The nowadays overused, but nonetheless still appropriate, adage that “we are what we eat” is as relevant to animal well-being as it is to humans. Food, with which we should align water, is way more than the sum of its parts. Food builds bodies, nourishes form and maintains immunity, among many other things. It also has a strong feel-good factor that traverses physical, mental and behavioural health. It has long been known that searching for, finding and consuming food presents a holistic challenge and stimulation within evolved strategies for both body and mind, not least the rush of rewarding neurotransmitters such as dopamine. Make no mistake, the right foodstuff can make all the difference to the health and welfare of any animal.
Being food wise
Foodwise, what goes in should only come out when its useful components have been properly absorbed, although many animals, including lizards, birds and mammals, engage in opportunistic coprophagia – which can boost gut microbiota or “recycle” residual protein when needs must (waste not, want not!). Relatedly, the significance both of macronutrients, from fat to fibre, and of micronutrients, from electrolytes in water to various metals, is now well known and well used in the biological and veterinary communities. A deficiency of pretty much any normal nutrient will sooner or later likely manifest in some form of morbidity. Getting ahead of the nutrition game is far easier than playing catch-up by way of additives and injections.
Omnivores, omnivores and omnivores
Yet how many animal keepers and food manufacturers intentionally factor in the possible importance of such nutritional diversity around non-target, accidentally eaten, natural foods?
Nearly all animals are specifically categorised as omnivores, carnivores or herbivores, but it’s not that simple. Sure, classifications are traditionally essential to understanding dietary habits and needs. But not so fast! Carnivores, probably exemplified by snakes, consume whatever their prey consumed – so a preyed-on rabbit may have a belly full of veg. Conversely, herbivores, such as bovids, almost certainly scoop up large volumes of invertebrates despite targeting only the grassy and leafy fodder beneath their feet. Basically, most or all animals are incidental omnivores, like it or not. Given that incidental omnivorism has been the natural way throughout evolutionary history, the potential benefits of such secondary nutritional intake should not be undervalued. Yet how many animal keepers and food manufacturers intentionally factor in the possible importance of such nutritional diversity around non-target, accidentally eaten, natural foods? Probably very few.
Supplements are no supplement for the real thing
Nutrition science has become bloated with studies; indeed, over 16,000 peer-reviewed research and review articles are listed for the past 12 months alone, which is a lot for most people to digest! Undoubtedly, the ever-growing diversity and precision of commercially prepared supplements has emerged along with the greater scientific advances in dietary needs. A quick search of just one page on Google finds over 300 different supplements by at least 10 different producers. That is not necessarily a bad thing in itself, because quite reasonably, many animals across all classes may at some point, or even regularly, experience one or another food deficiency and thus a requirement for such products. But deep down, is that really a good thing? No matter how technically meritorious, the use of any processed, potted or powdered supplement marks a failure to provide the right type of nutrition. Were animals given natural foodstuffs in all the right amounts, then one should hit the spots and not the pots.
Recipes for success or failure?
Complicating matters further is the issue that one cannot simply rely on what a captive animal apparently wants to eat. Too often when pets are left to their own dietary decision making, labradors go obese, cat teeth go bad and tortoises die. Humans and other animals will, for example, target outrageously sugary foods, and frequently to their long-term detriment. The likely biological basis of such bad behaviour is the good taste and high calorific value. Tempting tastes and concentrated calories often become cravings, and likely arise because, in the wild, nature’s offerings – such as the fallen fruits of autumn – dish out temporary bonanzas allowing for the convenient storage of glycogen and fat. However, under human control the sugar rush is on tap, on all supermarket shelves, on the internet, all day. But the brain doesn’t know that, and occasional essentials become available as excesses.
Final thoughts
Despite the ongoing plethora of papers, relatively little is truly known regarding the genuine dietary habits of most species kept in captivity
So, observing what captive animals or people may prefer doesn’t always serve well. What’s the answer? Obviously, captive animal diets should be significantly based on natural habits. Easily said, but again, how often does that happen? Worse, despite the ongoing plethora of papers, relatively little is truly known regarding the genuine dietary habits of most species kept in captivity. That does rather beg the question: why are there so many supplements when the true nutritional needs aren’t even fully understood? And therein lies the real food for thought.
