• No results found

LAYERS BASED ON BODY WEIGHT OR

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "LAYERS BASED ON BODY WEIGHT OR"

Copied!
6
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

A COMPARISON

OF

PERFORMANCE

AND

EGG

WEIGHT^

ENERGY

INTAKE

OF COMMERCIAL

LAYERS

BASED

ON

BODY

WEIGHT

OR

R H. HARMS2,

V.

OLlVERO, and G.

B. RUSSELL

D e p m e n t of Daily and Poulby Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 Phone: (352) 392-1932

E-mail: russell@dps.ufl.edu

FAX: (352) 392-3047

Primary Audience: Nutritionists,

Egg

Producers,

Extension

Workers

DESCRIPTION

OF

PROBLEM

The National Research Council [ 1

J

in 1971 calculated the nutrient requirement of the commercial laying hen as a percentage of the diet. In the next edition [2], the requirement was again expressed as a percentage of the diet, but also included a suggested daily intake per hen based on feed consumption (FC) of

110 @day. Harms et d. [3] designed a feeding program for commercial layers in which the nutrient content of the diet was changed as

feed intake changed. The basis of the require- ments was again modified by

NRC

[4] when the requirement was expressed as a percent- age of the diet and as a daily requirement per hen, assuming an average daily feed intake of 110 g. In the latest NRC

[5]

revision, the

requirement was expressed as a percentage of the diet when the hen consumes 80, 100, or

l.20 &day.

It has previouslybeen suggested [6,7,8,9]

that pullets should be housed based on

body weight (BW). This practice resulted in

segregating pullets as to age at sexual maturity. Therefore, it has been questioned whether one feed wiU furnish the requirement for all

hens in a flock. It has been reported

[lo]

that daily egg production (EP) did not differ sig-

nificantly between light, medium, and heavy hens. Egg weight

(EW)

increased significantly

as

BW

increased, accompanied by an increase in

FC

and energy intake. Harms and Russell

[ll] also assigned hens into three groups based on

EW

at 42 wk of age. They found that BW was positively related to egg output.

1 Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Journal Series No. R06978.

(2)

180

Tqptophan

ENERGY FOR LAYING HENS

0.18

Feed intake increased as egg output in-

creased, resulting in essentially the same amount of energy and Met consumed per g

of egg content (EC) for all three groups. The Met intake of hens increased with each increase in EC; however, the MeVg EC did not differ for the three groups. Recently, Harms [ 121 suggested that the ratio of energy to Met should be considered when formu- lating feed for commercial layers. Therefore, the present experiment was conducted to study the relationship of EW or BW to energy intake, as well as to energylg EC, and to de- termine whether EW or BW would be affected in any of the three groups when fed the same feed.

Cvstine

M~TERTALS

AND

METHODS

0.28

The experiment employed 150 Hy-Line W-36 [D] pullets 22 wk of age placed in indi- vidual cages in awindowless, tunnel-ventilated house. The first 2 wk were considered as an adjustment period and collection of experi- mental data was started when the hens were

24 wk of age. A corn-soybean meal diet was fed (Table 1). The feed was supplied to in- dividual hens in two plastic cups. The data for the 25- to 27-wk age period for analysis of future performance was used to divide the pullets into three groups based on BW or EW. The comparative measurements were made for 10 wk (27 to 38 wk of age). The three groups were selected based on BW. The hens were also selected on the basis of EW. The 10 hens with the heaviest BW or EW and the hens with the lightest BW or EW were dis-

carded before selecting the respective groups. The next 40 lightest hens constituted the light BW or EW group. The 30 hens with the average BW or EW constituted the medium group. Ten hens at the extremes of this group were eliminated. The next 40 hens were selected as the heaviest group.

Daily EP for each hen was recorded and averaged for the week. One egg laid from each hen during the last 2 days of the week was welghed. These eggs were broken out. Researchers washed the shells, allowed them to

dry,

and weighed them. EC was calculated by multiplying the percentage of EP by EW minus shell welght. FC was measured at the end of each week, and fresh feed was placed in the cups. The kcal of energy consumed per

dav was calculated bv multidvine the dailvFC

Threonine Arginine Valine Isoleucine Leucine Histidine Phenyialanine Energy (kcal MEVkg)

TABLE 1. Composition of layer diet

INGREDIENT % OF DIET 058 0.97 0.70 059 0.39 0.41 0.76 2810 Yellow corn

I

68.40 CALCULATED VALUES (%)D Protein Calcium Methionine Methionine

+

Cvstine 0.66 Lvsine

I

0.78

by the energy content of the feed. The kcal energy per/g EC was calculated by dividing daily energy intake by daily EC. The hens were individually weighed on the last day of each week.

The data for each measurement were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA [14].

Duncan’s multiple range test [15] was used to determine differences amone treatments.

(3)

HARMS et al. 181

RESULTS

AND

DISCUSSION

SELECTION BASED ON BODY WEIGHT There were no significant differences in EP (Table 2) among the three groups. In con- trast, there were significant differences among the three groups for EW at 28 wk (Table 3).

The differences in BW remained consistent and sigtllficant for the 10-wk experiment. The medium group was 103 g heavier than the light group at 28 wk, up to 111 g heavier at 38 wk. The heavy group was 125 g heavier than the medium group at 28 wk, up to 166 g heavier at

38 wk.

EW differed significantly for each group at 28 wk of age (Table 4). The medium hens laid eggs that were 1.3 g heavier than eggs laid by the light group; the heavy hens laid eggs

2.9 g heavier than those of the medium hens. The difference in EW for the three groups was consistent for the 10-wk period.

FC was higher for the medium hens than for the light hens (Table

Z),

and the

FC

was higher for the heavy groups than for the me- dium group. The medium hens consumed

8.6 kcaVday more energy than did the light hens during Week 28 (Table 5). The heavy hens consumed 36.6 kcal more energy than did the light hens at this age.

This

trend for consumption of energy was consistent for the

10 wk. T h e medium hens consumed

17.6 k 4 d a y more energy than did the light hens during Week 37, and the heavy hens consumed 16.5 k d d a y more than did the medium hens at this age.

The energy consumed/g EC was essen-

tially the same for both the light and medium hens (Table 6). Although the difference was not significant, the heavy hens consistently consumed higher energy/g EC than did the medium and light hens.

There were signifcant differences among the three groups for BW at 28 wk (Table 7).

The medium group weighed 52 g more than the light group. The heavy group weighed 99 g more than the medium group. These differ- ences existed throughout the 10-wk experi- ment. At 38 wk the medium group weighed

38 g more than the light group, and the heavy group weighed 44 g more than the medium group.

SELECTION BASED ON EGG WEIGHT Egg production did not differ sigolfcantly among the three groups (Table 2). However, EW was significantly different for the three groups at 28 wk (Table 8). Eggs from the me- dium group weighed 3.0 g more than those from the light group. Eggs from the heavy group weighed 4.0 g more than the eggs from the light group. Significant differences be- tween groups existed for the 10-wk experi-

(4)

182

AGE

ENERGY FOR LAYING HENS

BODY WEIGHT GROUP Light

I

Medium

I

Heavy

AGE

I

beueamwithin rowswith the same superscripts do not

I

differ significantlv (P < .OS).

BODY WEIGHT GROUP

Light

1

Medium Heavy

w e a n s w i t h i n a rowwith the same superscript do not differ significantly (P < .OS).

ment. At 37 wk there was 3.6 g difference be- tween the medium and light groups in the weight of eggs. Also, there was a difference between the medium and heavy groups of 4.1 g

in the weight of the eggs.

FC was significantly different among the three groups (Table 2). The light group had a FC of %.6 g/hen/day as compared to 102.0

and 105.6 g for the medium and heavy groups, respectively.

TABLE 5. Energy intake of hens grouped according

to body weight

AGE BODY WEIGHT GROUP

Light

I

Medium

I

Heavy

wk kcayheddav 28

I

2 4 S b

I

254.1b

I

282.1' 29 253.2b 262.Ob 284.1' 30 252.OC 264.6b 281.0' 31 276.3' 289.2b 303.8' 32 279.9b 296.1' 307.6' 275.1' 289.1b 311.8' 274.8' 294.Ob 313.6' 270.2' 36 274.0b 293.6' 305.8' 37 2735' 291.1b 307.9'

I

w e a m w i t h i n a rowwith the same superscript do not

I

differ significantly (P < .OS).

