Anyone else use Grubbly Farms feed? Opinions on it?

[CaliforniaMountainChicks]

I was wondering if anyone else on here uses Grubbly Farms chicken feed and what your opinions on it are. Have you noticed a difference in their health, egg production, feather quality, etc., when using this feed compared to others? I would love anyones opinion on the feed and the differences you've noticed, or lack thereof, when on this feed. They are raising their prices again and it is going to be getting a little pricey to feed my 13 chickens, so I just want to see if it is worth it to still purchase this feed or if I should start to look elsewhere. I do like their delivery service as I live an hour away from the closest 3 cities, and with gas prices it costs $80 just to drive there. Let me know your opinions on this feed, I really appreciate it!

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Which King Brand feeds do they carry?

We'd be happy to help teach you how to read the labels and compare the products nutritionally.

(Internet sure makes things easier!)

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Crumbles and Pellets substantially identical nutritionally.

Sorry, being lazy with my cut and paste, got things to do today, ressed for time.
For speed, we are going to call these "!GMO" [King "Freedom"], "Org" [King Organic], and "Grub" [Self Evident]

Crude Protein: Grub < !GMO = Org
All of these are in the typical range for a "Layer" Style feed. Increased protein levels, assuming adequate amino acid levels wi that protein are associated with increased frequency of lay, size of egg, quality of content, but the differneces are quite small. The studies comparing 16% protein with 18 or 20% protein generally found those increases to be on the order of a few percent (at best), that is 1-3 extra eggs per year in a prolific breed, maybe a gram or two in average egg weight. Its measurable, but its not obvious. Higher protein is also associated with more robust immune systems, faster molts, and (to a point) better feed efficiency, again, depending on the amino acid profiles. Nod (small) to King Brands

Lysine: Grub < !GMO = Org
Lys is usually considered the second most important critical (or limiting) amino acid. Its primarily associated with muscle development, particularly the breast. Differences between 0.75% and 0.8% are negligible, particularly in layer breeds and adults (whose nutritional needs decline as they age). Anything over 0.7% is adequate to the needs of most non-broiler birds. Some more recent studies are beginning to offer 0.8 as the target to reach, but there is room for reasonable dispute.

Methionine: Org < !GMO < Grub
Met is typically considered the most important limiting amino acid, though its not as well studied in part because it could only be measured individually in the last 30, 40 years. "Met + Cys" (as appears on the non GMO bag) is how you will see it in the old studies. The optimum ratio is somewhere close to 50/50 Met:Cys. I've had to make a guess at the Met levels in the !GMO based on ingredients. Wheat usually has a ratio between 2:3 and 4:5. Met is one of the hardest Amino Acids to supply in grain based diets, so these numbers are no suprise. I consider .4 to be the minimum target, and seek higher levels for my own flocks. Younger birds need more - much more - with literature suggesting levels between 0.5 and 0.7 as targets, but .4 +/- for layers and .5+/- for broilers are common recommends. You will see other commercial feeds as low as 0.3 (based, seemingly, on studies from the late 70s and early 80s when measuring Met apart from Cys was more difficult). Small nod to Grubblies.

Calcium: Org = Grub < !GMO
Those same studies put targets for calcium in laying hens around 3.5% +/-. The Non-GMO has a higher calcium level, which is not necessarily a net benefit. Over a very long time scale, calcium can build up in chickens and cause numerous problems. Hatchlings and roosters are most susceptible, but hens that only infrequently lay small eggs can suffer too. Not that both brands use some amount of mono calcium diphosphate, and/or dicalcium phosphate in addition to ground limestone/osyter shell. The former two have fewer issues with calcium toxicity than does the latter - the phosphorus acts as a buffer. How much?? Its an ingredient list, not a recipe. No way to know (and it likely changes based on cost).

Phosphorus: !GMO = Org < Grub
0.5 is common in the industry. 0.6 - 0.8 is better. Grubblies is the superior product here, both because it contains more total phosphorus and becauseit has less average calcium (as well as the "buffered" calcium sources), so its Ca : P ratio is better. Even so, its not great. All of these are not more than adequate, with a slight nod to Grubblies.

Fat: Org < !GMO < Grub
Target fat levels for layers is around 3.5% +/-. Waterfowl are usually recommended around a % higher, broilers intended for table (and not famed for long life) have recommends up to about 6%. Chickens don't deposit intramuscular fat like we do - they carry it on the keel, along the thighs, and packed around the inner organs, where excess contributes to sudden heart failure and fatty liver disease. The clear winner here is the Organic, while Grubblies choice of protein from a high fat animal source works to its detriment.

