Poultry By-Product Meal

Protein
Avoid
Moderate nutritional value

Last updated: February 10, 2026

Table of Contents

Quick Summary

Poultry By-Product Meal Rendered poultry parts excluding feathers, heads, feet, intestines. Can include necks, organs, undeveloped eggs.

Category
Protein
Common In
Kibble, wet food, treats, protein supplements
Also Known As
poultry meal, chicken by-product meal
Watts Rating
Avoid ✗

What It Is

Poultry by-product meal is the rendered, dried, and ground product from poultry parts excluding feathers, heads, feet, and intestines. According to AAFCO, it consists of clean parts of slaughtered poultry including necks, undeveloped eggs, feet (if pressure-cooked to remove outer skin), intestines (if contents are removed), and organs such as heart, liver, and gizzards. The rendering process involves cooking the parts at high temperatures, removing moisture and fat, then grinding into a concentrated protein powder. Poultry by-product meal typically contains 60-65% protein and 10-15% fat with minimal moisture (10%), making it a more concentrated protein source than fresh poultry. Like all generic by-product ingredients, the primary concern is lack of specificity - 'poultry' could be chicken, turkey, duck, or mixed; the proportion of nutritious organs (liver, heart) versus less desirable parts (feet, necks with little meat) is unknown and likely variable. The rendering process provides some consistency and shelf stability, but the vague ingredient naming prevents consumers from assessing quality. Premium brands avoid this ingredient entirely, opting for named meals ('chicken meal,' 'turkey meal') that signal transparency.

Compare to Similar Ingredients

Why It's Used in Dog Products

Poultry by-product meal appears in dog food primarily as an economical protein source. When poultry is processed for human consumption (breast, thighs, wings), internal organs, necks, feet, and other parts remain. These provide protein and nutrients but have limited U.S. retail market. Pet food utilizes these parts, reducing waste and providing affordable protein. From a purely nutritional standpoint, organs like heart, liver, and gizzards are highly nutritious - in many ways superior to muscle meat. However, manufacturers use the generic 'poultry by-product meal' term rather than specific ingredients for economic and practical reasons: (1) sourcing flexibility - they can use chicken by-products when cheap, turkey when chicken prices rise, creating formulation flexibility without label changes; (2) bulk purchasing - mixed poultry by-products cost less than sourcing specific chicken or turkey organs; (3) utilizing lower-value parts - feet and necks provide protein but little meat, padding the formula economically; (4) avoiding consumer scrutiny - many owners reject specific organ names despite nutritional value. The ingredient appears primarily in budget and mid-tier commercial foods. Premium brands use named meals and specific organs instead, marketing transparency.

Nutritional Profile

Key Micronutrients: If poultry by-product meal contains significant organ meats, it provides valuable vitamins and minerals: liver supplies vitamin A, B vitamins, iron, and copper; heart offers B vitamins, iron, and CoQ10; gizzards provide iron and zinc. However, if the meal is primarily feet, necks, and lower-value parts, micronutrient density decreases significantly. Without knowing proportions, nutrient content is unpredictable.

Quality Considerations

Quality ranges from potentially good to questionable, with no transparency. Best case: poultry by-product meal includes substantial organ meats (liver, heart, gizzards) from healthy, properly raised chickens and turkeys, with quality control ensuring cleanliness and proper rendering. This represents genuine nutritional value at affordable prices. Worst case: by-product meal consists primarily of feet, necks with minimal meat, and lower-value parts from unknown sources with questionable handling and rendering practices. Reality likely varies by manufacturer and individual batches. Rendering provides some quality standardization - high heat kills pathogens and creates consistent particle size - but can't compensate for poor starting material. Premium brands avoid generic poultry by-product meal, using specific named meals ('chicken meal,' 'turkey meal') that signal sourcing transparency and quality control. Budget brands rely heavily on by-product meal to achieve low prices. Mid-tier brands may use small amounts supplementing named proteins. The lack of species and part specification is the warning sign.

Red Flags

Green Flags

Quality Note

Poultry by-product meal is rendered protein from various poultry organs and parts (liver, heart, gizzards, necks, feet). It can be nutritionally adequate if well-sourced, but complete lack of species and composition transparency prevents quality assessment. Rendering provides concentrated protein and stability, but vague terminology signals cost prioritization over transparency.

