Why the 6% difference?

Post Reply
User avatar
Hondo
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 1:37 pm
Location: Northern California

Why the 6% difference?

Post by Hondo » Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:34 pm

Why the 6% difference between a 30/20 and a 24/20 dog food?

I know that dogs get their energy from the fat side, so I understand the 20% for the hard working dogs.

However, why the 6% percent difference in protein? I've noticed that there are a few feed companies that carrry a 24/20.

The percentages are always a little interesting to me.

I know a lot of people on this board use feeds that are 30/20 and 24/20 and their dogs are field trialers, all day hunters, basically canine athletes. So why the difference? Does a 24/20 do something more or less than a 30/20 and vice versa.

Just curious....

And for those who are wondering I still use Loyall Active Adult 26/19 and my dog does great on it. Plus, I love that Tractor Supply now carries it and sells it for $29.99 which is cheaper than the other feed store I was buying it at.

-Hondo

User avatar
bossman
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: McKinney, Tx

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by bossman » Sat Jul 14, 2012 8:23 pm

Hondo...Great question. I'm looking forward to the replies.

Ghosted3
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 769
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 11:25 pm
Location: Hillsboro, Illinois

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by Ghosted3 » Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:16 pm

Protein increases muscle growth, as well as muscle healing time, meaning the higher the protein, the faster the dog "should" get to peak performance as well as it "should" have maximum recovery.

Corry

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by ezzy333 » Sat Jul 14, 2012 11:23 pm

Ghosted3 wrote:Protein increases muscle growth, as well as muscle healing time, meaning the higher the protein, the faster the dog "should" get to peak performance as well as it "should" have maximum recovery.

Corry
I think you will find that protein is needed for muscle growth and/or repair but I don't think you can find anything that says more protein spurs muscle growth once the dog has a normal amount in it's feed. Young dogs that are growing plus extremely active or hard working dogs need more than the less active mature or older dog.

I think the biggest factor is marketing once you get to the 20% leveland higher. There is the old syndrome that says if a little is good a lot must be better. And people still believe that when they read it in some company's ads. As I have stated before we are on the edge the way we feed our dogs and that is the biggest factor in causing many of the percieved problems the less experienced seem to have consistantly. We feed our dogs too much of a lot of things and then wonder why the allergies, sensitive stomach, digestive problems, and a host of other ailments that are just not normal for any dog. And 90% of them showup in the one or two dog owners and not in the kennel of the breeders or trainers.

Ezzy
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

User avatar
gotpointers
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 995
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:27 am
Location: Belen,Nm

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by gotpointers » Sun Jul 15, 2012 1:18 am

I live by "if a little is good a lot must be better". :D

User avatar
mcbosco
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3577
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Monmouth County NJ

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mcbosco » Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:06 am

"I know a lot of people on this board use feeds that are 30/20 and 24/20 and their dogs are field trialers, all day hunters, basically canine athletes. So why the difference? Does a 24/20 do something more or less than a 30/20 and vice versa"


There are two reasons why 24/20's exist, one is pure economics and one has actual scientific basis.

Cost - Protein is the most expensive part of the food, a 24/20 can be sold for less money than a 30/20 and still deliver a lot of calories. It is a high value formula. The 6% difference is made up with a less expensive carbohydrate.

If you are the cynic that I am, then you would say a 24/20 is a "price-point diet". If you look at brands of dog foods, 24/20's seem to be offered only by the companies selling lower priced foods. I am not trying to be a snob, but compared to a 30/20, 24/20's have less costly calories.

Science - Food is 3 things, Protein, Fat & Carbohydrates. Each of these is metabolized differently and each can be used for energy, but protein as an energy source is very inefficient, requiring more steps to be converted into energy. Fat is the easiest with carbohydrates in the middle.

More steps means more heat and more calories loss. 30% of gross protein calories are lost during metabolism. So, with a 24/20 diet you could argue that it has sufficient protein for muscle repair and other needs but proportionally it has more efficient energy sources than a 30/20.

People generally say that their dogs hold weight better on 24/20's because, at least on paper, fewer total calories are lost during metabolism.

So what is the right answer? The 10% gap is the tried and true ratio for keeping the dog's weight optimal and supplying energy. The fact that you see the 24/20's in lower priced brands tells me the science is more valid on the side of the 10% differential, the 30/20. Pro Plan for example does not offer a 24/20, and neither do all the more expensive performance lines. Just a handful of companies actually sell a 24/20. So to use Ezzy's logic, if they were actually beneficial and needed, why doesn't every company offer one?

