Fermenting feed for layers?

[Miss Lydia]

Thanks for posting the link! That blog and the comments really helped me. I started some!

As you have just found out fermenting is mighty easy. And you can use so many different things in it which makes it even better.

 

[Michelle82]

Quote:
The trick is to "dry" hatch. There is an article on dry hatching on the forum.
In short you don't add water to the machine during brooding -- only add water when you stop turning the eggs in preparation for hatch, that's day 19.
We have a lot of natural minerals I our water here and have extra tick egg shells, dry hatch works a lot better.

 

[Michelle82]

Quote:
The use of a little vinegar in the drinking water really works. However fermenting the food does have it's advantage. I was a sceptic at first, but the feed bill doesn't lie. Feed cost for my hatchery is down by 35% with a slightly lower mortality rate( about 3%) and the exact same average weight gain.... The ornamental chicken chicks are doing much better.

It does have it's downside. The Fermented feed smells sour and the feeding trays are harder to clean. The stuff burns the little cuts and scrapes on my hands every single day. The biggest problem is that Fermented feed sometimes dry out on the top and forms almost like a skin that little chicks find hard to eat, so we scratch the feed and make a sort of slightly wet crumb.

Sticky bum is now a 3% problem appose to 30%. A little vinegar in the drinking water did not give the same results.
I hatch about 40 to 140 chicks every week depending on how many eggs I sell and the results with fermented feed has been consistent for several months now.

 

[ChickNanny13]

I'm wanting to try FF but the reading/research has been mind boggling with eye strain, ha ha. So far this thread has made it "simple" now it's a matter figuring "how much" for (4) 20wk old pullets; (3) Wyandottes & (1) Ameraucana/EE. Thinking of starting off "small" using as a treat to see how they take to it (they are spoiled & finicky pets), can't figure how much ACV? Any idea how much ACV if I were to start with mate 2 cups of feed?

 

[Beekissed]

Weaversfarm,

The vinegar you have in the picture has been pasteurized and all of the bacteria have been killed in the bottle. The mother part of unpasteurized vinegar is a bacterium called Acetobacter pasteurianus. There are different strains of this bacterium that can tolerate different levels of acid in the vinegar. You have to remember that if you ferment the feed the available carbohydrates that are in the feed are reduced. The sugars are converted to vinegar by the bacteria- the longer the food is fermented the more sugars are converted to vinegar. The vinegar can be used to make energy by a chicken but I do not know what the conversion rate is for the reaction. There will be a loss of energy available for the bird in the feed. I know there will be an energy loss when the sugars are converted to vinegar (acetic acid) whether this will be enough to be a major effect on the caloric content of the feed ?????. I estimate one in 19 calories will be lost due to fermentation.

If I was going to feed my birds fermented feed, I would add extra dried molasses to the feed just before I feed the birds.

The whole idea behind the fermentation is to acidify the intestine of the birds. This could be done easily by putting acetic acid in the birds drinking water.

Tim

I'll respectively disagree with this....the sugars are not converted to vinegar~acetobacter bacilli actually consume the alcohol sugars produced as a byproduct of LAB metabolism, but the LABs so outnumber the Acetobacter that they are inhibited and will not go into overgrowth and produce significant amounts of vinegar in the fermented feeds. The grain's starches and proteins are converted to fatty chain amino acids, a perfect protein that can be more utilized by a monogastric animal such as the chicken, thereby increasing the useable protein by 12% and making vitamins and minerals more available for use. Cereal grains are a poor source of proteins until fermentation changes them into something more equal to animal proteins.

The whole idea behind fermentation of the feed is to change the carbs and proteins to something more available to the chicken so that the grains do not move through the intestines undigested and unused for nutrition~not merely to acidify the bowels, so adding vinegar to the water does not do anything to increase available nutrition like fermentation does.

Adding molasses just adds more empty carbs that are not much use unless the goal is merely to put on weight fast for butchering. A fat hen is not usually the best layer, so just getting birds fat is not the goal unless one is trying to get meat birds to a butcher weight quickly.

In the end it comes down to, what is more desirable for nutrition~empty carbs or bioavailable proteins, minerals and vitamins?

 

[Michelle82]

So just a personal note on this thread.

I have now been using fermented feed for about 6months. The biggest change is the mortality rate among the little chicks. I would advise fermented feed for anyone keeping chicks 6 weeks old and younger, especially for the ornamental more fragile breeds. I keep about 400 chickens at any given time and fermenting feed is messy, time consuming and a little gross BUT with such a remarkable drop in mortality it is worth it.

