Evaluation of the nutritional adequacy of commercially available diets for pet and farm rabbits compared to pet rabbit nutritional recommendation.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence of nutritional adequacy of commercial rabbit feeds and explore the impact of target species, premium claims and the intended purpose (farm vs. pet) on the nutritional content and adequacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search on the Google Shopping platform identified 47 complete rabbit feeds from various brands. The feeds were categorised by purpose (farm or pet) and target species (mono-species or multi-species), and the nutritional guarantees were compared with established recommendations for pet rabbits. Differences between groups were analysed using non-parametric statistical methods, and any inadequacies were quantified. RESULTS: Nutritional inadequacies were identified in 77% of the feeds. Common issues included excessive maximum calcium (57%) and insufficient crude fibre (35%). Multi-species feeds were more likely to contain inadequate levels of protein, fibre and energy compared to mono-species feeds. Farm feeds frequently exceeded calcium limits. Although hay provision is essential for maintaining rabbit welfare, recommendations for hay inclusion were often absent from the feed labels. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This study reveals significant nutritional inadequacies in commercial rabbit feeds, particularly in multi-species products. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved feed formulations and regulatory oversight. To avoid potential nutritional deficiencies or excesses and to support optimal rabbit health, veterinarians and pet owners should carefully and critically evaluate feed labels.