Fiber: Org < !GMO < Grub
Not as much research here, the acceptable ranges are far more nebulous. Even so, chickens don't benefit from high fiber diets the way we do, and some of the comon sources of high fiber in their diets are associated with antinutritional factors. All of these are technically acceptable, with the Grubblies being a bit high of the "typical" range.

At this point, there's enough info to help make a decision, you can basically ignore the rest. I will mention metabolizable energy (on the Non-GMO bag), though it doesn't appear on many feed labels. The typical "thumb rule" is that an adult bird will eat about 100g or a quarter pound in feed each day. That's based on a diet of between 12 and 13.5 kcal/. The !GMO is towards the lower end of the normal range, likely due to all that fiber. One could reasonably expect their birds may eat a little more of the feed (compared to the 100g theoretical) as result - but without similar numbers on the other bags, you can't compare, and fiber alone doesn't tell the whole story, not by a long shot.

tl;dr? I'm not in love with any of these, but if I had to choose one of the three, I'd be weighing the cost of the King Brand Organic against the risks of the extra calcium and fat in the non-GMO. The answer to which would depend on my budget, my flock composition, and how long I planned to keep my birds.

oh, and I'd never buy whole grain feed. The reasons for which include those you have already discovered and others.

Hope that helps!

 

[U_Stormcrow]

No need to apologize! I really appreciate you taking time out of your day to help out!! Hopefully this could help out others who come across the thread as well! Definitely learned a lot from you! Thank you again.
(Definitely never buying whole grain feed again either, I tried scratch and peck a year ago and the dominant hens would pick out the “good stuff” first and leave the rest for the lower girls)

You are too kind. I'm just paying back/paying forward for all the assistance I was given when I first started here on BYC with my own flock.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

I am familiar with Grubbly Farm's products. I have some concerns with their final nutritional analysis (particularly the fat content), but the amino acid profile is better than many products occupying a similar space (due to their extensive use of animal protein). Honestly, few soy-free products can get anywhere close, and most (all that I am personally familiar with) have the same concern with high fat content if they do.

A day or so ago I compared Grubbly's Starter with Purina's Start and Grow and their Flock Raiser.

Its good feed.

Having said that, I can purchase a good "Layer" style feed from the local mill at the cost of about $0.24/lb, and a specialized high protein starter feed at just under $0.34/lb. The best price I can find on Grubblies is 4x that price.

Is the feed 4x superior nutritionally? ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Its your money, not for me to tell you how to spend it - but if you are buying Grubblies rationally, its for a reason other than spectacular nutrition for your chickens. Only you can determine if its worth it.

 

[Kiki]

I'd like to chime in that I have measured out a few different types of chicken feed...
An adult chicken roughly should eat about 3/4 cup worth of feed per day.

 

[CaliforniaMountainChicks]

Crumbles and Pellets substantially identical nutritionally.

View attachment 3154698

View attachment 3154700View attachment 3154702
Sorry, being lazy with my cut and paste, got things to do today, ressed for time.
For speed, we are going to call these "!GMO" [King "Freedom"], "Org" [King Organic], and "Grub" [Self Evident]

Crude Protein: Grub < !GMO = Org
All of these are in the typical range for a "Layer" Style feed. Increased protein levels, assuming adequate amino acid levels wi that protein are associated with increased frequency of lay, size of egg, quality of content, but the differneces are quite small. The studies comparing 16% protein with 18 or 20% protein generally found those increases to be on the order of a few percent (at best), that is 1-3 extra eggs per year in a prolific breed, maybe a gram or two in average egg weight. Its measurable, but its not obvious. Higher protein is also associated with more robust immune systems, faster molts, and (to a point) better feed efficiency, again, depending on the amino acid profiles. Nod (small) to King Brands

Lysine: Grub < !GMO = Org
Lys is usually considered the second most important critical (or limiting) amino acid. Its primarily associated with muscle development, particularly the breast. Differences between 0.75% and 0.8% are negligible, particularly in layer breeds and adults (whose nutritional needs decline as they age). Anything over 0.7% is adequate to the needs of most non-broiler birds. Some more recent studies are beginning to offer 0.8 as the target to reach, but there is room for reasonable dispute.

Methionine: Org < !GMO < Grub
Met is typically considered the most important limiting amino acid, though its not as well studied in part because it could only be measured individually in the last 30, 40 years. "Met + Cys" (as appears on the non GMO bag) is how you will see it in the old studies. The optimum ratio is somewhere close to 50/50 Met:Cys. I've had to make a guess at the Met levels in the !GMO based on ingredients. Wheat usually has a ratio between 2:3 and 4:5. Met is one of the hardest Amino Acids to supply in grain based diets, so these numbers are no suprise. I consider .4 to be the minimum target, and seek higher levels for my own flocks. Younger birds need more - much more - with literature suggesting levels between 0.5 and 0.7 as targets, but .4 +/- for layers and .5+/- for broilers are common recommends. You will see other commercial feeds as low as 0.3 (based, seemingly, on studies from the late 70s and early 80s when measuring Met apart from Cys was more difficult). Small nod to Grubblies.

