Key result
The QT interval of non-dormant bears (0.14–0.23 s) and marmots (0.07–0.14 s) is shorter than that of humans (0.39 s), indicating bear hearts behave electrophysiologically like small hibernators.
Observational
No immediate change to human QT norms; leaves open whether bear models extend to clinical hibernation-mimetic cardioprotection.
Small hibernating animals experience cycles of deep hypothermia followed by rewarming and feeding. This contrasts with bears, which remain in hibernation for four to seven months, experiencing large reductions in energy metabolism and heart rate, and small reductions in core temperature, and do not eat, drink, urinate, or defecate throughout. We measured the QT interval (QT) of the electrocardiogram (EKG) to determine whether the hearts of bears behave electrophysiologically more like classic hibernators or non-hibernators. We compared EKGs from grizzly and polar bears with small hibernators (marmots) and humans. Animal data were obtained using implanted radio capsules. EKGs of non-dormant marmots were characterized by a shortened QT (0.07–0.14 s); this held for grizzly and polar bears (0.14–0.23 s), but not for humans (0.39 s). Thus, the QT of bears resembles that of small hibernators. At the same heart rate, the QT of non-dormant bears and marmots differs in winter and summer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Folk et al. (2008) reported an observational. Hibernating animals (bears and marmots) vs. Humans was evaluated on QT interval. The QT interval of non-dormant bears (0.14–0.23 s) and marmots (0.07–0.14 s) is shorter than that of humans (0.39 s), indicating bear hearts behave electrophysiologically like small hibernators.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: