Taste responses of dogs to ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, and ethylene glycol-based antifreeze.

Although it is widely believed that ethylene glycol-based antifreeze (AF) is an attractive tastant to dogs and other animals, empirical data on this point are not available. In experiment 1, we examined the propensity of 178 adult mixed-breed dogs to approach, sniff, and lick a concentration of AF commonly used in automotive cooling systems (50%). Despite the fact that most of the dogs approached and sniffed the AF in these 5-minute tests, only 9% initiated lick responses and most of these were brief and not followed by additional licking. In experiment 2, the lick responses of five gastric-cannulated dogs to aqueous solutions of 20% sucrose, 50% ethylene glycol, 50% propylene glycol, water, and 50% AF were examined in 14-minute tests before and after periods of food and water deprivation. Under the latter conditions, 2 of the 5 dogs drank amounts of ethylene glycol that would have been lethal to uncannulated dogs. None of the five dogs drank potentially lethal amounts of AF. The preference order for these tastants was sucrose greater than water greater than ethylene glycol greater than AF = propylene glycol. Although these findings question the general belief that AF is highly palatable to most dogs, they do imply that large individual differences in responsiveness exist and that AF ingestion is likely influenced by motivational state. Furthermore, they suggest the possibility that unpleasant-tasting additives could be successfully developed to eliminate the ingestion of AF, because the initial attractiveness of AF is relatively low. Such additives would have to be stable in vehicular cooling systems and not adversely affect the functional aspects of AF performance.