EXPANDED DRY PRODUCT FOR IMPROVING THE DENTAL HYGIENE OF A PET

Abstract

The present disclosure relates to a low-density dry food composition having a penetration rate of at least about 30% and comprising at least, by weight relative to the total weight of said composition: a. a protein source in an amount ranging from about 15% to about 30%, b. fat in an amount ranging from about 5% to about 15%, c. starch in an amount ranging from about 35% to about 5% and d. a total dietary fibers source in an amount ranging from about 3% to about 12%. The disclosure also relates to methods of use for improving oral hygiene, and methods for manufacturing said disclosure.

Claims

1. A low-density dry food composition comprising at least: a. a protein source in an amount ranging from about 15% to about 30% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition, b. a fat source in an amount ranging from about 5% to about 15% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition, c. a starch source in an amount ranging from about 35% to about 65% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition; and d. a total dietary fibers source in an amount ranging from about 3% to about 12% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition, wherein the composition has a penetration rate of at least about 30%.

2. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, having a penetration rate of from about 30% to about 75%.

3. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising a protein source in an amount ranging from about 18% to about 25% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition.

4. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, wherein the protein source is selected from a vegetal protein source, an animal protein source, and mixtures thereof.

5. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 4, wherein the vegetal protein source is selected from soybean, chickpea, pea, corn gluten, lentils and barley vegetal proteins, or mixtures thereof.

6. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 4, wherein the animal protein source is selected from poultry, beef, chicken, chicken meal, lamb, lamb meal, dried egg, fish, fish meal, meat and bone meal, meat byproducts, insects, and meat meal animal proteins, and mixtures thereof.

7. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 4, wherein the protein source is selected from corn gluten vegetal proteins and poultry animal proteins.

8. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 4, wherein the ratio of animal proteins to vegetal proteins is from about 1:2 to about 2:1.

9. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising fat in an amount ranging from about 5% to about 15% by weight, relative to the total weight of the composition.

10. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, wherein the said fat is selected from pork fat, pork lard, poultry fat, chicken fat, beef fat, lamb fat, fish oil and sunflower.

11. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising starch in an amount ranging from about 35% to about 65% by weight, relative to the total weight of the composition.

12. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, wherein the said starch is selected from wheat, barley, tapioca, wheat flour, corn flour, rice, potatoes, peas and oat starch.

13. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising a total dietary fibers source in an amount ranging from about 4% to about 10% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition.

14. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, wherein the said fibers are selected from beet pulp, soybean hulls, bran from wheat, cellulose, chicory, corn, rice bran, whole grain oat and whole grain barley fibers, and mixtures thereof.

15. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, further comprising ash in an amount ranging from about 2% to about 10% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition.

16. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, having a volume density ranging from about 100 g/L to about 250 g/L.

17. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising an amount of water ranging from about 2% to about 11% by weight relative to the total weight of the composition.

18. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, comprising an effective amount of immunoglobulins.

19. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, having a porosity comprised between about 50% and about 85%.

20. (canceled)

21. (canceled)

22. (canceled)

23. (cancelled)

24. The low-density dry food composition according to claim 1, wherein said composition is a kibble.

25. (canceled)

26. (canceled)

27. (canceled)

28. (canceled)

Description

[0269] The present disclosure is further illustrated by, without in any way being limited to, the examples below with references to the following Figures:

[0270] FIG. 1: A graphical depiction of the time of ingestion of various embodiments of the compositions of the disclosure.

[0271] FIG. 2: Mean Product: Time in seconds+95% multiple comparison intervals (letter show Tukey group).

[0272] FIG. 3: Boxplot of time in second by composition.

EXAMPLES

Example 1

Impact of the Fat Content of the Food Compositions on the Volume Density and Penetration Rate of Kibbles of the Disclosure

[0273] Three different formulations of food compositions according to the disclosure were prepared as kibbles (Compositions 1, 2 and 3).

[0274] These compositions were prepared with the same general process as defined above.

[0275] The dry ingredients were thus ground into a grinder to get particles below 1.5 mm. The ground ingredients were introduced in a conditioner and mixed with added water and steam to form a dough.

[0276] The dough was then transferred into an extruder and then heated under pressure. The heated dough was then pushed through a die machine to obtain an expanded extrudate which was then cut into kibbles.

[0277] The process according to the disclosure can be realized using any extruder available to the person skilled in the art. As non-limitative examples, it can be used an Extruder WENGERX115, X165 or X180 X185.

