OEM Formulation Design for Small-Breed Dry Dog Food: Functional Ingredient Selection and Development Considerations

For dry food formulated for small adult dogs, reducing kibble size is one important design factor. However, kibble size alone is often not enough to address the unique needs of small dogs, including limited food intake, energy density, oral size, weight management, and risks related to urinary, dental, joint, and cardiac health.

In Japan’s dog market, products for toy and small-breed dogs represent an important category, partly due to housing conditions and pet-keeping environments. The Japan Pet Food Association publishes its National Survey on Dog and Cat Ownership every year, and the 2025 survey results have also been released. In OEM development, it is not enough to create a product that can simply be labeled “for small dogs.” The formulation must also align with both the feeding behavior and nutritional design requirements of small dogs.

This article organizes dry food formulation for small adult dogs from three perspectives: body size, metabolism, and health risk factors. It explains how OEM development managers and product planning teams can select functional ingredients in a practical, decision-oriented way.

What This Article Covers

• Why “small kibble” alone is not enough for small adult dog formulations.
• A decision-making framework for formulation design based on body size, metabolism, and health risk factors.
• Selection criteria for protein sources, fats, carbohydrates, dietary fiber, minerals, and functional ingredients.
• Why palatability, kibble size, hardness, and coating design should be considered together with nutritional design.
• Key cautions when using grain-free claims, EPA/DHA, joint-support ingredients, and oral-care ingredients.
• Practical points for labeling, regulatory compliance, quality control, and specification management in OEM development.

Three Key Perspectives in Formulating Food for Small Adult Dogs

The starting point for small adult dog formulation should not be “dog breed name” or “kibble size.” Instead, the differences in body size, metabolism, and health risk factors should be translated into clear product design requirements.

Body Size: Body Weight, Oral Size, and Limited Food Intake

In general, small dogs are often classified as dogs weighing under 10 kg, while toy breeds are often classified as dogs weighing under 4–5 kg. However, these are only convenient categories for product design. In reality, even within the small-dog category, breeds such as Chihuahuas, Toy Poodles, Pomeranians, Miniature Dachshunds, Shih Tzus, and Miniature Schnauzers differ significantly in body structure, bite, coat type, activity level, and predisposition to certain health conditions.

A dog’s energy requirement is not simply proportional to body weight. It is generally evaluated using metabolic body weight, calculated as body weight in kilograms to the power of 0.75, or kg^0.75. FEDIAF nutritional guidelines organize adult maintenance energy requirements in kcal per unit of metabolic body weight according to activity level. Nutrient density should therefore also be designed based on metabolizable energy.

When compared using metabolic body weight, a 2 kg dog requires roughly twice as much energy per kilogram of body weight as a 30 kg dog. Even when comparing a 10 kg dog with a 30 kg dog, the smaller dog requires about 1.3 times more energy per kilogram of body weight. In other words, small dogs eat less per meal, but their nutritional density per unit of body weight needs to be relatively higher.

Design Implication

For dry food aimed at small dogs, simply making the kibble smaller is not enough. The formulation must deliver energy, essential amino acids, essential fatty acids, minerals, vitamins, and functional ingredients in appropriate amounts within a limited intake volume. This means nutritional density and palatability must be designed together at the final product level.

Metabolism: Higher Energy Requirement and Individual Variation

Small dogs have relatively higher energy requirements per kilogram of body weight, but this does not mean they have a low risk of obesity. In fact, indoor lifestyles, neutering or spaying, lower activity levels, and frequent treats can easily lead to excess calorie intake and weight gain.

Regarding carbohydrates, dogs have little salivary amylase, but they do have pancreatic amylase and can utilize cooked and expanded starches. Carciofi et al. (2008) reported that digestibility and postprandial glucose and insulin responses in dogs differed depending on the carbohydrate source when extruded diets were made using cassava flour, brewer’s rice, corn, sorghum, peas, and lentils.

