Gaps and Controversies in Feline Food Palatability

Feline food palatability is fundamental to ensure nutritional intake and the commercial success of pet foods, yet the field has several gaps, unresolved contradictions, and methodological inconsistencies. A literature search identified 141 relevant publications. Critical evaluation of this body of work revealed four recurring areas of tension: the inconsistent definition of palatability, where the same term evaluates different constructs; contradictory behavioral indicators, where the same behaviors (e.g., nose-licking) are variably interpreted as positive or negative across studies; methodological fragmentation arising from overarching test selection, study design implementation, and inconsistent or selective reporting; and the disconnect between owners’ perception of palatability and objectively measured feline responses. This critical narrative review discusses the origins of these inconsistencies, their implications for cross-study comparison, and their combined effect on the reliability of existing evidence. Resolving these contradictions may benefit from a proposed integrative framework for defining palatability, a standardized ethogram for behavioral indicators, and a decision framework for selecting assessment methodologies. These approaches could improve the comparability and reliability of future studies, but their effectiveness requires validation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Animals
Published
2026-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ani16172721
Primary Topic
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gaps and Controversies in Feline Food Palatability

Aman Paul, Sabine Danthine, Yolandi van der Vyver, Christophe Blecker
Animals
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
article

Gaps and Controversies in Feline Food Palatability

Aman Paul, Sabine Danthine, Yolandi van der Vyver, Christophe Blecker
article en

Abstract

Feline food palatability is fundamental to ensure nutritional intake and the commercial success of pet foods, yet the field has several gaps, unresolved contradictions, and methodological inconsistencies. A literature search identified 141 relevant publications. Critical evaluation of this body of work revealed four recurring areas of tension: the inconsistent definition of palatability, where the same term evaluates different constructs; contradictory behavioral indicators, where the same behaviors (e.g., nose-licking) are variably interpreted as positive or negative across studies; methodological fragmentation arising from overarching test selection, study design implementation, and inconsistent or selective reporting; and the disconnect between owners’ perception of palatability and objectively measured feline responses. This critical narrative review discusses the origins of these inconsistencies, their implications for cross-study comparison, and their combined effect on the reliability of existing evidence. Resolving these contradictions may benefit from a proposed integrative framework for defining palatability, a standardized ethogram for behavioral indicators, and a decision framework for selecting assessment methodologies. These approaches could improve the comparability and reliability of future studies, but their effectiveness requires validation.

AnimalsVol. 16(17)
University of Liège (BE), Gembloux Agro-Bio Tech (BE), International Institute of Social History (NL)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Human-Animal Interaction Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.