Review tracks shift toward bioactive compounds in pet food

Version 2

A new review in Veterinary Research Communications suggests the pet food sector is entering a more evidence-focused phase, shifting from the broad language of “functional ingredients” toward the narrower, more mechanistic concept of bioactive compounds. The authors frame this as an effort to bring companion animal nutrition closer to the terminology used in human nutrition, and to better connect ingredients in commercial pet foods with defined biologic activity and disease-risk reduction. A related review in Animals reinforces that trend, especially for plant-derived ingredients such as polyphenols, plant extracts, and microalgae that are increasingly positioned as health-supporting additions in dog and cat diets. (petfoodindustry.com)

That shift has been building for years. Functional positioning in pet food has expanded alongside premiumization and pet parent demand for diets tied to gut health, skin and coat support, immune resilience, cognition, and healthy aging. Industry coverage and literature reviews have described growing use of probiotics, prebiotics, fibers, oils, antioxidants, and phytogenic ingredients, while WSAVA has kept the profession’s focus on nutritional adequacy, individualized assessment, and evidence-based recommendations rather than marketing language alone. (petfoodindustry.com)

The Guo review appears to center on one of the field’s biggest unresolved issues: terminology. In practice, “functional ingredient,” “nutraceutical,” “supplement,” and “bioactive” are often used loosely or interchangeably in the pet sector. Clarifying those categories could help veterinarians, formulators, and regulators distinguish between ingredients that provide essential nutrition, ingredients added for a claimed physiologic benefit, and compounds with emerging but still limited clinical evidence. That distinction matters because the same ingredient class may have very different evidentiary support depending on species, dose, delivery format, and whether it is fed in a complete diet, a topper, or a supplement. (wsava.org)

The companion review in Animals highlights how broad the plant-derived category has become. According to the review summary, polyphenols and plant extracts are associated with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and microbiome-modulating effects, while microalgae and omega-3 sources are discussed for lipid metabolism, cardiovascular support, and skin health. Other recent reviews in this area similarly describe plant extracts and related compounds as potential tools for gut health, redox balance, and adjunctive nutritional support. But those same sources also point to a recurring limitation: much of the evidence remains preclinical, short-term, ingredient-specific, or based on surrogate markers rather than hard clinical outcomes in veterinary patients. (mdpi.com)

Regulatory reality is another important part of the story. Interest in novel functional compounds can move faster than regulatory acceptance. FDA stated in an April 7, 2025 warning letter that it is not aware of an applicable exception that would allow CBD to be used as an ingredient in animal food, and products marketed as CBD dog and cat treats were deemed adulterated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. At the same time, FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine opened a January 2025 request for information on cannabis-derived products in veterinary medicine, signaling continued agency interest in safety signals and veterinary experience, even as formal approval remains absent. Separately, AAFCO approved a new scientific review pathway through Kansas State University Olathe for animal food ingredients in January 2025, which could shape how future functional ingredients reach the market. (fda.gov)

Expert reaction in the strict quote-driven sense was limited in the publicly indexed material tied directly to these two reviews, but the broader industry conversation is consistent: science has to catch up with claims. Coverage in Petfood Industry has repeatedly emphasized that functional positioning is attractive to pet parents, yet substantiation, formulation controls, and feeding-trial-quality evidence remain central if those products are going to earn trust from veterinarians. Recent reporting on therapeutic gastrointestinal diets also shows why the distinction matters: when functional ingredients are studied in a defined formulation, researchers can measure effects on digestibility, fecal metabolites, and microbiome shifts, but even then, authors often caution that findings in healthy animals may not translate directly to clinical patients. (petfoodindustry.com)

Why it matters: For veterinary teams, these reviews are less about a single breakthrough ingredient and more about a framework for evaluating a fast-growing category. As pet parents bring in diets and supplements marketed for immunity, inflammation, cognition, skin, mobility, or microbiome health, veterinarians are increasingly asked to separate plausible nutrition support from overstated claims. A more standardized vocabulary around bioactive compounds could help clinicians ask better questions: Is the ingredient legally permitted in animal food, stable in the finished product, present at an effective dose, supported in the target species, and tied to clinically relevant outcomes rather than biomarker changes alone? That’s especially important in cats, in patients with chronic disease, and in elimination-diet or adverse food reaction cases where ingredient complexity can work against clinical goals. (wsava.org)

What to watch: The next phase will likely center on better-controlled canine and feline trials, more precise claim substantiation, and continued regulatory sorting of which emerging compounds belong in complete diets, complementary feeds, or supplements, and which still fall outside accepted animal food use. (petfoodindustry.com)