Loading…
Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1
Considering the different potential benefits of divergent fiber ingredients, the effect of 3 fiber sources on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fermentation product formation, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats (Felis catus) fed kibble diets was compared....
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of animal science 2012-07, Vol.90 (7), p.2233 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 2233 |
container_title | Journal of animal science |
container_volume | 90 |
creator | Fischer, M M Kessler, A M de Sá, L R M Vasconcellos, R S Filho, F O Roberti Nogueira, S P Oliveira, M C C Carciofi, A C |
description | Considering the different potential benefits of divergent fiber ingredients, the effect of 3 fiber sources on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fermentation product formation, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats (Felis catus) fed kibble diets was compared. Twenty-four healthy adult cats were assigned in a complete randomized block design to 2 groups of 12 animals, and 3 animals from each group were fed 1 of 4 of the following kibble diets: control (CO; 11.5% dietary fiber), beet pulp (BP; 26% dietary fiber), wheat bran (WB; 24% dietary fiber), and sugarcane fiber (SF; 28% dietary fiber). Digestibility was measured by the total collection of feces. After 16 d of diet adaptation and an overnight period without food, blood glucose, cholesterol, and triglyceride postprandial responses were evaluated for 16 h after continued exposure to food. On d 20, colon biopsies of the cats were collected under general anesthesia. Fiber addition reduced food energy and nutrient digestibility. Of all the fiber sources, SF had the least dietary fiber digestibility (P < 0.05), causing the largest reduction of dietary energy digestibility (P < 0.05). The greater fermentability of BP resulted in reduced fecal DM and pH, greater fecal production [g/(cat x d); as-is], and greater fecal concentration of acetate, propionate, and lactate (P < 0.05). For most fecal variables, WB was intermediate between BP and SF, and SF was similar to the control diet except for an increased fecal DM and firmer feces production for the SF diet (P < 0.05). Postprandial evaluations indicated reduced mean glucose concentration and area under the glucose curve in cats fed the SF diet (P < 0.05). Colon mucosa thickness, crypt area, lamina propria area, goblet cell area, crypt mean size, and crypt in bifurcation did not vary among the diets. According to the fiber solubility and fermentation rates, fiber sources can induce different physiological responses in cats, reduce energy digestibility, and favor glucose metabolism (SF), or improve gut health (BP). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT] |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1032978036</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2733262441</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_10329780363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNjkFOw0AMRUcIJELhDpbYNtJMRinpGlFxAPbVNPWkUyUzwXZAvQ1HxQgOwMqW__v_-8pUrm3a2ruNvzaVtY2ru841t-aO-Wyta9ptW5mvXTogQUSaMEs4pDHJBTBG7IWhZMCMNFwg5CNMoaeSF6GkKBzTgCzp17HWhD6MIBSS8BrmwjKTmpIeJ9TgohgCIc8lMyryk9iXUStOiUUXbSkRygfSJ6bhJNAHYXdvbmIYGR_-5so87l7enl_rmcr7oh_sz2WhrNLeWd9snzrrN_5_1Ddnel9_</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1032978036</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1</title><source>Oxford University Press:Jisc Collections:OUP Read and Publish 2024-2025 (2024 collection) (Reading list)</source><creator>Fischer, M M ; Kessler, A M ; de Sá, L R M ; Vasconcellos, R S ; Filho, F O Roberti ; Nogueira, S P ; Oliveira, M C C ; Carciofi, A C</creator><creatorcontrib>Fischer, M M ; Kessler, A M ; de Sá, L R M ; Vasconcellos, R S ; Filho, F O Roberti ; Nogueira, S P ; Oliveira, M C C ; Carciofi, A C</creatorcontrib><description>Considering the different potential benefits of divergent fiber ingredients, the effect of 3 fiber sources on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fermentation product formation, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats (Felis catus) fed kibble diets was compared. Twenty-four healthy adult cats were assigned in a complete randomized block design to 2 groups of 12 animals, and 3 animals from each group were fed 1 of 4 of the following kibble diets: control (CO; 11.5% dietary fiber), beet pulp (BP; 26% dietary fiber), wheat bran (WB; 24% dietary fiber), and sugarcane fiber (SF; 28% dietary fiber). Digestibility was measured by the total collection of feces. After 16 d of diet adaptation and an overnight period without food, blood glucose, cholesterol, and triglyceride postprandial responses were evaluated for 16 h after continued exposure to food. On d 20, colon biopsies of the cats were collected under general anesthesia. Fiber addition reduced food energy and nutrient digestibility. Of all the fiber sources, SF had the least dietary fiber digestibility (P < 0.05), causing the largest reduction of dietary energy digestibility (P < 0.05). The greater fermentability of BP resulted in reduced fecal DM and pH, greater fecal production [g/(cat x d); as-is], and greater fecal concentration of acetate, propionate, and lactate (P < 0.05). For most fecal variables, WB was intermediate between BP and SF, and SF was similar to the control diet except for an increased fecal DM and firmer feces production for the SF diet (P < 0.05). Postprandial evaluations indicated reduced mean glucose concentration and area under the glucose curve in cats fed the SF diet (P < 0.05). Colon mucosa thickness, crypt area, lamina propria area, goblet cell area, crypt mean size, and crypt in bifurcation did not vary among the diets. According to the fiber solubility and fermentation rates, fiber sources can induce different physiological responses in cats, reduce energy digestibility, and favor glucose metabolism (SF), or improve gut health (BP). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-8812</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-3163</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Champaign: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Cats ; Cholesterol ; Dietary fiber ; Fatty acids ; Glucose ; Triglycerides</subject><ispartof>Journal of animal science, 2012-07, Vol.90 (7), p.2233</ispartof><rights>Copyright American Society of Animal Science Jul 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fischer, M M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kessler, A M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Sá, L R M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vasconcellos, R S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filho, F O Roberti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nogueira, S P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliveira, M C C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carciofi, A C</creatorcontrib><title>Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1</title><title>Journal of animal science</title><description>Considering the different potential benefits of divergent fiber ingredients, the effect of 3 fiber sources on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fermentation product formation, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats (Felis catus) fed kibble diets was compared. Twenty-four healthy adult cats were assigned in a complete randomized block design to 2 groups of 12 animals, and 3 animals from each group were fed 1 of 4 of the following kibble diets: control (CO; 11.5% dietary fiber), beet pulp (BP; 26% dietary fiber), wheat bran (WB; 24% dietary fiber), and sugarcane fiber (SF; 28% dietary fiber). Digestibility was measured by the total collection of feces. After 16 d of diet adaptation and an overnight period without food, blood glucose, cholesterol, and triglyceride postprandial responses were evaluated for 16 h after continued exposure to food. On d 20, colon biopsies of the cats were collected under general anesthesia. Fiber addition reduced food energy and nutrient digestibility. Of all the fiber sources, SF had the least dietary fiber digestibility (P < 0.05), causing the largest reduction of dietary energy digestibility (P < 0.05). The greater fermentability of BP resulted in reduced fecal DM and pH, greater fecal production [g/(cat x d); as-is], and greater fecal concentration of acetate, propionate, and lactate (P < 0.05). For most fecal variables, WB was intermediate between BP and SF, and SF was similar to the control diet except for an increased fecal DM and firmer feces production for the SF diet (P < 0.05). Postprandial evaluations indicated reduced mean glucose concentration and area under the glucose curve in cats fed the SF diet (P < 0.05). Colon mucosa thickness, crypt area, lamina propria area, goblet cell area, crypt mean size, and crypt in bifurcation did not vary among the diets. According to the fiber solubility and fermentation rates, fiber sources can induce different physiological responses in cats, reduce energy digestibility, and favor glucose metabolism (SF), or improve gut health (BP). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Cats</subject><subject>Cholesterol</subject><subject>Dietary fiber</subject><subject>Fatty acids</subject><subject>Glucose</subject><subject>Triglycerides</subject><issn>0021-8812</issn><issn>1525-3163</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNjkFOw0AMRUcIJELhDpbYNtJMRinpGlFxAPbVNPWkUyUzwXZAvQ1HxQgOwMqW__v_-8pUrm3a2ruNvzaVtY2ru841t-aO-Wyta9ptW5mvXTogQUSaMEs4pDHJBTBG7IWhZMCMNFwg5CNMoaeSF6GkKBzTgCzp17HWhD6MIBSS8BrmwjKTmpIeJ9TgohgCIc8lMyryk9iXUStOiUUXbSkRygfSJ6bhJNAHYXdvbmIYGR_-5so87l7enl_rmcr7oh_sz2WhrNLeWd9snzrrN_5_1Ddnel9_</recordid><startdate>20120701</startdate><enddate>20120701</enddate><creator>Fischer, M M</creator><creator>Kessler, A M</creator><creator>de Sá, L R M</creator><creator>Vasconcellos, R S</creator><creator>Filho, F O Roberti</creator><creator>Nogueira, S P</creator><creator>Oliveira, M C C</creator><creator>Carciofi, A C</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>U9A</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120701</creationdate><title>Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1</title><author>Fischer, M