TABLE 6. Energy intakelg egg content from hens

I

I

5::

I

558'

I

5.878

1

w e a m w i t h i n a rowwith the same superscript do not differ significantly (P e .OS).

6.02' 5.74a

Energy intake/hen/day (Table 9) was always higher, but not always significant, based on weight. There was a difference of

12 k d d a y between the light and medium groups at 28 days. This gap increased to

17 kcal at 37 wk. There was 15 kcal difference between the medium and heavy groups at

37 wk of age.

Hens in the heavy group consumed si&- icantly less energy/g EC than did the other two

(5)

AGE

wk

HARMS et al.

EGG WEIGHT GROUP

Light Medium Heavy

kcal/hen/dav 183 32 33 34 35

TABLE 7. Body weights of hens grouped according to egg weight

EGG WEIGHT GROUP

283' 296b 315'

2rSb 299a 301'

282b 294b

ma

276b 298a 297a

w e a m w i t h i n mwswith the same superscriptsdo not differ si@icantly (P < .OS).

33 545' 58.0b 62.2"

34 55.3' 59.1b 625'

7

TABLE 8. Egg weight of hens grouped according to egg weight

EGG WEIGHT GROUP

I

28

I

51.6'

I

54.6b

I

58.6'

I

I

29

I

53.3'

I

56.10

I

59.9

I

I

30

I

53.4'

I

56.9b

I

60.2'

I

I

31

I

53.T

I

57Sb

I

61.1'

I

I

32

I

54.4'

I

58.2b

I

61.9

1

55.9" 63.6' 63.1' 56.1' 63.8'

w e a m w i t h i n rowswith thesamesuperscriptsdo not differ significantly (P < .OS).

groups at 28 wk and at 35 wk (Table 10). How- ever, for the remainder of the experiment there was no difference among the three groups. The value of 5.23 g for the heavy group at 28 wk did not appear to be correct. If a

missing value were calculated for the heavy group, it would be 5.82. This figure would agree with values for the light and medium groups.

Hens selected based either on BW or EW at 25 wk remained in their respective groups to 38 wk of age (Tables 3 and 7). This finding

28

I

252'

1

ma

I

2 a a 29

I

250'

I

2Mib

I

%la 30

I

256b

I

272"

I

282'

I

31

I

278b

I

290b

I

306a 36

I

281'

I

2wa

I

297a 37

I

276'

I

293b

I

ma

w e a m w i t h i n rowswith the same superscriptsdo not differ significantly (P < .OS).

TABLE 10. Energy intake/g egg content from hens

6.043' 5.802' 5.975' 5.712' 37 5.824'

I

w e a n s w i t h m rowswith thesamesuperscriptsdonot

I

differ sienificantlv (P < .OS).

agrees with previous reports [6,7,8,9]. At the end of the experiment, the BW of the heavy hens was 277 g heavier than the BW of the light hens (Table 7) as compared to 83 g difference when selected on EW.

The average EP for the 10 wk was not

significantly different when hens were selected based on BW or EW (Table 2). However, the average difference in EW between the light and heavy groups was 4.4 g when selected for BW as compared to 7.3 g when selected on the basis of EW (Table 2).

(6)

184 ENERGY FOR LAYING HENS Hens selected for the respective weight

groups continued to produce significantly

dif-

ferent amounts of EC regardless of whether they were selected on the basis of BW or EW (data not shown). When hens were selected on EW, the shell we+t (SW) of the medium hens was heavier than the SW of the hght hens (Table 2), and the SW was significantly heavier from the heavy hens than the SW from the medium hens. When the hens were selected for BW, the SW from the light group was sig- nificantly lower than SW from the other two groups. However, there was no difference in SW for the medium and heavy groups.

FC was sigolficantly different among the three groups for hens selected on BW or hens selected for EW (Table 2).

