Publikationsdatenbank

Effects of silkworm pupae meal and silkworm pupae oil in a diet on the microbiota and bacterial metabolites in the feces of healthy dogs (2025)

Art

Poster

Autoren

Baum, Lilly

Linti, Antonia

Hänse, Maria

Potthoff, Janes

Belik, Vitaly (WE 16)

Sergeeva, Alisa (WE 16)

Vahjen, Wilfried (WE 4)

Zentek, Jürgen (WE 4)

Paßlack, Nadine

Kongress

29th Congress of the European Society of Veterinary & Comparative Nutrition ESVCN

Leipzig, 04. – 06.09.2025

Quelle

Proceedings of the 29th Congress of the European Society of Veterinary & Comparative Nutrition ESVCN : 4th – 6th September 2025 Leipzig, Germany — Wilkens MR, Vervuert I, Heilmann R, Dobenecker B, Rackwitz R (eds.) (Hrsg.)

Leipzig: Müller Buchbinderei GmbH, 2025. LBH: Leipziger Blaue Hefte — S. 117

Sprache

Englisch

Kontakt

Institut für Tierernährung

Königin-Luise-Str. 49
14195 Berlin
+49 30 838 52256
tierernaehrung@vetmed.fu-berlin.de

Abstract / Zusammenfassung

Introduction: Insect-based dog foods are already widely available on the European market. The used insect species, however, could potentially affect the feed acceptance, tolerance and the intestinal microbiota. Due to a paucity of data, the present study was conducted to evaluate the effects of silkworm products in dog diets.
Animals, material and methods: Ten healthy adult beagle dogs were included in this cross-over trial, receiving 2 diets that differed in the protein and fat source. While the control diet contained poultry by-product meal and rapeseed oil, the test diet was based on silkworm pupae meal and silkworm pupae oil. The diets were complete, isoenergetic and showed comparable crude nutrient and mineral contents. Each diet was fed for 6 weeks, without a wash-out period in between. At the end of the feeding periods, fecal samples were collected to analyze the microbiota (16S rDNA sequencing) and bacterial metabolites (standard laboratory methods). The data analysis was carried out with R (version 2024.12.0, RStudio Build 467), using a repeated-measures linear mixed-effect model. Group differences were considered to be statistically significant at P < 0.05.
Results: In general, both diets were well accepted and tolerated by most of the dogs. However, two dogs developed diarrhea when the test diet was offered. Therefore, they were excluded from the data set of the test group. No differences in the feed intake and fecal score were detected depending on the dietary treatment. Additionally, the alpha diversity of the microbiota as well as the relative abundance of bacterial phyla and most bacterial genera in the feces of the dogs did not differ between the feeding groups. The only exception was made by the relative abundance of Lachnoclostridium, which was low in general, but significantly higher in the control group (0.46 ± 0.20 %) than in the test group (0.34 ± 0.32 %). The analysis of microbial metabolites revealed higher concentrations of propionic acid, histamine, tyramine and spermidine as well as lower concentrations of ammonium, n-butyric acid, phenol and phenylethylamine in the feces of the dogs, when the insect-based diet was fed (P < 0.05).
Discussion and conclusion: A diet based on silkworm pupae meal and oil was comparably well tolerated to a diet with a conventional protein source by most of the dogs. The observed differences in some bacterial metabolites in the feces of the animals suggest an effect of the dietary treatment on the metabolic activity of the gut microbiota. Although e.g., the lower ammonium concentrations associated with the intake of the insect-based diet could be considered beneficial, the lower n-butyrate levels might imply the opposite. The relevance of these findings therefore requires further evaluation. Likewise, the importance of the detected difference in the relative abundance of Lachnoclostridium between the feeding groups should be investigated in future studies.