Duck Feed Requirements Advice

[MandoDuck]

Hello!
I am new here so I'm very happy to meet all of the duck enthusiasts of this community!
Even though I don't own a duck (yet), I am very passionate about learning how to raise and care for these fun feathery creatures. Now, add this to my dream of becoming a nutritionist and try to guess the final result
So, long story short, I challenged myself to build my first (perfectly) balanced recipe, based on the ideal nutritional needs of a duck. I plan to make it 100% natural, with no supplements added. I searched all the studies I could find on the internet, I took some notes and here is the final profile of micronutrients I came up with:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ouid=116134306427536864669&rtpof=true&sd=true

If there are any animal nutritionists who read this thread, I would be very grateful if you can take a look and tell me if there are any mistakes. Once I have all my targets set, I'll try to build the recipe with the help of a professional nutritionist I know.

Greetings from Romania,
Ioana

 

[U_Stormcrow]

I am aware of this thread, and will write further in a few days. I need to check notes, am crunched for time, subject to other's schedules the next couple days, and honestly - I have more at my fingertips on chickens than ducks, so please - don't tag me in an effort to help the OP, and if you have good duck nutrition resources, PLEASE chime in. I'll add them to my growing digital library.

Thanks BYC family!

 

[Sally PB]

@MandoDuck, welcome! U_Stormcrow knows a lot about poultry nutrition. Or maybe I should say he knows how to find out a lot about it.

You can put your location in your profile, and then it's always there. It really helps to know where people are, especially if you're in another country. Climate matters a lot, and knowing that you're outside the US means we won't just assume you have access to the same supplies that are in the US.

Good for you for doing your research before you get your birds.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Looks like I'm adding to my digital library. For those who look on me as an expert, this is how I've become somewhat knowledgable - searching out answers to questions I don't know, digesting the results into some for of palatable understanding, then saving the reference materials against later need.

Here is the NAP. Of course I'm going to look at it.

Cornell and Merck were both busts this time, they are often a good starting spot, but vary wildly in how much detail they offer on any given topic.

PoultryDVM, another source of typically shallow info, of sometimes dubious quality? Simply copied the (1994) NAP.

Poultry.Extension.Org another shallow source, but a good starting point. They do offer seperate targets for meat ducks and layers, however.

NC State has a good summary, but is short on sources for it. Most are from the mid 80s, though the numbers compare favorably with some of the secondary sources, such as those of Metzer farms.

Now we wade into the weeds.

HERE is a much more recent source, a meta-study. I like these, they gather data from multiple sources and compare the results. LOTS of sources. Its also discriminatory, seperating birds by age, breed, purpose.
HERE is another recent meta-study, focused on mineral needs.
I'll follow (and have followed) a number of those sources as well.

I like to check foreign sources as well - they tend to have differing assumptions, based on available feed ingredients - but where they generally align with US sources, it adds confidence. Particularly sources from countries which eat more of the poultry in question, or have fewer protein options.

Australia Not very helpful - no sources. But it does have some sample "home brew" rations.
NDVSU largely repeats older US sources (the National Resource Council). But it is organized nicely, and honest enough to admit what they don't know (or didn't, at the time of the original sourcing).

Others are similar. Time to digest, then compare to the numbers @MandoDuck has already put into the calculator. Of course, we are dealing with ranges of recommendations based on various study methodologies and measurement means, so opinions WILL vary. But we should be generally in the same regions. SO far, I have few quibbles with those numbers, and the magnitude of those quibbles is quite small.

For instance, 0.9% calcium target instead on 0.8% I'd emphasize the top end of the recommended range for non-phytate Phospherus (0.4) rather than 0.3-0.4, and the high end of the (Se)lenium as well. On (Cu)peric [Copper], most of the sources I've skimmed are comming in at 6mg +/-, within the offered 5-8mg range, i'd list that as "ideal".

(Met)ionine is one I have some biase towards, and would put my range in 0.4-0.5% (3-4000mg/kg), rather than the 3-4k range suggested, but I also know how hard that is to source. Some of the other AAs if so difficult to find good data on, in terms of levels present in feed ingredients, I won't focus on at all. Others, such as (Tryp)tophan have targets so low they are near impossible to miss with a corn and grain based diet, so again, I'll discount those in the feed construction focus.

Vitamin levels I need to go thru very carefully, but in the main, I'm quite impressed with what @MandoDuck has already put together before asking assistance of the community.

 

[MandoDuck]

Looks like I'm adding to my digital library. For those who look on me as an expert, this is how I've become somewhat knowledgable - searching out answers to questions I don't know, digesting the results into some for of palatable understanding, then saving the reference materials against later need.

