Fermenting Feed for Meat Birds

[yinepu]

Quote:
I always thought feed and food were the same thing.. you eat it.. your kids eat it.. your animals eat it..
why would corn be called food for you but feed for your animals?... I buy dog FOOD.. fish FOOD.. cat FOOD.. yet when it comes to livestock it's FEED (hence me urging the search term of FOOD and not FEED)
I feed collard greens to my emu.. does it become FEED then even though I bought it at the grocery store?

search engines are funny things.. if you put in feed it thinks it's livestock only.. somehow food becomes a different entity when it comes to the search engines...

fermentation will be the same regardless

 

[yinepu]

Quote:
and thank you too mike.. I'm all set too.. even though I never stated that fermented food is all people should eat.. and if I did put that in there.. I sure as heck do not remember typing it! But thank you for telling me I apparently did..

 

[Kilsharion]

So, I'm reading through this thing...and, there are some things that jump out at me.

1. They had 30 birds age 16-38 weeks in a space that was 8 square meters....for those of you who don't know what that means...it means they had 30 birds in a total of 26 sq feet...break it down farther...less than one sq ft per bird - dunno about you, but my health would suffer in such an environment, too
2. The birds were beak trimmed and commercial stock - the stock that loves to go all cannibal on you, esp in confined spaces
3. Their fermentation process consisted of water and feed....that's it. No starter culture. After 72 hours they called it fermented and ran with it.
4. The "loss of appeal" that they refer to? It's when they would put out more than the birds could eat in a single day and expect the birds to eat it the following day....I'd pretty much turn my nose up at day old food, myself. It had nothing to do with the birds no longer finding the FF tasty when provided in a proper manner.
5. I'm not, personally, a fan of the feed mix they used; but, whatever...
6. Looking at Table 4 which shows the body weight, feed intake, egg production and egg quality from the first day of the experiment....the birds getting FF started out at the poor end of the scale from the get go. At 16 weeks, the dry food group was 1451g and the FF were at 1432g. Three weeks later, the FF group was up and remained up.
7. The feed intake difference was ~20g of dry matter per hen difference - with the FF being the lower of the two.
8. The egg production was lower with FF; however, the weight was higher.
9. The feed conversion for the two groups was nearly identical by the end of the experimental cycle with the FF being very, very slightly higher.
10. The plummage difference they were talking about? They did a scoring on the condition of it...here were the results:

Quote:

Neck -- 3.54 -- 2.81
Breast -- 2.64 -- 1.83
Back -- 2.53 -- 1.98
Wing -- 3.66 -- 3.23
Tail -- 2.41 -- 2.15

Note that the FF birds experienced some cannibalism while in their confinement...so - how much of this has to do with the FEED and how much has to do with other variables? Think on that. One also has to wonder how beak trimmed birds managed cannibalism....

Also, the birds were brought in at 16 weeks after having been on crumbles the first 16 weeks of life and nowhere near anything 'sour' smelling that they associated with food. As such, of course an adaptation period would be expected. How many of you could go home, tonight, and plop kimshi down in front of your teenager and expect them to dive right in?

 

[Kjordanov]

Feed whatever you want it won't effect us lol

 

[Rockashelle]

It threw me for a loop as well. I mean there are 180+ pages with nothing but good about FF. I think the idiot bell in my head just went off. I am going to split my meat birds up into 2 groups one with FF and one without. When I get them I will post pictures and show my results from start to finish

 He works for a feed company of course he is going to want you to buy more feed not less….. I think I need to smack myself upside the head.

Hey Mike! My farrier told me to switch to rolled barley for a mare I had that wouldn't hold weight. I tried everything... He's an old timer with tons of experience. He does speaking at clinics and a big time feed company asked him to come do a presentation for them. Afterwards, they asked him not to come back because, "he was bad for business"! Just FYI



Ps - I should note that I've been feeding FF for 3 weeks and have seen a great improvement with my heritage birds. Give it a try!

 

[yinepu]

So, I'm reading through this thing...and, there are some things that jump out at me.

