Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1899-05-19

VIII Poultry Thrive ON Grain Aionef
F. H. Hall, giving results Of expert
ments in feeding poultry at the New
York Agricultural College. says:
Cheap Protein.-In feeding poul-
try. as in feeding other animals
and all plants, the heterogeneous
compounds are the most expen-
sive. We can economize in fer
ltilizer-buying by selecting the brand
,or chemical whose composition proves
It best and cheapest; in cattle-feeding
the shifting prices Of the various by
products allow us to discriminate to
our advantage In the purchase Of pro-
'tein; and a still wider difference sep
'arates the cost Of heterogeneous mate
,rials in the many poultry foods. Fowls
and ducks naturally eat considerable
animal matter as well as vegetable
food. Can we economic here? Is the
cheap protein Of peameal. oatmeal,
wheat bran or linseed meal as efficient
as that in the more expensive animal
meal, dried blood or fresh bone; or
must we include some form Of animal
nitrogen in our rations to replace the
grasshoppers and earthworms Of nat
ural poultry life?
Animal Nitrogen Best.-"Experi-
ments made at the station with
chicks, pullets, cockerels and duck
lings seem to indicate conclusive
ly that part of the protein must be
drawn from animal sources II we are
to get the best results; and, with duck
fings In particular, some form OF ami
NAL food in addition to skim-milk or
curd, seems essential for the mainte-
nance Of health and vigor.
Tests with Chicks.-Two sets OF
trials were made with chicks. One lot
in the first trial was carried from one
half week of age until twenty-five
weeks old upon grain mixture Oh
corn meal (12), wheat -four az. ground
oats (2), wheat bran ~, wheat mid
Idlings ~, peameal U and old process
,linseed meal ~, with wheat, corn, an
,imal meal and fresh bone. The CORE
spending lot upon vegetable food re-
!ceived a grain mixture OF pea meal
i(6). old process linseed meal az, wheat
bran (O, ground oats (2), high grade
gluten meal (2), wheat middlings ~
land cornmeal ~, with wheat, corn
and skim-milk or curd. These two
rations were practically equivalent, SO
far as amounts Of protein are con-
icerned, although the animal meal
feed had little wider nutritive ratio
than the grain feed. The distinctive
difference was that in the first ration
about two-fifths of the protein came
from animal sources, while in the
other ration all came from grain ex-
cept a little from skim-milk. In the
second trial the chicks were started at
six weeks and carried for fourteen
weeks, the contrasted rations being as
in the first trial.
f; Results with Chicks-In each trial
more food was eaten by the lot receiv-
ing animal protein, the gain in weight
was more rapid and maturity was
reached earlier, less food was required
for each pound Of gain, and the cost
of gain was less. During the first
twelve weeks of the first trial the
chicks on animal meal gained Sc per
cent more than those on the vegetable
diet, although they ate only SO per
cent more; they required half pound
less of dry matter to gain one pound,
and each pound of gain cost only Az
cents. as compared with is cents for
the granted birds. During the next
eight weeks the cost Of gain was IN
cents and IL 1-5 cents, respectively.
The animal-meal chicks reached two
pounds in weight more than five weeks
before the others; they reached three
hounds more than eight weeks sooner;
and three pullets of the lot began lay
ing four weeks earlier than any among
the grain-fed birds. With the second
lot of chicks, starting at six weeks OF
age, the differences were in the same
direction, though not quite SO strik-
ing; thus showing that the great ad-
vantage of the animal nitrogen is in
promoting quick, healthy growth and
early maturity, rather than increasing
the tendency to fatten.