Does the size of a cat affect the size of a whole prey meal?

Does the size of a given cat influence the optimal weight of its meal in a whole prey diet? From previous articles on the Raw Petfood animal nutrition blog, we are already familiar with the broad profile of typical feline prey as well as the equally diverse spectrum of their sizes. Cats have revealed themselves to be predators with exceptionally flexible preferences and capabilities. They can adapt to almost any ecosystem, very quickly becoming specialists in hunting the available prey species—ranging from insects to animals as large as wallabies matching them in weight. These findings do not make it easier to determine the optimal prey-weight range for cats on a whole prey diet. In the article below, we will examine whether the body weight of an individual cat brings us closer to an answer.

What relationship might exist between a cat’s body weight and the size of its meal?

From the article on typical prey sizes in nature, we already know that the range of animal weights appearing on a cat’s menu is extremely wide—especially when scavenged carrion occasionally consumed by cats is taken into account. For the purposes of this article, however, we will leave livestock to BARF feeders and focus on smaller animals that constitute feline prey. After all, when discussing a whole prey diet for cats, this usually refers to mice, rats and other rodents, day-old chicks, quail, or possibly rabbits. Some scientific publications also describe a general rule according to which felid species weighing over 10 kg consume prey larger than themselves, while those weighing under 10 kg tend to select prey smaller than their own body mass. This aligns with the logical principle that the larger the predator, the larger the prey it typically consumes.

But how does this apply to domestic cats? Should the selection of whole prey components differ for a roughly 2 kg Singapura compared to a 10 kg Maine Coon? Although such extreme differences in body mass are not commonly observed among cats living in the wild, the analyses cited in the bibliography of this article may nevertheless bring us closer to answering the question posed in the title.

A cat’s body weight may be related to the size of the prey it consumes for several reasons. Obvious factors include hunting skills, which develop with age and thus with body mass—young individuals may have more limited access to larger prey simply due to the difficulty of capturing it. One study also proposed, supported by anecdotal evidence, that in areas heavily populated by larger prey species (such as rabbits), natural selection within cat populations favors larger overall body size and longer lifespan. This, in turn, would translate into greater hunting success with relatively large prey.

In practice, however, body mass is most important in considerations of whole prey meal size primarily because of its direct relationship with bite force. Numerous studies report that an individual’s body weight is the factor with the greatest influence on bite force. Body mass proved more significant than sex, age, or even body condition. Heavier cats are simply capable of generating greater mechanical bite force than lighter ones.

Bite force and meal size in a cat’s whole prey diet

Predators rely heavily on the head and jaws when capturing, immobilizing, and consuming prey. For this reason, skull morphology and bite force can significantly affect a wild hunter’s ability to handle larger or more difficult-to-capture prey. Among felids, this relationship is particularly pronounced, as their hunting method and killing mechanics rely largely on the effective, precise use of the jaws.

The mechanics of a cat’s jaw fit the general pattern of predator skull construction. It is characterized by a high coronoid process and a hinge-like mandibular condyle, which improves the mechanical leverage of the temporalis muscle responsible for generating strong jaw closure. In addition, the teeth are aligned with the condyle, facilitating efficient transmission of bite force. The masseter and pterygoid muscles also play an important role, contributing to jaw adduction and lateral stabilization during prey capture, immobilization, and manipulation.

What distinguishes felids from other predators is their short muzzle, and consequently the short external lever arm of jaw pressure. This structure favors the development of powerful jaw muscles, enabling rapid and mechanically efficient mouth closure and a very strong grip. It is an adaptation essential for subduing live prey that often fights fiercely for its life.

This anatomy contrasts sharply with longer-muzzled skulls, such as those typical of dogs, where a longer lever favors higher jaw movement speed. Such an arrangement is characteristic of predators specializing in relatively smaller, more agile prey, as well as species that hunt through prolonged chases or ambush from a distance.

