MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402541799 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.163

502 Cat and mouse: The effect of consuming four different diet formants (intact mice, raw, canned wet and kibble) on energy expended to consume a meal and immediately post-prandial in domestic cats

2024· article· en· W4402541799 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie K Gwynne, Kim Boersma, G. Bosch, B. Beerda, Alexandra Rankovic, Dave J Seymour, Anna K. Shoveller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiet and metabolism studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMealFood scienceRaw materialFormantBiologyChemistryAnimal scienceEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cats are obligate carnivores; however, we feed them a variety of different diet formats without a clear understanding of feeding behavior and metabolism among diet formats. Whole-prey or raw diets may mimic a more natural diet and require more energy to consume. However, there is currently a dearth of literature examining feline energy expenditure (EE) during the consumption of and immediate post-prandial period when fed different diet formats. The present study aimed to investigate differences in the energetics of adult cats consuming four different diet formats in isocaloric offerings: raw intact mice, commercial raw, canned wet, and kibble diets. Adult neutered male cats [n = 12; body weight (BW) = 4.82 ± 0.164 kg) were used in a 4 x 4 replicated Latin square design and adapted to consuming each diet format before the initiation of the study. Following a 2-d adaptation period, cats were fed 25% of their daily caloric requirement (50.77 ± 1.549 kcal) in indirect calorimetry chambers in which VO2 and VCO2 exchange were measured. Energy expenditure (kcal/BW0.67 kg) was calculated for the consumption period, 15 min immediately post-prandial and 2 h post-prandial. Respiratory gases were measured for one fasted reading, followed by the first feeding. During each feeding, measurements were taken during the consumption period and 15 min post-prandial. For the following 2 h, respiratory gases were measured every 25 min for an additional 4 measures of respiratory gases. All data were analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model considering the effects of treatment, time and their interaction as fixed, and the effects of cat and period as random. A spatial power covariance structure was used to model repeated measures. Significance was considered at P < 0.05 and Tukey’s post-hoc test was performed to separate means. Energy expenditure during consumption and 15 min post-prandial was similar among treatments, and EE for 15 min post-prandial was greater than EE during consumption (P < 0.001). During the 2 h post-prandial, EE for the mice diet was greater than the kibble and canned wet diets (P < 0.001), while EE for the raw diet was only greater than the kibble diet (P < 0.001). Energy expenditure was similar between the kibble and canned wet diets (P = 0.919) and between the mice and raw diets (P = 0.598). Among all treatments and time periods, the mouse diet had the greatest mean EE. An increase in EE during the feeding period and post-prandial could benefit sedentary indoor cats who may be in positive energy balance. Feeding cats a naturalistic diet, such as intact mice or a raw diet, may increase activity levels and EE, but the longer-term effects of these feeding formats on energy balance need to be explored.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal Science→Same topicDiet and metabolism studies→French-language works237,207→