Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T23:55:34.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Extracted herbage leaf protein for poultry feeding II. The use of leaf protein in chick rations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

G. Pearson Hughes  and
Dudley E. Eyles
G. Pearson Hughes
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Station, Stratford-on-Avon
Dudley E. Eyles
Affiliation:
Grassland Research Station, Stratford-on-Avon
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

1. Two live-weight gain experiments using dayold chicks are described. A mash containing a basic ration with leaf protein was compared with a control mash containing the basic ration plus fish meal.

2. Details of the source of the leaf protein, its extraction and chemical analysis are given.

3. The composition and analyses of the mashes are recorded, together with their rate of feeding.

4. The live-weight gains at fortnightly intervals are discussed and the results adjusted for sex of chicks, weight at day-old and level of protein in the mash.

5. In the first experiment some of the pullets from each treatment were fed on a commercial growers' ration from 6 weeks old to maturity.

6. The birds on both treatments in the two experiments were equally healthy. The mortality rates were normal. The leaf-protein chicks had deep yellow pigmentation.

7. The results of the experiments are compared. In the first the leaf-protein mash was as valuable as the fish-meal mash; in the second experiment the fish-meal mash proved to be superior.

8. A new method of measuring the biological value of the protein of herbage plants is suggested, using extracted protein fed to chicks or rats.

9. It is concluded that a mash composed of homegrown cereals plus leaf protein with vitamin supplements, a balance of minerals and additional aminoacid if necessary, would be suitable for rearing chicks.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , April 1953 , pp. 144 - 151
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Armstrong, R. H. & Thomas, R. (1950). Brit. J. Nutr. 4, 166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, S., Henry, K. M., Kon, S. K., Osbourne, L. W., Thompson, S. Y. & Winsley, J. (1938). Biochem. J. 32, 2024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas Fixsen, M. A. (1935). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 4, 447.Google Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. (1951). Brit. J. Nutr. 5, 243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. & Duckworth, J. (1951). 9th World's Poult. Sci. Congr., Paris, 2, 18.Google Scholar
Crampton, E. W. (1934). Emp. J. Exp. Agric. 2, 337.Google Scholar
Ewing, W. R. (1951). Poultry Nutrition. P.O. Box 248, South Pasenda, California, E. Ray Ewing, 227.Google Scholar
Halnan, E. T. (1942). J. Agric. Sci. 32, 180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halnan, E. T. (1948). The scientific principles of poultry feeding. Bull. Minist. Agric., Lond., no. 7, 50.Google Scholar
Lippincott, W. A. & Card, L. E. (1946). Poultry production, 7th ed., p. 260. London: Henry Kimpton.Google Scholar
McCollum, E. V., Simmons, N. & Pason, H. T. (1921). J. Biol. Chem. 47, 235.Google Scholar
Menge, H., Moreng, K. E. & Combs, G. F. (1951). Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol., N.Y., 76, 46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. (1923–1924). J. Biol. Chem. 58, 873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osbourne, T. B., Mendel, L. B. & Fowler, E. L. (1919). J. Biol. Chem. 37, 223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temperton, H. (1948). 8th World's Poult. Sci. Congr., Copenhagen, p. 71.Google Scholar
Thomas, B. & Armstrong, R. H. (1950). Emp. J. Exp. Agric. 18, 31.Google Scholar