# High quality or Low quality dog food?



## We Love Mouse

I usually include dog kibble into my homemade mix for my mice, but don't really think about brands and such. I know high quality dog food usually contains better quality ingredient, less or no corn ,no food colourings but more expensive and has high meat content(=protein might be too high) while low quality ones are cheaper and doesn't contain as much meat. However the ingredient is low quality and usually contain food colourings, which I'm not sure if it would effect the mice in long term or not. So which one would be more suitable?


----------



## Fantasia Mousery

For mice, low quality dog food is most suitable. If you use high quality, you need to give them only very, very little of it. The high protein levels in high quality dog food is too much. Yes, they need protein, but not that much.
Low quality dog food is high on grains and such, which is also good for the mice.


----------



## sys15

my staple food has always been the lowest protein, lowest fat, highest grain dog food i can find locally.

it's been getting harder recently as most manufacturers seem to be producing smaller sized kibbles than they did 5-10 years ago. so now, i have to also factor in one with kibble large enough to not immediately fall through the bars.


----------



## We Love Mouse

Thank you, so, low quality one then.

@sys15 - same here with the dog food size. Even though I bought the kibble for large dog, the size is still around 1.5-2cm. across, 0.5 cm thickness. With that size it *always* fall out of the wire basket I made (1/2" mesh, 1/4" is too small for them to eat from easily) to stop them kicking the food around and pee on it.


----------



## Stina

While I agree "low quality" dog food is the better option....my opinion of high quality dog food includes ONLY grain free....if its not grain free, its not something I would ever feed to my dogs, and is such low quality in my opinion. That said, I will not feed super cheap craptacular dog food to my rodents as they tend to include ingredients known to be harmful to rodents (such as ethoxyquin and very high levels of corn and soy...they are not necessarily inherently bad as ingredients..but the dog foods that include them will usually be made with mostly one or both and corn can have toxins from contamination and soy can increase some cancer risks in large quanities). For my rodents I use only foods that are natural and corn, wheat, and soy free. I get foods that are either on sale or clearance. If you are using dog food as part of a mix including something with lower protein, it will not add too much protein. I feed my rodents a mix of Harlan Teklad/Native Earth lab blocks (18% protein) and dog food...the dog food is usually 20-26% protein and I do not feel it is too much and have never had any problems.


----------



## moustress

Corn, free, wheat free and soy free are good places to start. Avoid anything with tomato pomace, as that's not good for meeces. I nrver mix the kibble with the regular stuff, but dole it out carefully, with different amounts and frequency depending on the age, breeding status, and number of babies being nursed. I provide a lump of kibble per night to breding animals for a few days before they are put together, I think it may help to produce better eggs and 'swimmers', every day through obvious pregnancy, twice a day for nursing mothers, a little more if I allow them to keep more than six babies. I also give it to young meeces up through about four or five weeks, crumbling it when they are quite small. Little mousies will start nosing it and then wating it about the time their eyes open. I think the corn, wheat and soy free are expecially good for that purpose.

The stuff I use is based on lamb and rice, both ingredients of which are less likely to cause any health problems. Beef and pork are not good, and poultry by products are disgusting! Pheh! I don';t buy the most expensive stuff on the shelf, but I read an awful lot of labels before I choose Professional for Puppies. I wouldn't give my meeces anything that I wouldn't eat my self, in a pinch. That includes the old oatmeal found in the back of the cupboard with the little crawlie 'protein bonuses' in it; yumy good, no doubt!. If were hungry, I'd surely eat it after rinsing to drown the bugs, and skim them off.


----------



## We Love Mouse

Most dog food here is full of corn,soy and by-products, that's the problem. Even most of the expensive ones (more than 300baht or $10 per kg.) here still have corn and soy, at least on the third or forth ingredient. Cheap ones are basically a mixture of corn, wheat, soy and by products. The ones that doesn't contain those stuff usually haven't got any grains in it at all. 
The brand that I feed my dogs (TOTW) doesn't contain any grains, but has high protein level for mice(25%). Would that be better (in tiny quantities in the mix) than using cheap ones? My mix is mainly oats with a mixture of millet, canary seed, flaxseed(small amount), sunflower seed(small amount), green peas(dried ones in my hamster food), rabbit feed, and other things I don't know the name in English.

ps. I recently lost my first mice (2 years old) from a large tumor in his abdomen, it is heartbreaking. I don't want this to happen again with my other mice.


----------



## Stina

Yeah, Taste of the Wild would be fine  I would definitely use it over the foods loaded with corn, wheat, soy, and all kinds of other random crap. 25% protein is fine btw....if that was their entire diet it would be be high....but consider that you are mixing it with MUCH lower protein items in the rest of the mix (I'm pretty sure all, or nearly all of those additions are less than 15% protein...which is actually too low for breeding mice (though may be ok for mature adult maintainance). Even if you mixed your mix with the TOTW 50/50 you'd still be under 20% protein.


