in similar behaviors, and hold similar opinions regarding their pets. The universality and strength of this attachment may be because household pets fit into the biological attachment system that exists to bond parents and children. Additionally, pets may convey a feeling of security or a sense of well-being that is rooted in our evolutionary past.
Problem urination is the most frequent feline behavior problem for which veterinary consultation is sought. The first step is to differentiate between inappropriate urination and urine marking. This is an array of behavioral approaches that are particularly useful with inappropriate urination and may also be useful with urine marking. Anti-anxiety drugs may be used if behavioral approaches are not effective in treating urine marking or inappropriate urination.
Cases involving inappropriate elimination can be treated successfully through careful diagnosis, identification of causative factors, and development of an appropriate treatment plan. Veterinarians can provide a valuable service to their clients through case workups, educational information, and timely referrals. Normal elimination and marking behavior and causative factors involved in inappropriate elimination cases are reviewed. Treatments, including behavior modification techniques and drug therapy suggestions, also are included in this article.
The spraying problem. Results and analysis of the Glaxovet/FAB survey
- G C Skerrit
- J E Jemmett
Skerrit GC, Jemmett JE (1980) The spraying problem. Results
and analysis of the Glaxovet/FAB survey. Feline Advisory
Bureau Bulletin 18 (2), 3e4.
Diagnosis and treatment of feline elimination disorders
- S Heath
Heath S (2001) Diagnosis and treatment of feline elimination
disorders. Pet Behavior: a Practical Approach. Course
Notes. Gloucester, UK: British Small Animal Veterinary
Association.
Behavioral and pharmacological approaches to problem urination in cats. Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice 26
- B L Hart
Hart BL (1996) Behavioral and pharmacological approaches
to problem urination in cats. Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice 26, 651e658.
Attachment of people to companion animals. Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice 15
- V L Voith
Voith VL (1985) Attachment of people to companion animals. Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice
15, 289e295.
House soiling by cats. BSAVA Manual of Canine and Feline Medicine
- D F Horwitz
- D S Mills
- S Heath
Horwitz DF, Mills DS, Heath S (2002) House soiling by cats.
BSAVA Manual of Canine and Feline Medicine. Gloucester,
UK: British Small Animal Veterinary Association.
Pearl vs clumping: litter preference in a population of shelter cats [abstracts
- J C Neilson
Neilson JC (2001) Pearl vs clumping: litter preference in
a population of shelter cats [abstracts]. In: Abstracts from
the American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior, Boston.
p. 14.
Progress in Companion Animal Behavior. Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice 27
- L L Cooper
Cooper LL (1997) Feline inappropriate elimination. In:
Houpt KA (ed), Progress in Companion Animal Behavior.
Veterinary Clinics North America Small Animal Practice 27,
pp. 569e600.
Elimination behavior problems in cat
- S Crowell-Davis
Crowell-Davis S (2001) Elimination behavior problems in
cat. In: Proceedings 2001 American Animal Hospital Associations Annual Meeting. pp. 34e37.