Sensory and experiential factors in the design of foods for domestic dogs and cats

Bradshaw, J. W. S.

doi:10.1079/pns19910015

Cited by 37 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lack of ability to upregulate the intestinal capacity to transport glucose suggests that high-carbohydrate diets are unsuitable for cats. Dogs, in contrast, are known to taste sweet (4,20), and have been shown to have the genes encoding for the sweet taste receptor subunits, T1R2 and T1R3 (34). In addition, we have shown here that they express T1R2 and T1R3 proteins in their intestine, providing the means for SGLT1 upregulation.…”

Section: Domestic Dogs Are Descended From Wolves (Canis Lupus)mentioning

confidence: 65%

Sodium/glucose cotransporter-1, sweet receptor, and disaccharidase expression in the intestine of the domestic dog and cat: two species of different dietary habit

Batchelor

Al-Rammahi

Moran

et al. 2011

American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast, the dog (Canis familiaris), a carno-omnivore, has a varied diet. This study was performed to determine the expression of the intestinal brush border membrane sodium/glucose cotransporter, SGLT1, sweet receptor, T1R2/T1R3, and disaccharidases in these species adapted to contrasting diets. The expression (this includes function) of SGLT1, sucrase, maltase and lactase were determined using purified brush border membrane vesicles and by quantitative immunohistochemistry of fixed tissues. The pattern of expression of subunits of the sweet receptor T1R2 and T1R3 was assessed using fluorescent immunohistochemistry. In proximal, middle, and distal small intestine, SGLT1 function in dogs was 1.9-to 2.3-fold higher than in cats (P ϭ 0.037, P ϭ 0.0011, P ϭ 0.027, respectively), and SGLT1 protein abundance followed an identical pattern. Both cats and dogs express T1R3 in a subset of intestinal epithelial cells, and dogs, but not cats, express T1R2. In proximal and middle regions, there were 3.1-and 1.6-fold higher lactase (P ϭ 0.006 and P ϭ 0.019), 4.4-and 2.9-fold higher sucrase (both P Ͻ 0.0001), and 4.6-and 3.1-fold higher maltase activity (P ϭ 0.0026 and P ϭ 0.0005), respectively, in the intestine of dogs compared with cats. Dogs have a potential higher capacity to digest and absorb carbohydrates than cats. Cats may suffer from carbohydrate malabsorption following ingestion of high-carbohydrate meals. However, dogs have a digestive ability to cope with diets containing significant levels of carbohydrate.canine; feline; glucose transport; carbohydrate; intestine IN NONRUMINANT MAMMALS, DIETARY carbohydrate is hydrolyzed by pancreatic amylase and brush border membrane (BBM) disaccharidases to monosaccharides, mainly glucose, galactose and fructose. Glucose and galactose are transported across the BBM by sodium/glucose cotransporter-1 (SGLT1) (41). SGLT1 is the rate-limiting step for entry of glucose into the body. Therefore, its function is essential for the provision of glucose, contributing to glucose homeostasis. Little is known about SGLT1 expression in the intestine of domestic dogs (Canis familiaris) and cats (Felis catus).It has been proposed that intestinal glucose transport tends to match the natural diet of a species (7,19), and this process is also known to be adaptively regulated by diet in most species studied (6, 8, 12-14, 17, 27, 37, 39). Recent investigations have provided strong evidence that dietary regulation of intestinal SGLT1 expression (and thus BBM glucose transport capacity) involves sensing by the intestinal sweet receptor, the T1R2/T1R3 heterodimer, which is present in certain intestinal enteroendocrine cells (15,30,32). It has been shown that cats are unable to upregulate intestinal glucose transport in response to increased dietary carbohydrate (8). Interestingly, the gene for T1R2, a subunit of the sweet receptor, is a pseudogene in cats (28), while dogs possess the gene for this receptor subunit (34).Dogs and cats are from separate branches within the order Carnivora. This order...

show abstract

Section: Domestic Dogs Are Descended From Wolves (Canis Lupus)mentioning

confidence: 65%

Sodium/glucose cotransporter-1, sweet receptor, and disaccharidase expression in the intestine of the domestic dog and cat: two species of different dietary habit

Batchelor

Al-Rammahi

Moran

et al. 2011

American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The third chemosensory system, the vomeronasal organ appears to be involved only in the perception of social odours (Hart and Leedy, 1987). Good reviews are available on the sensory capability of cats (Boudreau and White, 1978;Bradshaw, 1991) and on experiential factors that affect feeding behaviour (Bradshaw, 1991). In-house tasting trials using a human taster are commonly conducted by the pet food industry, although there is a paucity of relevant information in the scientific literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cats use both taste and smell in the detection and selection of food (Bradshaw, 1991). The third chemosensory system, the vomeronasal organ appears to be involved only in the perception of social odours (Hart and Leedy, 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimizing the sensory characteristics and acceptance of canned cat food: use of a human taste panel