Within the felid family, the domestic cat lineage is particularly noteworthy. Species in this group are characterized by a relatively broad “face,” and the ratio of zygomatic arch width to skull length is clearly greater than in most other felids. The domestic cat skull is also relatively wide, with a well-developed braincase and robust cheekbones—features typically associated with strongly developed masseter muscles. This anatomical configuration favors the generation of substantial bite force despite the animal’s small absolute size.

It is therefore not surprising that many studies assume that a cat’s size and skull shape—directly influencing bite force—may play a decisive role in prey size selection. Predators, including cats, rely on head and jaw structure not only when killing but also when acquiring and processing food. After immobilizing prey with the forelimbs and claws, a cat typically crushes the cervical vertebrae with its jaws, severing the spinal cord. The occasional tossing and striking of prey before the final kill is interpreted as a way to exhaust it, reducing the risk of injury from defensive biting or scratching.

An increase in so-called “bite performance,” likely encompassing both bite force itself and the efficiency of its application, may have significance beyond hunting. In many species, improvement in this trait enhances territorial defense and may indirectly influence reproductive success. Cats are territorial animals and use both claws and teeth in conflicts with other individuals. Those with greater bite force may have an advantage in direct physical confrontations. Bite force is also relevant in reproduction, as males grasp females by the scruff during copulation, inducing a characteristic immobilization reflex while protecting themselves from aggression. For this reason, bite force in cats need not be solely a product of prey-related selection; sexual selection may also play a role.

Felids exhibit considerable variation in body size, and skull size and structure strongly correlate with bite force and the maximum prey size a given species or individual can handle. Bite force thus serves as a useful indicator of prey-handling ability and indirectly reveals potential dietary differences among these predators.

It should be noted that in scientific studies, bite force is often estimated based on skull analyses that consider muscle attachment areas. This method is “retrospective,” reflecting past conditions. For a given attachment area to be biologically meaningful, the animal must at some point have possessed adequately developed muscles. This means that current dental status or muscle condition is not always the key predictor of bite force; conditions during maturation or early adulthood may be more relevant.

An illustrative example frequently cited in the literature involves a large tomcat weighing 4.24 kg with a bite force higher than predicted for its body mass. The cat was completely toothless. The lack of teeth made age determination difficult, but closed cranial sutures indicated the animal was likely over six years old. Despite this, its stomach contained as many as ten mice and a domestic chicken, clearly demonstrating that even with severe dental impairment, the cat remained an effective predator. This case shows that hunting ability and prey handling depend not only on current dental condition but also on overall skull structure, prior muscle development, and learned hunting strategies.

Can a cat’s sex influence the size of its meal?

At first glance, the question of whether a cat’s sex affects whole prey meal size may seem of little importance, especially since many domestic cats are neutered. In reality, however, the issue is justified because cats exhibit pronounced sexual dimorphism. This means that females and males differ in body structure, and these differences are not limited solely to reproductive anatomy.

Studies conducted on free-ranging cats in Australia showed that males reached body weights from 3.4 to 7.3 kg, while females weighed from 2.5 to 5 kg. Females were therefore on average nearly half as light as males, while males exhibited an estimated bite force that was 20.0% greater. Importantly, the interaction between sex and body mass was included in all best-fitting statistical models. Males showed a more pronounced increase in estimated bite force with increasing body mass than females.

These differences may be relevant to prey selection. Larger prey is generally more difficult to hunt and subdue, and immobilizing it may require greater muscle mass and a stronger skeletal structure. Interestingly, the opposite relationship was observed in smaller individuals: small males had lower estimated bite force than females of comparable body mass. As size increased, however, this pattern reversed, with large males achieving greater estimated bite force than females of the same mass.

Although studies show that even small cats can handle relatively large and potentially dangerous prey, most analyses nevertheless indicate large tomcats as predators with a broader prey spectrum. This follows directly from their greater body mass and stronger bite force, which translate into higher effectiveness in handling larger animals.