1. They had 30 birds age 16-38 weeks in a space that was 8 square meters....for those of you who don't know what that means...it means they had 30 birds in a total of 26 sq feet...break it down farther...less than one sq ft per bird - dunno about you, but my health would suffer in such an environment, too
2. The birds were beak trimmed and commercial stock - the stock that loves to go all cannibal on you, esp in confined spaces
3. Their fermentation process consisted of water and feed....that's it. No starter culture. After 72 hours they called it fermented and ran with it.
4. The "loss of appeal" that they refer to? It's when they would put out more than the birds could eat in a single day and expect the birds to eat it the following day....I'd pretty much turn my nose up at day old food, myself. It had nothing to do with the birds no longer finding the FF tasty when provided in a proper manner.
5. I'm not, personally, a fan of the feed mix they used; but, whatever...
6. Looking at Table 4 which shows the body weight, feed intake, egg production and egg quality from the first day of the experiment....the birds getting FF started out at the poor end of the scale from the get go. At 16 weeks, the dry food group was 1451g and the FF were at 1432g. Three weeks later, the FF group was up and remained up.
7. The feed intake difference was ~20g of dry matter per hen difference - with the FF being the lower of the two.
8. The egg production was lower with FF; however, the weight was higher.
9. The feed conversion for the two groups was nearly identical by the end of the experimental cycle with the FF being very, very slightly higher.
10. The plummage difference they were talking about? They did a scoring on the condition of it...here were the results:

Quote:

Neck -- 3.54 -- 2.81
Breast -- 2.64 -- 1.83
Back -- 2.53 -- 1.98
Wing -- 3.66 -- 3.23
Tail -- 2.41 -- 2.15

Note that the FF birds experienced some cannibalism while in their confinement...so - how much of this has to do with the FEED and how much has to do with other variables? Think on that.

Also, the birds were brought in at 16 weeks after having been on crumbles the first 16 weeks of life and nowhere near anything 'sour' smelling that they associated with food. As such, of course an adaptation period would be expected. How many of you could go home, tonight, and plop kimshi down in front of your teenager and expect them to dive right in?

and as I suspected.. a FLAWED study
i have to wonder who was backing it

i'll stick with fermented for my birds.. the ducks and geese love it.. so do the pigeons, chickens, and turkeys. I have NEVER seen my birds clean out a feeder of crumbles or pellets... I have found a lot of wasted feed though..

but with the fermented they clean up every bit... plus the savings from the feed store show me a heck of alot. I would rather that the feed go IN the birds and not to feed the local wildlife.

I have a couple of scrawny roos that are almost 2 years old now.. they have FINALLY put on weight eating the fermented (freezer camp soon boys)!


So I will trust what I have seen with my own eyes.. what my bank account shows me.. plus what some of the people here have stated over some flawed study backed by some unknown entity that may have some hidden motives

 

[Mikedero]

and as I suspected.. a FLAWED study
i have to wonder who was backing it

i'll stick with fermented for my birds.. the ducks and geese love it.. so do the pigeons, chickens, and turkeys. I have NEVER seen my birds clean out a feeder of crumbles or pellets... I have found a lot of wasted feed though..

but with the fermented they clean up every bit... plus the savings from the feed store show me a heck of alot. I would rather that the feed go IN the birds and not to feed the local wildlife.

I have a couple of scrawny roos that are almost 2 years old now.. they have FINALLY put on weight eating the fermented (freezer camp soon boys)!


So I will trust what I have seen with my own eyes.. what my bank account shows me.. plus what some of the people here have stated over some flawed study backed by some unknown entity that may have some hidden motives

then explain these results away
https://www.backyardchickens.com/t/672135/meatie-experiment-ff-vs-crumbles


but you are forgetting the time I reffer to as I fill my feeder twice a week VS with FF daily and to me that is worth a few bags difference per year

 

[Kilsharion]

Fermented liquid feed reduces susceptibility of broilers for Salmonella enteritidis.
L Heres, B Engel, F van Knapen, M C M de Jong, J A Wagenaar, H A P Urlings Institute for Animal Science and Health, Department of Infectious Diseases and Food Chain Quality, Lelystad, The Netherlands. [email protected]-ur.nl

