CITED
CITED
Association of American Feed Control Officials Publication. AAFCO, Inc., Atlanta, GA.
(1992)
Official
Downloaded from jn.nutrition.org by guest on April 28, 2012
(salt) are lowered compared with the 1974 NRC rec ommendations, especially for adult maintenance dog foods (Henrikson 1968, Jenkins and Phillips 1960, NRC 1985). In addition to setting levels for amounts of calcium and phosphorus individually, minimum and maximum ranges for the calcium-to-phosphorus ratio have been set. The new profiles also establish minimum required amounts of essential amino acids, as well as protein. Amino acid requirements were also recommended in the 1985 NRC edition but not the 1974 edition. Changes in the amounts of some of the amino acids compared with the 1985 NRC recom mendations were also incorporated (Biaza et al. 1982, Czarnecki and Baker 1982, Hirakawa and Baker 1985, Hirakawa and Baker 1986). The Feline Nutrition Expert (FNE) Subcommittee was formed in 1991 to address the same issue in cat foods and the NRC recommendations. The FNE Sub committee updated the cat food nutrient profiles in a manner similar to that of dog foods (Table 2) (AAFCO 1993). Taurine levels were established for both ex truded and canned products, with higher levels in canned foods to account for the lower availability of taurine in these products (Douglass et al. 1991). Mod ifications in the levels of protein, calcium, phosphorus, potassium, zinc and niacin were also made compared with the 1978 NRC recommendations (Buffington et al. 1991, NRC 1986). A minimum level of vitamin K activity in products containing high amounts of fish was established (Strieker 1991). Maximum levels of some nutrients (methionine, zinc and vitamins A and D) were also established (Fau et al. 1987, NRC 1980, NRC 1987). In addition to establishing new nutrient profiles for cat foods, another charge of the FNE Subcommittee was to revise the AAFCO feeding trial protocols for both dog and cat foods. The number of animals were increased from six to eight per test diet. Also, more specific statistical methodology was incorporated. For a diet to pass under the new protocols, mean values of parameters in the treatment group animals may not be significantly different from mean values in the con trol group animals, whereas values under the old pro tocols had to fall within a range of "normal" values. Animals under the old protocols could show profound drops in hemoglobin values, for example, and yet if values remained in the normal range the diet would pass. This treatment effect is better detected by use of the new methods. Many "loopholes" were also filled to better preserve data integrity. For example, under the old protocols a certain number of animals had to successfully pass the test, but the protocols did not specify how many an imals could be put on test. Theoretically, an unlimited number of animals could be put on test to replace those removed for "nonnutritional reasons" until enough passed. Now,