Raw meat based diet influences faecal microbiome and end products of fermentation in healthy dogs

Sandri, Misa; Monego, Simeone Dal; Conte, Giuseppe; Sgorlon, Sandy; Stefanon, Bruno

doi:10.1186/s12917-017-0981-z

Cited by 139 publications

(151 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with the available literature on the gut microbiota of healthy dogs (35,36), the phylum-level microbial profiles at the baseline were dominated by Firmicutes (relative abundance, mean ± SEM, 73.1 ± 4.2%), with Actinobacteria (14.2 ± 3.1%), Bacteroidetes (7.8 ± 2.2%), and Fusobacteria (3.9 ± 1.2%) as minor components (Figure 2). Lachnospiraceae, Coriobacteriaceae, Clostridiaceae, and Erysipelotrichaceae were the major families of the baseline microbiota (relative abundance ≥ 10%; Figure 3A).…”

Section: Microbiota Analysissupporting

confidence: 85%

Influence of Lactobacillus kefiri on Intestinal Microbiota and Fecal IgA Content of Healthy Dogs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing incidence of gastrointestinal tract pathologies in dogs and the worrisome topic of antibiotic resistance have raised the need to look for new therapeutic frontiers. Of these, the use of probiotics represents a potential therapeutic alternative. Lactobacillus kefiri (Lk) is a species of Lactobacillus isolated from kefir. Previous studies have demonstrated that its administration in mice downregulates the expression of proinflammatory mediators and increases anti-inflammatory molecules in the gut immune system. It also regulates intestinal homeostasis, incrementing immunoglobulin A (IgA) secretion. Since Lk has never been studied as a single probiotic in dogs, the aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of Lk in dogs, and its effect on IgA secretion and on intestinal microbiota composition. Ten healthy dogs without a history of gastrointestinal diseases were included. The dogs received Lk at a dose of 10 7 live microorganisms orally, once daily for 30 days. The fecal samples were tested before administration, in the middle, at the end, and 30 days after discontinuation. The IgA secretion concentration and the microbiota composition were evaluated on the fecal samples. The results in this study suggested that Lk did not influence the concentration of IgA, nor significant changes of the intestinal microbiota were observed during and after the treatment. Therefore, additional studies are needed to investigate if a higher daily dosage of Lk can influence the intestinal homeostasis of dogs.

show abstract

Section: Microbiota Analysissupporting

confidence: 85%

Influence of Lactobacillus kefiri on Intestinal Microbiota and Fecal IgA Content of Healthy Dogs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dogs were classified into three study groups based on their behavioral phenotype: aggressive, phobic or normal behavior. The phylogenetic profiles of the canine GM observed in our cohort were found to be in line with those already reported in literature for healthy dogs [9,29,30], but with a slightly higher abundance of Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, as well as a corresponding lower abundance of Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria. According to our results, the aggressive group GM is characterized by a higher number of observed OTUs compared to both phobic and normal behavior groups.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Gut microbiome structure and adrenocortical activity in dogs with aggressive and phobic behavioral disorders

