2002
DOI: 10.1093/jn/132.6.1704s
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

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

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
23
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
3
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Hagerman et al [41] observed a reduction in the digestibility of CP in sheep fed a diet containing CT, HT did not present the same effects. The reduction in DE and ME of the diets containing sorghum observed in this study concurs with previous studies [42]. DE and ME tend to decrease with the increase of dietary tannin content, through the formation of complexes with carbohydrates, reducing the activity of the amylolytic enzymes and their energetic use [43].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Hagerman et al [41] observed a reduction in the digestibility of CP in sheep fed a diet containing CT, HT did not present the same effects. The reduction in DE and ME of the diets containing sorghum observed in this study concurs with previous studies [42]. DE and ME tend to decrease with the increase of dietary tannin content, through the formation of complexes with carbohydrates, reducing the activity of the amylolytic enzymes and their energetic use [43].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Unpolished cereal grains have a relatively high content in non-starch polysaccharides such as arabinoxylans and β-glucans (Blakeney and Flinn, 2005), whereas the NSP content in rice has been reported to be very small (Englyst et al, 1983), which may explain some of these observations. Additionally, compared to rice, starch in sorghum and maize is known to be less digestible due to a resistant starch-protein matrix and a protective effect of their non-starch polysaccharides (Twomey et al, 2002).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The discrepancy between in vitro and in vivo results was presumably caused by the fact that faeces do not contain only protein of dietary origin, but also bacteria and other endogenous protein sources (mainly sloughed off intestinal cells and digestive enzymes), leading to an underestimation of protein digestibility (Crampton & Rutherford 1954). The presence of dietary fibre (Burrows et al 1982) and protein digestibility are the factors that most affect the digestibility of a commercial food for dogs, because the digestibility of starch, if it has been properly cooked, and fat is in general very high (Twomey et al 2002;Vhile et al 2007). Protein digestibility of a commercial pet food may be negatively affected by the utilisation of poor protein sources (Cramer et al 2007) and an excessive heat treatment (Opstvedt et al 1984).…”
Section: Validation Of the In Vitro Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%