[0278] For this specific example, the amount of water added into the conditioner may vary from about 3% to about 5%, the amount of steam water added into the conditioner may vary from about 1% to about 3%.

[0279] For this specific example, the amount of water added into the extruder may vary from about 2.5% to about 5%. The amount of steam water added into the extruder may vary from about 1% to about 3%.

[0280] The parameters of this particular example consist of parameters used at the pilot scale. Considering the general knowledge of the Peron skilled in the Art, these parameters can be calculated and evaluated to fit to any industrial scale.

[0281] These three compositions, detailed in the following Table 1, differ in view of their fats content: 8%, 10% or 12% (by weight relative to the total weight of the corresponding composition).

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Composition 1 Composition 2 Composition 3 Raw materials (% total weight) (% total weight) (% total weight) Proteins 21 21 21 Fats 8 10 12 CFIB 1.6 2.1 2.1 Ash 5.4 5.4 5.4 NFE 54.5 52 50 Moisture 9.5 9.5 9.5

[0282] The volume density of the three sets of kibbles obtained was measured using the method described in the present text.

[0283] The results obtained are indicated in the following Table 2.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Density (/L) Composition 1 100 Composition 2 100 Composition 3 105

[0284] The results obtained are similar for these three compositions.

[0285] The penetration rate of the kibbles of each composition was then measured following the method detailed in the present text.

[0286] The results obtained for the penetration rates are indicated in the following Table 3:

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Penetration rate (%) Composition 1 39 Composition 2 40 Composition 3 35

[0287] It is observed that the variation of the fats content in the kibbles in the specific range of a composition of the disclosure does not significantly affect the volume density and penetration rate of the generated kibbles.

Example 2

Impact of the Shape of the Food Compositions of the Disclosure on the Penetration Rate

[0288] Kibbles of the following composition 4 were prepared according to Table 4 either as conventionally round-liked shaped kibbles or as square-like (longitudinal) shaped kibbles.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Composition 4 Raw materials (% total weight) Proteins 21 Fats 8 CFIB 2.1 Ash 5.4 NFE 54 Moisture 9.5

[0289] Usually, most kibbles are made using “radial” extrusion, i.e. an expansion of the product which is perpendicular to the outlet of the extruder.

[0290] Kibbles were also made, using the exact same composition, using “longitudinal” extrusion, i.e. an expansion of the product which is in line with the outlet of the extruder.

[0291] This difference leads to a change in the direction of the internal texture of the kibbles: the arrangement of the ingredients in the mass throughout its extrusion is guided horizontally, which as for consequence a different orientation of the air bubbles contained in it.

[0292] Such changes in the internal texture of the kibbles cause changes in the way the animal chews. Indeed, creating a kibble through longitudinal extrusion induces a chewing which is perpendicular to the fibres direction, allowing an improved brushing of the pet teeth.

[0293] The penetration rates of the two above-mentioned types of kibbles, having as sole differences the form and type of extrusion used, are measured according to the method detailed in the present text. The results obtained are indicated here-after in Table 5.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Round kibbles Longitudinal kibbles Penetration rate (%) 44.8 55.5

[0294] A 24% increase of the penetration rate is accordingly observed with the use of longitudinal kibbles compared to the round ones.

Example 3

Impact of Moisture of the Food Compositions on the Penetration Rate

[0295] Kibbles of the following compositions were prepared according to Table 6 using a square form either with an 8% by weight (relative to the total weight of the composition) or with a 10.5% by weight amount of water (moisture) relative to the total weight of the composition.

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Composition A Composition B Raw materials (% total weight) (% total weight) Proteins 21.3 20.8 Fats 12.2 11.9 CFIB 2.1 2.1 Ash 5.4 5.4 NFE 51 49.3 Moisture 8 10.5

[0296] The penetration rates of these two types of kibbles are measured according to the method detailed in the present text and indicated here-after in Table 7.

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Composition A Composition B (Moisture 8% by (Moisture 10.5% by weight) weight) Penetration rate (%) 45.1 56

[0297] An increase superior to 24% of the penetration rate is accordingly observed with the increase of the moisture rate of the composition from 8% to 10.5% by weight.

Example 4

Immunoglobulins Activity Confirmation Within the Compositions of the Disclosure

[0298] The goal of this study was to examine the activity of gingipain antibody (immunoglobulins=IgY) within the expanded finished product within the composition of the disclosure. More particularly, the targeted bacteria are preferentially P. gingivalis and P. gulae.

[0299] Indeed, the ingredient has been proved to be efficient in other products (toothpaste, etc.) but never in a pet food. Some complexities due to the pet food process (temperature of coating process, addition of acid raw material in coating . . . ) can affect the activity of the immunoglobulins.

[0300] The kibbles according to the disclosure were coated with aroma, fat and immunized egg powder (containing IgY). 3 samples of finished products (Sample No.1, No.3 and No.5) were analyzed by Elisa to measure the activity retained of specific gingipain antibody. Non-coated kibbles, without any coating ingredients, and without immunized egg powder (Sample No.2 and No.4) have been analyzed by Elisa and were used as the negative control.

[0301] The 3 samples No.1, No.3 and No.5 of compositions according to the disclosure are close to 100%, meaning that the immunoglobulins contained in the final compositions according to the disclosure are active, so acting on dog's oral health (=reduction of dental plaque and reduction of gingivitis scoring).

TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Sample name Specific gingipain antibody activity (Kibbles according to the disclosure) retained (%) Sample No. 1 Kibbles 97.8 Sample No. 2 Kibbles 3.8 Sample No. 3 Kibbles 82.3 Sample No. 4 Kibbles 1 Sample No. 5 Kibbles 90.9

Example 5

Dental Clinical Study

[0302] The hypothesis for this study is that the combination of chemical effects of IgY egg powder/PRN(Plaque Reduction Nutrient)/STPP and mechanical effect of the aerated texture of the composition of the disclosure will reduce the accumulation of plaque and calculus and prevent halitosis in a clean-tooth model and will reduce the growth of bacteria associated with gingivitis in dogs.

[0303] The primary objective was to demonstrate dental health improvement (a reduction of minimum 15% of at least one of the following effects: level of aroma compounds linked to bad breath, gingivitis scoring, P. gingivalis and P. gulae population, plaque scoring, tartar scoring and the most relevant: plaque accumulation detected by QLF), by feeding the dogs with 10% of their daily ration in the composition of the disclosure, compared to the control (Royal Canin Neutered Adult dry). The secondary objective is to prove the value of adding immunized egg powder in the diet to claim about “healthy gums”.

[0304] One group of 15 dogs. Each phase lasts 3 weeks to observe variations in tartar accumulation.

[0305] Each product (composition A, composition B and Control) will be given at 10% of the daily allocation in kcal. The complement will be 90% of Royal Canin Neutered Adult dry.

[0306] Composition A=PRN/STPP in coating with IgY, at 10% of the ration

[0307] Composition B=PRN/STPP in coating without IgY, at 10% of the ration

[0308] Control=Royal Canin Neutered Adult dry at 10% of the ration

Example 6

Ingestion Speed in Dogs

[0309] The meal duration of 3 versions of the composition according to the disclosure with different shapes (square, triangle and round) and 1 control product is evaluated in 15 small dogs from the Royal Canin kennel (internal study). The same calorie ration is offered with the 4 products: 3 versions of the composition according to the disclosure (different shapes: square, triangle, round) and 1 control product [referred as “Control” in the Figures], which is a Royal Canin dental product. The duration of each dog's meal (in seconds) is timed. Only the dogs having finished their ration (N=15) have been considered for the analysis.

[0310] Results are represented in the FIGS. 1, 2 and 3. There is no significant difference in terms of meal duration between the 3 shapes of the composition of the disclosure, but the difference between the average of the 3 versions of the disclosure and the control product is very significant, with an augmentation of 180% of the meal time, at the same calorie content. These results clearly demonstrate the capacity of the composition according to the disclosure to increase the meal duration with, consequently, an increase of the time of abrasion of the teeth of the animal eating the said composition. This example demonstrates the superior capacity to abrade or brush the teeth of an animal consuming the composition.

Example 7

Acceptance of the Product in Cats in the Form of a Functional Complement

[0311] The test plan was as follows:

[0312] Ranking test (a ration of 100 g is offered to cats) on 1 exposure out of 20 research cats of the following 3 products (3 different forms of the disclosure). The objective of this study was to confirm that the cat can consume 10% of its ration in composition of the disclosure. A secondary objective is to identify one of the 3 forms in terms of chewing and palatability.

TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Standard 95% Confidence Interval Product Mean Error Lower Upper Composition 42.62 4.14 32.55 52.7 CAT 1 Composition 41.02 4.14 30.95 51.1 CAT 2 Composition 40.7 4.14 30.63 50.77 CAT 3

[0313] The consumption of the 3 compositions according to the disclosure is almost identical and therefore does not allow a shape to be detached. Nevertheless, the 3 products are consumed on average at around 40% of the daily ration, knowing that the target for a functional complement is 10%, the product is considered palatable, the acceptance of the product is validated in cats.