From literature review to feeding study to regulatory dossier — research for pet food, supplement and ingredient companies, designed to support real claims in real markets.
Claims, new ingredients and regulatory submissions all need evidence. That evidence can come from published literature, laboratory studies, feeding trials or a combination — and the design of each study decides whether its results will hold up with regulators, retailers and pet owners.
We design and run research for pet food, supplement and ingredient companies, from evidence reviews to feeding studies and regulatory dossiers. Clients own their study data, publication is by mutual agreement with client authorship, and GLP studies are delivered through qualified partner facilities.
Start your project with Guires PNLProve your ingredient works in a real pet product and build the data regulators ask for.
Substantiate the claims on your pack before a competitor or regulator asks.
Credible evidence on a startup budget, focused on the claims that matter most.
An applied partner for pet nutrition research.
Independent technical due diligence on pet nutrition companies and ingredients.
Start with what is already known, generate the data you need, then turn it into documents that persuade and comply.
Know what is already proven before you spend on studies.
Generate new data in the target species.
Turn data into documents that persuade and comply.
The minimum evidence for common claims, and the rules to check in each market.
| Claim you want to make | Minimum evidence | Rules to check |
|---|---|---|
| Palatability (“dogs love it”) | Controlled palatability study against a stated comparator | Wording must match what was tested |
| Digestibility / stool quality | Digestibility study with faecal scoring | — |
| Complete & balanced | Formulation to a nutrient profile, or an AAFCO feeding trial | Wording set by AAFCO or FEDIAF |
| Functional nutrition (joint, skin, gut) | Published evidence for the ingredient and dose, plus a controlled study in the target species where needed | EU: substantiation available before marketing (Reg. 767/2009 Art. 13); UK: robust evidence for health claims (CAP) |
| EU zootechnical feed additive for cats and dogs | Four efficacy studies covering both species | EFSA FEEDAP efficacy guidance (2024) |
| EU sensory (palatability) additive | At least three independent short-term in vivo studies | EFSA FEEDAP efficacy guidance (2024) |
| New ingredient for the US | Safety, intended-use and manufacturing data package | FDA AFIC or GRAS, or AAFCO SRIS review |
| Medical or disease-related claims | Not a pet food claim | Prohibited for feed in the EU; veterinary-medicine route in the UK (VMD) and Australia (APVMA) |
A complete pathway for showing how your ingredient performs in dog and cat products.
What is known, and what is missing, for your ingredient.
Your ingredient in a realistic product.
Product for testing.
Acceptance and shelf behaviour.
Confirm levels and safety.
Effects in the target species.
Methods, results and conclusions.
Structured for EFSA/FSA, FDA or AAFCO routes.
Ingredient, additive and claim routes by market. Last reviewed: September 2026.
| Market | Ingredient and additive route | Claims |
|---|---|---|
| European Union | Feed additives authorised under Reg. (EC) 1831/2003 after EFSA assessment; efficacy guidance updated 2024 (applies from Dec 2024) | Claims objective, verifiable and substantiated before marketing; no disease claims (Reg. 767/2009 Art. 13) |
| United Kingdom | Feed additive dossiers through the FSA regulated-products process; only the 2024 EFSA efficacy guidance accepted from Feb 2026 | Evidence held for objective claims; health claims need robust evidence (CAP Code) |
| United States | New ingredients via FDA AFIC (GFI #294) or GRAS (21 CFR 570); AAFCO SRIS review open since Oct 2025; FDA proposed mandatory GRAS notification in Aug 2026 | Medical and disease-related claims assessed under FDA CPG 690.150 |
| Australia | Pet foods with an obvious dose or defined clinical use need APVMA registration as veterinary chemical products | Claims checked against the pet food / veterinary chemical boundary |
| India | IS 11968:2019 (BIS); DAHD import conditions, including 2026 conditions for pet food containing probiotics | No specific novel-ingredient route identified; we advise case by case |
Peer-reviewed evidence on how pet nutrition research succeeds — and where it goes wrong.
A 2022 meta-analysis of 72 trials found clear evidence for omega-3s in canine and feline osteoarthritis, but “a very marked non-effect” for chondroitin–glucosamine.
Evidence reviews come first, so studies target ingredients and doses that can work.
Probiotic trials in dogs and cats reporting an effect were far more likely to be published (5 of 7) than those that did not (1 of 5).
We encourage reporting every result, positive or negative.
Veterinary trials with pharmaceutical funding reported positive outcomes 56.9% of the time, against 29.1% with no funding stated.
Funding is disclosed and outcomes are pre-specified, so sponsored research stays credible.