----------



## sys15

We Love Mouse said:


> the expensive ones (more than 300baht or $10 per kg.)


good lord!


----------



## We Love Mouse

Stina said:


> Yeah, Taste of the Wild would be fine  I would definitely use it over the foods loaded with corn, wheat, soy, and all kinds of other random crap. 25% protein is fine btw....if that was their entire diet it would be be high....but consider that you are mixing it with MUCH lower protein items in the rest of the mix (I'm pretty sure all, or nearly all of those additions are less than 15% protein...which is actually too low for breeding mice (though may be ok for mature adult maintainance). Even if you mixed your mix with the TOTW 50/50 you'd still be under 20% protein.


I haven't think about the protein level in grains until you mention it. I usually add no more than 30% dog food into my mix anyway, so that wouldn't be a problem. Let see if the mice will going to eat it or not.



sys15 said:


> We Love Mouse said:
> 
> 
> 
> the expensive ones (more than 300baht or $10 per kg.)
> 
> 
> 
> good lord!
Click to expand...

I know right! Those import fees and stuff pretty much double the price of dog food here. Most of the locally made ones are crappy. too bad.


----------



## moustress

Too much protein can make the mousie sick. It's important to think about just how much is the right amount for each different situation. I didn't slwwp last night, so I'm a Little Fuzzy. *bleh*


----------



## Stina

What do you consider "too much" protein?...some say 20% is too much...which I think is completely wrong. I've only ever heard of rare instances of 20-25% protein diets supposedly causing skin and coat problems in poorly bred mice...but never any other actual problems. Now that doesn't mean I'd go and feed mice a 30%+ protein diet....but mice are omnivores...along with grains they eat a lot of insects and such in the wild...their diet isn't naturally super low protein. Again, pregnant/nursing mice generally REQUIRE an absolute minimum of 18% protein to raise litters most successfully....and many lines require more. All of my mice recieve a diet that is generally probably between 20 and 22% protein...I use a mix of Harlan Teklad/Native Earth 2018 lab block (18% protein) and dog food that is generally 26% protein or so average and mix it either 2:1 or 1:1 (block to dog food...depending on the protein in the dog food) and that is what ALL of my rodents (mice/rats/ASF's/pygmy mice) are fed. I have never noticed any sort of health issues in my animals that I feel could be related to this diet.


----------



## sys15

Stina said:


> pregnant/nursing mice generally REQUIRE an absolute minimum of 18% protein to raise litters most successfully....and many lines require more.


in general i agree with you that higher protein levels do no harm, and are good for reproductive females; however i'll take issue with the absolutism of this statement. i, and i imagine many others, have bred mice on diets lower than 18% protein, and both the females and the offspring did fine. my mother in law has a couple of cages that breed like rabbits, and their diet is largely stale tortillas.

domestic mice can thrive on a wide variety of diets.


----------



## Stina

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4758&page=87

Some may breed on a lower protein diet...but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't be more successful (mom's stay healthier and raise babies that will be healthier long term and reach their full potential) on a higher protein diet. The link above is to a page in "Nutrient Requirements of Lab Animals" that includes a table detailing the protein requirements of gestating/lactating does. "Take issue" if you wish....but those are requirements based on scientific research. Needs will vary some from line to line, but generally, at least 20% is what's required for optimal health of mom and babies.


----------



## sys15

as i said, i don't disagree with the statement that reproductive females should get higher %s of protein. i disagree with the absolutism. it is not a REQUIREMENT, nor is it an absolute minimum.


----------



## Stina

A. I didn't say it was a requirement to produce offspring. I said it was a requirement the ideal health of the animals involved. I would love to see _any_ evidence to the contrary...but I know that you cannot provide it (unless you've taken a large number of animals from the same line and put some on a higher protein diet, and some on a lower protein diet, that are otherwise very similar diets).

B. If you take issue with the statement, take issue with the scientists who've done the work to prove it...not with me. I am only sharing what I have learned through reading and my own experience. Scientists that have studied it say it is a requirement....I can also say from my own experience that when I've had breeding does on higher than 20% protein diets they've done better than when they were on a lower protein diet.

C. Fine, is not necessarily optimal.


----------



## Stina

I will also add...that the life stage with the highest nutritional requirements, will have nutritional requirements that will work for all life stages...its just that there are life stages that can thrive in optimal health with slightly lower nutritional requirements.

...oh and I should have said 18% minimum protein for gestating/lactating does, not 20%....I was looking at the wrong thing.


