ASH AND GRIT FOR GROWING CHICKS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2651, 4 January 1905, Page 31

ASH AND GRIT FOR GROWING CHICKS.

Think 'wha£ the. chick , or' duckling does during the" first three months of its growth.? i Marvin* 15, 18,' -or mor&-years,\ may multiply his birth- weighi' by' 20"; the calf we'iglling'from 501b, : 751b" may in three years-: became .a..- cow; bull or" steer "of from 9001b to 12001b But the chick in 10 weeks often shows a gain of 1500 pei\ cent., and dxicklings may add from 50 to 100 per cent, to their weight weekly. And the growth is not of flesh, fat, 'or soft tissue merely ; for the extensive, strong, bony framework must be formed with equal rapidity. — Grains Defieent in Ash. — Cannot the birds secure from grains the ash elements needed to supply the demand for bone material? If 10 per cent, of the daily increase in weight is made up of ash, then the fowl must either consume foods which contain somewhere near this percentage, must store up a very large proportion of what enters the body, or must con- ! sume excessive quantities of food to eecure the necessary mineral elements. . - | The ordinary grains will not supply this ash in any such proportion. Indian corn j contains only 1£ per cent, of ash, wheat lese than 2 per cent., wheat screening or oate 3 per cent., middlings 3 1-3 per cent., and bran, which is richest in this element I of grains or grain refuses commonly used, j carries less than six per cent. In digestion j experiment© with other animals, ash is ' usually Je*ss completely digested than the | other nutrients, l so it would - not be safe ! jto assume that fowls stdre ' up , so much more of: the* ash. .than.of. thS food as a wliole^— althbugK a. portion of the "other constituents ie usedi _ in " supplying the energy expended and ' does not add directly to the bird's Weight.THus we must force the fowl to eat large quantities of . food in order to get the amount of ash needed ; or we must provide some richer source of mineral elements than grains. If the bone-making material is not- abundant one of two things will happen: Th« bones will be large, eoft, and w«ak,

' resulting in lameness or deformity; or the development of the- bird will be governed by the- mineral elements and will thus be retarded, making growth slow and unsatisfactory. Such a check in growth can rarely be overcome, just as it is almost impossible 1o restore the full flow of milk in a cow that has been starved to a marked shrinkage of production. — 'Sources of Ash. — It has been shown by previous tests that ducklings must have animal food to quite an extent to do their best, and the same was thought to be true of chicks as well, when the first eeries of tests was concluded. In subsequent tests it was shown that most of the advantage of the animal food, in the case of the chicks, was due to the large amount of ash elements the meat contained ; foi when bone a*>h was added to purely grain rations, made palatable by great variety and regular changes, the chicks did as well as upon rations with animal food. The ash elemen* was the essential factor in the case of the chieke. Dticklings., however, need tho animal protein ; for they never do so well when that is lacking, even if the ash elements are liberally provided. The mature hen requires large quantities of "lime for egg-making, but can obtain it from oyster shells and similar inorganic materials. Is the same thing true of growing chicks, which need lime to build bone ? Phosphorus also is required in bone-making, and grains do liot furnish enough of it for rapid I " 'growth. Can this be obtained from/ minerals direct, as well as from the ground bone, bone ash or meat jneal? If mineralsare eaten by the chicks,' % does any, part of them become soluble and serve as true nutrients, or do tb minute particles of the minerals' merely act as grit in the crop and aid mechanically in digesting the food? — Important Experiments. — These are some of the questions which the New York experiment station has ■sought- to solve, in part, by a serie. of lests extending over several years, and including 19 lots of Leghorn chicks. The separate lots were composed of 24- to 76 chicks, contrasted lo^s being always alike, and were fed from' 10 to 12 weeks, beginning with chicks from one to three weeks old. The rations for,- some lots were made, up without animal food, and for others with animal 'food ; and the materials • were so 1 combined that under rations of each, general class certain ones should, be 'lower than usual in ash, others higher than usual, and still others of medium ash content. Then to the rations thus made up there were added varying nercent-ages of grit or sand, of fine ground rock phosphate and, ground oyster shell, of bone a*sh, of eand and rock, of sand andi oyster shell, or of bone ash and oyster shell,. — Results.— Sand alone, both in a ration without animal -food and in one containing animal, "food -with 'bone,- .contributed-, V o'- -a more use .of-, the -food. ( The increase /in weight, was .not much gr£*teis,-;but the^ chicks were healthier, • more vigorous, and appar.ently- better prepared than those with_out; sand in -their food to • make „ profitaßle". later ,growth. v This was true" even in "cases _wHere the chick^ were ..running upon sanded floors "and-'so were : ive&. to ; ' picky up. 'sand as ~they, required it. * • This- emphasises tile 'necessity "of Mookihg '. tsarefully after' the" supply j>i 'grit, - but it does not imply that it is best to buy poultoy foods in which sand has been, mixed.' Sand or grit can be obtained more cheaply and added •to the food as required. The ground rock phosphate proved of mor value as an- addition t rations than did sand. 'When used without sand in two grain rations, better results followed, in' both efficient use of food and in> rate of growth, than when sand alone ,?as- added to similar rations. When used with sand in one ration containing animal food but somewhat low in ash, and in anot-he* ration withoxit animal food, the chicks grew more rapidly and required less food for equal growth than -when sand only was mixed with the same *oods. Oyster shell, on the other hand, proved an undesirable, component of ration for chicks. Whether the ration contained! animal food or was composed of grains alone, the health of the chicks was not so good, nor was the food used so efficiently when oyster shells were included as when sand alone was added to the rations : and the comparison was still less favourable between the oyster shells and the ground, rock" phosphates. Oyster shells mixed with bone ash gave better results than oyster shells alone; in one case this combination was more efficient than" sand and! in another case nearly as efficient, but there was plainly some injurious action of the cyster shells., Though it is not certain that „such- is the case, ,it is probable that the powdered shell*, neutralise too completely and jcontinuou'sly^or too rapidly, some of the Jfligesiive juices," and thus interfere with the -proper digestion of some of, the other foods.' — Conclusions. — - v • These experiments show plainly the advantage of a plentiful supply of aeh for growing fowls, and, by themselves indicate that even the tiny chicks can make profitable use of such uncommon elements of poultry diet as sand and rock phosphate. The tests must not, however, be regarded rs revolutionising poxiltry feeding, or considered as recommendations for the use of all such materials in ordinary practice. They are, rather, of scientific interest as establishing the necessity for certain elements in the food of poultry. Those elements can ' be obtained ea&iei-, in better combination, and in more palatable form in materials already recommended by our most successful feeders — fine, raw, or cooked bone. Of these, of some animal meal, of green vegetables. . clover or alfalfa, and of good, clean grit, every grower of young chicks should make careful and constant use.