Here is the NAP. Of course I'm going to look at it.

Cornell and Merck were both busts this time, they are often a good starting spot, but vary wildly in how much detail they offer on any given topic.

PoultryDVM, another source of typically shallow info, of sometimes dubious quality? Simply copied the (1994) NAP.

Poultry.Extension.Org another shallow source, but a good starting point. They do offer seperate targets for meat ducks and layers, however.

NC State has a good summary, but is short on sources for it. Most are from the mid 80s, though the numbers compare favorably with some of the secondary sources, such as those of Metzer farms.

Now we wade into the weeds.

HERE is a much more recent source, a meta-study. I like these, they gather data from multiple sources and compare the results. LOTS of sources. Its also discriminatory, seperating birds by age, breed, purpose.
HERE is another recent meta-study, focused on mineral needs.
I'll follow (and have followed) a number of those sources as well.

I like to check foreign sources as well - they tend to have differing assumptions, based on available feed ingredients - but where they generally align with US sources, it adds confidence. Particularly sources from countries which eat more of the poultry in question, or have fewer protein options.

Australia Not very helpful - no sources. But it does have some sample "home brew" rations.
NDVSU largely repeats older US sources (the National Resource Council). But it is organized nicely, and honest enough to admit what they don't know (or didn't, at the time of the original sourcing).

Others are similar. Time to digest, then compare to the numbers @MandoDuck has already put into the calculator. Of course, we are dealing with ranges of recommendations based on various study methodologies and measurement means, so opinions WILL vary. But we should be generally in the same regions. SO far, I have few quibbles with those numbers, and the magnitude of those quibbles is quite small.

For instance, 0.9% calcium target instead on 0.8% I'd emphasize the top end of the recommended range for non-phytate Phospherus (0.4) rather than 0.3-0.4, and the high end of the (Se)lenium as well. On (Cu)peric [Copper], most of the sources I've skimmed are comming in at 6mg +/-, within the offered 5-8mg range, i'd list that as "ideal".

(Met)ionine is one I have some biase towards, and would put my range in 0.4-0.5% (3-4000mg/kg), rather than the 3-4k range suggested, but I also know how hard that is to source. Some of the other AAs if so difficult to find good data on, in terms of levels present in feed ingredients, I won't focus on at all. Others, such as (Tryp)tophan have targets so low they are near impossible to miss with a corn and grain based diet, so again, I'll discount those in the feed construction focus.

Vitamin levels I need to go thru very carefully, but in the main, I'm quite impressed with what @MandoDuck has already put together before asking assistance of the community.

Thank you so much for the throughout research you put in your reply! I've also used multiple resources, including some of the ones that you've linked. For the AA profile I gathered some info from HERE

 

[MandoDuck]

Today I took part in a conference about Avian Nutrition that opened my mind more in terms of whole raw food for birds. There is no such thing as a complete diet, as every individual needs something different. I will try my best to formulate a general feed pattern for ducks, taking in consideration both micromanaging and the holistic orientation. So my goal right now isn't to get a perfect recipe, but one that can be diversified in millions of ways and make the birds thrive on it.
PS: I already have a few years of experience with BARF diet for dogs, so I hope I will complete this big challenge. Keep your fingers crossed!

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Thank you so much for the throughout research you put in your reply! I've also used multiple resources, including some of the ones that you've linked. For the AA profile I gathered some info from HERE

Thank you, adding that link to my library. Its very similar to the EU findings regarding low protein diets supplimented with AAs for layer hens (chickens).

 

[Miss Lydia]

So what your saying is one feed doesn't fit all? Not even an All flock?

 

[U_Stormcrow]

So what your saying is one feed doesn't fit all? Not even an All flock?

All flocks are intended to be a "good fit", suitable for all.

Many of these studies are intended to find a "perfect fit", suited to a particular breed, at particular ages, under particular management methods, often with a focus on reducing the expense of the feed.

The last link Mando offered, for instance, is on the use of synthetic AA to produce meat ducks (Pekin White) on reduced protein feeds (cheaper) without sacrificing weight gain, feed consumption, or body fat. They got it down to roughly 15% protein with essentially the same results as a 17.2% crude protein diet, which is, frankly, very impressive.

Of course, my ducks never go below 20% cp, and that level of protein wasn't even considered int he study.

 

[MandoDuck]

The ducks are smarter than you might think If you offer a flock a blend of 20 types of chopped veggies, each one will eat only what they need and balance their own diets. Pellets don't offer them this opportunity. Also, something the manufactures won't tell you: these highly processed feed lack a lot of nutrients (like omega 3, which degrades at room temperature). So what you hear as "complete" diet, is actually a lie.