Our verdict
Is Nature's Select Classic Chicken & Rice Recipe a good dog food?
We score it 48/100 (Average). This reflects the ingredient quality, composition and label transparency of the recipe as declared on the label.
Only part of the analytical constituents are declared, so the nutritional picture is incomplete.
100% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.
Who is this food for?
Suits
- Labelled by the manufacturer for adult dogs
- Single named protein: chicken
- Doesn't list beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients
Consider something else if:
- Your dog avoids grain: the label lists rice - brown / whole grain
These points are derived from declared ingredients and analysis, not a substitute for veterinary advice. If your dog has a diagnosed condition, food choice is a medical nutrition decision: speak to your vet. Find foods that fit your dog.
Ingredients (26)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- supplement 24.7%
- veg 24.0%
- carb 14.2%
- meat 14.1%
- fibre 11.0%
- additive 7.5%
- oil 4.5%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Deboned Chicken | Deboned Chicken | meat · good | - | 5.1 |
| 2 | Chicken Meal | Dried chicken protein | meat · good | - | 5.0 |
| 3 | Brown Rice | Rice - brown / whole grain | carb · medium | - | 4.9 |
| 4 | Grain Sorghum | Sorghum | carb · medium | - | 4.8 |
| 5 | Peas | Peas | veg · good | - | 4.7 |
| 6 | Millet | Millet | carb · good | - | 4.6 |
| 7 | Chicken Fat (Preserved with Mixed Tocopherols) | Chicken Oil and Fat | oil · good | - | 4.5 |
| 8 | Dried Yeast | Yeast | supplement · good | - | 4.4 |
| 9 | Dried Beet Pulp | Beet Pulp | fibre · medium | - | 4.3 |
| 10 | Flaxseed | Linseed | veg · good | - | 4.2 |
| 11 | Hydrolyzed Whole Chicken | Chicken | meat · medium | - | 4.1 |
| 12 | Natural Flavors | Flavor | additive · poor | - | 4.0 |
| 13 | Yeast Culture | Yeast | supplement · good | - | 3.9 |
| 14 | Dehydrated Alfalfa Meal | Alfalfa Meal | fibre · medium | - | 3.8 |
| 15 | Potassium Chloride | Potassium Chloride | supplement · medium | - | 3.7 |
| 16 | Dried Kelp | Kelp | veg · good | - | 3.6 |
| 17 | Salt | Salt | additive · poor | - | 3.5 |
| 18 | Choline Chloride | Choline | supplement · good | - | 3.4 |
| 19 | Dried Chicory Root | Chicory root | veg · good | - | 3.3 |
| 20 | Taurine | Taurine | supplement · good | - | 3.2 |
| 21 | DL-Methionine | Methionine | supplement · good | - | 3.1 |
| 22 | L-Carnitine | L-Carnitine | supplement · medium | - | 3.0 |
| 23 | Tomato Pomace | Tomato Pomace | fibre · medium | - | 2.9 |
| 24 | Carrots | Carrots | veg · good | - | 2.8 |
| 25 | Blueberries | Blueberries | veg · good | - | 2.7 |
| 26 | Cranberries | Cranberries | veg · good | - | 2.6 |
- 1. Deboned Chicken5.1% estimated
- 2. Chicken Meal5.0% estimated
- 3. Brown Rice4.9% estimated
- 4. Grain Sorghum4.8% estimated
- 5. Peas4.7% estimated
- 6. Millet4.6% estimated
- 7. Chicken Fat (Preserved with Mixed Tocopherols)4.5% estimated
- 8. Dried Yeast4.4% estimated
- 9. Dried Beet Pulp4.3% estimated
- 10. Flaxseed4.2% estimated
- 11. Hydrolyzed Whole Chicken4.1% estimated
- 12. Natural Flavors4.0% estimated
- 13. Yeast Culture3.9% estimated
- 14. Dehydrated Alfalfa Meal3.8% estimated
- 15. Potassium Chloride3.7% estimated
- 16. Dried Kelp3.6% estimated
- 17. Salt3.5% estimated
- 18. Choline Chloride3.4% estimated
- 19. Dried Chicory Root3.3% estimated
- 20. Taurine3.2% estimated
- 21. DL-Methionine3.1% estimated
- 22. L-Carnitine3.0% estimated
- 23. Tomato Pomace2.9% estimated
- 24. Carrots2.8% estimated
- 25. Blueberries2.7% estimated
- 26. Cranberries2.6% estimated
Nutrition and feedingProtein 24% · Fat 12%
Declared analysis (as fed)
| Nutrient | As fed |
|---|---|
| Protein | 24% |
| Fat | 12% |
| Fibre | 4.50% |
| Moisture | 10% |
| Omega-3 fatty acids | 0.50% |
| Omega-6 fatty acids | 2% |
| Calcium | 1.30% |
| Phosphorus | 0.80% |
Energy: 347 kcal/100g
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Follow daily feeding guidelines by weight (0-20 lbs: 1-1.5 cups; 21-30 lbs: 1.5-2 cups; 31-40 lbs: 2-2.5 cups; 41-50 lbs: 2.5-3 cups; 51-60 lbs: 3-3.5 cups; 61-70 lbs: 3.5-3.75 cups; 71-80 lbs: 3.75-4.25 cups; 81-90 lbs: 4.25-4.75 cups; 91-100 lbs: 4.75-5 cups; increase by 0.5 cup for every 10 lbs over 100 lbs). Split into two meals. Transition over 7 days.
