Metabolic profile testing (MPT) refers to the use of a battery of tests for the diagnosis of subclinical nutritional and metabolic disease in dairy cows on a herd basis. Typically, blood samples from 5-7 animals per production group are tested for various analytes. Automated laboratory testing and the ease of taking blood samples have made herd MPT popular. In practice however, there are a number of limitations, such as selection of animals, the type of biochemical tests, the homeostatic mechanisms of cows, and the difficulty in the interpretation of results. Widespread use of metabolic profiles for all farms and all cows is not warranted and will result in poor predictive values. Profiles have more value when used appropriately in the diagnostic process or as part of a specific objective in herd monitoring programs for metabolic disease. Profile testing should not be used in place of other more appropriate procedures, such as ration evaluation and physical examinations. MPT is most useful in the diagnosis and management of periparturient disease. Specific nutrient imbalances, either deficiency or excess, in the diet of late-gestation cows have been related to increased prevalence of milk fever, hypomagnesemia, retained placentas, downer cow syndrome, mastitis, udder edema, ketosis, hepatic lipidosis, and displaced abomasum (Table 1).

Equine Veterinary EducationVolume 12, Issue 6 p. 333-336 Equine serum biochemical analyte comparisons on the Boehringer Mannheim/Hitachi 911 and Abaxis VetScan clinical chemistry analysers H. Dawson, H. Dawson Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorA. Sutton-Harmer, A. Sutton-Harmer Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorB. Hoff, B. Hoff Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorE. Grift, E. Grift Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this author H. Dawson, H. Dawson Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorA. Sutton-Harmer, A. Sutton-Harmer Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorB. Hoff, B. Hoff Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorE. Grift, E. Grift Animal Health Laboratory, Laboratory Services Division, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1H 6R8, Canada.Search for more papers by this author First published: 05 January 2010 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3292.2000.tb00071.xAboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume12, Issue6December 2000Pages 333-336 RelatedInformation

The objective of this study was to compare and assess the agreement between the Coulter AcT Diff hematology analyzer (CAD) and the Bayer Technicon H1 (H1) using blood samples from 391 animals of 4 species. The H1 has been used in veterinary laboratories for many years. Recently, Coulter modified the CAD and added veterinary software for hematologic analysis of feline, canine, and equine samples. A comparison of hemograms from dogs, cats, horses, and cattle was made using EDTA-anticoagulated blood samples. Both instruments were calibrated using human blood products. Performance characteristics were excellent for most values. The exceptions were MCV in canine samples (concordance correlation of.710), platelet counts for feline and equine samples (.258 and.740, respectively), feline and bovine WBC counts (.863 and.857, respectively), and bovine hemoglobin (.876).