The studies forming the basis of this article primarily concern domestic, free-ranging, and wild representatives of Felis catus, but similar relationships are also observed in other felids. An example is the bobcat, which also exhibits pronounced sexual dimorphism. Male bobcats weigh on average about 8.4 kg, while females average around 6.2 kg. Dietary studies have shown that males more frequently consume white-tailed deer, which is linked to their ability to hunt larger prey and defend their kills from other predators. Females, on the other hand, more often select smaller prey such as snowshoe hares.

It can therefore be concluded that males achieve greater body mass and bite force, potentially allowing them to hunt a wider range of prey. Other studies, however, found no significant differences in the proportion of rabbits in the diet of “immature” females weighing under 2.2 kg, males under 3.5 kg, and cats classified as “mature.” This indicates that although sex and associated body mass and bite force may influence the potential prey size range, in practice cat diets remain largely flexible and dependent on prey availability.

A cat’s age and the size of its meal

Another factor appearing in analyses of prey size selection is age. In the studies underlying these considerations, age proved to be the strongest predictor of prey size. Older cats hunted the largest prey on average. It should be emphasized, however, that although this relationship was statistically significant, its predictive power remained relatively weak.

In practice, this means that despite a clear trend, very large variation in hunting behavior was observed. Even small, younger cats were capable of catching and consuming relatively large and potentially “dangerous” prey that could actively resist. Conversely, some of the largest individuals in the studied sample consumed very small prey, including invertebrates. Age therefore does not unequivocally determine meal size, but rather increases the likelihood of selecting larger prey.

The ability to handle larger prey increases with age for several reasons. First, older individuals exhibit greater estimated bite force. Studies have shown that age had a significant effect on this parameter—older cats generated greater jaw force than younger animals. Similar age-related increases in estimated bite force have been observed in many other predator species, suggesting a general biological phenomenon rather than one specific to domestic cats.

Second, hunting experience increases with age. Older cats have an advantage over younger individuals because their skills develop through repeated exposure to an increasingly broad range of prey types. Repeated hunting attempts, encounters with different defensive strategies, and the need to adapt to varying prey sizes and behaviors lead to gradual improvements in hunting efficiency.

As a result, older Felis catus individuals not only possess greater mechanical jaw strength but are also better able to use it. They should therefore have a greater capacity to handle prey regardless of individual differences in temperament or current condition. At the same time, research clearly shows that age does not limit younger and smaller cats—even they are capable of effectively hunting relatively large prey. In the context of a whole prey diet, this means that while a cat’s age may favor the selection of larger dietary items, it should not be treated as the sole or decisive determinant of meal size.

Differences resulting from the origin of the studied cats

Clear differences in estimated bite force were recorded depending on the environment from which the cats originated. Wild rural cats had higher estimated bite force than urban stray cats, despite no significant differences in body mass between these groups. These differences were most evident among younger and smaller individuals, where wild cats clearly outperformed their stray counterparts. This suggests that regular contact with live prey may influence jaw strength development, and differences in diet composition—including a greater share of live prey in free-ranging cats—likely drive the observed disparities.

Interestingly, although in one study stray cats had slightly larger heads, they simultaneously exhibited lower estimated bite force than wild cats. This difference was evident even at comparable body mass—lighter wild cats had greater estimated bite force than lighter stray cats.

The greatest dietary differences between wild rural cats and urban stray cats concerned the availability of live prey. Wild cats had a much higher proportion of house mice, rabbits, reptiles, and invertebrates in their diet, whereas human-derived waste played a significant role for stray cats. On average, 18.8% to 30.0% of stomach content volume in the examined stray cat sample consisted of refuse—mainly human food remains, as well as plastic, paper, and foil. These data indicate that cats living near human settlements modify their diet according to food availability or preferences for easily accessible scraps, whose acquisition and ingestion require far less jaw force than hunting live prey.

Conclusions on the relationship between a cat’s body mass and meal size

Data analysis indicates that prey body mass is positively correlated with a cat’s age, body mass, and bite force. These relationships were not very strong, primarily due to the extremely wide range of prey sizes hunted by all cats regardless of individual traits.