I think there is more evidence to suggest that 24/20's exist because they are less expensive calorie-for-calorie, not because they are better or actually needed.

User avatar
mountaindogs
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2449
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:33 pm
Location: TN

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mountaindogs » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:28 am

This article has some good info. As always you should follow the referenced research to learn the science behind the summary.
http://www.purinavets.eu/PDFs/ResearchR ... issue1.pdf

User avatar
mcbosco
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3577
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Monmouth County NJ

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mcbosco » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:52 am

"Clearly, working dogs perform better with premium quality food containing
20-30 percent fat and 27-35 percent protein."

Above is from Dr. Reynolds in GA terms. The statement in Mountaindogs link refers to 24% of calories, not the GA protein on the bag. In a 20% fat food, 24% protein is too little using Dr. Reynolds research.

User avatar
mountaindogs
GDF Junkie
Posts: 2449
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:33 pm
Location: TN

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mountaindogs » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:39 am

His research if you read through it all.. says 24 is a baseline for working dogs but 32% showed little to no soft tissue damage. So yes... you have good better best levels going on in these studies.

User avatar
ezzy333
GDF Junkie
Posts: 16625
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2004 3:14 pm
Location: Dixon IL

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by ezzy333 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:59 am

The link that Mountaindogs refered us to follows pretty much what we concluded also. 24% protein seems to better than 16% in relation to soft tissue damage but nothing was even mentioned about a need to go higher than the 24%. Plus one of the major concerns is getting the glycogen levels restored after intense exercise which is a function of carbhydrates. Carbs tend to feed the white muscle fibers that are used in short quick bursts of activity such as quick turns or having to jump while fat is the source of energy that the red muscle fibers use to function in longer steady exercise. The protein is only used efficiently as a repair or growth kit so is most important for young growing individuals and also after periods of exercise and not prior to exercise. And the research shows that 24% is very adequate for doing the job, especially if it is well balanced in all of the essential amino acids.

And remember none of our dogs need or use the kind of diet needed for dogs working long hours in the extreme cold that the sled dog works and sleeps in.

Ezzy
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=144
http://www.perfectpedigrees.com/4genview.php?id=207

It's not how many breaths you have taken but how many times it has been taken away!

Has anyone noticed common sense isn't very common anymore.

User avatar
Hondo
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 1:37 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by Hondo » Sun Jul 15, 2012 12:55 pm

So if I'm correct in my understanding the article states that our dogs are considered "intermediate" because the activity levels do not reach that of the highest energy demanding canine athlete, the sled dog.

Thus, our hunting/field trialing dogs would do absolutely fantastic and reach their nutritional athletic potential because they would be getting all the protein, fats, and carbohydrates that their bodies would need to maintain their peak performance.

So if we feed our dogs a food with a guaranteed analysis of 24/20 we would be providing all that are dogs need to be the best that they can be nutrition wise. They would not be lacking for more protein, fat, and/or carbohydrates. Thus, the 6% more protein in 30/20 is wasted because our dogs never attain the activity level actually required to utilize that extra protein. They get all they will ever need at 24%.

-Hondo

User avatar
mcbosco
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3577
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Monmouth County NJ

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mcbosco » Sun Jul 15, 2012 2:18 pm

I don't read the article that way because of the reference to 24% of calories. He is not saying a food with 24/20% GA protein is baseline sufficient. I work the math being 28-29% GA protein. Which is consistent with his other statement:

"Clearly, working dogs perform better with premium quality food containing
20-30 percent fat and 27-35 percent protein."


In a 24/20 GA, the calories from protein are about 20%.

User avatar
Hondo
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 1:37 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by Hondo » Sun Jul 15, 2012 2:38 pm

mcbosco wrote:I don't read the article that way because of the reference to 24% of calories. He is not saying a food with 24% GA protein is baseline sufficient. I work the math being 28-29% protein. Which is consistent with his other statement:

"Clearly, working dogs perform better with premium quality food containing
20-30 percent fat and 27-35 percent protein."


In a 24/20 GA, the calories from protein are about 20%.
Thanks for clarifying mcbosco.

So the baseline would be 28/20 guaranteed analysis feed.

Thus, based on the article and your clarification. If you want to keep your dog in top nutritional condition a 30/20 would for all intents and purposes be ideal.

I guess this will always be a balancing act. Since our dogs' activity levels are what really dictate their nutritional needs. If my dog never reaches activity levels that require a 30/20 then the 26/19 I feed her is sufficient for her needs. However, how do I determine when she would need a more potent feed and need to be bumped up to a 30/20?