Potential Concerns

Primary concern is lack of transparency preventing quality assessment. 'Poultry by-product meal' could include nutritious organs from quality birds or primarily low-value parts (feet, necks) from questionable sources - consumers can't distinguish. Second, inconsistency - composition varies between batches based on poultry market prices and availability, creating unpredictable nutritional value. Third, species ambiguity - 'poultry' includes chicken, turkey, duck, goose, or mixed. Dogs with specific poultry allergies (e.g., chicken) can't determine if their allergen is present. Fourth, rendering concerns - while rendering kills pathogens and provides stability, high heat may reduce some nutrient bioavailability, particularly heat-sensitive vitamins. Fifth, feet inclusion - AAFCO permits rendered feet, which contribute protein but primarily collagen with incomplete amino acid profiles and lower biological value than muscle or organ meat. Sixth, quality signaling - using generic by-product meal instead of named meals suggests cost-cutting priorities, often correlating with other formula compromises. Finally, missed opportunities - poultry organs are nutritious and economical, but hiding them in vague terminology perpetuates negative perceptions and prevents informed consumer choices.

Contraindications

Life Stage Considerations: Poultry by-product meal appears in formulas for all life stages, though its unpredictability makes it suboptimal. Puppies need consistent high-quality protein for growth - variability is concerning. Adults might tolerate inconsistency but deserve transparency. Senior dogs with sensitive digestion benefit from predictable, easily digestible proteins. Working and active dogs need reliable protein quality for performance. Pregnant and nursing dogs have elevated needs better met by specified, quality-assured ingredients. While by-product meal CAN be nutritionally adequate if well-sourced, you have no way to verify this.

Scientific Evidence

Limited research exists on 'poultry by-product meal' specifically due to variable composition. Research on poultry organs individually shows nutritional value. Rendering process research demonstrates protein concentration and pathogen elimination. The concern is transparency and consistency, not inherent unsuitability.

Key Research Findings

Evidence Level: Limited research on by-product meal as a category due to variable composition. Strong evidence that rendering concentrates protein and that poultry organs are nutritious, but unknowable proportions in any given product prevent quality assessment.

How to Spot on Labels

Reading ingredient labels can be confusing. Here's how to identify and evaluate this ingredient:

What to Look For

Alternative Names

This ingredient may also appear as:

Typical Position: In budget foods, appears as first or second ingredient indicating primary protein source. In mid-tier foods, appears in positions 3-7 as supplemental protein. Premium foods avoid this ingredient entirely, using named meals and specific organs instead.

Watts' Take

The frustrating truth about poultry by-product meal is that it COULD be a good ingredient - poultry organs are nutritious and the rendering process creates stable, concentrated protein. If manufacturers were transparent about including substantial liver, heart, and gizzards from quality birds, this would be defensible. Instead, the vague term allows flexibility to use whatever parts are cheapest (often feet and necks) from unspecified birds (could be chicken one batch, turkey the next). Premium brands avoid this opacity, using 'chicken meal' or naming organs specifically. The generic by-product term signals: 'we want flexibility to use whatever is cheapest without telling you.' That lack of transparency typically correlates with overall lower quality standards. We recommend avoiding when possible - not because by-products are inherently bad, but because transparency matters and this ingredient offers none.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is poultry by-product meal bad for dogs?

Not inherently bad, but problematic due to lack of transparency. Poultry by-product meal CAN include nutritious organs (liver, heart, gizzards) that are genuinely valuable protein sources. If the meal consisted primarily of these organs from healthy birds with proper processing, it would be a good ingredient. The problem is you'll never know the actual composition - it could be 50% organs (good) or 70% feet and necks (adequate but less ideal). The generic term allows manufacturers to use whatever poultry parts are cheapest without changing labels. Premium brands that use poultry organs list them specifically ('chicken heart,' 'turkey liver') to demonstrate transparency and quality. If the by-products included were consistently valuable, manufacturers would name them for marketing advantage. The vague term signals flexibility to use whatever is cheapest, suggesting cost prioritization over quality. It won't harm your dog, but it represents unknown and inconsistent quality that better brands avoid.

What's actually in poultry by-product meal?

