Softening dry food with water is believed to be more beneficial to the intestinal health and nutrients absorption of dogs by some owners, but there appears to be little scientific basis for this belief. Thus, this study aimed to compare feeding dry food (DF) and water-softened dry food (SDF) on stress response, intestinal microbiome, and metabolic profile in dogs. Twenty healthy 5-month-old beagle dogs were selected and divided into two groups according to their gender and body weight using a completely randomized block design. Both groups were fed the same basal diet, with one group fed DF and the other fed SDF. The trial lasted for 21 days. The apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of nutrients, inflammatory cytokines, stress hormones, heat shock protein-70 (HSP-70), fecal microbiota, short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), branch-chain fatty acids (BCFAs), and metabolomics were measured. Results showed that there was no significant difference in body weight, ATTD, and SCFAs between the DF and SDF groups (p > 0.05), whereas feeding with SDF caused a significant increase in serum cortisol level (p < 0.05) and tended to have higher interleukin-2 (p = 0.062) and HSP-70 (p = 0.097) levels. Fecal 16S rRNA gene sequencing found that the SDF group had higher alpha diversity indices (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the SDF group had higher levels of Streptococcus, Enterococcus, and Escherichia_Shigella, and lower levels of Faecalibacterium (p < 0.05). Serum and fecal metabolomics further showed that feeding with SDF significantly influenced the purine metabolism, riboflavin metabolism, and arginine and proline metabolism (p < 0.05). Overall, feeding with SDF caused higher cortisol level and generated effects of higher intestinal microbial diversity in dogs, but it caused an increase in some pathogenic bacteria, which may result in intestinal microbiome disturbance and metabolic disorder in dogs. In conclusion, feeding with SDF did not provide digestive benefits but caused some stress and posed a potential threat to the intestinal health of dogs. Thus, SDF is not recommended in the feeding of dogs.

Frozen meat is an important source of protein in pet food, and has attracted much attention in recent years. In this study, we compared the effect of meat meal (MM), frozen meat (FM), and hydrolyzed frozen meat (HFM) as ingredients in extruded pet food on its palatability and apparent digestibility, as well as its effects on the immune response, fecal microbiota, and metabolome of British shorthair cats. A total of 24 British shorthair cats were allocated to the MM, FM, and HFM groups according to body weight and gender. The palatability test lasted 4 days and the feeding test lasted 45 days. The results showed that the FM and HFM diets had better palatability than the MM diet (p < 0.05) and significantly improved dry matter and crude protein digestibility (p < 0.05). The serum IL-10 level was significantly higher in the HFM group compared to the MM and FM groups (p < 0.05). The serum IgM levels were also found to be significantly higher in the FM group compared to the MM and HFM groups (p < 0.05). The blood urea nitrogen/creatinine ratio was significantly lower in the HFM and FM groups than in the MM group (p < 0.05). Cats fed HFM had a higher abundance of fecal Actinobacteria and Bifidobacterium and a lower content of Bacteroidota (p < 0.05). Furthermore, serum metabolomics analysis revealed that the tryptophan (Trp) metabolism and bile acid metabolism were affected by HFM. Overall, FM and HFM were better for the cat’s health than meat meal, but they also have some potential risks.