Evaluation of Torula yeast as a protein source in extruded feline diets

The objective of this work was to evaluate the use of a Torula yeast (TY) on diet processing, palatability, and total tract nutrient digestibility in extruded feline diets. Four dietary treatments were compared, differing by protein source: TY, pea protein concentrate (PP), soybean meal (SM), and chicken meal (CM). Diets were produced using a single-screw extruder under similar processing conditions. Palatability assessment was conducted as a split plate design where both first choice and intake ratio (IR) were determined. Apparent total tract digestibility (ATTD) of nutrients was estimated using Titanium dioxide as an indigestible marker. During diet production, specific mechanical energy of TY and SM (average of 187 kJ/kg) was greater (P < 0.05) than for PP (138 kJ/kg); however, CM was similar to all treatments (167 kJ/kg). Kibble diameter, piece volume, and sectional expansion ratio were greatest for TY (P < 0.05). Additionally, both bulk and piece density were lowest (P < 0.05) for TY. Kibble hardness was lower for TY and SM (P < 0.05; average of 2.10 Newtons) compared to CM and PP (average of 2.90 Newtons). During the palatability trial, TY was chosen first a greater number of times than CM (P < 0.05; 36 vs. 4, respectively), but differences were not found between TY and PP (25 vs. 15, respectively) or TY and SM (24 vs. 16, respectively). Cats had a greater IR (P < 0.05) of TY compared to CM and PP (0.88 and 0.73, respectively). However, there was no difference in preference between TY and SM. ATTD of dry matter (DM) and organic matter (OM) was greater (P < 0.05) for CM (87.43% and 91.34%, respectively) than other treatments. Both DM and OM ATTD of TY were similar (P < 0.05) to PP and SM (average of 86.20% and average of 89.76%, respectively). Ash ATTD was greater (P < 0.05) for cats fed TY and SM (average of 37.42%), intermediate for PP (32.79%), and lowest for CM (23.97%). Crude protein (CP) ATTD of TY was similar to all other treatments (average of 89.97%), but fat ATTD was lower (P < 0.05; 92.52%) than other treatments (93.76% to 94.82%). Gross energy ATTD was greater (P < 0.05) for CM than TY (90.97% vs. 90.18%, respectively); however, TY was similar to PP and SM (average of 90.22%). Total dietary fiber ATTD was similar between TY and CM (average of 66.20%) and greater (P < 0.05) than PP and SM (average of 58.70%). The TY used in this study facilitated diet formation, increased diet preference, and was highly digestible when fed to cats.