The presence of Salmonella in chickens is a problem because poultry meat is recognized as a source of human salmonellosis. Fermented feed has characteristics like a high number of lactobacilli and high concentration of lactic acid, which could make chickens less susceptible for infection with Salmonella. Fermented feed might therefore prevent the colonization of chickens with Salmonella. Two studies were performed to quantify the effect of fermented liquid feed on the susceptibility of broilers for Salmonella. The fermented feed was prepared by fermenting a dry broiler feed supplemented with 1.4 parts of water. Lactobacillus plantarum was used for fermentation. The fermented liquid feed (FLF) contained 10(9) to 10(10) cfu lactobacilli per gram, and the pH was 4. Individually housed control chickens and FLF-fed chickens were inoculated with 10(2) to 10(7) cfu Salmonella enteritidis (SE). Colonization was estimated by cloacal swabs and quantitative caecal culture. The proportion of SE-shedding chickens was decreased in FLF-fed chickens. FLF-fed chickens required a longer time after inoculation or a higher inoculation dose to get the same proportion of infected chickens in comparison with dry feed-fed chickens. The level of cecal colonization with Salmonella in the ceca was not different at the end of the experimental period. The results indicate that FLF can hamper the introduction of Salmonella in broiler flocks because the chickens are less susceptible for infection. Fermented liquid feed might therefore be a new hurdle in the strategy to control Salmonella in chicken flocks.


Effects of Bacillus subtilis var. natto and Saccharomyces cerevisiae mixed fermented feed on the enhanced growth performance of broilers.
K-L Chen, W-L Kho, S-H You, R-H Yeh, S-W Tang, C-W Hsieh Department of Animal Science, National Chiayi University, Taiwan.

Bacillus subtilis var. natto N21 (Bac; for greater proteolytic capacity) and Saccharomyces cerevisiae Y10 (Sac; for greater acidic capacity) were applied to produce a 2-stage combined fermentation feed. This study investigated whether the enhancement of Bac+Sac fermented feed on broiler growth performance was due to the probiotics per se or due to the fermentation process. Trial 1 included 1-d-old broiler chicks (n=144) randomly assigned to control, water added (same as in the fermentation feed, 23%), and Bac+Sac fermented feed (FBac+Sac) treatments with 4 replicates. Trial 2 included 21-d-old broiler chickens (n=12) assigned into control and FBac+Sac groups for a metabolic trial for nutrient availability. Trial 3 included 1-d-old male broiler chicks (n=216) randomly assigned into 6 treatments with 3 replicates. Treatments included a control, Sac fermented feed (FSac), FBac+Sac, Bac powder (PBac), Sac powder (PSac), and Bac+Sac powder (PBac+Sac). The results from trial 1 showed that FBac+Sac increased BW and feed intake (P<0.05) in 21- and 39-d-old chickens. The water-added group showed decreased BW, weight gain, and feed intake (P<0.05). Trial 2 showed that FBac+ Sac increased gross energy availability (P<0.05). Trial 3 showed that FBac+Sac increased 21- and 39-d-old BW and weight gain (P<0.05). Diets supplemented with probiotic powder or fermented with Sac did not improve broiler growth performance (P>0.05). The growth performance improvement of the FBac+Sac treatment was probably not due to the added water, probiotic powder inclusion, or through single-strain fermentation, but due to the 2-stage fermentation process using Bac and Sac strains.


[Campylobacter and Salmonella control in chickens and the role of fermented food].
Lourens Heres Centraal Instituut voor DierziekteControle (CIDC-Lelystad), Postbus 2004, 8203 AA Lelystad. [email protected]

Salmonella and Campylobacter are undesirable pathogens on poultry. Therefore the effect of fermented feed on the colonization in the gastro-intestinal tract of the chicken, the introduction of both bacteria in a chicken flocks, and the transmission between chickens was studied. Broilers that were fed with fermented feed were significantly less susceptible for Salmonella and Campylobacter than chickens on a standard chicken feed. The spread of Salmonella between broiler chickens was reduced. However, the results also showed, like for other known control measures, that this feed can not absolutely guarantee the absence of Salmonella and Campylobacter. Therefore fermented feed must be seen as one of the hurdles in a so called multiple hurdle strategy. The combination of different hurdles should prevent the introduction and transmission. The effect of fermented feed on Campylobacter and Salmonella is partially caused by the presence of high concentrations of organic acids. In chickens fed with liquid feed the acidic barrier in the first part of the GI-tract was clearly improved. Besides organic acids there are other changes in the GI-tract. Changes in colonization levels of indicator organisms, changes in levels of organic acids and an increased pH in ileum and ceacum. These changes indicate a stabilised GI-flora in fermented feed fed poultry. The research confirmed that by changes in the composition of the feed (carbohydrates, acids, or micro-organisms) the GI-health can be promoted and therewith can contribute to the control of food pathogens in farmed animals.