-Hondo

User avatar
mcbosco
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3577
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Monmouth County NJ

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mcbosco » Sun Jul 15, 2012 4:01 pm

Thanks for clarifying mcbosco.

So the baseline would be 28/20 guaranteed analysis feed.

Thus, based on the article and your clarification. If you want to keep your dog in top nutritional condition a 30/20 would for all intents and purposes be ideal.

I guess this will always be a balancing act. Since our dogs' activity levels are what really dictate their nutritional needs. If my dog never reaches activity levels that require a 30/20 then the 26/19 I feed her is sufficient for her needs. However, how do I determine when she would need a more potent feed and need to be bumped up to a 30/20?

-Hondo
Here is something from Martin Coffman:

"For field trial and hunting dogs, there are benefits to higher levels of dietary protein. In studies published by the Iams Company, four groups of dogs were put through a rigorous training protocol similar to what we use in conditioning bird dogs. The groups were fed diets that were exactly the same except in protein levels. The diets contained 16, 24, 32 and 40 percent dietary protein levels as fed respectively.

Of the dogs fed the 16 percent protein food, none completed the training period without having at least one muscle or tendon injury. Two of the dogs fed the 24 percent protein food had injuries. But, importantly, none of the dogs fed a diet containing 32 or 40 percent dietary protein had an injury during training.

In addition, as the dietary protein levels increased, blood plasma volume also increased, as did the red blood cell mass. Hence the recommendation that athletic performance-type dogs be fed a diet with 30 percent dietary protein levels on an “as fed” basis. (That means what the Guaranteed Analysis says on the bag.)"


So there are other reasons to uses a higher protein food.

User avatar
bossman
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 755
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 9:14 pm
Location: McKinney, Tx

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by bossman » Sun Jul 15, 2012 4:35 pm

This has been some really good stuff. As many of us have commented on other threads, I feed 30/20 all year. Just less in the "off season" ( and my pedigree finally worked)

User avatar
SCT
Rank: 5X Champion
Posts: 858
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:43 pm
Location: Utah

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by SCT » Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:04 pm

I just switched to Inukshuk 32/32. I will use it year round, but watch for weight gain during the off season. I'll just cut portions back if my pointers show signs of getting fat.

dr tim
Rank: Senior Hunter
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:50 pm
Location: marquette, michigan

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by dr tim » Mon Jul 16, 2012 7:29 am

Rob Downey of Annamaet and David Kronfeld of Penn did studies with beagles displaying 26% protein was the lowest they could go and not have any injuries. This was done 20 years ago or so and has been one of the standards in the sporting dog diet development curves. Reynolds followed this idea in his studies and they have been implemented by many companies as the lowest acceptable protein levels that would maintain muscle and promote growth of said muscles when the muscles are stressed or taken past their routine level of training. You can't build muscle without going past the regular thresholds of activity or training.

Carbs are needed very little by the dog. To replace glycogen you can bring simple sugars into their stomachs within 30-60 minutes post exercise for maximum replenishment or you haveo wait for the dog to replace this glycogen by the typical mechanisms which can take up to 3 days or longer under perfect conditions. Dr. Mike Davis of Oklahoma has showed this very well in recent studies on glycogen usage on the dog. Miss the opportunity and the glycogen doens't replenish quickly. This is the typical cause of poor showings at events on day 2.

Now, some breeds do have remarkable recovery traits on their own but still are sucesptible to poor glycogen replenishment issues like other dogs. The coursing dogs are examples of this. Are there other types of hunting dogs that have similar recovery abilities like these coursing dogs? I bet there are.

What does it all mean? Maybe scientific research does come across ideas that do work when implemented. Or just that it is darn amazing how a dog operates regardless of what is given them to work with.

nanney1
Rank: Champion
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:42 am

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by nanney1 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:03 pm

26% guaranteed analysis on the bag or 26% as fed? If as fed, then a 24/20 food should meet that requirement.

User avatar
mcbosco
GDF Junkie
Posts: 3577
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 6:22 pm
Location: Monmouth County NJ

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by mcbosco » Mon Jul 16, 2012 12:43 pm

GA and 'as fed" are the same. The 26% refers to what is on the bag, or GA and 'as fed'.

I think you are thinking of "dry matter basis".

nanney1
Rank: Champion
Posts: 360
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:42 am

Re: Why the 6% difference?

Post by nanney1 » Mon Jul 16, 2012 1:05 pm

mcbosco wrote:GA and 'as fed" are the same. The 26% refers to what is on the bag, or GA and 'as fed'.

I think you are thinking of "dry matter basis".
O.K., Thanks for clearing that up.

Post Reply