The administration of an oral probiotic has been demonstrated to impact oral microbial diversity in humans but has not been examined in canines. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that oral probiotic administration would impact the oral microbiota of canines compared to control. Working canines in training (n = 13) were assigned to Test or Control groups and acclimated to one of three commercially available study diets utilizing common protein sources (Purina Pro Plan Savor lamb, Purina Pro Plan Sport chicken, Purina Pro Plan Focus salmon) for a minimum of 30 days prior to initiation of the study. Following acclimation, dogs in the Test group began a daily regimen of oral probiotic (Fortiflora ® Purina, St. Louis, MO) top-dressed on their midday feeding. Control dogs received their midday feeding with no probiotic. All dogs were sampled once weekly via oral pediatric swabs across the 7-week study. Next generation sequencing (Illumina, MiSeq) was utilized to develop microbial profiles specific to treatment, diet, and time. Bacterial composition was dominated by eight phyla (Proteobacteria 43.8%, Bacteroidetes 22.5%, Firmicutes 18.9%, Actinobacteria 6.1%, Fusobacteria 3.6%, Gracilibacteria 2.1%, SR1 Absconditabacteria 1.5%, and Saccharibacteria 1.3%) representing more than 99% of the relative abundance of the microbial composition. Probiotic administration failed to impact relative abundance at any taxonomic level (P > 0.05). Similarly, no effect on the oral microbiota was measured for diet (P > 0.05). Comparison using a Jaccard Index demonstrate a consistent microbial profile over the 7-week study with no impact evidenced by study week (P = 0.19). The data also revealed a profile of ubiquitous taxa that were present across all dogs and all samples regardless of breed, sex, diet, treatment or other factors. These genera include Actinomyces, Corynebacterium, Capnocytophaga, Flavobacterium, Gemella, Abiotrophia, Streptococcus, and Frederiksenia. These data demonstrate the stability of canine oral microbiota over time.

This case series describes the clinical courses of 3 juvenile Yucatan miniature swine (Sus scrofa) that experienced a suspected anaphylactic reaction to ketamine hydrochloride during premedication for protocol-related surgery. All 3 swine rapidly developed diffuse erythema shortly after injection with ketamine-containing drug combinations. Clinical signs ranged from tachycardia and erythema alone to tachycardia and erythema followed by respiratory and cardiac arrest. Ketamine was considered the most likely cause of these reactions because it was the only agent in the premedication sedation combination that was used in all 3 swine. Subsequent intradermal skin testing confirmed this suspicion. With supportive care measures and standard medical interventions for anaphylaxis, all 3 animals recovered well and went on to be successful experimental subjects when an alternative anesthetic regimen that did not contain ketamine was used. To our knowledge, this report is the first description of a suspected adverse ketamine reaction of this type in swine despite the widespread use of the drug in this species. Ketamine anaphylaxis is rare in people, but the few cases described presented with symptoms similar to the clinical signs seen in the pigs in this report. In addition to highlighting a potential adverse drug reaction to ketamine in swine, this case series demonstrates the value of emergency preparedness for even the most routine of procedures.