However, it is not appropriate to make a blanket statement that “small dogs are always prone to blood sugar spikes.” Glycemic response varies depending on breed, age, body size, body fat percentage, activity level, processing conditions, starch gelatinization, dietary fiber content, and portion size.

Design Implication

In formulations for small adult dogs, carbohydrate sources should not be selected only based on the phrase “low GI.” Digestibility, post-meal response, stool quality, kibble formation, palatability, cost, and labeling feasibility should all be evaluated together.

Health Risk Factors: Areas Often Considered in Small-Dog Formulation

In small dogs, the following health-related areas are often considered during formulation design. However, pet food is not intended to treat disease. For complete and balanced adult maintenance foods, acceptable expressions should generally be limited to wording such as “health maintenance,” “nutritional support,” “weight management,” and “consideration for oral health.”

Area	Common Issues	Related Breeds or Types	Formulation Connection
Dental and oral health	Plaque, tartar, periodontal disease, bad breath	Toy breeds and small dogs in general	Kibble size, hardness, chewability, polyphosphates, VOHC standards
Joints and skeletal health	Patellar luxation, intervertebral disc disease, weight load	Chihuahuas, Pomeranians, Dachshunds, etc.	Weight management, EPA/DHA, glucosamine, chondroitin
Metabolism	Obesity, hyperlipidemia, pancreatitis risk	Miniature Schnauzers, etc.	Fat level, fatty acid profile, energy density
Urinary health	Struvite, calcium oxalate uroliths	Shih Tzus, Yorkshire Terriers, etc.	Urine volume, Ca/P/Mg, urinary pH, sodium, water intake
Digestion	Soft stool, stool volume, adverse food reactions	Large individual variation	Protein digestibility, dietary fiber, prebiotics
Heart health	Mitral valve disease and other concerns	Breeds with predispositions, such as Cavalier King Charles Spaniels	Weight management, sodium, EPA/DHA, taurine and amino acid confirmation

A Three-Perspective Formulation Framework

Formulating a high-function dry food is not about adding trending functional ingredients. It begins by defining the functional requirements needed for the product concept.

Three-Perspective Reverse Design Framework for Small Adult Dog Dry Food

1. Body Size

Small body weight
Small oral size
Limited intake per meal

↓

Appropriate energy density that is neither too high nor too low
Kibble size and hardness suitable for small dogs
Nutrient density that meets nutritional standards even with small intake volume

2. Metabolism

Higher energy requirement per kilogram of body weight
Large individual variation due to activity level, neuter status, and age
Breed-related differences in fat and carbohydrate tolerance

↓

Highly digestible protein sources
Control of fat level and fatty acid profile
Differentiated use of carbohydrate sources and dietary fiber

3. Health Risk Factors

Consideration for dental, joint, urinary, cardiac, and metabolic health

↓

Oral-care design
Weight-management design
Mineral, urinary pH, and water-intake design
Functional claims that avoid labeling risk

Based on this framework, the major formulation requirements for small adult dog dry food can be organized into the following six areas.

1. Securing highly digestible protein:
   Because small dogs have limited intake capacity, it is important to focus not only on crude protein level, but also on the amount of available essential amino acids.
2. Appropriate energy density:
   If energy density is too high, obesity risk increases. If it is too low, the dog may not be able to consume enough food to meet nutritional needs. Target breed and activity level must be clearly defined.
3. Fatty acid profile design:
   Palatability, skin and coat health, inflammatory balance, oxidative stability, and risks related to pancreatitis or obesity should be evaluated together.
4. Functional differentiation of carbohydrates and dietary fiber:
   Kibble formation, digestibility, stool quality, postprandial response, and the risks of grain-free positioning should be assessed together.
5. Precise mineral balance:
   Calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, sodium, zinc, iron, and other minerals should be designed not as isolated values, but as interacting nutrients.
6. Integration of physical design and labeling design:
   Kibble size, hardness, coating, residual levels of functional ingredients, and claim wording should be confirmed based on the final product.

Selecting Functional Ingredients

The criterion for selecting ingredients should not be whether an ingredient is well known. The key question is whether the ingredient can clearly support a specific functional requirement within the formulation.