According to AAFCO, poultry by-product meal includes rendered poultry necks, undeveloped eggs, feet (if pressure-cooked), intestines (contents removed), and organs like heart, liver, and gizzards. It excludes feathers, heads (unless necks with heads), and raw feet (uncooked). This means you're getting some combination of organs and parts, rendered into concentrated protein powder. In theory, this could be mostly nutritious organs. In practice, manufacturers choose whatever combination is most economical at any given time. One batch might be 40% organ meats (liver, heart); another might be 60% feet and necks. The bird species also varies - could be chicken, turkey, or mixed depending on market prices. You're guaranteed it meets AAFCO's broad definition, but specific composition remains unknown and variable. Contact manufacturers for typical composition details, though most won't provide specifics.

Is poultry by-product meal better than meat by-products?

Slightly better due to rendering, but both suffer from transparency issues. Poultry by-product meal is rendered (cooked, dried, ground) providing concentrated protein (60-65%), shelf stability, and some compositional consistency through processing. Non-rendered meat by-products are fresh/frozen with high moisture content and more variable composition. The rendering process standardizes particle size and kills pathogens, offering quality advantages. However, both use vague terminology hiding actual composition and quality. Poultry by-product meal contributes more protein per pound and has more predictable protein concentration, making it functionally superior for formula protein levels. But neither provides adequate transparency about specific organs, parts, or quality. Better than meat by-products? Yes, marginally due to rendering benefits. Good ingredient? No, due to lack of transparency. Best choice? Named proteins and specific organs ('chicken meal,' 'beef liver') provide both quality and transparency.

Why do manufacturers use poultry by-product meal instead of chicken meal?

Cost and flexibility. Poultry by-product meal is significantly cheaper than chicken meal because: (1) it includes lower-value parts (feet, necks) in addition to organs; (2) manufacturers can substitute turkey, duck, or other poultry when chicken prices rise without reformulating; (3) bulk purchasing mixed by-products costs less than sourcing specific chicken. The generic term provides formulation flexibility - if chicken by-products become expensive one month, they can use turkey instead without label changes. This reduces costs and simplifies operations. However, this flexibility comes at the expense of consumer transparency and confidence. Premium brands use chicken meal specifically because customers value knowing exactly what protein source their dogs are eating. The choice to use generic by-product meal instead of named meal signals prioritization of cost savings over transparency and quality assurance.

Can dogs be allergic to poultry by-product meal?

Yes, dogs with poultry allergies can react to poultry by-product meal. The bigger problem is uncertainty - 'poultry' includes chicken, turkey, duck, and potentially others. A dog allergic specifically to chicken might tolerate turkey, but 'poultry by-product meal' prevents identifying which birds are included. One batch might be primarily chicken (triggering allergies); another might be primarily turkey (tolerated). This variability makes by-product meal completely unsuitable for dogs with known or suspected poultry allergies. If your dog has food allergies, avoid all generic by-product ingredients that don't specify species. Choose foods with clearly named, single-source proteins ('salmon,' 'lamb,' 'venison') so you can definitively identify and avoid allergens. The ambiguity in poultry by-product meal makes it impossible to manage food allergies effectively.

Should I avoid poultry by-product meal entirely?

We recommend choosing foods with named protein sources whenever budget allows. Poultry by-product meal's lack of transparency prevents quality assessment and suggests cost prioritization over quality. However, real-world budget constraints matter. If choosing between: (1) expensive named-protein food you can't consistently afford, or (2) affordable food with by-product meal you can maintain, consistency may outweigh ingredient transparency. Additionally, if comparing by-product meal food to plant-heavy formulas with minimal animal protein, the by-product meal provides animal-based protein and nutrients despite opacity. Context matters: avoid by-product meal if you can afford named proteins ('chicken meal,' 'beef meal'); consider it acceptable if budget requires compromise and the alternative is inadequate animal protein. Better approach: quality budget brands exist using named proteins at reasonable prices. You don't need premium pricing to avoid vague ingredients - prioritize brands that value transparency even in affordable formulas.

Analyze Your Dog's Food

Want to know what's really in your dog's food, treats, or supplements? Paste the ingredient list to get instant analysis.

Try the Analyzer Tool