Only 23 of 143 parallel trials in dogs and cats published in 2019 specified their primary outcome.
Protocols and reports follow ARRIVE 2.0 and PetSORT reporting standards.
Common standards now exist for preregistering animal studies, so results can be checked against the original plan.
We preregister protocols where appropriate.
WSAVA advises vets to ask whether manufacturers conduct studies and publish them in peer-reviewed journals.
We help brands build a publishable evidence base.
How your evidence is structured for review: EU/GB feed additive dossier (Reg. 429/2008), US GRAS notice for animal food (21 CFR 570) and a claim substantiation file.
Download sample reportTypical industry ranges, from agreed protocol to final report. Regulator review times are set in law. Your proposal confirms exact timing and a fixed price.
| Stage | Study or output | Typical timeline | What drives it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence | Ingredient evidence assessment | 2–4 weeks | Number of ingredients, species and claims |
| Evidence | Systematic or literature review | 8–16 weeks | Search scope, number of studies screened, quality appraisal |
| Evidence | Feasibility study | 2–4 weeks | Technical, regulatory and commercial questions covered |
| Evidence | Product benchmarking | 3–6 weeks | Number of competitor products and whether they are analysed |
| Studies | Palatability study | 2–4 weeks | One-bowl or two-bowl design, species, panel size |
| Studies | Digestibility study | 4–8 weeks | Adaptation and collection periods, marker or total collection |
| Studies | Custom feeding or efficacy study | 3–6 months | Study length, endpoints and sample analysis |
| Studies | AAFCO adult maintenance trial | About 8 months | At least 26 weeks on test, plus set-up and reporting |
| Studies | Shelf-life and stability study | 3–6 months accelerated; real time to end of shelf life | Target shelf life, pack and storage conditions |
| Publications | White paper | 3–6 weeks | Depth of evidence and review rounds |
| Publications | Scientific manuscript | 6–10 weeks to submission | Data readiness; journal peer review adds months |
| Publications | Technical or regulatory dossier | 8–16 weeks once data are complete | Market, dossier type and data gaps |
| Publications | Claim substantiation file | 2–6 weeks | Number of claims and markets |
Regulator review times: EFSA gives its opinion within six months of a valid application, extended whenever it asks for more information (Reg. (EC) 1831/2003, Art. 8) legislation. FDA responds to a GRAS notice within 180 days of filing, extendable by 90 days (21 CFR 570.265) eCFR.
Stay ahead with regulation updates, the latest research, ingredient spotlights, recalls and market trends for pet nutrition research — written by our formulation, testing and regulatory teams.
Every project at Guires Pet Nutrition Lab runs inside an ISO 9001:2015 certified quality system and FSSAI-licensed operations, with documented methods, calibrated instruments, traceable raw materials and reviewed reports — so the results behind your product can be checked and defended.
Usually with an evidence review: it shows what is already proven, what a claim needs, and whether a new study is worth running.
We generate and structure efficacy and technical data to EFSA, FSA, FDA and AAFCO expectations.
You own your study data. Publication is decided by mutual agreement, with authorship from your team, and we encourage publishing all results, positive or negative. Our own methods and know-how are not transferred; you receive the specific process improvements developed during your study.
Yes — GLP studies are run through accredited partner laboratories, and we manage the study for you. Non-GLP studies are run to the same protocol, reporting and welfare standards.
Yes — on study design, product supply, analysis, palatability and publication, with co-authorship agreed up front.
Evidence reviews take weeks; feeding trials take months (AAFCO adult maintenance runs at least 26 weeks). See the typical timeline table above. Pricing depends on design, panel size and markets, so every project starts with a scoped, fixed quote.
Clients in the USA, UK and UAE on working with Guires PNL. Names are withheld at clients’ request.
“We wanted to make digestive-health claims for our probiotic dog food but lacked supporting evidence. Their researchers reviewed the scientific literature and identified exactly what those claims required.”
“Our project involved evaluating ingredient functionality alongside regulatory requirements. They organised the research findings and flagged documentation gaps early, saving us considerable time.”
“We planned to launch an omega-3 skin and coat supplement in the region and needed our claims to hold up under regulatory review. Their team compiled the scientific evidence and prepared the substantiation dossier for our submission.”
Tell us what you need to prove and for which market — we will scope the evidence and the study.
Every Guires PNL product is formulated to comply with the FEDIAF Nutritional Guidelines and the AAFCO Dog and Cat Food Nutrient Profiles. Neither body issues certificates to manufacturers, so compliance is verified independently against their published standards — and every product comes with a complete documentation package for regulatory submissions in the EU, US, Australia and Asian markets.
How we verify compliance →