I started small with a little bucket and about 20 chicks, but now feed it to all my chicks and I have about 320 chicks of various sizes and breeds at any given time. I plan on extending my fermentation program to the larger chickens as well this year. Will report the results back in a year.


This is just one of my little bantam hens. She and all her siblings were raised on fermented chicken feed.

 

[Beekissed]

So just a personal note on this thread.

I have now been using fermented feed for about 6months. The biggest change is the mortality rate among the little chicks. I would advise fermented feed for anyone keeping chicks 6 weeks old and younger, especially for the ornamental more fragile breeds. I keep about 400 chickens at any given time and fermenting feed is messy, time consuming and a little gross BUT with such a remarkable drop in mortality it is worth it.

I started small with a little bucket and about 20 chicks, but now feed it to all my chicks and I have about 320 chicks of various sizes and breeds at any given time. I plan on extending my fermentation program to the larger chickens as well this year. Will report the results back in a year.


This is just one of my little bantam hens. She and all her siblings were raised on fermented chicken feed.

That's a beautiful bird!!! What great feedback on the FF! Could you give us a few numbers on the drop in your mortality rate? What was your usual before starting the FF and what is it now?

 

[gjensen]

Bee, I have some thoughts.

I have been skimming over commercial studies on fermented feed. I have found some that were mentioned in these threads, and others. As usual there is some conflicting information out there. Even among the experts. I do not care to dig into too deep. I am not smart enough for that.

What I have found, and sticks out to me, is the results. I do not get a lot out of the testimonies etc. I can't measure them, and I do not know the variables. The commercial studies are results orientated and have measurable. They are short on observations considering the overall effect on the health of the bird.

One study showed an initial drop in production of layers, and after an adjustment period, laying returned to an equivalent of the control group. The measurable difference between the group fed the FF and the control was the drop in consumed feed. One study showed as much as 20% and another 15%.
I got thinking about why there was a drop in feed intake. One factor I had to consider is the additional volume of the water. I have not looked at the recipes, but it has to be a factor.

On the other hand, there was no drop in production. Production in commercial layers under a controlled setting is a important indicator. It does not take much tinkering with the diet to see measurable changes.
Less feed, and no change in production. I have been looking at the bio chemical processes, but not ready to get the shovel out. The basics is what matters to me now. The initial conclusion I had to explain it is just general availability. Obviously the FF has already started the digestion process. I think the nutrients are generally more available and the feed easier to digest because the digestion process has already been started.
In short there is certainly some chemical changes like what you and Mr. Atkinson has discussed, but there is some uncertainties for me. The content of the feed varies, the methods vary, and I am not sure of how much change happens how fast. Then there has to be an adjustment for the changes that would happen in the gut anyways. A lot of variables that are difficult to know.
I have found nothing (yet) that compares the process to the process that happens in the gut side by side.

When we do FF, it takes some time for the population of the microbes to get "right". As it gets right, the chemical changes accelerates. When feed gets into the gut, the conditions are (should be) excellent for these processes. The stomach is designed for it. We can not get the same effect in a bucket. But what I think we do in the bucket is start the process ahead of time making the contents of the feed more available. The birds may get more out of the feed generally as a result.
I do not think it is a coincidence that the contents in the gut has the same kinds of odors that we get in a bucket.

The calories that is required to digest the feed has to be considered as well.

I think the method controls waste to. Not so much in a commercial layer operation, but in a home flock there tends to be a measurable amount of waste. Especially with crumbles and the feeders that they sell today. If the birds are wasting 10% (20% in some houses), and the volume is changed by the addition of water, and the need has changed because of the general availability of the feed content . . . . I can see where one can see a substantial reduction in feed costs.

I took notice to your thoughts on the restorative powers of the feed in birds that are showing generally poor health. I cannot help but think to how important our "gut" is to our health. Maybe the biggest health challenge our birds face is there environment. In many houses the conditions are too clean, and in many, the bedding is not adequately managed. The house, run, and yard become a pressure all of their own. With otherwise poor management the birds decline rather fast, and much of their challenges are what they ingest. The balance between the good guys and bad guys in the digestive system can get out of balance relatively fast and the birds health follows.

I think the FF can improve gut health, in birds that are challenged by cocci, e. coli, etc.

