Influence of dietary protein content and source on fecal quality, electrolyte concentrations, and osmolarity, and digestibility in dogs differing in body size1

Abstract

When fed the same diet, large-breed dogs tend to produce feces of poorer quality compared with small-breed dogs. Moreover, German shepherds, although having a BW similar to Giant Schnauzers, are particularly prone to digestive intolerance, producing feces of poor consistency and increased moisture. Digestive tolerance reflects the reaction of the animal to the diet, and it can be assessed by determining fecal quality (consistency, moisture, volume, odor, and color). This study was conducted to assess the effect of protein source and content on fecal quality, and to determine whether greater digestibility and lesser fecal osmolarity and electrolyte concentrations are associated with improved fecal quality in dogs differing in body size and digestive tolerance. Twenty-seven healthy female dogs were divided into 4 groups according to BW and digestive tolerance: small, medium, large tolerant, and large sensitive. Five diets, varying in protein source (wheat gluten, poultry meal, and a 50:50 mixture of both sources) and concentration (22, 29, and 39% CP on a DM basis for low, medium, and high, respectively) were tested. The present study was divided in 2 phases: 2 diets were studied in a crossover design in phase I, and 3 diets were studied in a Latin square design in phase II. Diets were fed for 14 d, followed by a 12-d transition period. Fecal score (1 = dry and hard feces, to 5 = liquid diarrhea), moisture, electrolytes (Na and K), and osmolarity, and digestibility of DM, energy, fat, CP, and ash were determined. Fecal score and moisture (P < 0.001) were less and overall digestibility (P < 0.001 for DM, CP, fat, ash, and energy) was greater for wheat gluten than for poultry meal diets. Large dogs had the greatest fecal score and moisture (P < 0.001), together with the greatest overall digestibility (P < 0.001 for DM, P = 0.054 for CP, P = 0.005 for ash, and P = 0.003 for energy). Osmolarity was less for wheat gluten-based diets (P < 0.001), and was not affected by dog size. Fecal electrolyte concentration varied mainly with dog group (P = 0.005 for Na, and P < 0.001 for K), being greater in large sensitive dogs compared with small dogs. Wheat gluten was proved to be a suitable protein source for modulating fecal quality in dogs, particularly in sensitive breeds. Poorer fecal quality in large sensitive dogs can be related to greater digestibility and greater fecal electrolyte concentrations, but not to fecal osmolarity.

Efficacy and Tolerance of Two Low-Carbohydrate Diets in Large Adult Dogs with Digestive Sensitivity: A Randomized, Cross-Over, Blinded Evaluation

“…Several specificities in the composition of SENSI versus ADULT could explain its better results obtained in the present study. As observed by Nery et al [17], the higher the protein content (from 22 to 39% DM), the greater was the faecal score and the higher was the faecal fermentation [15,17]. In our study, the reduction of the protein content in SENSI vs ADULT (32 vs 39% DM) may have resulted in the normalization of faecal moisture and consistency as well as the reduction of fetid odours.…”

“…However, large dogs, and more specifically certain sensitive breeds such as German Shepherd, Labrador Retrievers, Great Danes or Giant Schnauzers, are known to have particularly sensitive digestive systems that are manifested by exacerbated colonic fermentations and lower faecal consistency [13][14][15][16][17][18], and whatever the breed, some individual dogs may also have digestive sensitivity without there being a specific cause. While a diet formulated with highly digestible proteins improves faecal quality in dogs, especially in large sensitive ones [15,17,18], increased dietary protein concentrations are suspected to lead to a greater faecal score by affecting the quantity of substrate available for colonic fermentation [15,18].…”

Digestive physiology of captive giant anteaters (Myrmecophaga tridactyla): determinants of faecal dry matter content

“…() and Nery et al. () with tighter correlations ( R = 0.87, p = 0.001, n = 10 and R = 0.88, p < 0.001, n = 20 respectively).…”

“…Unfortunately, a faecal scoring system was not used often enough during this study for statistical evaluation. In dogs, a systematic relationship between faecal DM and faeces consistency can be demonstrated, for example in the data of Meyer et al (1999) where significant correlations exist for both a canned diet (R = 0.76, p = 0.006, n = 11) or a dry diet (R = 0.66, p = 0.027, n = 11), or the data of Zentek et al (2004) and Nery et al (2010) with tighter correlations (R = 0.87, p = 0.001, n = 10 and R = 0.88, p < 0.001, n = 20 respectively).…”

Efficacy of a Probiotic‐Prebiotic Supplement on Incidence of Diarrhea in a Dog Shelter: A Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo‐Controlled Trial

“…All staff received training in the 4‐category fecal scoring system and posters were placed in all dog kitchens and admission rooms as a prompt. Fecal scoring is subjective and there is likely to be some intra‐observer and interobserver variability despite having descriptors and representative picture available, but there is evidence to suggest fecal scoring is superior to measuring fecal moisture content and fecal dry matter 21, 22…”