Protein Sources: Digestibility and Amino Acids Matter More Than Crude Protein

In protein design, crude protein level should not be treated as the only quality indicator. Crude protein is calculated from nitrogen content, so it does not directly show how much of the essential amino acids a dog can actually use, nor does it show digestibility.

According to AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles, the minimum crude protein level for adult maintenance dog food is 18% on a dry matter basis. However, this is only a minimum requirement. In actual dry food products for small adult dogs, the level is often set around 22–30%, depending on the product concept. What matters is not only the percentage itself, but also essential amino acids such as lysine, methionine, and cystine, as well as digestibility and raw material lot stability.

Protein Source	Main Advantages	Design Considerations
Chicken meal	Cost-efficient, good amino acid balance, easy to procure	Need to confirm ash level, quality variation, and rendering quality
Turkey meal	Useful for differentiation as a poultry protein other than chicken	Need to confirm procurement stability and price fluctuations
Fish meal / salmon meal	Easy to connect with EPA/DHA claims, often highly palatable	Oxidation, histamine, heavy metals, fish species, and origin control are important
Pork meal	High palatability and good amino acid profile	Cultural, religious, or labeling restrictions may apply depending on destination market
Hydrolyzed protein	Useful in products designed with adverse food reactions in mind	Need to confirm cost, flavor, molecular weight control, and labeling consistency
Egg powder	Excellent amino acid balance and easy to position as a quality ingredient	Cost is high, so inclusion level is often limited
Plant protein	Useful for cost control, kibble formation, and sustainability positioning	Need to check essential amino acids, phytic acid, and risks from overusing legumes

Design Implication

In complete and balanced foods, combining two or three protein sources can make it easier to complement amino acid profiles and reduce procurement risk. On the other hand, in limited-ingredient diets designed with adverse food reactions in mind, narrowing the number of protein sources may better match the product concept. Therefore, it is not always correct to say that multiple protein sources are superior.

Fats: Balancing Palatability, Energy, and Oxidative Stability

Fat strongly affects both energy density and palatability in dry food. Under AAFCO adult maintenance standards, the minimum fat level is 5.5% on a dry matter basis. However, in general complete and balanced dry foods, fat is often formulated at around 10–18%, depending on the product concept.

For small adult dogs, increasing fat can improve palatability and energy density, but it also requires consideration of obesity, hyperlipidemia, and breeds at risk of pancreatitis. Miniature Schnauzers, in particular, are well known for their association with hyperlipidemia. It is therefore important to manage not only total fat level, but also the fatty acid profile.

Fat Source	Main Use	Design Considerations
Chicken fat	Improves palatability, raises energy density, supplies linoleic acid	Oxidative stability, antioxidants, and lot quality
Fish oil / salmon oil	Supplies EPA/DHA; supports skin, coat, and inflammatory balance claims	Easily oxidized, so POV and AV control are essential
Flaxseed oil	Supplies ALA and supports plant-based omega-3 positioning	Dogs have limited conversion efficiency from ALA to EPA/DHA
Sunflower oil	Supplies linoleic acid and supports skin and coat positioning	Overall balance should be checked to avoid excessive omega-6
MCT oil	Supports positioning around rapidly available energy	Need to distinguish whether it is C8/C10-focused or coconut-derived
Coconut oil	Oxidative stability, flavor, and lauric acid positioning	Should not be treated as identical to MCT oil; saturated fat ratio must be checked

Long-chain omega-3 fatty acids such as EPA and DHA are considered in formulations designed to support skin and coat health, inflammatory balance, and cardiovascular health. However, no uniform recommended inclusion level for EPA/DHA in adult maintenance food has been established. FEDIAF takes a cautious position, stating that although evidence of benefits from omega-3 fatty acids in adult dogs is increasing, there is not yet enough information to define a specific recommended level.