Let me add this. The stomach sends more information to the brain than the brain sends to the stomach. The brain is not into micro managing, and the stomach is a major player. There is more neuro receptors in the digestive system by far than anywhere else in the body. 70% of Serotonin, an important neuro transmitter is made in the stomach. You could almost say that it all starts in the stomach. Some medical professionals call the gut, the second brain.
We are just really starting to examine the links between what goes on in the gut (concerning bacteria etc.) and it's relationship to many neurological disorders etc. It is almost it's own ecosystem. As much as we know, we really know very little. When you start dealing with neurological disorders, our shortcomings and lack of knowledge is exposed. Because it innervates everything systematically. None of these disorders that I am thinking of are curable at this point.
I am challenged by a neurological disorder that affects the autonomic nervous system. I have seen more benefit in managing my symptoms by addressing what goes on in my stomach etc. than anything else alone. The first signs of something being wrong was in my gut. Everything else followed.
It all starts in the gut, and we still have a lot to learn.

A question I have is, have you experimented with modified versions of your methods? I would be interested in comparing the results to feed that has been soaked for 24 hours and probiotics added. Would there be, could there be a measurable difference? A good comparison would be a good indicator to where the benefits originate.

Labor and quality control is two big challenges for the commercial sector.

 

[Michelle82]

Day-old White frizzle Pekin

Two week old. Buff Orpington and Potch koekoeks eating Fermented feed.
Week old Buff and Koekoek chicks eating fermented feed.

Quote:
The numbers. Overall Mortality was 35% and now is at 20%. That is for chicks hatched from day one two six weeks.
The TWO most remarkable improvements are

1-> With sticky bum, that was a major problem and now maybe 1 in a 100 chicks require a cleaning. (Cleaning = the gentle removal of waste unclogging the cloaca) The previous number 20 in every 100 chicks required cleaning.
2-> I had a serious problem raising ( fancy bantams )Phoenix and Wyandotte bantam chicks. In 2012 I only raised 4 phoenix chicks from a 60 chicks I hatched. I could not figure out why they were dying,( they showed no signs of disease) now with the fermented feed I raised 50% of the chicks I hatch. Still not great but much better. In fact for the first time ever I have Polish, Phoenix and Wyandotte chicks that actually grow-up.

I think I should add what do I ferment. I buy boiler starter ( 18% protein ) and then mix it with crushed corn. The ratio is one scoop crushed corn to 4 scoops boiler starter. There is no Layer starter available in my area. Nor is their any untreated( non-medicated) feed available. I live in a very remote area. I made my own mother using crushed apples and water and patience. I tried to find the fancy vinegar this thread suggested, but that was simply not possible. I ferment my feed for at least 3 days before feeding it and use all of the fermented feed before 7days has past since the beginning of fermentation.

Then lastly I think I should add the even though my chickens after 6 weeks eat normal chicken feed the mortality number in chickens from 6weeks to 12weeks is also lower than it was before I started with the fermented feed. The mortality dropped from about 5% to 2.5%. This drop however could be due to the improvements I made to housing. With the day-old chicks to six week old chicks I changed nothing about their set-up other than their food and the containers I feed them in.

Hope that helps.

 

[Beekissed]

Bee, I have some thoughts.

I have been skimming over commercial studies on fermented feed. I have found some that were mentioned in these threads, and others. As usual there is some conflicting information out there. Even among the experts. I do not care to dig into too deep. I am not smart enough for that.

What I have found, and sticks out to me, is the results. I do not get a lot out of the testimonies etc. I can't measure them, and I do not know the variables. The commercial studies are results orientated and have measurable. They are short on observations considering the overall effect on the health of the bird.

One study showed an initial drop in production of layers, and after an adjustment period, laying returned to an equivalent of the control group. The measurable difference between the group fed the FF and the control was the drop in consumed feed. One study showed as much as 20% and another 15%.
I got thinking about why there was a drop in feed intake. One factor I had to consider is the additional volume of the water. I have not looked at the recipes, but it has to be a factor.

On the other hand, there was no drop in production. Production in commercial layers under a controlled setting is a important indicator. It does not take much tinkering with the diet to see measurable changes.
Less feed, and no change in production. I have been looking at the bio chemical processes, but not ready to get the shovel out. The basics is what matters to me now. The initial conclusion I had to explain it is just general availability. Obviously the FF has already started the digestion process. I think the nutrients are generally more available and the feed easier to digest because the digestion process has already been started.
In short there is certainly some chemical changes like what you and Mr. Atkinson has discussed, but there is some uncertainties for me. The content of the feed varies, the methods vary, and I am not sure of how much change happens how fast. Then there has to be an adjustment for the changes that would happen in the gut anyways. A lot of variables that are difficult to know.
I have found nothing (yet) that compares the process to the process that happens in the gut side by side.