Pickering

2009

Animal Physiology Nutrition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA methodology based on descriptive analysis techniques used in the evaluation of human food has been successfully refined to allow for a human taste panel to profile the flavour and texture of a range of cat food products (CFP) and their component parts. Included in this method is the development of evaluation protocols for homogeneous products and for binary samples containing both meat chunk (MC) and gravy/gel (GG) constituents. Using these techniques, 18 flavour attributes (sweet, sour/acid, tuna, herbal, spicy, soy, salty, cereal, caramel, chicken, methionine, vegetable, offaly, meaty, burnt flavour, prawn, rancid and bitter) and four texture dimensions (hardness, chewiness, grittiness and viscosity) were generated to describe the sensations elicited by 13 commercial pet food samples. These samples differed in intensity for 16 of the 18 flavour attributes, which allows for individual CFP flavour profiles to be developed. Principal components analysis (PCA) could successfully discriminate between samples within the PCA space and also reveal some groupings amongst them. While many flavour attributes were weakly correlated, a large number (describing both taste and retro-nasal aroma qualities) were required to adequately differentiate between samples, suggesting considerable complexity in the products assessed. For both MC and GG, differences between samples for each of the texture dimensions were also found. For MC, grittiness appears to be the most discriminating textural attribute, while for GG viscosity discriminates well between samples. Meat chunks and gravy/gels differed significantly from each other in both flavour and texture. Cat food products differed in their liking ratings, although no differences were found between homogeneous, MC and GG samples, and eight flavour attributes were correlated with overall liking scores. It is now necessary to determine the usefulness and limits of sensory data gathered from human panels in describing and predicting food acceptance and preference behaviours in cats. For instance, while the sense of taste in cats appears generally similar to that of other mammals, they lack a sweet taste receptor (Li et al., 2006), which may limit the applicability of sweetness ratings obtained from humans. Modification of existing techniques used with human food research, such as external preference mapping (Naes and Risvik, 1996) may be useful. Ultimately, this may facilitate more economical and efficient methods for optimizing cat food flavour and texture and predicting the effects of composition and processing changes on cat

show abstract

“…Analyzing the behaviors associated with feeding helps us to better understand the needs of the cat and enhance the cats' quality of life. Providing palatable food for pet cats is an important part of creating a positive experience in the everyday life of the animal and in extension, a part of animal welfare (Boissy et al 2009;Bradshaw, 1991). Cats are so sensitive to the palatability of their food that an unpalatable food item can be rejected to the extent that the cat develops medical Michaela Hanson Master Thesis (Applied Ethology and Animal Biology) University of Linkoping problems from starvation (Zaghini & Biagi, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such variation is to be expected, however, as individual preferences are common in the food selection process. Earlier experience of different food items is one of the most important aspect in terms of individual food preferences in cats (Bradshaw, 1991;Bradshaw et al, 2000). The cats used in the present study, however, have all been raised with the same type of diet and variation due to earlier experience was reduced to a minimum.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Facial expressions and other behavioral responses to pleasant and unpleasant tastes in cats (Felis silvestris catus)

Hanson

Jojola²,

Rawson³

et al. 2016

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sammanfattning/Abstract:The behavior and facial expressions performed by cats have been reported to be visibly affected by the perceived taste quality of a food item. The goal of the present study was to assess how cats react to pleasant and unpleasant tastes. The facial and behavioral reactions of 13 cats to different concentrations of L-Proline and quinine monohydrochloride as well as mixtures with different concentrations of the two substances were assessed using a two-bottle preference test. The cats were videotaped during the tests and the frequency and duration of 50 different behaviors was analyzed in Noldus the Observer XT. The cats responded to tastes regarded as pleasant by having their eyes less than 50 % open for significantly longer periods of time compared to a water control. Tongue protrusions were also observed significantly more frequently when the cats sampled from a solution with a preferred taste compared to a water control. When encountering solutions of quinine monohydrochloride or mixtures containing quinine monohydrochloride the cats were observed to perform tongue protrusion gapes much more frequently compared to a water or L-Proline control. Even though the cats did not significantly differ in the number of times they licked at spouts containing the 50 mM L-Proline and 500 mM quinine monohydrochloride mixture compared to a 50 mM L-Proline, no masking effect could be confirmed as there was no increase in the acceptance of the mixture was observed. The present study suggests that the knowledge about behavioral responses to pleasant or unpleasant taste can be utilized in future studies on how cats perceive different tastes.

show abstract

Sensory and experiential factors in the design of foods for domestic dogs and cats

Cited by 37 publications

References 37 publications

Sodium/glucose cotransporter-1, sweet receptor, and disaccharidase expression in the intestine of the domestic dog and cat: two species of different dietary habit

Sodium/glucose cotransporter-1, sweet receptor, and disaccharidase expression in the intestine of the domestic dog and cat: two species of different dietary habit

Optimizing the sensory characteristics and acceptance of canned cat food: use of a human taste panel

Facial expressions and other behavioral responses to pleasant and unpleasant tastes in cats (Felis silvestris catus)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About