Design Implication

When adding EPA/DHA, formulation should not focus only on “what percentage to include.” Fish oil oxidation control, antioxidant strategy, and claim wording must be designed together. Expressions that imply treatment or prevention of disease should be avoided. Safer wording includes “health maintenance,” “maintenance of healthy skin and coat,” and “nutritional support.”

Carbohydrates: Evaluate Digestibility, Stool Quality, and Kibble Formation, Not Only Low-GI Positioning

Carbohydrates are closely connected to kibble formation, energy supply, dietary fiber design, stool quality, and cost. Dogs can utilize properly cooked and expanded starches, so it is inappropriate to oversimplify the issue by saying “grains are bad” or “carbohydrates are unnecessary.”

At the same time, studies have reported that digestibility and postprandial glucose and insulin responses vary depending on carbohydrate source. Therefore, in small-dog formulations, grains, tubers, legumes, tapioca, and other carbohydrate sources should be used according to the product concept.

Carbohydrate Source	Formulation Characteristics	Recommended Use
White rice / brewer’s rice	Highly digestible; tends to stabilize palatability and stool quality	Main ingredient for highly digestible or standard formulations
Brown rice	Useful for dietary fiber and natural-ingredient positioning	Differentiation from white rice and stool-quality design
Sorghum	May help moderate postprandial response and fits gluten-free positioning	Formulations considering glycemic response and grain diversity
Barley	Contains soluble fiber such as beta-glucan	Formulations focused on stool quality, satiety, and postprandial response
Sweet potato	Easy to use for natural-ingredient and clean-label positioning	Complementary ingredient in grain-free or reduced-grain formulations
Peas / lentils	Supply protein and fiber; often used in grain-free formulations	Avoid overuse; check ingredient diversity and amino acid balance
Tapioca	Useful for kibble formation, grain-free support, and allergen diversification	Best used for physical properties and formulation adjustment rather than nutrition claims

Caution on Grain-Free Diets and DCM

Since 2018, the FDA has investigated a potential association between grain-free pet foods, especially products containing high levels of peas, lentils, other legumes, or potatoes, and non-hereditary dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) in dogs. In its December 2022 update, the FDA stated that the reported cases alone did not provide sufficient data to establish causality, and that it would not issue further routine updates unless meaningful new scientific information became available.

The practical conclusion in 2026 is neither “grain-free is dangerous” nor “grain-free has no concerns at all.” In OEM formulation, it is important to avoid excessive dependence on legumes and tubers, and to confirm methionine, cystine, and taurine-related design, the proportion of animal protein, dietary fiber content, and final product analytical values.

Dietary Fiber and Gut-Health Ingredients: Designing Stool Quality and Satiety

In dry food for small dogs, stable stool quality has a major impact on repeat purchases. Dietary fiber is not simply a matter of “the more, the better.” Solubility, insolubility, fermentability, and viscosity must be understood and used appropriately.

Ingredient	Main Function	Considerations
Beet pulp	Moderately fermentable; stabilizes stool quality; supports short-chain fatty acid production	Excessive inclusion may affect stool volume and palatability
Cellulose	Insoluble fiber; supports satiety and stool-volume control	Overuse can reduce nutrient density
Inulin / FOS	Prebiotics and soluble fiber	Excessive inclusion may cause soft stool or gas
Psyllium	Water retention and bowel-movement support	Viscosity may affect processing
Mannan oligosaccharides	Gut-health support positioning	Need to confirm raw material specifications and effective inclusion level

When using probiotics, strain name, viable count, heat stability, and addition process are important. Typical dry food extrusion involves high temperature and high pressure, so probiotics are generally added after extrusion through coating or by using heat-resistant materials.

Design Implication

For gut-health claims, it is important to retain documentation not only on the ingredient name, but also on inclusion level, test data, and labeling substantiation. If a product strongly promotes an ingredient that cannot be measured in the final product, labeling and quality assurance risks increase.

Joint-Support Ingredients: Consider Together with Weight Management

In small dogs, skeletal and joint concerns such as patellar luxation and intervertebral disc disease are often incorporated into product concepts. However, general pet food cannot claim to treat or improve joint disease. From a formulation perspective, acceptable positioning should generally stay within expressions such as “maintenance of healthy joints,” “consideration for mobility load,” or “weight management and joint care.”

