Journal of Nutrition LabDiet, Your World of Nutritional Answers

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Twomey, L. N.
Right arrow Articles by Laviste, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Twomey, L. N.
Right arrow Articles by Laviste, M. C.

© 2002 The American Society for Nutritional Sciences J. Nutr. 132:1704S-1705S, June 2002

Supplement: Waltham International Symposium

The Use of Sorghum and Corn as Alternatives to Rice in Dog Foods

Leanne N. Twomey3, David W. Pethick, James B. Rowe*, Mingan Choct*, John R. Pluske, Wendy Brown* and Maria C. Laviste{dagger}

Division of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, Murdoch WA, Australia; * Animal Science, The University of New England, Armidale NSW, Australia and {dagger} Uncle Ben’s of Australia, Wodonga Vic, Australia

3To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: twomey{at}central.murdoch.edu.au.

KEY WORDS: • dog • cereal • rice • sorghum • corn

EXPANDED ABSTRACT

Rice is commonly used in premium Australian dog foods because of its highly digestible and hypoallergenic nature (1). Sorghum and corn are grains available in Australia that are considerably less expensive than rice. Sorghum and corn are known to contain starch that is less digestible in the intestinal tract because of a strong starch–protein matrix (2); however, the extrusion process involved in the manufacture of dog food is likely to gelatinize the starch and make it more digestible (3). The purpose of this study was to evaluate fecal nutrient digestibility of diets containing rice, sorghum and corn, and to determine the effect these diets had on fecal quality through evaluation of fecal score.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 
Animals and diets

Eighteen mixed-breed dogs aged between 1 and 6 y were divided into three balanced groups and fed extruded dry dog foods containing either rice, sorghum or corn. The other dietary ingredients included sugar beet pulp, maize gluten, vitamin and mineral mix, poultry meal, beef tallow, sunflower oil and celite (ingredient inclusion levels withheld by the manufacturer). The chemical analyses of the experimental diets are summarized in Table 1. The diets contained the digestibility marker celite (Celite Corp., Lompoc, CA) included at a level of 2%, which was determined as acid-insoluble ash using the technique described by Choct and Annison (4). The maintenance energy requirement was calculated as (kJ) = 460 x (body weight in kg)0.75 (5). This amount was increased by 20% to ensure the dogs maintained their body weight, and then used to calculate the amount of food offered daily using the metabolizable energy concentration of the diets (6).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 1 Cereal and chemical composition of the diets1

 
Testing procedures

The University of New England Animal Ethics Committee approved all procedures conducted during the trial. The trial was conducted over 12 d, following an adaptation period on a commercial dry dog food of 4 wk. The diets were introduced over the first 4 d, and fecal samples were collected on the final 5 d of the trial period. Fecal scores were measured with a score of 1 (indicating hard dry feces) and a score of 5 (indicating diarrhea), using the Waltham Feces Scoring System (Waltham Center for Pet Nutrition, Leicestershire, UK).

Chemical analyses

The fresh fecal samples were dried at 80°C until constant weight was achieved, then the samples from the 5-d collection period for each dog were pooled and ground through a 1-mm mill screen. The total starch of the feed and feces was determined enzymatically using the Megazyme Total Starch Assay Kit (Megazyme Australia Pty., Warriewood, NSW, Australia). The gross energy content of the diets and fecal samples was determined using a DDS isoperibol calorimeter (Digital Data Systems, Johannesburg, South Africa). The nitrogen of the feed and fecal samples was determined using a Leco Nitrogen Analyzer (FP-2000, Castle Hill,NSW, Australia). The crude protein content was calculated as N x 6.25. The fat content of the fecal samples was analyzed by the Soxhlet extraction procedure using AOAC Official Method 991.36 (7). The fat content of the feed was analyzed after acid hydrolysis by the Soxhlet extraction procedure using the AOAC Official Method 954.02 (7). Soluble and insoluble nonstarch polysaccharides and free sugars were determined by a combination of the methods of Englyst and Hudson (8) and Theander and Westerlund (9). Nutrient digestibilities were determined using the ratio of marker to nutrient in the feed and feces.

Statistical analysis

The data were analyzed using the statistical package StatView 5.0 for Windows (AddSoft Pty., Woodend, Vic, Australia). A one-way ANOVA measure of the mean values of the 5-d collection period was performed for each group (n = 6 per group), followed by a Bonferroni/Dunn test to compared treatment means. Differences were considered significant at values of P < 0.05.


   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
LITERATURE CITED
 
There was a significant effect (P < 0.05) of treatment group on the mean fecal scores (Fig. 1). The rice diet caused a higher mean fecal score compared to that of the sorghum and corn diets, indicating that the feces of the dogs in the rice group were looser. However, the mean fecal scores were all within the ideal range according to the Waltham Fecal Scoring System, and therefore the inclusion of corn or sorghum as the major cereal grain in the food did not negatively affect fecal quality.



