The billion-dollar, cutting-edge science of convincing dogs and cats to eat what’s in front of them.

Palatant Coat
Palatant Coat: A tech pours palatant—which can include proteins, yeasts, and antioxidants—over unflavored kibble in a hand coater, which rotates to cover the pieces evenly.  John Fedele

PARC techs also try to keep a bead on doggy interactions in the yards. “We need to know,” says McCarthy. “Are you down because you don’t like the food or because Pipes stole your bone earlier?” Kleinsorge mentions that a dog named Mohammid has lately had an upset stomach, and Porkchop likes to eat the vomit. “So that’s cutting into Porkchop’s appetite.” And probably yours.

In addition to calculating how much of each food the dogs ate, PARC techs tally the First-Choice Percentage: the percentage of dogs who stuck their snout in the new food first. This is important to a pet food company because with dogs, as Moeller said earlier, “if you can draw them to the bowl, they’ll eat most of the time.” Once the eating begins, though, the dog may move to the other food and wind up consuming more of it. Since most people don’t present their dogs with two choices, they don’t know the extent to which their pet’s initial, slavering, scent-driven enthusiasm may have dimmed as the meal progressed.

The challenge is to find an aroma that drives dogs wild without making their owners, to use an Amy McCarthy verb, yak. “Cadaverine is a really exciting thing for dogs,” says Rawson. “Or putrescine.” But not for humans. These are odoriferous compounds given off by decomposing protein. I was surprised to learn that dogs lose interest when meat decays past a certain point. It is a myth that dogs will eat anything. “People think dogs love things that are old, nasty, dragged around in the dirt,” Moeller tells me. But only to a point, he says. “Something that’s just starting to decay still has full nutritional value. Whereas something that bacteria have really broken down—it’s lost a lot of its nutritional value, and they would only eat it if they had no choice.” Either way, a pet owner doesn’t want to smell it.

Some dog food designers go too far in the other direction, tailoring the smell to be pleasing to humans without taking the dog’s experience of it into account. The problem is that the average dog’s nose can be up to 10,000 times more sensitive than the average human’s. A flavor that to you or me is reminiscent of grilled steak may be overpowering and unappealing to a dog.

Earlier today, I watched a test of a mint-flavored treat marketed as a tooth-cleaning aid. Chemically speaking, mint, like jalapeño, is less a flavor than an irritant. It’s an uncommon choice for a dog treat. (As is jalapeño, although according to psychologist Paul Rozin, Mexican dogs, unlike American dogs, enjoy a little heat. His work suggests that animals have cultural food preferences too.) The manufacturers are clearly courting the owners, counting on the association of mint with good oral hygiene. The competition courts the same dental hygiene association but visually: The biscuit is shaped like a toothbrush. Only Mohammid preferred the minty treats—which may explain the vomiting.

A dog named Winston is nosing through his bowl for the occasional white chunk among the brown. Many of the dogs picked these out first. They’re like the M&M’s in trail mix. McCarthy is impressed. “That’s a really, really palatable piece.” One of the techs mentioned that she tried some earlier and that the white morsel tasted like chicken. Or, rather, “chickeny.”

I must have registered surprise at the disclosure, because Kleinsorge jumps in. “If you open a bag and it smells really good. . .”

The tech shrugs. “And you’re hungry. . .”

* * *

single page

9 Comments

Kibble: Never A Good Option

www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/kibble-never-a-good-option/

Sigh, this article is harolding "better" kibble based off more meat products. Auroria's article is based off cheaper cardboard-ish kibble. Both are biased. If your dog is happy and healthy, who cares?

Must be doing something wrong, I've fed all of my dogs kibble, and not the expensive, organic, scientific stuff either. They have lived long, healthy lives. Healthy enough that when I have to change vets, they always comment on my pets' condition and say, "You must be feeding them the expensive, organic, scientific stuff!" "No, no, and nope."

Thanks for the fascinating article. I laughed out loud a couple of times.

While “The Chemistry of Kibble” [April, 2013] provided an interesting insight into what most pet food manufacturers try to do to make their food palatable. The article states that pet foods are mixed with “soy and wheat grains… [and that] cats and dogs are not grain eaters.” I think it is worth noting that there are plenty of pet foods available that are grain-free that do not require tricks to “entice [pets] to eat enough for it to be nutritionally sufficient.”

One wonders where Spanky, Thomas, Skipper, Porkchop, Mohammid, Elvis, Sandi, Bela, Yankee, Fergie, Murphy, Limburger, and some 300 other dogs and cats came from before they 'resided' in a lab cage at this facility and where they'll go once the lab is finished with them. There are plenty of good kibble manufacturers who make high quality food without using lab animals to taste-test. Given the ultimate consumers are pets at home, it makes more sense to taste test to pooches with the diet and lifestyle of a pet, rather than lab animal.

This is an unnecessary article glorifying an extremely unnecessary 'science' industry created not for pet health or welfare, but simply profit.

Absolute garbage. Why must everything have some freekin' chemical to cover up the fact that it's made with more chemicals and processed crap? I like Doritos, but I'm not going to live on them no matter how tasty they are.

First off, the first ingredient of these cheap kibble recipes is corn meal, wheat is way down the list, and K9's cannot digest cornmeal. It requires feeding them twice as much kibble to get the benificial protein that they need at the risk of overloading them on the carbohydrates that they do not need, which not only is bad for them and causes weight gain, but also much higher rates of digestive and health issues along with shortend life spans and quality of life in their later years. Cheap kibble is also way more expensive in reality because you do feed twice as much as you would with premium foods that are not quite double the price. If you feed a 90lb. dog 3 cups of cheap kibble twice a day along with canned food, you could do the same job with just 2 cups of premium kibble twice a day with no canned food at all. Premium kibble is almost all protein, this is the fuel K9's require for a long vibrant life. Not to mention that they leave alot less waste to clean up and are way less gassy.

All of our rescues have come in overweight and lethargic compared to their healthy counterparts, even at 4 and 5 years old they acted closer to 10 in vitality, 2 months of premium and not only do they lose weight dramatically, they regain their vibrance and playfullness, coats improve and problem health issues diminish add to the overall reduction in the cost of caring for your best friend.

Sure, you can go cheap, but your buddy will die sooner and the last years of his life will suck compared to a life of proper nutrition. Not one K9 trainer will ever recommend a cheap kibble brand, even iams has corn meal in it. TIP: if you see a comercial for it, it's garbage, if it's sold in a grocery store, it's garbage. Pet store and feed houses are where you find what you need, they rarely carry grain based food. If you see corn anywhere in the ingredient list, move on. Try it for a couple of months, you will see the difference and you will spend less over time. The only downside is that your dog will be more energetic.

I can change my cats' food any time I want, as long as the new stuff costs more than the old stuff. The problem is, I can never reverse the process.

I thoroughly enjoyed this article and its insights. I turned away from kibble long ago and I'm glad that I did.


140 years of Popular Science at your fingertips.



Popular Science+ For iPad

Each issue has been completely reimagined for your iPad. See our amazing new vision for magazines that goes far beyond the printed page



Download Our App

Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone or Android phone with full articles, images and offline viewing



Follow Us On Twitter

Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed


April 2013: How It Works

For our annual How It Works issue, we break down everything from the massive Falcon Heavy rocket to a tiny DNA sequencer that connects to a USB port. We also take a look at an ambitious plan for faster-than-light travel and dive into the billion-dollar science of dog food.

Plus the latest Legos, Cadillac's plug-in hybrid, a tractor built for the apocalypse, and more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor:Rose Pastore | Email

Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email

circ-top-header.gif
circ-cover.gif