[Banner]

If a puppy is one of the smallest in the litter one week after birth and not necessarily the runt....... comparatively when it becomes an adult, will it still be small compared to the others in the litter? I've always wondered this. Or does size at birth or right after birth really a determining factor on how large a puppy will grow compared to its litter.

 

[Banner]

Might be some correlation but in no way is it absolute.
Many smallest-in-the-litter end up being the average or on the larger side in the end if given access to the same nutrition.

I don't know of any study that's been done to state percentages but I'm sure it's out there.

Yeah this is what I wondering. So size at birth and just the first 2 weeks isn’t necessarily a determining factor of the size as an adult.

 

[Banner]

The ones that are small at birth are sometimes that way because they may have been conceived later than their littermates, if the bitch had repeated matings several days apart. Or it may be they weren't as well nourished in the womb due to the way the placenta was attached. Those are the ones that can grow to be the same size as their littermates, if the breeder allows them a chance to nurse as much as they want, and not get pushed away from the nipple by the larger pups.

Genetics are the main factor - a genetic dwarf is, of course, always going to be small, or a pup may take after a parent who is smaller than usual for the breed.

Unless a pup is very severely malnourished, nothing you feed it (supplements, special food, etc.) is going to make a bit of difference in its final size, which is determined solely by genetics.

This is great info. Thank you!