Effects of a 28-day feeding trial of grain-containing versus pulse-based diets on cardiac function, taurine levels and digestibility in domestic dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2018, the US Food and Drug Administration reported a link between canine dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and grain-free diets. Evidence to support a link has emerged, but the specific ingredients responsible and the role of taurine or other causative factors remain unclear. We hypothesized dogs fed pulse-based, grain-free diets for 28 days will show decreased macronutrient digestibility, increased fecal bile acid excretion, and reduced plasma cystine, cysteine, methionine and taurine, causing sub-clinical cardiac or blood changes indicative of early DCM. Three diets were formulated using white rice flour (grain), whole lentil (grain-free), or wrinkled pea (grain-free) and compared to the pre-trial phase on a commercial grain-based diet. After 28 days of feeding each diet, the wrinkled pea diet impaired stroke volume and cardiac output, increased end-systolic ventricular diameter and increased plasma N-Terminal Pro-B-type Natriuretic Peptide (NT-ProBNP), albeit in a sub-clinical manner. Digestibility of some macronutrients and sulphur-containing amino acids, excluding taurine, also decreased with pulse-based compared to grain-based diets, likely due to higher fiber levels. Plasma taurine levels were unchanged; however, plasma methionine was significantly lower after feeding all test diets compared to the commercial diet. Overall, DCM-like changes observed with the wrinkled pea diet, but not lentil diet, after only 4 weeks in a breed not known to be susceptible support a link between pea-based diets and canine nutritionally-mediated DCM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".