Representative ingredients include the following.

• Glucosamine:
  Widely used as an ingredient associated with cartilage components. In dry food, it is important to confirm not only the inclusion level, but also the residual level after processing and the level at the end of shelf life.
• Chondroitin sulfate:
  Often used together with glucosamine. The source, purity, molecular weight, and claimable level need to be confirmed.
• MSM:
  Sometimes used in joint-support formulations as a sulfur source. However, efficacy wording must be handled carefully.
• EPA/DHA:
  Considered in formulations designed with inflammatory balance around the joints in mind. However, claims implying disease improvement should be avoided.

Design Implication

The most fundamental part of joint-support formulation is weight management. Even if functional ingredients are included, the product becomes less practical if the energy density is too high, feeding guidelines are unclear, or palatability is so high that overeating becomes likely.

Oral-Care Ingredients: Physical Kibble Design and Evidence Standards

Periodontal disease is very common in dogs. According to the MSD Veterinary Manual, up to 80% of dogs show some form of periodontal disease by the age of two. Toy breeds are also considered a higher-risk group for periodontal disease. For dry food aimed at small dogs, dental and oral care are important areas of differentiation.

However, dry food does not automatically remove tartar. If the kibble is too small, swallowed whole, or too soft, the mechanical cleaning effect may be limited.

Main design factors include the following.

• Kibble size and shape: The size and shape should encourage chewing, while still being manageable for small dogs.
• Hardness and fracture pattern: If the kibble breaks before contacting the teeth, cleaning effect is weak. If it is too hard, palatability may decline.
• Sodium polyphosphate and similar ingredients: These may be used to chelate calcium in saliva and help address tartar formation.
• VOHC standards: VOHC evaluates whether products meet pre-set standards for plaque and tartar control in dogs and cats by reviewing test data conducted according to VOHC protocols. VOHC itself does not conduct the product testing.

Design Implication

For oral-care claims, the final product’s kibble shape, chewing time, test data, and claim substantiation are more important than the ingredient name alone. When possible, companies should refer to the categories and evaluation approach used for VOHC Accepted Products and avoid excessive efficacy claims.

Minerals and Vitamins: Consider Urinary and Skeletal Health Together

In small-dog formulations, mineral design relates to urinary health, skeletal health, skin and coat, and cardiac considerations. Calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, sodium, and zinc in particular should be confirmed not as standalone values, but as interacting nutrients.

Nutrient	Formulation Relevance	Considerations
Calcium	Bones, teeth, nerve and muscle function	Ratio with phosphorus; excess may affect urolith risk
Phosphorus	Bones and energy metabolism	Excess should be avoided in renal-support formulations
Magnesium	Enzyme reactions, bones, struvite component	Both excess and excessive reduction should be avoided
Sodium	Palatability, water intake, electrolyte balance	Design intent should be clear for breeds at cardiac risk
Zinc	Skin, coat, immunity, enzymes	Bioavailability should be considered when plant ingredients are heavily used
Vitamin E	Antioxidant nutrition and fat oxidation control	Especially important in high-fat and fish-oil formulations
Vitamin D	Calcium and phosphorus metabolism, bones	Both minimum and maximum levels must be confirmed due to excess risk

In dogs, struvite uroliths are often associated with urinary tract infections, particularly alkaline urine caused by urease-producing bacteria. Dietary design should consider urine volume, magnesium, phosphorus, protein design, and urinary pH in an integrated way. Calcium oxalate uroliths, on the other hand, cannot be dissolved through diet, and recurrence management is important. Preventive design should evaluate urine volume, calcium excretion, citrate, sodium, and Ca/P/Mg balance together.

Design Implication

Claims such as “low magnesium” or “urinary pH control” often require claim substantiation and test data. In complete and balanced foods, wording that suggests treatment or prevention of urinary disease should be avoided. If necessary, the product should be clearly separated from veterinary therapeutic diets and veterinarian-managed categories.