When we do FF, it takes some time for the population of the microbes to get "right". As it gets right, the chemical changes accelerates. When feed gets into the gut, the conditions are (should be) excellent for these processes. The stomach is designed for it. We can not get the same effect in a bucket. But what I think we do in the bucket is start the process ahead of time making the contents of the feed more available. The birds may get more out of the feed generally as a result.
I do not think it is a coincidence that the contents in the gut has the same kinds of odors that we get in a bucket.

The calories that is required to digest the feed has to be considered as well.

I think the method controls waste to. Not so much in a commercial layer operation, but in a home flock there tends to be a measurable amount of waste. Especially with crumbles and the feeders that they sell today. If the birds are wasting 10% (20% in some houses), and the volume is changed by the addition of water, and the need has changed because of the general availability of the feed content . . . . I can see where one can see a substantial reduction in feed costs.

I took notice to your thoughts on the restorative powers of the feed in birds that are showing generally poor health. I cannot help but think to how important our "gut" is to our health. Maybe the biggest health challenge our birds face is there environment. In many houses the conditions are too clean, and in many, the bedding is not adequately managed. The house, run, and yard become a pressure all of their own. With otherwise poor management the birds decline rather fast, and much of their challenges are what they ingest. The balance between the good guys and bad guys in the digestive system can get out of balance relatively fast and the birds health follows.

I think the FF can improve gut health, in birds that are challenged by cocci, e. coli, etc.

Let me add this. The stomach sends more information to the brain than the brain sends to the stomach. The brain is not into micro managing, and the stomach is a major player. There is more neuro receptors in the digestive system by far than anywhere else in the body. 70% of Serotonin, an important neuro transmitter is made in the stomach. You could almost say that it all starts in the stomach. Some medical professionals call the gut, the second brain.
We are just really starting to examine the links between what goes on in the gut (concerning bacteria etc.) and it's relationship to many neurological disorders etc. It is almost it's own ecosystem. As much as we know, we really know very little. When you start dealing with neurological disorders, our shortcomings and lack of knowledge is exposed. Because it innervates everything systematically. None of these disorders that I am thinking of are curable at this point.
I am challenged by a neurological disorder that affects the autonomic nervous system. I have seen more benefit in managing my symptoms by addressing what goes on in my stomach etc. than anything else alone. The first signs of something being wrong was in my gut. Everything else followed.
It all starts in the gut, and we still have a lot to learn.

A question I have is, have you experimented with modified versions of your methods? I would be interested in comparing the results to feed that has been soaked for 24 hours and probiotics added. Would there be, could there be a measurable difference? A good comparison would be a good indicator to where the benefits originate.

Labor and quality control is two big challenges for the commercial sector.

I haven't experimented with it. I've not done side by side comparisons at all because, as you've said, I'm very results driven in this feeding method. As a nurse I have a fair idea of the importance of GI health in regards to the immune, cardiac, endocrine and nervous systems as one cannot be separated from the others. It's a ripple effect and the old doctors knew that...I've got old magazines where ads for laxatives for children are frequently shown and seemed to indicate that laxatives were not just for old people back then. These ads even stated about how the general health was driven by the GI health and that is still as true today but you won't find anyone trying to improve their children's bowel function as a regular health practice.

What amazes me is that a very large part of livestock health concerns revolve around the digestive tract but no one seems to connect chickens into that information stream....except for agriculture scientists in other countries:

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/vmi/2010/479485/ This one compares villus length/height after feeding organic acids.

This one is a general study but didn't have a lot of specifics and comparison information: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/19373724/

This one has some great comparisons of villi with different concentrations of fermentation, but they are studying fermented soybean meal and not cereal grains, specifically: http://www.pjbs.org/ijps/fin640.pdf

I find this one to be the most comprehensive study on the different types of organic acids in the fermentation and the results of each: http://www.ajol.info/index.php/ajb/article/viewFile/60378/48610

It's a sad fact that not many studies are being done on how to naturally improve poultry health in this country as I feel they view their agricultural practices as "live hard, die young" and find them adequate for feeding the masses without any necessity to explore a healthier bird life for those fast lived poultry.

What I can give is a list of reported results from cumulative studies and anecdotal ones from the many people trying this method and though this can only be considered anecdotal, some of these results were so common among the results that one can only conclude it is indeed caused by the fermented feeds.

Quote: