Literature DB >> 19210254

Comparison of the guaranteed analysis with the measured nutrient composition of commercial pet foods.

Richard C Hill1, Christina J Choate, Karen C Scott, Geert Molenberghs.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare guaranteed and measured concentrations of nutrients in commercial pet foods.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SAMPLE POPULATION: Annual inspection reports of pet food analyses from 5 states. PROCEDURES: Guaranteed and measured concentrations of crude protein (CP), crude fat (CF), crude fiber (CFb), moisture, and ash in pet foods were compared. The concentration difference for each nutrient was compared among types of food, target species, target life stages, manufacturers, and laboratories.
RESULTS: The guaranteed and measured concentrations of nutrients were significantly different. For all foods, mean concentration differences were as follows: CP, 1.5%; CF, 1.0%; CFb, -0.7%; moisture, -4.0%; and ash, -0.5%. Crude protein difference for treats was significantly larger than differences for dry and canned foods. Crude fat difference for dry foods was significantly less than differences for canned foods and treats. Crude fiber and moisture differences for canned foods were significantly less than the corresponding differences for dry foods and treats. Only CFb differences differed among target species, life stages, manufacturers, or laboratories. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Addition of 1.5% and 1% to the guaranteed minimums for CP and CF, respectively; subtraction of 0.7%, 4%, and 0.5% from the guaranteed maximums for CFb, moisture, and ash, respectively; and addition of 0.23 kcal/g to the as-fed metabolizable energy value calculated by use of modified Atwater factors from guaranteed analyses provides a more accurate estimate of the nutrient and metabolizable energy content of commercial pet foods. Nevertheless, the actual composition of a food should be determined whenever possible.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19210254     DOI: 10.2460/javma.234.3.347

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Vet Med Assoc        ISSN: 0003-1488            Impact factor:   1.936


  9 in total

1.  Many Canadian dog and cat foods fail to comply with the guaranteed analyses reported on packages.

Authors:  Stuart W Burdett; Wilfredo D Mansilla; Anna K Shoveller
Journal:  Can Vet J       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 1.008

2.  Feeding oxidized chicken byproduct meal impacts digestibility more than performance and oxidative status in nursery pigs.

Authors:  Carl A Frame; Elisabeth Huff-Lonergan; Brian J Kerr; Mariana Rossoni Serao
Journal:  J Anim Sci       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.159

3.  Vegan versus meat-based dog food: Guardian-reported indicators of health.

Authors:  Andrew Knight; Eason Huang; Nicholas Rai; Hazel Brown
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-04-13       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Heterogeneity of gut microbial responses in healthy household dogs transitioning from an extruded to a mildly cooked diet.

Authors:  Jirayu Tanprasertsuk; Justin Shmalberg; Heather Maughan; Devon E Tate; LeeAnn M Perry; Aashish R Jha; Ryan W Honaker
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 2.984

Review 5.  Nutritional sustainability of pet foods.

Authors:  Kelly S Swanson; Rebecca A Carter; Tracy P Yount; Jan Aretz; Preston R Buff
Journal:  Adv Nutr       Date:  2013-03-01       Impact factor: 8.701

Review 6.  Vegetarian versus Meat-Based Diets for Companion Animals.

Authors:  Andrew Knight; Madelaine Leitsberger
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 2.752

7.  A survey of feeding, activity, supplement use and energy consumption in North American agility dogs.

Authors:  Gina K Dinallo; Jennifer A Poplarski; Gretchen M Van Deventer; Laura A Eirmann; Joseph J Wakshlag
Journal:  J Nutr Sci       Date:  2017-08-29

8.  Plant-based (vegan) diets for pets: A survey of pet owner attitudes and feeding practices.

Authors:  Sarah A S Dodd; Nick J Cave; Jennifer L Adolphe; Anna K Shoveller; Adronie Verbrugghe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Evaluation of nutritional value and microbiological safety in commercial dog food.

Authors:  Katarzyna Kazimierska; Wioletta Biel; Robert Witkowicz; Jolanta Karakulska; Xymena Stachurska
Journal:  Vet Res Commun       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 2.459

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.