Summary of Rat Life Span Data

User avatar
SillyTilly
Member
Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:34 pm
Location: South Shropshire

Summary of Rat Life Span Data

Post by SillyTilly » Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:35 pm

Hi All,

Had a spare couple of hours this eve, so I stuck all that lifespan data into the PC.

I've give you a detailed analsis tomorrow, but here's a quick summary:

Average (mean) lifespan is 23.8 months,

The most common age (mode) is 24 months.

14% of rats live less than 12months
48% of rats live between 13 and 24 months
27% live between 25 and 36months
11% live over 36months

Olivia
Grand Finale, Finestaire, Fin de Siecle, Sarah, HG, Jude and Madonna.
Sleep tight Dilwyn, Eleanor, Belle, Yorkie, Chloe, Lily, Missy, Rosie, Tess, Dru, Faith, Hope, Charity, Felicity, Dominic, Sam, Sophie, Penny and Sky

http://www.dales-fans.org.uk

User avatar
Sylentskye
Member
Member
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Central Maine, US

Post by Sylentskye » Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:57 pm

what was the end count of the # of rats you collected data for? Thanks!

User avatar
Ripley
Member
Member
Posts: 1342
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2005 11:47 am
Location: South Lincolnshire
Contact:

Post by Ripley » Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:59 pm

That's interesting! It's great you took the time to work that out! :D

7 of 15 of my rats are 24 months or older, and i've only ever had one rat die before 24 months (she was 22 months).

I must be lucky! :o

User avatar
joolzratbag
Member
Member
Posts: 6417
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:28 pm
Location: Cambs & Brighton
Contact:

Post by joolzratbag » Mon Aug 08, 2005 6:57 am

Thanks for doing this Olivia! I am ashamed to say I have meaning to add my data for ages and never got round to it :oops: Had I known you were about to do that, it might have induced me to! ;)

Of the 18 rats I have owned since 1999 - 9 have lived to over 2 and one has lived to over 3, and 5 are still living. The others made it to 18 months or more, except for Cookie who died of respiratory/heart problems at 11 months.

I don't have figures for all my other rats that go back to the '80's. I had all my rat info in diaries which I no longer have :(
But I didn't lose any before 18 months and 3 of them lived to approx 3 1/2.
~Joolz~
Bonny :dumbogirly: Annee :dumbogirly:
RIP all those before them <:3 )~~~
Rat Health

User avatar
SillyTilly
Member
Member
Posts: 1051
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 1:34 pm
Location: South Shropshire

Post by SillyTilly » Sat Aug 13, 2005 8:57 pm

RIght done some more in depth work now.

Here are the overall results. In total there was data for 336 rats (in fact there were a few more, but there wasn't enough to be able to use).

location
uk 324
america 12


gender
male 152
female 175
not given 9


origin
petshop 189
bred - petshop 12
breeder 56
friend 9
rehome 6
rescue 51
unknown 13


COD
abcess 3
accident 7
blood loss 2
brain 28
cancer 3
chocked 1
epilipsy 3
heart failure 20
hind leg paralysis 5
infection 5
kidney failure 5
liver failure 2
mammary tumors 10
old age 55
organ failure 1
paralysis 1
pregnancy complications 1
pyometra 4
resp 88
self harm 1
tumor 60
unknown 24
not given 7



I then split the rats into two groups. Those from a formal breeder, and those from the other sources. Unfortuneately we only had 56 breeder rats. Which doesn't make for the best statistical analysis. So if any breeders out there have some data it'd be gratefully appreciated.

So here are the results for the two groups.

Breeder rats (total 56)

COD
abcess 0 0%
accident 3 5%
blood loss 1 2%
brain 5 9%
cancer 0 0%
chocked 0 0%
epilipsy 0 0%
heart failure 4 7%
hind leg paralysis 1 2%
infection 2 4%
kidney failure 2 4%
liver failure 1 2%
mammary tumors 0 0%
old age 8 14%
organ failure 1 2%
paralysis 0 0%
pregnancy complications 0 0%
pyometra 1 2%
resp 12 21%
self harm 0 0%
tumor 11 20%
unknown 4 7%
not given 0 0%


mode 23
median 20.5
mean 20.0625

age at death
0-12months 9 16%
13-24months 33 59%
25-36months 11 20%
37+months 3 5%


other sources (total 280)

COD
abcess 3 1%
accident 4 1%
blood loss 1 0%
brain 23 8%
cancer 3 1%
chocked 1 0%
epilipsy 3 1%
heart failure 16 6%
hind leg paralysis 4 1%
infection 3 1%
kidney failure 3 1%
liver failure 1 0%
mammary tumors 10 4%
old age 47 17%
organ failure 0 0%
paralysis 1 0%
pregnancy complications 1 0%
pyometra 3 1%
resp 76 27%
self harm 1 0%
tumor 49 18%
unknown 20 7%
not given 7 3%


mode 24
median 24
mean 24.5125

age at death
0-12months 37 13%
13-24months 131 47%
25-36months 79 28%
37+months 33 12%


SOrry the layout isn't great - I can't work out how to draw tables on here.

Olivia

PS If there are any serious statisticians out there I'm happy to email the excel file over.
Grand Finale, Finestaire, Fin de Siecle, Sarah, HG, Jude and Madonna.
Sleep tight Dilwyn, Eleanor, Belle, Yorkie, Chloe, Lily, Missy, Rosie, Tess, Dru, Faith, Hope, Charity, Felicity, Dominic, Sam, Sophie, Penny and Sky

http://www.dales-fans.org.uk

User avatar
Sloth
New Member
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 1:24 pm
Location: Wallasey, UK
Contact:

Post by Sloth » Sun Mar 19, 2006 6:44 pm

Nice work.

Just a small querey, where you give the mode mean and merdian. what for which data set is it, and what are the units.
I'm not a statisticians, but could you email the workbook.

use my msn contact email address
Whiskey :halo: Peanut :halo: Lemon :halo: Toffee :halo: Sprite :halo: Benji4 :halo: Liggy :halo: & Whatever :halo:

User avatar
Vermin
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:48 pm

Post by Vermin » Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:40 pm

The data sounds good but you have to remember that the data is not from a representative population i.e. the people taking part in this survey do not reflect the standard population of rat owners. NFRS owners are more likely to be knowledgable and so dietary factors and dietry predisposed diseases (diabetes etc) for example, are less likely to be a cause of death. This will affect the nature of the results obtained, as will not truely reflect the population of rat owners.

It is unlikely that rats from breeders have a significant reduced risk of abcess development. Abcesses are caused by infections and have no genetic predisposition. What is more likely to play a role is that perhaps (and I only pontificate) people who buy their rats from breeders are more enthusiastic and other factors in which they raise their pets play a role in this (I buy my rats from pet shops so please no one take offense!)

Also to check the validity of results. I would carry out pearsons square test or whatever you find relevant to your data set.

Basically all I want to say is your data is very interesting but needs further development before anyone can take any serious conclusions from it. You may realise this but I just wanted to point this out to people who may not know and may be put off from buying rats from good pet shops based on this data.
O..O
>v<
(v v)~~
w^w

User avatar
toyah
Member
Member
Posts: 1755
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2002 2:23 pm
Location: Glasgow
Contact:

Post by toyah » Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:40 am

It is unlikely that rats from breeders have a significant reduced risk of abcess development. Abcesses are caused by infections and have no genetic predisposition.


But surely rats with better immune systems are less likely to develop abscesses, and immune system is something that is genetically determined to a degree?
Everything happens to everybody sooner or later if there is time enough.

Hawthorn Rats - http://www.hawthorn.smugmug.com

User avatar
Vermin
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 1:48 pm

Post by Vermin » Sat Apr 29, 2006 11:56 am

Hi.

Having studied immunology you are quite right to point out that in a minority of cases immune systems can be comprimised in certain genetic disease states. But this is quite rare. For the majority of individuals husbandry plays a larger role. Such as rearing the rat in a cleaner environment (although not too clean as no immune challange can lead to hypersensitivity reactions - 'the hygiene hypothesis'), making sure they recieve enough passive antibodies from cholostrum in the first few hours of life and importantly nutrition. Most individuals are built with the basis for good immunity and it is the environmental challanges that will determine how it evolves, whether it will be sufficient and whether hypersensitivity reactions will occur.

Good breeding will be beneficial for the reduction of other heriditary diseases such as diabetes insipidus and melitus (type 1), conformation (body postures - bad body postures can predispose to arthritis) etc.

I would say that on the whole rats are a very robust species in that they suffer from far less genetic complications than say dogs, horses and cats. The only major draw backs from rats (from my experience keeping them and being in practise) is that they are very prone to developing respiratory diseases and mallignant tumours. Respiratory diseases are majoryly controlled by husbandry (what bedding we keep them on and environmental dust allergens). Tumours on the other hand are debatable. They do develop from exposure to environmental agents (mutagens) but there certainly may be genetic predispositions (mainly recognised in pedigree dogs). What role this may take between specialist bred rat and those found in pet shops I dont know. To make a valid comparison one would have to take a representative sample from the population of pet rat owners and obtain significant levels of data and apply the relevant statistical tests. It would be very interesting to find out!

xXx
O..O
>v<
(v v)~~
w^w

User avatar
vbeberness
Member
Member
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 8:13 pm
Location: idaho

ripleysratpack

Post by vbeberness » Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:19 am

Wow, what do you feed your rats. I want mine to live a long time too. thanks :smileyrat:
I'll miss you Bubbles :halo: Twiggy :halo: and Penny. R.I.P. :halo: Jemma :halo:

User avatar
antandneil
Member
Member
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:05 am
Location: Sheffield UK

Post by antandneil » Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:18 pm

I am a statistician and I endorse what Vermin says, to be truly meaningful, you really need to ensure that the sample is representitve of the population. Whilst what you have done is mathematically correct, and you have made a great job of the analyisis, I would suggest it is representitive only of the sample you have, not of rats overall.
:rainbow: Minty Cocoa Sandy Snowy Casper Rupert Jules Arthur Archie Moz Foster Bella Oscar Dexter Bruno Sophie Ronnie Frasier Chester Stryker Patch Reggie Molly Gracie Maisie Eunice Rosie Wilbur Maude Dolly Monty Sophie Scrag Henry Niles

Estelle
Member
Member
Posts: 1241
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2002 6:38 pm

Post by Estelle » Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:48 am

antandneil wrote: I would suggest it is representitive only of the sample you have, not of rats overall.

I agree totally on that. When you look through the people who are posting, you generally don't see many breeders on there so there will always be a massive gap in the stats on them. I've personally had around 300 rats live their lives here during the time i've kept rats and i keep my own statistics, plus the stats of the rats that people have from me, but there is no way i'd ever have the time to consider adding to a thread for the kind of figures i've had and i'd expect the vast majority of breeders to either fit into that category or in the category where they don't keep that much in the way of records anyway.

User avatar
joolzratbag
Member
Member
Posts: 6417
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 4:28 pm
Location: Cambs & Brighton
Contact:

Post by joolzratbag » Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:32 am

It doesn't have to be that way though. More and more people on this forum try to get pedigree rats, so that is representative of quite a few of the rats breeders have bred, and although it would be too much to post all the past rats, it would not take long to add new rat statistics as they happen for those breeders that have the time to do a few posts every now and then.
Over a period of 5 or 10 years, it would be a more representative sample.
It's never going to be representative of all the pet rats in the country, but the more rats that are added, the more interesting the statistics will become, and it would be very cool to be able to look back in 5 or so more years time and compare the data of farmed rats against pedigree rats, and the more people that get involved in the thread, the more interesting (and slightly more representative) the data would be.
~Joolz~
Bonny :dumbogirly: Annee :dumbogirly:
RIP all those before them <:3 )~~~
Rat Health

User avatar
Squirrel
Member
Member
Posts: 529
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 2:38 pm
Location: London, England
Contact:

Post by Squirrel » Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:50 pm

I've had 26 rats and have records for all (well copies of Pro-rat-a that have their tributes in, including cause of death) so I should really collate this information.

I am totally not surprised that the top cause of death is respiratory problems. My own stats bear that out. No numbers at present but the majority of mine died that way, I'd say at least 50%. The next most common cause of death (well being pts) is cancer. Other causes have been: accident (3), heart problems, internal absesses (1), kidney failure (1). All but 3 were put to sleep and only one died at home (heart failure I think), the other two died of resp probs at the vets before I could get there. I've only had one rat live to be as old as 3 and one lived to be 2 1/2. I'd say the average was 2 years.
Mummy to Courcelles, Lilac, Feather, Midnight & Cocoa

User avatar
Vawny
New Member
New Member
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: England

Post by Vawny » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:25 am

I am a little bewildered that a rat passed away because of self harm. What do you mean specifically...?
... and here endeth the tail...

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest