Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Estimating energy losses with urine in the cat


Wichert, Brigitta; Liesegang, Annette; Hartnack, S (2014). Estimating energy losses with urine in the cat. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 98(4):628-635.

Abstract

Urinary energy losses in cats have to be determined in energy balance trials as well as for the calculation of the metabolizable energy (ME) content of cat food. The aim of the present study was: first, to assess whether the energy content of cat urine quantified by bomb calorimetry differs from that quantified using GE (kJ) urine = 33 kJ × g C urine + 9 kJ × g N urine and investigate whether this difference could be attributed to influences of diets. Second, to assess whether the subtraction of 3.1 kJ/g of protein intake used for estimation of metabolizable energy content of cat foods is confirmed as usable. Data from 27 energy and protein balance trials from different studies with complete sampling of urine and faeces (29 cats in part A and 35 cats in part B) were used. Gross energy, carbon and nitrogen were determined in food, faeces and urine. Gross energy values in urine tended to be higher when determined with the formula of Hoffman and Klein compared to bomb calorimetry. The average relative difference of gross energy values between the methods was 18.8%. The mean energy loss in kJ/g of protein intake resulted in 3.7 kJ/g protein intake, which was not statistically significantly different (p = 0.12) from the tested value of 3.1 kJ/g of protein intake. In conclusion, the formula of Hoffman and Klein is not appropriate for the estimation of energy in cat urine. In balance studies, it is advisable to quantify the urinary energy content by bomb calorimetry. In the second part of the study, the protein correction factor to determine ME of 3.1 kJ/g protein intake for urinary energy losses of Kienzle et al. could be confirmed.

Abstract

Urinary energy losses in cats have to be determined in energy balance trials as well as for the calculation of the metabolizable energy (ME) content of cat food. The aim of the present study was: first, to assess whether the energy content of cat urine quantified by bomb calorimetry differs from that quantified using GE (kJ) urine = 33 kJ × g C urine + 9 kJ × g N urine and investigate whether this difference could be attributed to influences of diets. Second, to assess whether the subtraction of 3.1 kJ/g of protein intake used for estimation of metabolizable energy content of cat foods is confirmed as usable. Data from 27 energy and protein balance trials from different studies with complete sampling of urine and faeces (29 cats in part A and 35 cats in part B) were used. Gross energy, carbon and nitrogen were determined in food, faeces and urine. Gross energy values in urine tended to be higher when determined with the formula of Hoffman and Klein compared to bomb calorimetry. The average relative difference of gross energy values between the methods was 18.8%. The mean energy loss in kJ/g of protein intake resulted in 3.7 kJ/g protein intake, which was not statistically significantly different (p = 0.12) from the tested value of 3.1 kJ/g of protein intake. In conclusion, the formula of Hoffman and Klein is not appropriate for the estimation of energy in cat urine. In balance studies, it is advisable to quantify the urinary energy content by bomb calorimetry. In the second part of the study, the protein correction factor to determine ME of 3.1 kJ/g protein intake for urinary energy losses of Kienzle et al. could be confirmed.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 03 Feb 2015
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:05 Vetsuisse Faculty > Institute of Animal Nutrition
05 Vetsuisse Faculty > Chair in Veterinary Epidemiology
Dewey Decimal Classification:570 Life sciences; biology
610 Medicine & health
630 Agriculture
Language:English
Date:August 2014
Deposited On:03 Feb 2015 16:46
Last Modified:01 Jun 2017 03:02
Publisher:Wiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
ISSN:0931-2439
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.12102
PubMed ID:23855592

Download