View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1 Mean fecal score for each treatment group. Values are means ± SEM, n = 6, P < 0.05 from ANOVA.

 
The fecal starch digestibility was not different among treatment groups (P > 0.05), with each diet having 100% fecal starch digestibility (Table 2). This indicates that the extrusion process used in the manufacture of the diets gelatinized the starch in the sorghum and corn diets and made it readily digestible (3). The fecal protein and gross energy digestibility coefficients were different for each treatment group (P < 0.01). The fecal protein and gross energy digestibility coefficients were highest with the rice diet, followed by the sorghum and corn diets, suggesting that the rice diet was the most digestible (1). The higher gross energy digestibility of the rice diet resulted in the increased digestible energy content of the rice diet compared to that of the corn and sorghum diets (P < 0.001). The fat digestibility of the rice diet was also greater than that of the corn and sorghum diets (P < 0.01) (Table 2).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE 2 Nutrient digestibility coefficients and digestible energy content of the experiment diets1

 
The nutrient digestibilities of the corn and sorghum diets were lower compared with that of the rice diet. However, the nutrient digestibilities of each diet were above the average digestibility values for commercial dog foods (6). The fecal score results did not reflect the nutrient digestibilities, with the corn and sorghum diets causing firmer feces, although the dogs on each diet all had ideal fecal quality. Because fecal quality is one of the most important factors by which dog owners judge the quality of a dog food, and the nutrient digestibility results were above the accepted industry standard, extruded sorghum and corn are good alternatives to rice as the primary cereal grain in dog foods.


   FOOTNOTES
 
1 Presented as part of the Waltham International Symposium: Pet Nutrition Coming of Age held in Vancouver, Canada, August 6–7, 2001. This symposium and the publication of symposium proceedings were sponsored by the Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition. Guest editors for this supplement were James G. Morris, University of California, Davis, Ivan H. Burger, consultant to Mars UK Limited, Carl L. Keen, University of California, Davis, and D’Ann Finley, University of California, Davis. Back

2 Supported by The Australian Research Council. Back


   LITERATURE CITED
TOP
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 LITERATURE CITED
 

1. Costa, N. D. (1997) Nutrition of the dog: an Australian overview. Corbett, J. L. Choct, M. Nolan, J. V. Rowe, J. B. eds. Recent Advances in Animal Nutrition in Australia 1997:117-129 The University of New England Armidale, NSW, Australia .

2. Murray, S. M., Fahey, G. C., Jr, Merchen, N. R., Sunvold, G. D. & Reinhart, G. A. (1999) Evaluation of selected high-starch flours as ingredients in canine diets. J. Anim. Sci. 77:2180-2186.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

3. Camire, M. E. (1998) Chemical changes during extrusion cooking. Recent advances. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 434:109-121.[Medline]

4. Choct, M. & Annison, G. (1992) The inhibition of nutrient digestion by wheat pentosans. Br. J. Nutr. 67:123-132.[Medline]

5. Harper, E. J. (1998) Changing perspectives on aging and energy requirements: aging and energy intakes in humans, dogs and cats. J. Nutr. 128(suppl. 12):2623S-2626S.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

6. National Research Council (1985) Nutrient Requirements of Dogs 1985 National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press Washington, DC .

7. Association of Official Analytical Chemists (1985) Official Methods of Analysis 14th ed. 1985 AOAC Washington, DC .

8. Englyst, H. N. & Hudson, G. J. (1993) Spiller, G. eds. Dietary Fiber and Human Nutrition 2nd ed. 1993:53-71 CRC Press Boca Raton, FL .

9. Theander, O. & Westerlund, E. (1993) Spiller, G. eds. Dietary Fiber and Human Nutrition 2nd ed. 1993:77-98 CRC Press Boca Raton, FL .




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J ANIM SCIHome page
L. D. de-Oliveira, A. C. Carciofi, M. C. C. Oliveira, R. S. Vasconcellos, R. S. Bazolli, G. T. Pereira, and F. Prada
Effects of six carbohydrate sources on diet digestibility and postprandial glucose and insulin responses in cats
J Anim Sci, September 1, 2008; 86(9): 2237 - 2246.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J ANIM SCIHome page
J. D. Quigley III, J. M. Campbell, J. Polo, and L. E. Russell
Effects of spray-dried animal plasma on intake and apparent digestibility in dogs
J Anim Sci, June 1, 2004; 82(6): 1685 - 1692.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Twomey, L. N.
Right arrow Articles by Laviste, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Twomey, L. N.
Right arrow Articles by Laviste, M. C.

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Copyright © 2002 by American Society for Nutrition