This

difference was significant each week regardless of themethod of selection (not shown). The difference in FC

resulted in increased energy intake (Tables 5 and 9) since all groups received the same feed. The major cause for the increased energy in- take as the hens became heavier was result of the increased production of EC (Table 2) with increased BW. However, the heavy hens con- sumed more energy/g EC when selected on

the basis of BW than was consumed by the light and medium groups (Table 6). There was no

significant difference in the energy con- sumed/g EC when the hens were selected on

the basis of EW (Table 10). This finding agrees with a previous report [ll].

Energy intake increased as EC increased.

This consistency allowed all three groups to produce 1 g EC on approximately the same energy (Table 2), indicating that individual hens consume the feed to meet their individual energy needs.

CONCLUSIONS

AND

APPLICATIONS

1. Egg production was not affected by selection of hens based on body or egg weight.

2. Egg weights were greater as body weight increased.

3. Feed and energy intakes were greater with each increase in egg content.

4. The energy required to produce 1 g of egg content was approximately the same for medium and heavy groups when selected for egg weight. The energy required to produce 1 g of egg content was always lower for the light group regardless of the basis of selection.

REFERENCES

AND

Noms

1. National Research Council, 1971. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 6th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

2. National Research Council, 1977. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 7th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

3. Harms, R E , C.R Douglas, RB. Christmas, B.L Damron, and RD. Miles, 1978. Feeding commercial lay- ers for maximum performance. Feedstuffs 50(8):23-24.

4. National Research Councll, 1984. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 8th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

5. National Research Council, 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.

6. Quisenbcrry, J.H., J.W. Bradley, J.R Cathey, F.D.

Thornberry, and S A Nag& 1967. J3cd wei t and laying orkers (Abs).

Grformance. Pages 302-303 in: Proc.

Lex

968 n. S. Agric.

7. Thornberry, F.D. and J.H. Quisenberry, 1968. The effects of pullet body we1 t at housing on laying hen performance. Poultry S i .

z

71727 (Abs).

8. Bell, D.D., 1968. Eighteen-week b weight and performance in caged layers. Poultry Sci.21655 (Abs).

9. Leeson, S. and J.D. Summers, 1987. Effect of im- mature body weight on laying performance. Poultry Sci.

66:1924-1928.

10. Harms, RH., P.T. Costa, and R D . Mil- 1982.

Daily feed intake and

according to their b z w e i g h t . Poultry Sci. 61:1O8?yg

11. H a m s , RH. and G.B. Rnssell, 1996. Ability of commercial laying hens producing different egg outputs to meet their methionine and ene requirements when fed the same diets. Poultry Sci. 75%9-521.

12. Harms, RH., 1999. Modified laying hen feeding specifications takin into account energy:amino acid ratio. Feedstuffs 71(fl):l, 20-22.

rformance of laying hens

13. Hy-Line International, West Des Moines, IA

50265.

14. SAS Institute, 1990. SAS User's Guide, Statistics.

15. Duncan, D.B., 1955. Multiple range and multiple SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC.

References

Related documents

The service parameters reflect the end user view of the network chain, which means parameters like voice quality, data throughput, lost SDS’s, speech delay etc.. The overall

The abbreviation VoIP means Voice over Internet Protocol and describes a technology of transferring voice and control information (in the form of digital data) over a standardized

Proximate analysis: Crude protein  Principle and Scope..  Sample preparation

In his book, Shakti Mohan Singh describes this as Moebius-strip of reality, where direct and reverse zodiac sign progressions follow each other in never-ending,

c) Regulation 36(3) of the Electricity Regulations 1994 states that for an installation where hand-held equipment, apparatus or appliance is likely to be used, protection

&gt; Development Community: Potential for new revenue stream for building owners with surplus parking; also a justification for building less parking because it would enable more

This research investigates whether the financial literacy of individuals influences risk taking decisions and diversification behavior. This issue is relevant in that investors

RDUC Reduce and Improve Capitol Dental Care, Lebanon Community Hospital Linn 1/1/19 12/31/21 SDoHWG Social Determinants of Health Workgroup InterCommunity Health Network CCO