Effect of feeding silages or carrots as supplements to laying hens on production performance, nutrient digestibility, gut structure, gut microflora and feather pecking behaviour.
S Steenfeldt, J B Kjaer, R M Engberg
Department of Animal Health, Welfare and Nutrition, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, University of Aarhus, Tjele, Denmark. [email protected]
1. An experiment was carried out to examine the suitability of using maize silage, barley-pea silage and carrots as foraging materials for egg-laying hens. Production performance, nutrient digestibility, gastrointestinal characteristics, including the composition of the intestinal microflora as well as feather pecking behaviour were the outcome variables. 2. The protein content of the foraging material (g/kg DM) was on average 69 g in carrots, 94 g in maize silage and 125 g in barley-pea silage. The starch content was highest in the maize silage (312 g/kg DM), and the content of non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) varied from 196 to 390 g/kg, being lowest in carrots. Sugars were just traceable in the silages, whereas carrots contained on average 496 g/kg DM. 3. Egg production was highest in hens fed either carrots or maize silage, whereas hens fed barley-pea silage produced less (219 vs. 208). Although the consumption of foraging material was high (33, 35 and 48% of the total feed intake on 'as fed' basis for maize silage, barley-pea silage and carrots, respectively) only a minor effect on nitrogen corrected apparent metabolisable energy (AME(n)) and apparent digestibility was seen. At 53 weeks of age, hens fed maize silage had AME(n) and apparent digestibility values close to the control group (12.61 and 12.82, respectively), whereas access to barley-pea silage and carrots resulted in slightly lower values (12.36 and 12.42, respectively). Mortality was reduced dramatically in the three groups given supplements (0.5 to 2.5%) compared to the control group (15.2%). 4. Hens receiving silage had greater relative gizzard weights than the control or carrot-fed groups. At 53 weeks of age, the gizzard-content pH of hens receiving silage was about 0.7 to 0.9 units lower than that of the control or carrot-fed hens. Hens fed both types of silage had higher concentrations of lactic acid (15.6 vs. 3.2 micromoles/g) and acetic acid (3.6 vs. 6.1 micromoles/g) in the gizzard contents than the other two groups. The dietary supplements had a minor effect on the composition of the intestinal microflora of the hens. 5. Access to all three types of supplements decreased damaging pecking in general (to feathers as well as skin/cloaca), reduced severe feather pecking behaviour and improved the quality of the plumage at 54 weeks of age. 6. In conclusion, access to different types of foraging material such as silages and carrots improved animal welfare.

There are many more...

 

[Costa Rica Art]

This IS a forum discussing what you need to do and how to feed your flock fermented feed. Of the nearly 5,000 post I would be surprised if way over than half support the feeding of and how good it has been for their birds. Perhaps 1/4 of the posts added to the over 1/2 talk about how to ferment the feed and what starters to use and which feeds they ferment. Then there are others that are fermenting feed/food for their other animals and have posted the results. No one here is out to pressure anyone into feeding FF to the flock or other animals, if you don't want to feed your flock FF, no problem but challenging those who have had good results with tails of others negativity doesn't belong here after a point has been made. There has been lots of documented studies done for FF of all kinds, you can ignore those facts and quote any source that is negative but it will not change this group that is about fermented feed for chickens.

 

[yinepu]

This IS a forum discussing what you need to do and how to feed your flock fermented feed. Of the nearly 5,000 post I would be surprised if way over than half support the feeding of and how good it has been for their birds. Perhaps 1/4 of the posts added to the over 1/2 talk about how to ferment the feed and what starters to use and which feeds they ferment. Then there are others that are fermenting feed/food for their other animals and have posted the results. No one here is out to pressure anyone into feeding FF to the flock or other animals, if you don't want to feed your flock FF, no problem but challenging those who have had good results with tails of others negativity doesn't belong here after a point has been made. There has been lots of documented studies done for FF of all kinds, you can ignore those facts and quote any source that is negative but it will not change this group that is about fermented feed for chickens.