Additives declared on the label
Nutritional additives
Zinc 200 mg/kg; Selenium 0.35 mg/kg; Vitamin E 150 IU/kg; Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C) 100 mg/kg; L-Carnitine 150 mg/kg; Taurine 0.1%; Glucosamine 500 mg/kg; DL-Methionine 0.45%; Zinc Sulfate; Ferrous Sulfate; Manganese Sulfate; Copper Sulfate; Zinc Proteinate; Manganese Proteinate; Copper Proteinate; Calcium lodate; Selenium Yeast; L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (Source of Vitamin C); Vitamin B3 (Niacin); Vitamin E Supplement; Vitamin B5 (Calcium Pantothenate); Vitamin B1 (Thiamine Mononitrate); Vitamin B6 (Pyridoxine Hydrochloride); Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin); Vitamin A Supplement; Vitamin B9 (Folic Acid); Vitamin B7 (Biotin); Vitamin B12 Supplement; Vitamin D3 Supplement
Technological additives
Mixed Tocopherols (Preservative); Rosemary Extract
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-09-19
Brand and contact: Nature's Select
- Phone
- 714-993-5500
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-09-19
- Scored with
- Model v3 (methodology)
- Product page
- naturesselectshop.com
Recall history is presentation-only and never affects the score. Dates are when we recorded the data, not when the manufacturer last changed the recipe.
Brand and retailer reviews
External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.
Trustpilot: 4.5/5 · 18 reviews
157 reviews on this product · 4.9/5
Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.
Score details and methodologyCalculations, history and evidence
Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated
Why this score?
This recipe achieves an overall rating of 48 out of 100. The inclusion of ingredients without printed percentages contributed -10.6 points, and the processing format adjusted the score by -6.7. Conversely, the overall quality of the ingredient list added +5.6 points, while being labelled nutritionally complete contributed +2.3 points to the final evaluation.
Scored with model v3 on 2026-10-25. Each component is the feature value for this product multiplied by the model's published coefficient.
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.6 | 9.191 | +5.56 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 16.0% | -0.115 | -1.85 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.092 | -0.52 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 15.3% | -0.005 | -0.08 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 8.6% | 0.163 | +1.41 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 29.2% | -0.012 | -0.36 |
| Recipe graded poor | 7.5% | -0.065 | -0.49 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 4.0% | 0.060 | +0.24 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Additive penalty | -9.07 | 0.222 | -2.01 |
| Processing multiplier | 0.98 | 33.786 | +33.11 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.6 | 9.191 | +5.56 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 16.0% | -0.115 | -1.85 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 5.7% | -0.092 | -0.52 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 15.3% | -0.005 | -0.08 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 8.6% | 0.163 | +1.41 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 29.2% | -0.012 | -0.36 |
| Other share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.375 | +0.00 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.027 | +0.00 |
| Recipe graded poor | 7.5% | -0.065 | -0.49 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 4.0% | 0.060 | +0.24 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | yes | 2.294 | +2.29 |
| Frozen or chilled fresh | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | no | 0.707 | +0.00 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| High carb and low meat | no | -1.180 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × printed percentages | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × fresh | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Fresh × high meat | 0.0 | 11.084 | +0.00 |
| Additive penalty | -9.07 | 0.222 | -2.01 |
| Processing multiplier | 0.98 | 33.786 | +33.11 |
| Processing: Raw | no | -0.054 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Chilled | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Refrigerated | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Freeze Dried | no | 6.629 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Air Dried | no | 6.331 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Cold Pressed | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Baked | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | yes | -6.713 | -6.71 |
| Processing: Dry Semi Moist | no | -6.174 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Muesli | no | -10.146 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- +0.02
- Additives declared on label
- +2 transparency bonus
- Subtotal
- 48.1
- Final score
- 48/100
Contributions are rounded to two decimals, so they may not sum exactly to the subtotal. The full coefficient table is published on the methodology page.