M ; Kessler, A M ; de Sá, L R M ; Vasconcellos, R S ; Filho, F O Roberti ; Nogueira, S P ; Oliveira, M C C ; Carciofi, A C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_10329780363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Cats</topic><topic>Cholesterol</topic><topic>Dietary fiber</topic><topic>Fatty acids</topic><topic>Glucose</topic><topic>Triglycerides</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fischer, M M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kessler, A M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Sá, L R M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vasconcellos, R S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Filho, F O Roberti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nogueira, S P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliveira, M C C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carciofi, A C</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Career & Technical Education Database</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fischer, M M</au><au>Kessler, A M</au><au>de Sá, L R M</au><au>Vasconcellos, R S</au><au>Filho, F O Roberti</au><au>Nogueira, S P</au><au>Oliveira, M C C</au><au>Carciofi, A C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1</atitle><jtitle>Journal of animal science</jtitle><date>2012-07-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>90</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2233</spage><pages>2233-</pages><issn>0021-8812</issn><eissn>1525-3163</eissn><abstract>Considering the different potential benefits of divergent fiber ingredients, the effect of 3 fiber sources on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fermentation product formation, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats (Felis catus) fed kibble diets was compared. Twenty-four healthy adult cats were assigned in a complete randomized block design to 2 groups of 12 animals, and 3 animals from each group were fed 1 of 4 of the following kibble diets: control (CO; 11.5% dietary fiber), beet pulp (BP; 26% dietary fiber), wheat bran (WB; 24% dietary fiber), and sugarcane fiber (SF; 28% dietary fiber). Digestibility was measured by the total collection of feces. After 16 d of diet adaptation and an overnight period without food, blood glucose, cholesterol, and triglyceride postprandial responses were evaluated for 16 h after continued exposure to food. On d 20, colon biopsies of the cats were collected under general anesthesia. Fiber addition reduced food energy and nutrient digestibility. Of all the fiber sources, SF had the least dietary fiber digestibility (P < 0.05), causing the largest reduction of dietary energy digestibility (P < 0.05). The greater fermentability of BP resulted in reduced fecal DM and pH, greater fecal production [g/(cat x d); as-is], and greater fecal concentration of acetate, propionate, and lactate (P < 0.05). For most fecal variables, WB was intermediate between BP and SF, and SF was similar to the control diet except for an increased fecal DM and firmer feces production for the SF diet (P < 0.05). Postprandial evaluations indicated reduced mean glucose concentration and area under the glucose curve in cats fed the SF diet (P < 0.05). Colon mucosa thickness, crypt area, lamina propria area, goblet cell area, crypt mean size, and crypt in bifurcation did not vary among the diets. According to the fiber solubility and fermentation rates, fiber sources can induce different physiological responses in cats, reduce energy digestibility, and favor glucose metabolism (SF), or improve gut health (BP). [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Champaign</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0021-8812 |
ispartof | Journal of animal science, 2012-07, Vol.90 (7), p.2233 |
issn | 0021-8812 1525-3163 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1032978036 |
source | Oxford University Press:Jisc Collections:OUP Read and Publish 2024-2025 (2024 collection) (Reading list) |
subjects | Cats Cholesterol Dietary fiber Fatty acids Glucose Triglycerides |
title | Fiber fermentability effects on energy and macronutrient digestibility, fecal traits, postprandial metabolite responses, and colon histology of overweight cats1 |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T05%3A22%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Fiber%20fermentability%20effects%20on%20energy%20and%20macronutrient%20digestibility,%20fecal%20traits,%20postprandial%20metabolite%20responses,%20and%20colon%20histology%20of%20overweight%20cats1&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20animal%20science&rft.au=Fischer,%20M%20M&rft.date=2012-07-01&rft.volume=90&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2233&rft.pages=2233-&rft.issn=0021-8812&rft.eissn=1525-3163&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2733262441%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_10329780363%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1032978036&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |