Chemical composition, true nutrient digestibility, and true metabolizable energy of chicken-based ingredients differing by processing method using the precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay1.

Chicken-based ingredients are commonly used in pet food products, but vary greatly in nutrient composition and processing conditions that may affect their protein quality and digestibility. Testing the quality of protein sources undergoing different processing conditions provides important information to pet food producers. The objective of this study was to determine the chemical composition, nutrient digestibility, protein, and AA digestibility scores, and nitrogen-corrected true metabolizable energy (TMEn) of chicken-based ingredients that had undergone different processing conditions (i.e., chicken meal, raw chicken, retorted chicken, and steamed chicken) using the precision-fed cecectomized rooster assay. True nutrient digestibility was variable among the protein sources (60% to 76% of DM, 66% to 81% of OM, 83% to 90% of AHF, 50% to 95% of AA and 73% to 85% of TMEn/GE). In general, the chicken meal had a lower (P < 0.05) nutrient digestibility than other ingredients tested, including DM, OM, and most indispensable and dispensable AA, with most having a true digestibility between 75% and 85%. The steamed chicken had the highest indispensable AA digestibilities, with all having a true digestibility greater than 88% and most being over 90%. TMEn value and digestible indispensable AA scores (DIAAS)-like values were higher (P < 0.0001) in the less processed chicken-based ingredients in comparison to chicken meal. Although animal proteins are often considered to be complete proteins, DIAAS-like values <100% suggest that ingredients like chicken meal may not provide all indispensable AA when included at levels to the meet minimal crude protein recommendation. Although raw protein sources are often touted as being the most digestible and of the highest quality, the steamed chicken had the highest (P < 0.0001) DIAAS-like values in this study. This study demonstrates the considerable variability that exists, not only in the chemical composition but also in the true nutrient digestibility among chicken-based ingredients undergoing different processing conditions. These data justify more in vivo testing and the use of DIAAS-like values that consider AA profile, in vivo digestibility, and species-specific recommendations, to evaluate protein-based ingredients intended for use in dog and cat foods.