Mondo

Barone

Soverini

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

27Accompanying human beings since the Paleolithic period, dogs has been recently regarded as a 28 reliable model for the study of the gut microbiome connections with health and disease. In order to 29 provide some glimpses on the connections between the gut microbiome layout and host behavior, 30 we profiled the phylogenetic composition and structure of the canine gut microbiome of dogs with 31 aggressive (n = 17), phobic (n = 15) and normal behavior (n = 17). According to our findings, 32 aggressive behavioral disorder was found to be characterized by a peculiar gut microbiome 33 structure, with high biodiversity and enrichment in generally subdominant bacterial genera. On the 34 other hand, phobic dogs were enriched in Lactobacillus, a bacterial genus with known probiotic and 35 psychobiotic properties. Although further studies are needed to validate our findings, our work 36 supports the intriguing opportunity that different behavioral phenotypes in dogs may be associated 37 with peculiar gut microbiome layouts, suggesting possible connections between the gut microbiome 38 and the central nervous system and indicating the possible adoption of probiotic interventions aimed 39 at restoring a balanced host-symbiont interplay for mitigating behavioral disorders. 40 41 42 Keywords: microbiome, behavioral disorders, aggressive dogs, phobic dogs, hormones, HPA-axis 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Descending from the gray wolf (Canis lupus), dogs were domesticated during the Paleolithic 53 period, accompanying humans across the transition from hunting-gathering to rural agriculture of 54 the Neolithic, to post-industrialized Western lifestyle [1-3]. The frequent sharing of food resources 55with human beings has been a selective force able to drive changes in the digestive and metabolic 56 system of dogs, enabling them to efficiently adapt to a more starch-enriched diet compared to their 57 wild ancestor, and ultimately influence canine behavior [4,5]. The canine gastrointestinal tract 58 harbors a complex and highly biodiverse microbial ecosystem, whose predominant taxa resemble 59 those typically found in the gut of other omnivorous mammals. However, in comparison to both 60 mice and pigs, the canine gut microbiome (GM) result the most similar to humans [6,7]. Thus, in 61 dogs, the GM-host mutualistic exchange well approximate what has been observed in humans [8-62 11]. Indeed, the peculiar patterns of dysbiosis observed in dogs with IBD are generally comparable 63 to variations typically found in humans, suggesting that bacterial responses to inflammatory 64 conditions are conserved among the two [12,13]. As observed in humans, the eubiotic and stable 65 configuration of the canine GM is therefore of fundamental importance for the maintenance of a 66 homeostatic gut environment and of the overall host health. 67Several recent studies have shown the ability of the mammalian GM to communicate with the host 68 central nervous system (CNS) through several parallel channels, involving the vagus nerve, 69 neuroimmune and ...

show abstract

“…Faecal bacterial diversity appeared to be higher among six raw‐fed dogs compared with five fed conventionally processed food in a metagenomic study (Kim et al ). A small feeding trial of boxer dogs comparing raw high‐quality beef plus supplement with a commercial dry diet and including metagenomic analysis reported smaller, firmer stools and changes (of unclear significance) in the faecal bacterial community (Sandri et al ). Kittens raised on a rabbit‐based raw diet also had better stool quality, assessed with a visual grading system, than their commercial diet‐fed peers, but both groups grew similarly (Glasgow et al ).…”

Section: Evidence Concerning the Benefits Of Raw Feedingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards

Davies

Lawes

Wales

2019

J of Small Animal Practice

133

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a recent trend to feed pet dogs and cats in Britain and other developed countries on raw meat and animal by‐products using either commercial preparations or home recipes. This shift from heat‐treated processed food has been driven by perceived health benefits to pets and a suspicion of industrially produced pet food. The diets of wild‐living related species have been used as a rationale for raw feeding, but differences in biology and lifestyle impose limitations on such comparisons. Formal evidence does exist for claims by raw‐feeding proponents of an altered intestinal microbiome and (subjectively) improved stool quality. However, there is currently neither robust evidence nor identified plausible mechanisms for many of the wide range of other claimed benefits. There are documented risks associated with raw feeding, principally malnutrition (inexpert formulation and testing of diets) and infection affecting pets and/or household members. Surveys in Europe and North America have consistently found Salmonella species in a proportion of samples, typically of fresh‐frozen commercial diets. Another emerging issue concerns the risk of introducing antimicrobial‐resistant bacteria. Raw pet food commonly exceeds hygiene thresholds for counts of Enterobacteriaceae. These bacteria often encode resistance to critically important antibiotics such as extended‐spectrum cephalosporins, and raw‐fed pets create an elevated risk of shedding such resistant bacteria. Other infectious organisms that may be of concern include Listeria, shiga toxigenic E scherichia coli , parasites such as Toxoplasma gondii and exotic agents such as the zoonotic livestock pathogen Brucella suis, recently identified in European Union and UK raw pet meat imported from Argentina.

show abstract

Raw meat based diet influences faecal microbiome and end products of fermentation in healthy dogs

Cited by 139 publications

References 50 publications

Influence of Lactobacillus kefiri on Intestinal Microbiota and Fecal IgA Content of Healthy Dogs

Influence of Lactobacillus kefiri on Intestinal Microbiota and Fecal IgA Content of Healthy Dogs

Gut microbiome structure and adrenocortical activity in dogs with aggressive and phobic behavioral disorders

Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About