----------



## sys15

Stina said:


> A. I didn't say it was a requirement to produce offspring. I said it was a requirement the ideal health of the animals involved. I would love to see _any_ evidence to the contrary...but I know that you cannot provide it (unless you've taken a large number of animals from the same line and put some on a higher protein diet, and some on a lower protein diet, that are otherwise very similar diets).
> 
> B. If you take issue with the statement, take issue with the scientists who've done the work to prove it...not with me. I am only sharing what I have learned through reading and my own experience. Scientists that have studied it say it is a requirement....I can also say from my own experience that when I've had breeding does on higher than 20% protein diets they've done better than when they were on a lower protein diet.
> 
> C. Fine, is not necessarily optimal.


a. ideal health is an impossible standard. you can measure relative performance, it is almost impossible to measure absolutes. neither the link you provided, nor any of the other literature i've seen attempts to state that any given diet is ideal. they simply report performance of a given strain on a given diet.

b. without having read all of the papers cited, i cannot help but think you are misreading, or misrepresenting those works. in the table you shared, as well as other citations i've seen, there is no language stating that those protein levels are required for successful reproduction. for the third time in as many posts, i am by no means disputing that higher %s are conducive to better reproductive success, and better post parturient condition. it has also been my experience that breeding mice do very well on diets of over 20% protein.

c. indeed. but requirements are always required, and absolute minimums are always absolute.


----------



## Stina

"Both casein-based purified and natural-ingredient diets have been used in studies of the protein requirement for reproduction and lactation. In a study limited to the first gestation/lactation, a diet containing 16.7 percent casein resulted in the lowest age at first estrus (30.5 days versus 36.7 days) and largest litter size (7.5 versus 7.1), while a diet containing 20 percent casein was needed to support lactation, as demonstrated by the weight of the dam and litter at 21 days in Swiss-STM mice (Goettsch, 1960) (Table 3-5). Natural-ingredient diets varying in composition but containing 18 to 24 percent crude protein have been used to evaluate the protein requirement for mice over 6- to 9-month periods (Bruce and Parkes, 1949; Hoag and Dickie, 1962) or over four to seven litters for five strains [BALB/cAnN, C3H/HeN, C57BL/6N, N:NIH(S), and DBA/2N] (Knapka et al., 1974, 1977). Although strain differences were observed, a natural-ingredient diet containing 18 percent crude protein supported litter sizes of six to seven and a weaning percentage of 80 to 85 percent over four to five litters (Knapka et al. 1974, 1977). Thus natural-ingredient diets containing 18 percent crude protein from a mixture of animal and plant proteins will meet the protein needs of gestating/lactating mice through several pregnancies."
I'm not misinterpreting anything....a large part of my education was learning how to read and interpret scientific documents. They would not be stating it as a requirement, if they didnt' find it to be a requirement. From this paragraph, it can be infered that at least 18% protein is required for does to maintain weight and successfully raise multiple moderately sized litters. The book is extensive and peer reviewed..it is a very legitimate piece of scientific literature....I did not read every study myself as that is partially the point of peer reviewed material...it has already been gone over with a fine toothed comb by multiple not involved in the actually research (and as such, theoretically not biased). At any rate...it is stated as a requrement for a reason...which is based on something absolute..in this case it looks like that is at least partially the does weight and the percentage of offspring surviving to weaning over a number of litters in multiple lines of mice.


----------



## sys15

stina, they don't.

other than stating that they are evaluating protein requirements (which admittedly, is also a bit of a misuse of the word, and if you find out what message board the authors post on, i'll go there and harass them instead of you), there is nothing there to suggest that 18% is the minimum level of protein required to sustain females over multiple successful litters. the study that evaluates crude protein from nat. sources didn't even evaluate a diet at lower than 18%. how could you possibly infer that such a diet did not meet min. reqs when one wasn't tested? the authors summarizing the paper certainly don't state that in the section quoted:

"natural-ingredient diets containing 18 percent crude protein from a mixture of animal and plant proteins will meet the protein needs of gestating/lactating mice through several pregnancies".

that says 18% was sufficient protein. in no way does it state than it was the minimum necessary.

there was just one study that appears to have evaluated a diet with less than 18% protein. there isn't enough information presented to evaluate what the study was or what it found. what is presented is simply that swiss websters had larger litters (than what is not clearly given, though it perhaps can be assumed that the comparison is to the higher % diet, and achieved reproductive maturity more rapidly on a 16.7 % casein diet, but that mice needed a higher % diet during lactation (data not given to show the difference in performance).

incidentally, it also states that pure casein is equal to a considerably lower % crude protein. and there's this quote:

"Mouse reproduction also was affected by protein × fat interactions. Knapka and co-workers (1977) suggested that optimal crude protein and crude fat concentrations should be lower than 18 percent and 10 to 11 percent, respectively."

anyways, i'm going to sleep. good night, stina. we can continue the discussion tomorrow, if you like.


----------