The results once again show that even small cats are capable of consuming large prey, while some of the largest individuals opt for very small prey such as invertebrates. Moreover, none of the analyzed factors—body mass, age, sex, or bite force—proved to be a predictor of the body mass of prey classified as “dangerous.”

At the same time, a cat’s physical condition had no significant effect on estimated bite force. This means that even individuals with nutritional deficiencies and poorer body condition were able to achieve similar estimated jaw force values as cats with relatively large body mass.

Many of the cited data pertain to situations in which body mass, sex, age, and bite force influence hunting success. In a whole prey diet, this factor loses its original importance. Cats receive prey in their bowls already dead, devoid of defensive capabilities, ordered by caregivers from a prey supplier. Jaw strength and acquired experience primarily affect the physical ability to consume prey of a given size, rather than the ability to obtain it.

It is therefore unsurprising to state that the larger the cat, the theoretically larger the prey it can consume. Based on the cited studies, more detailed conclusions can also be drawn: larger tomcats statistically have a greater chance of handling large whole prey items than similarly sized females, and cats exposed to whole prey early in life may show greater proficiency in consuming larger prey.

Should a cat’s size therefore influence the size of whole prey meals? The collected data suggest that it should. Taking all available information into account, the optimal whole prey size for a cat appears to be prey as large as the individual cat can consume without difficulty, while remembering to diversify the diet with smaller items.

Bibliography:

1. A global synthesis and assessment of freeranging domestic cat diet, Christopher A. Lepczyk, Jean E. Fantle-Lepczyk, Kylee D. Dunham, Elsa Bonnaud, Jocelyn Lindner, Tim S. Doherty & John C. Z. Woinarski.
2. Michael J. Konecny. Food habits and energetics of feral house cats in the Galápagos Islands.
3. Széles, G. L., Purger, J. J., Molnár, T., & Lanszki, J. Comparative analysis of the diet of feral and house cats and wildcat in Europe.
4. MacDonald, M. L., Rogers, Q. R. & Morris, J. G. Nutrition of the domestic cat, a mammalian carnivore.
5. Pearre, S. Jr. & Maass, R. Trends in the prey size-based trophic niches of feral and House Cats Felis catus.
6. Patricia A. Fleming, Heather M. Crawford, Clare H. Auckland and Michael C. Calver, Body Size and Bite Force of Stray and Feral Cats—Are Bigger or Older Cats Taking the Largest or More Difficult-to-Handle Prey?
7. Childs, J.E. (1986) Size-dependent predation on rats (Rattus norvegicus) by house cats (Felis catus) in an urban setting.
8. Glass, G.E.; Gardner-Santana, L.C.; Holt, R.D.; Chen, J.; Shields, T.M.; Roy, M.; Schachterle, S.; Klein, S.L. Trophic garnishes: Cat–rat interactions in an urban environment.
9. Dickman, C. R. & Newsome, T. M. Individual hunting behaviour and prey specialization in the house cat Felis catus: Implications for conservation and management.
10. Woinarski, J. C. Z. et al. Compilation and traits of Australian bird species killed by cats.
11. Collier, G. L. , Kaufman, W. , Kanarek, R., Fagen, J. 1978. Optimization of Time and Energy Constraints in the Feeding Behavior of Cats: A Laboratory Simulation.
12. Kanarek, R. B. 1975. Availability and caloric density of the diet as determinants of meal patterns in cats.
13. Kane, E., Rogers, Q. R., Morris, J. G., Leung, P. M. B. 1981. Feeding behavior of the cat fed laboratory and commercial diets [Drinking patterns, voluntary food consumption, appetite].
14. Kaufman, J. W., Collier, G., Hill, W. J., Collins, K. Meal cost and meal patterns in an uncaged domestic cat.
15. Konecny, M.J. (1987) Food habits and energetics of feral house cats in the Galápagos Islands.
16. Murphy, B.P.; Legge, S.M.; Palmer, R.; Dickman, C.R.; Augusteyn, J.; Comer, S.; Doherty, T.S.; Eager, C.; et al. Introduced cats Felis catus eating a continental fauna: Inventory and traits of Australian mammal species killed.