Dietary nutrient profiles of wild wolves: insights for optimal dog nutrition?

Abstract

Domestic dogs diverged from grey wolves between 13 000 and 17 000 years ago when food waste from human settlements provided a new niche. Compared to the carnivorous cat, modern-day dogs differ in several digestive and metabolic traits that appear to be more associated with omnivorous such as man, pigs and rats. This has led to the classification of dogs as omnivores, but the origin of these 'omnivorous' traits has, hitherto, been left unexplained. We discuss the foraging ecology of wild wolves and calculate the nutrient profiles of fifty diets reported in the literature. Data on the feeding ecology of wolves indicate that wolves are true carnivores consuming a negligible amount of vegetal matter. Wolves can experience prolonged times of famine during low prey availability while, after a successful hunt, the intake of foods and nutrients can be excessive. As a result of a 'feast and famine' lifestyle, wolves need to cope with a highly variable nutrient intake requiring an adaptable metabolism, which is still functional in our modern-day dogs. The nutritive characteristics of commercial foods differ in several aspects from the dog's closest free-living ancestor in terms of dietary nutrient profile and this may pose physiological and metabolic challenges. The present study provides new insights into dog nutrition and contributes to the ongoing optimisation of foods for pet dogs.

Functional implications of omnivory for dietary nutrient balance

“…Considering European free‐living mesocarnivores, the percent protein energy in the annual diet of pine martens was very similar to that reported for wolves (54%; Bosch et al ), feral cats (52%; Plantinga et al ) and European badgers (≈ 50%; Balestrieri et al unpubl. ), confirming the importance of protein regulation (Simpson et al ).…”

“…Secondary analyses of literature data have limitations due to the inevitable heterogeneity in both the methods and aims of studies, but also provide the opportunity to integrate data across geographic and temporal scales that would not be feasible in any one study. A limitation of our study and others that have used compilations of published dietary reports (Remonti et al , Plantinga et al , Bosch et al ) is that they are potentially subject to greater error and sampling imbalance than purpose‐designed observational studies of dietary intake (Johnson et al ). Moreover, dietary studies based on faecal analysis enable estimates of the relative bulk of different foods in the diet, but not the absolute amounts of food consumed (Remonti et al ).…”

Macronutrient intake of dogs, self‐selecting diets varying in composition offered ad libitum

“…In addition, it is clearly apparent that domesticated dogs are currently eating diets that differ substantially from what their ancestors consumed. Highlighting this, Bosch, Hagen‐Plantinga, and Hendriks () found that the dietary composition of wild wolves showed the selected protein–fat–carbohydrate profile was 54:45:1 by energy.…”

Key bacterial families (Clostridiaceae, Erysipelotrichaceae and Bacteroidaceae) are related to the digestion of protein and energy in dogs

“…However, dogs can tolerate low levels of carbohydrates and are therefore classed as omnivorous carnivores (Swanson et al, 2011). The canine intestinal tract reflects its carnivorous evolutionary history, being relatively short and thick-walled (Bosch, Hagen-Plantinga & Hendriks, 2015). Similarly, the composition of dogs’ intestinal microbiota may reflect these unique dietary requirements.…”