Investigating the Palatability of Lamb and Beef Components Used in the Production of Pet Food for Cats

Abstract

The pet food industry continues to utilise large amounts of inedible meat components from the human food industry. Although used extensively in pet food formulations and as palatants, little is known about the palatability of individual meat components. The objectives of this study were to investigate the palatability of raw meat components commonly used in the production of pet food, using acceptance and preference testing. Those examined were lung, heart, kidney, tripe, liver and mechanically deboned meat (MDM) from lamb and beef. Two-bowl acceptance tests were used to develop an overall ranking of components within each species. Two-bowl preference tests between equivalent beef and lamb components were then used to determine whether a preference was exhibited for one species over the other. For the acceptance of components from lamb and beef, liver was the most palatable within both species, with kidney equivalent to liver when testing lamb components. The MDM was identified as the least palatable component from both species. When examining the preference between equivalent components between species, cats showed preferences for lamb over equivalent beef components, except for heart and liver which showed no difference in intake between the two species. Overall, cats were able to clearly rank the palatability of different components from lamb and beef, as well as between equivalent components from the two species. Selecting highly palatable ingredients whilst still meeting pet food manufacturing guidelines may play a role in improving overall diet palatability and acceptance by cats.

Keywords: acceptance; by-products; diet; feline; ingredients; offal; organ meats; preference; red meat.

Figure 1

Average intake of the six lamb components out of the possible 1000 g served throughout the week (* maximum possible intake of liver was 325 g compared to 1000 g for the other components).

Figure 2

Average intake of the six beef components out of the possible 1000 g served throughout the week (* maximum possible intake of liver was 175 g compared to 1000 g for the other components).

Figure 3

Average intake of equivalent beef and lamb components offered in the two-bowl preference test. (Results with an asterisk indicate a significant difference in intake between equivalent components (p < 0.05), ^ maximum possible intake of each liver was 113.5 g compared to 500 g for the other components).