Palatability and Physical Design: As Important as Nutritional Design for Small Dogs

In dry food for small dogs, kibble size, hardness, aroma, and coating directly affect intake rate, repeat purchase, oral-care performance, and residual levels of functional ingredients.

Kibble Size Design

Because small dogs have smaller mouths, simply using kibble designed for medium or large dogs can lead to difficulty eating, swallowing whole, insufficient chewing, and reduced palatability.

Target Kibble Size Guide	Design Considerations
Toy dogs, up to around 4 kg: approximately 5–7 mm	Prioritize ease of eating, but watch for swallowing without chewing
Small dogs, around 4–10 kg: approximately 7–10 mm	Balance chewability and ease of eating
Small-dog oral-care products: slightly larger or specially shaped compared with standard kibble	Requires chewing-oriented design and hardness control

Kibble size is not only about diameter. Thickness, bulk density, expansion rate, and fracture pattern are also important. Even if two kibbles are both 7 mm, a lightly expanded kibble and a dense, hard kibble will differ greatly in ease of eating and chewability.

Hardness and Texture Design

Hardness changes depending on extrusion conditions, moisture, expansion rate, raw material particle size, fat addition, and drying conditions.

• arder kibble: May encourage chewing, but can be difficult for dogs with weaker jaws or senior dogs.
• Lightly expanded kibble: Easier to eat, but may reduce chewing.

For small adult dogs, unlike senior dogs, it is not necessary to make the kibble excessively soft. However, it is important to balance ease of eating and chewing based on the target breed’s jaw strength, dental condition, and palatability response.

Coating Design

Coating affects palatability, functionality, and oxidation control. Chicken fat, fish oil, digests, yeast extracts, and amino-acid-based palatants can strongly affect intake.

On the other hand, if coating fats are not included in the overall fat design, the final product’s fat level, EPA/DHA level, oxidative stability, and calorie density may deviate from the design values. Polyphosphates, probiotics, and heat-sensitive flavor ingredients are generally added after extrusion.

OEM Practical Point

OEM manufacturers should confirm not only formulation design values, but also final analytical values after coating, guaranteed values at the end of shelf life, acceptable variation ranges, and inspection items for each production lot.

Common Formulation Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Mistaking High Crude Protein for High Quality

Even if a product claims 35% crude protein, it is not necessarily a highly usable protein source for small dogs if digestibility is low or the essential amino acid balance is poor.

How to Avoid This

In addition to crude protein level, confirm ingredient-level digestibility, amino acid profile, ash content, heat history, and amino acid sufficiency in the final product.

Failing to Balance Low Fat and High Palatability

Reducing fat makes calorie control easier, but it may reduce palatability. Many small dogs are sensitive to palatability, and a food that is not eaten will not function nutritionally, no matter how well designed it is.

How to Avoid This

Instead of focusing only on fat percentage, support palatability through coating, flavor ingredients, kibble fracture pattern, and feeding design.

Prioritizing Grain-Free Claims and Becoming Too Dependent on Legumes

Grain-free positioning can be useful from a marketing perspective. However, based on the history of the FDA’s DCM investigation, excessive reliance on peas, lentils, and potatoes should be managed as a formulation risk.

How to Avoid This

When legumes or tubers are heavily used as main ingredients, confirm the animal protein ratio, methionine, cystine, taurine-related design, dietary fiber content, and final product analytical values.

Managing Minerals as Isolated Values

Calcium, phosphorus, magnesium, and zinc interact with one another. When plant-based ingredients are heavily used, the effect of phytic acid on mineral availability should also be considered.

How to Avoid This

Evaluate the Ca/P ratio, magnesium, sodium, and zinc in an interaction matrix, and confirm final product analytical values.

Using Medical or Drug-Like Claims

Expressions such as “improves arthritis,” “prevents heart disease,” “dissolves urinary stones,” or “treats periodontal disease” should be avoided in general pet food.

How to Avoid This

Use expressions that are more acceptable for general pet food, such as “health maintenance,” “nutritional support,” “weight management,” “consideration for oral health,” and “maintains healthy skin and coat.” When making emphasized claims, retain objective supporting evidence.

Practical OEM Development Considerations

The quality of a high-function dry food depends not only on formulation design, but also on regulatory review, quality control, specification management, and substantiation of labeling claims.

For the Japanese Market: Pet Food Safety Act and Fair Competition Code

When manufacturing, importing, or selling dog and cat food in Japan, companies must confirm manufacturing standards, ingredient standards, labeling standards, business operator notification, and record-keeping requirements under the Pet Food Safety Act. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries has published business operator materials that were last revised in June 2025.

In addition, the Fair Competition Code of the Japan Pet Food Fair Trade Conference covers required labeling items, as well as restrictions on misleading or unsupported claims such as “best,” “No. 1,” “unsafe,” or statements that disparage other products by suggesting they make pets more prone to disease.

OEM Practical Point

Labeling risk should be reviewed from the product planning stage across packaging, landing pages, advertising, social media, and sales materials. Even if the label itself complies with regulations, risk remains if advertising expressions are inappropriate.

For Overseas Markets: The Same Formula and Same Label Will Not Necessarily Work Everywhere

Destination Market	Main Items to Confirm	Practical Considerations
Japan	Pet Food Safety Act, Fair Competition Code, Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Act, Premiums and Representations Act	Efficacy claims, country of origin, emphasized claims, ingredient labeling
United States	FDA, AAFCO Model Regulations, state laws	Nutritional adequacy statement, ingredient names, claims, state-level registration
EU	Regulation (EC) No 767/2009, Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, etc.	Feed additives, labeling, nutritional and functional claims, import requirements
Thailand	Department of Livestock Development, Animal Feed Control Act-related requirements	Pet food registration, import/manufacturing/sales licenses, labels
Australia and New Zealand	Import quarantine, animal-derived ingredients, labels, industry standards	Proof of ingredient origin and heat treatment conditions is important
Canada	CFIA import requirements, animal-derived ingredients, facility information	For products manufactured in Thailand, facility and certification support through DLD may be required

Simply translating a Japanese label into English is not enough. For each destination market, companies must confirm ingredient names, additives, nutritional adequacy statements, efficacy claims, country of origin, import permissions, and certification requirements for animal-derived ingredients. Creating a destination-specific mapping at the specification stage can significantly reduce rework later in the development process.

Quality Control: Items to Confirm in the Final Product

For high-function dry food aimed at small adult dogs, it is desirable to set quality control items such as the following.

• General analysis: crude protein, crude fat, crude fiber, ash, moisture
• Minerals: Ca, P, Mg, Na, Zn, Fe, etc.
• Fatty acids: LA, ALA, EPA, DHA, omega-6/omega-3 ratio
• Oxidation indicators: POV, AV, and TBA value when needed
• Safety: heavy metals, mycotoxins, Salmonella, pesticide residues
• Physical properties: kibble size, hardness, bulk density, water activity
• Functional ingredients: residual levels of glucosamine, chondroitin, EPA/DHA, probiotics, etc.
• Storage stability: accelerated testing, real-time testing, guaranteed values at the end of shelf life

Specification Management: Connecting Formulation, Manufacturing, and Labeling in One Document

In OEM development, formulation sheets, raw material specifications, nutritional design documents, manufacturing conditions, final product standards, and labeling substantiation are often managed separately. When functional ingredients are used, this fragmentation can create problems later.

At minimum, specifications should include the following.

1. Product concept and target breeds/body-weight range
2. Nutritional adequacy standards, such as AAFCO, FEDIAF, and Japan-specific labeling policy
3. Ingredient list and supplier specifications
4. Inclusion levels, guaranteed levels, and analytical methods for functional ingredients
5. Manufacturing process and coating process
6. Final product standards and tolerances
7. Substantiation documents for labeling and advertising claims
8. Storage stability and shelf-life setting rationale
9. Criteria for responding to non-conforming lots

FAQ

Q1. What elements should be changed most significantly between formulations for small dogs and medium-sized dogs?