Calcium: Org = Grub < !GMO
Those same studies put targets for calcium in laying hens around 3.5% +/-. The Non-GMO has a higher calcium level, which is not necessarily a net benefit. Over a very long time scale, calcium can build up in chickens and cause numerous problems. Hatchlings and roosters are most susceptible, but hens that only infrequently lay small eggs can suffer too. Not that both brands use some amount of mono calcium diphosphate, and/or dicalcium phosphate in addition to ground limestone/osyter shell. The former two have fewer issues with calcium toxicity than does the latter - the phosphorus acts as a buffer. How much?? Its an ingredient list, not a recipe. No way to know (and it likely changes based on cost).

Phosphorus: !GMO = Org < Grub
0.5 is common in the industry. 0.6 - 0.8 is better. Grubblies is the superior product here, both because it contains more total phosphorus and becauseit has less average calcium (as well as the "buffered" calcium sources), so its Ca : P ratio is better. Even so, its not great. All of these are not more than adequate, with a slight nod to Grubblies.

Fat: Org < !GMO < Grub
Target fat levels for layers is around 3.5% +/-. Waterfowl are usually recommended around a % higher, broilers intended for table (and not famed for long life) have recommends up to about 6%. Chickens don't deposit intramuscular fat like we do - they carry it on the keel, along the thighs, and packed around the inner organs, where excess contributes to sudden heart failure and fatty liver disease. The clear winner here is the Organic, while Grubblies choice of protein from a high fat animal source works to its detriment.

Fiber: Org < !GMO < Grub
Not as much research here, the acceptable ranges are far more nebulous. Even so, chickens don't benefit from high fiber diets the way we do, and some of the comon sources of high fiber in their diets are associated with antinutritional factors. All of these are technically acceptable, with the Grubblies being a bit high of the "typical" range.

At this point, there's enough info to help make a decision, you can basically ignore the rest. I will mention metabolizable energy (on the Non-GMO bag), though it doesn't appear on many feed labels. The typical "thumb rule" is that an adult bird will eat about 100g or a quarter pound in feed each day. That's based on a diet of between 12 and 13.5 kcal/. The !GMO is towards the lower end of the normal range, likely due to all that fiber. One could reasonably expect their birds may eat a little more of the feed (compared to the 100g theoretical) as result - but without similar numbers on the other bags, you can't compare, and fiber alone doesn't tell the whole story, not by a long shot.



oh, and I'd never buy whole grain feed. The reasons for which include those you have already discovered and others.

Hope that helps!

No need to apologize! I really appreciate you taking time out of your day to help out!! Hopefully this could help out others who come across the thread as well! Definitely learned a lot from you! Thank you again.
(Definitely never buying whole grain feed again either, I tried scratch and peck a year ago and the dominant hens would pick out the “good stuff” first and leave the rest for the lower girls)

 

[U_Stormcrow]

This makes me so happy to read.

Likewise, though my ego needs no feeding.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Thanks for all that. Now I just need to make sure both places have the food in stock and pricing. What are some other sources or lysine? Out of curiousity.
I've read your posts on other sources of methionine.

Animal meals (fish, crab, etc) and insect proteins [honestly, these are great sources of amino acids in every case we care about], legume meals (soy meal, cottonseed meal, peanut meal) etc - because they are all fat-reduced protein-concentrated sources. Next up are your fava beans, cow peas, field peas, lentils, winter peas, and the rest of the common legumes. Black Gram seed and fenugreek seed are right in there with the legumes, then rapeseed (used to make canola oil, this is way fatty and should be avoided) and peanuts.

The rest of the seeds (Amaranth, Sunflower, Hemp, Sesame) are next - they aren't as low on lysine as some of the grains, but they aren't high enough to make a significant difference in the diet either - and like rapeseed, have high fat concerns as well)

 

[U_Stormcrow]

I’ve been using Grubbly feed since I got my day old chicks in February. They all eat everything but I noticed a difference in the bag I got in October. Since feeding them from this bag, they started picking feathers and laying has slowed down a bit. They just haven’t looked as good as they did. I have reached out to the company sending photos of that feed and the bag I got yesterday. There is a distinct difference between the two bags.
Waiting to hear back from the company but if they have issues with consistency, I’m thinking it may be time to switch feeds.

Please keep us in the loop. Not unusual for companies to periodically reformulate as price inputs change or for reasons of nutritional variation in crops.

Assume you checked the mill date code against bag age for possible poor inventory control by the supply chain.

Curious as to how they respond, given their efforts to position in the premium feed space.