Description:
<jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>Clinical pathology investigations are essential to evaluate the health status and practice management of ruminants. Appropriate and accurate <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s are required for the interpretation of laboratory results. Despite substantial phenotypic differences and management‐related disparities between male and female sheep, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s in rams are sparse and limited by small reference populations and outdated methods.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives</jats:title><jats:p>The purpose of this study was to establish <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s for hematologic, biochemical, and hormonal analytes in adult rams using controlled preanalytic and analytic procedures, and to investigate whether breed‐dependent partitioning of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s is required.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods</jats:title><jats:p>Reference individuals were selected by a direct a priori method. Blood was collected from 128 healthy adult rams representing 2 Greek breeds (64 Chios and 64 Florina). Hematologic analysis was performed on the Advia 120, while differential <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WBC</jats:styled-content> counts were manually performed on Giemsa‐stained blood smears. Flexor E, <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">AVL</jats:styled-content> 9180 Electrolyte Analyzer, and Immulite 1000 were used for biochemical and hormonal analyses, respectively. Combined and breed‐specific <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s were calculated using nonparametric and robust methods, respectively.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>Five outliers were detected based on laboratory results. Partitioning of <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s, based on both statistical and nonstatistical criteria, was recommended for some of the analytes.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title><jats:p>The <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s are in some agreement with those in the literature. The observed differences may be attributed to preanalytic and analytic factors. The <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">RI</jats:styled-content>s determined in this study can be used as a guide for the interpretation of laboratory results in rams and can potentially be adopted by veterinary laboratories, provided that similar equipment and reagents are used.</jats:p></jats:sec>