Comparison of rectal and tympanic core body temperature measurement in adult Guyanese squirrel monkeys (Saimiri sciureus sciureus)

Dominance rank and the presence of sexually receptive females predict feces-measured body temperature in male chimpanzees

Quantifying the costs of mating is key for understanding life-history trade-offs. As a reflection of metabolic rate, body temperature is one metric for assaying these costs. However, conventional methods for measuring body temperature are invasive and unsuitable for the study of free-living populations of endangered species, including great apes. A promising proxy for body temperature is fecal temperature, the internal temperature of fecal deposits shortly following defecation. We validated this method with humans, finding that maximum fecal temperature is a reliable proxy for rectal temperature. We then applied this method to wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) at Ngogo, Kibale National Park, Uganda. We collected and analyzed 101 fecal temperature measurements from 43 adult chimpanzees (male: N = 28; female: N = 15). Chimpanzee fecal temperature ranged from 33.4 to 38.9 °C, with a mean of 35.8 °C. Although fecal temperature was not predicted by sex, age, or ambient temperature, male fecal temperature was 1.1 °C higher on days when sexually receptive females were present and was positively correlated with male dominance rank. Post hoc analyses showed that overall copulation rates, but not aggression rates, were positively correlated with fecal temperature, suggesting that sexual physiology and behavior best explain mating-related temperature variation. Together, these results indicate fecal temperature is a reliable proxy for core body temperature in large-bodied mammals, captures metabolic costs associated with male mating behavior, and represents a valuable noninvasive tool for biological field research.

Measurement of body temperature in 300 dogs with a novel noncontact infrared thermometer on the cornea in comparison to a standard rectal digital thermometer

OBJECTIVE

To assess the accuracy of obtaining body temperatures in dogs with a noncontact infrared thermometer (NCIT) on the cornea compared with a rectal digital thermometer (RDT).

DESIGN

Prospective single center study.

SETTING

University teaching hospital.

ANIMALS

Three hundred dogs presented with low, normal, or high body temperatures.

INTERVENTIONS

Three body temperature readings were measured by an RDT and by an NCIT on the cornea of the left eye by 2 investigators (experienced and inexperienced). Results obtained by the 2 methods were compared.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Median body temperature measured by the experienced investigator with the RDT and the NCIT were 38.3°C (range 35.5°C-41.1°C; 95% CI: 38.2-38.4°C) and 37.7°C (35.9°C-40.1°C; 95% CI: 37.7°C-37.9°C), respectively. Measurement of RDT as well as of NCIT correlated well between both investigators (rRDT = 0.94; rNCIT = 0.82; respectively, P < 0.001 for both methods). Mean RDT and NCIT-temperature correlated poorly (r = 0.43; P < 0.001) when taken by the experienced investigator and even less by the nonexperienced investigator (r = 0.38; P < 0.001). Repeatability of the NCIT revealed an unsatisfactory value (0.24°C) compared to RDT measurement (0.12°C). Agreement between both devices in measuring low, normal, and high values, calculated by Cohens-Kappa, was unsatisfactory (к = 0.201; P < 0.001). Calculating the receiver operating characteristic curve to determine the best threshold for fever (defined as RDT temperature >39.0°C) showed an area under the curve of 0.76. Mean discomfort score was significantly lower using NCIT compared to RDT measurement (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was poor agreement between body temperatures obtained by RDT and NCIT. The corneal NCIT measurement tends to underrecognize hypothermic and hyperthermic conditions. Although the use of the NCIT yields faster results and is significantly more comfortable for the dog than the RDT measurement, it cannot be recommended in dogs at this time.

Agreement between auricular and rectal measurements of body temperature in healthy cats

Measurement of body temperature is a routine part of the clinical assessment of a patient. However, this procedure may be time-consuming and stressful to most animals because the standard site of temperature acquisition remains the rectal mucosa. Although an increasing number of clinicians have been using auricular temperature to estimate core body temperature, evidence is still lacking regarding agreement between these two methods in cats. In this investigation, we evaluated the agreement between temperatures measured in the rectum and ear in 29 healthy cats over a 2-week period. Temperatures were measured in the rectum (using digital and mercury-in-glass thermometers) and ear once a day for 14 consecutive days, producing 406 temperature readings for each thermometer. Mean temperature and confidence intervals were similar between methods, and Bland-Altman plots showed small biases and narrow limits of agreement acceptable for clinical purposes. The interobserver variability was also checked, which indicated a strong correlation between two near-simultaneous temperature readings. Results are consistent with auricular thermometry being a reliable alternative to rectal thermometry for assessing core body temperature in healthy cats.