Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38612333›Full record

ReviewAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

Insights to Study, Understand and Manage Extruded Dry Pet Food Palatability.

Gautier Le Guillas, Pascal Vanacker, Christian Salles, Hélène Labouré

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Gaps and Controversies in Feline Food Palatability.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. The Digestibility of Vegan and Vegetarian Diets for Dogs and Cats.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Gautier Le GuillasCentre R&D Nestlé S.A.S., F-80800 Aubigny, France.
Pascal VanackerCentre R&D Nestlé S.A.S., F-80800 Aubigny, France.
Christian SallesCentre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, CNRS, INRAE, Institut Agro, Université de Bourgogne, F-21000 Dijon, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0407-9778
Hélène LabouréCentre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, CNRS, INRAE, Institut Agro, Université de Bourgogne, F-21000 Dijon, France.

Funding

Association Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie ANRT-CIFRE 2019/1744PURINA (Nestlé) NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pet food production is a fast-growing industry. While extruded dry pet food is the favored pet food due to its convenience of use, it may have poorer palatability than other pet foods such as wet pet foods. However, palatability plays a pivotal role in meeting nutritional requirements or providing therapeutic benefits in cats and dogs, as it ensures food acceptance. Thus, both academics and manufacturers conduct routine palatability tests to assess acceptance and preference of products among pets, alongside sensory analyses involving human panels. Palatability is greatly influenced by species-specific and environmental factors in cats and dogs. The review will hence present the current knowledge on palatability assessment and animal food perception; it will then aim to explore strategies for effectively managing palatability in dry pet food by examining the impact of key ingredients and process parameters on the finished product's palatability. Moreover, the demands and needs for sustainable and healthier products as well as supply constraints present novel challenges and opportunities for academics and manufacturers.

Indexed as

dry cat fooddry dog foodextrusionpalatabilitypet foodpreference

Identifiers

PMID38612333
PMCPMC11010889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.