Nutritional: declared analysis vs reference ranges
How the declared analysis compares with FEDIAF reference ranges for adult dogs. The label prints as-fed values; we convert to a dry-matter basis before scoring, and the bands are dry-matter ranges. Scores rise to 100 at the band midpoint: the reference is adequacy, not maximisation. Nutrients with a published upper limit taper again above it; fat is policed through calorie density rather than a direct penalty.
Guaranteed-analysis FEDIAF score: crude minimums and maximums are bounds, not typical values; moisture (a maximum) uses the processing median where available; experimental US score.
| Nutrient | As fed (label) | Dry matter (scored) | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Protein | 24 | 26.5 (band 18 to 40%) | 93.2 |
| Fat | 12 | 13.3 (band 5.5 to 20%) | 100 |
| Fibre | 4.5 | 5 (band 0.5 to 5%) | 100 |
| Calcium | 1.3 | 1.4 (band 0.5 to 2.5%) | 98.1 |
| Phosphorus | 0.8 | 0.9 (band 0.4 to 1.6%) | 94.2 |
| Calcium:phosphorus ratio | 1.6 | 1.6 (band 1 to 2%) | 100 |
| Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3) | - | - | 100 |
| Energy (kcal/100g) | 347 | 383.4 | 100 |
Omega fatty acids (omega-6 and omega-3): scored as the mean of its declared components (omega-6 100). The FEDIAF minimum for omega-6 is linoleic acid specifically.
Scored over 8 declared nutrients (combined weight 100); undeclared nutrients do not affect the score. Moisture was not declared and was estimated at 9.5% from the food type.
Declared fortification: 29 nutritional additives on the label
- Zinc 200 mg/kg
- Selenium 0.35 mg/kg
- Vitamin E 150 IU/kg
- Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C) 100 mg/kg
- L-Carnitine 150 mg/kg
- Taurine 0.1%
- Glucosamine 500 mg/kg
- DL-Methionine 0.45%
- Zinc Sulfate
- Ferrous Sulfate
- Manganese Sulfate
- Copper Sulfate
- Zinc Proteinate
- Manganese Proteinate
- Copper Proteinate
- Calcium lodate
- Selenium Yeast
- L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (Source of Vitamin C)
- Vitamin B3 (Niacin)
- Vitamin E Supplement
- Vitamin B5 (Calcium Pantothenate)
- Vitamin B1 (Thiamine Mononitrate)
- Vitamin B6 (Pyridoxine Hydrochloride)
- Vitamin B2 (Riboflavin)
- Vitamin A Supplement
- Vitamin B9 (Folic Acid)
- Vitamin B7 (Biotin)
- Vitamin B12 Supplement
- Vitamin D3 Supplement
Low confidence: partial analysis or moisture estimated from the food type.
This measures agreement with published reference ranges, not suitability for an individual dog. For medical conditions, follow veterinary guidance.
Transparency: what the label discloses
How much the manufacturer discloses, measured against the FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice and Regulation 767/2009. Mandatory items dominate the weighting.
| Item | Points |
|---|---|
| Ingredient list on the label (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Printed percentages on the label (voluntary) - not on file | 0/20 |
| Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file | 0/15 |
| Additives declared (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Energy value declared (voluntary) | 5/5 |
| Complete/complementary designation (mandatory) | 5/5 |
| Feeding guidance given (mandatory) | 10/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| Country of manufacture stated (voluntary) | 10/10 |
| Batch and date labelling (mandatory) - not on file | 0/5 |
Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Analytical constituents declared, Batch and date labelling).
Safety: recall history
Recall and safety-notice history, time-decayed. This dimension is shown alongside the score and never feeds the headline number.
No recalls recorded in our database.
Evidence: what the brand claims, and what supports it
The claims made on the pack and product page, checked against the declared label. We record claims as stated; "consistent" means our stored label data supports the claim, "contradicted" means it conflicts with it. Functional claims are recorded but never scored.
100/100 · moderate — 2 checkable claims: 2 consistent, 0 contradicted.
Consistent with the label
- "formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrition Profiles for maintenance of adult dogs" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
- "complete and balanced" — supported by the declared complete and balanced data.
4 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Moderate: every checkable claim is consistent with the declared label.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| ideal for normally active adult dogs who enjoy the taste of chicken (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Perfect for adult dogs who want to maintain a healthy weight (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| smooth digestion thanks to prebiotics and probiotics (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrition Profiles for maintenance of adult dogs (on pack) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| complete and balanced (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| top seller since our humble beginnings in 1994 (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Alternatives to Classic Chicken & Rice Recipe
Similar on ingredients, protein, format or nutrition, using the same stored data.
Community0 comments
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.