ObjectiveFocused on the laboratory animal domestication and breeding of domestic cats, to explore the feeding management methods and breeding techniques of experimental cats. MethodsSeven Chinese garden cats from three litters were introduced from the rural suburbs of Guangzhou, and a breeding seed colony was established. The cats were domesticated in captivity, bred, closed breeding and transmission according to the feeding and management methods of laboratory animal. The population reproduction, the number of pregnancies per year, the litter season, the birth and weaning quality of the cats, and the survival rate of weaning were statistically collected. ResultsThe young breeding cats were able to adapt to the cage feeding management. In the transmission breeding and the expanded breeding colony, the number of female cats pregnant with one, two or three litters a year accounted for 63.2%, 26.3% and 10.5%, respectively. The proportions of litters born from the 1st to the 4th quarters were 20.7%, 20.7%, 27.6%, and 31.0%. A total of 29 pregnancies and 101 kittens were got from 19 female cats, with an average of (3.5±1.33) kittens per litter. The birth weights of female and male cats were (89.31±13.69) g and (93.47±15.12) g, respectively. Sixty-seven kittens survived from weaning. The average survival rate was 60.86%, and the weaning weights of female and male cats were (361.62±82.77) g and (376.0±91.71) g, respectively. ConclusionDomestic Chinese garden cats can adapt to laboratory animal feeding and breeding rules, and have strong fertility. They can normally pregnant and breeding throughout the year. The kittens grow to 5-6 months of age can meet the weight requirements for the examination of pharmaceutical hypotensive substances, and can be used as experimental cats for pharmaceutical examination with clear origin.

Objective:To compare the differences in lung function between sanitation workers and the general population undergoing routine physical examinations, and to analyze the risk factors for restricted airflow and severity of the condition in sanitation workers.Methods:This study is a large cross-sectional study called "Shanxin Respiratory Health Screening for Ten Thousand People". A total of 1 036 sanitation workers (sanitation group) and 6 701 individuals from the general population undergoing routine physical examinations (control group) were selected as the original study subjects from June 2021 to April 2022 (before matching). Both groups underwent pre-bronchodilator lung function tests, and the differences in lung function characteristics between the two groups were compared. The sanitation group also completed a questionnaire survey. Multivariate and ordinal multinomial logistic regression analysis were used to analyze the risk factors for airflow limitation and its severity.Results:A total of 1 027 individuals from the sanitation group and 999 individuals from the control group were included in the study. There were no significant differences in age, gender, height, weight, and body mass index (BMI) between the two groups (all P>0.05). The rate of airflow restriction was significantly higher in the sanitation group compared to the control group (22.88% vs 8.81%, P<0.001). In the sanitation group, there was no statistically significant difference in a self-assessment test for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (CAT) scores between individuals with airflow restriction (235 cases) and those without airflow restriction (792 cases) [(1.50±2.50) vs (1.15±2.03) points, P=0.084]. There were no statistically significant differences in forced vital capacity (FVC) as a percentage of predicted value (FVC%pred) between the two groups. However, the sanitation group had significantly lower %pred for forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV 1%pred), FVC/FEV 1 ratio (FEV 1/FVC%pred), forced expiratory flow at 50% of FVC (FEF 50%%pred), forced expiratory flow at 75% of FVC (FEF 75%%pred), and maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF%pred) compared to the control group (all P<0.05). The rates of abnormal FEF 50%%pred, FEF 75%%pred, and MMEF%pred were significantly higher in the sanitation group compared to the control group (17.62% vs 10.31%, 17.04% vs 10.01%, 27.26% vs 18.41%, all P<0.001). Small airway parameters and the rate of airflow restriction were significantly higher in past and current smokers of the sanitation group compared to never smokers (all P<0.05). Multifactorial analysis showed that high BMI ( OR=0.929, 95% CI: 0.885-0.974) was a protective factor for airflow restriction, while high smoking index was a risk factor ( OR=1.020, 95% CI: 1.011-1.030). Ordered multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that high BMI ( OR=0.925, 95% CI: 0.882-0.971) was a protective factor for the severity of airflow restriction, while high smoking index ( OR=1.020, 95% CI: 1.011-1.029) was a risk factor for the severity of airflow restriction. Conclusions:The incidences of airflow limitation and small airway abnormalities in sanitation workers are higher than that in general physical examination population. High smoking index and low BMI are independent risk factors for airflow limitation and its severity.