The highest-priority elements are kibble size, hardness, calorie density, and palatability. Because small dogs eat less per meal, nutrient density must be secured. At the same time, indoor lifestyles and neutering or spaying can increase obesity risk, so simply making the food high-calorie is not enough. Ease of eating, chewability, weight management, and final product nutrient density must be designed together.

Q2. Are grain-free formulations still useful?

They can still be useful from a market-positioning perspective. However, considering the FDA’s DCM investigation history, excessive dependence on peas, lentils, and potatoes should be avoided. As of 2026, causality has not been established, but it is recommended to confirm ingredient diversity, animal protein ratio, methionine, cystine, taurine-related design, and final product analytical values.

Q3. Can a product be considered high quality if it contains more than 35% protein?

No. Even if the crude protein level is high, the product cannot be considered high quality if digestibility or essential amino acid balance is poor. For adult maintenance food, the focus should be on ingredient quality, digestibility, sufficiency of lysine, methionine, cystine, and other amino acids, stool quality, and palatability rather than crude protein level alone.

Q4. How much EPA/DHA should be included?

There is no uniform recommended inclusion level for EPA/DHA in adult maintenance diets. It should be designed based on the product concept, total fat level, fish oil quality, oxidative stability, labeling policy, and destination-market regulations. What matters is not only the amount at the time of inclusion, but also the residual level after processing and at the end of shelf life.

Q5. Is adding polyphosphate enough for oral-care claims?

No. Polyphosphate is a useful option, but kibble size, hardness, shape, chewing time, and final product data are also important. Third-party standards such as VOHC should be referenced, and claims should ideally be based on test data.

Q6. What is the most commonly overlooked practical point in OEM products for small dogs?

Final product analysis after coating. Fat, EPA/DHA, polyphosphates, probiotics, flavor ingredients, and other components can change after manufacturing. It is necessary to confirm not only formulation design values, but also actual measured values in the final product and guaranteed values at the end of shelf life.

Conclusion

In the formulation of high-function dry food for small adult dogs, “small kibble” alone is not enough to create meaningful product differentiation. What matters is to reverse-engineer the functional requirements of the product from three perspectives: body size, metabolism, and health risk factors.

Key Points from This Article

1. From the body-size perspective, intake volume, oral size, and nutrient density must be considered together: Small dogs have higher energy requirements per kilogram of body weight, while their intake per meal is limited. Kibble size, hardness, and nutrient density must be aligned.
2. From the metabolism perspective, digestibility and energy management must be balanced: Highly digestible protein, appropriate fat level, carbohydrate source, and dietary fiber design should be built around individual variation.
3. From the health-risk perspective, formulate around design considerations, not efficacy claims: Dental, joint, urinary, cardiac, and metabolic considerations are important, but expressions that imply treatment or prevention should be avoided.
4. Functional ingredients should be evaluated in the final product, not only by inclusion level: Ingredients such as glucosamine, EPA/DHA, probiotics, and polyphosphates require confirmation of residual levels after processing and substantiation for claims.
5. In OEM development, formulation, manufacturing, labeling, and regulations must be managed together: Japan, the United States, the EU, Thailand, and other markets have different regulatory requirements. Organizing destination-specific labeling, registration, and safety requirements at the specification stage helps prevent major rework later in development.

At First Reach Thailand, we support pet food development by utilizing ingredient and OEM networks in Thailand, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Europe, and other regions. We help design products based on target market, quality grade, price range, and labeling strategy. For formulation design, ingredient selection, OEM factory selection, import/export support, and labeling review for high-function dry food for small dogs, please contact us through our free consultation form.

This article is intended to provide information for pet food manufacturers, OEM development managers, and procurement managers. It does not guarantee or assert any specific product efficacy or medical effect. For formulation design, regulatory compliance, and ingredient procurement, we recommend consulting specialists and confirming the latest regulatory information.