Heritage Large Fowl - Phase II

[3riverschick]

Pardon me for interrupting your gory little repartee.

I have some questions and hoping for some answers.

The avian small intestine, including the duodenum, jejunum and ileum.

In birds, do we want to see it longer or shorter in length;
heavier or lighter in weight?

Which combination of factors ( lighter, heavier, longer, shorter)
sets the stage for better growth and digestion?

Is the correct length and weight of the small intestine what breeders
and breed type descriptions refer to as "absence of offal"?

Is the length of the small intestine related to the width of the walls of the small intestine?

Is the width of the walls of the small intestine related to better uptake of nutrients inside it?

Does a longer small intestine mean the walls are thinner?

Thanks so much!
Karen

 

[hellbender]

Pardon me for interrupting your gory little repartee.

I have some questions and hoping for some answers.

The avian small intestine, including the duodenum, jejunum and ileum.

In birds, do we want to see it longer or shorter in length;
heavier or lighter in weight?

Which combination of factors ( lighter, heavier, longer, shorter)
sets the stage for better growth and digestion?

Is the correct length and weight of the small intestine what breeders
and breed type descriptions refer to as "absence of offal"?

Is the length of the small intestine related to the width of the walls of the small intestine?

Is the width of the walls of the small intestine related to better uptake of nutrients inside it?

Does a longer small intestine mean the walls are thinner?

Thanks so much!
Karen

Goodness Karen...I'd rather kill 'em any day as opposed to gutting 'em! I honestly can't wait to read the answer to these questions.

I'm very curious to know if there really a satisfactory answer to any one of them???

 

[Beekissed]

I can only answer one of those questions: Is the width of the walls of the small intestine related to better uptake of nutrients inside it?

The more wall space, the more villi, the longer the villi, the more surface area for capillary beds, the more capillary beds, the more nutrient uptake.

 

[3riverschick]

Goodness Karen...I'd rather kill 'em any day as opposed to gutting 'em! I honestly can't wait to read the answer to these questions.

I'm very curious to know if there really a satisfactory answer to any one of them???

I think there is, hellbender. I have been studying the effect of enzymes, probiotics, and other supplements on the growth and production of broilers. Because a Sussex is raised closer to a broiler than an egg layer, as it is first and foremost , historically, a meat bird. Different combinations of supplements have different effects on the growth and development of the broiler. However, the researchers already expect me to know the answers to these questions when they post their results. So unless I can find out the answers, I am not sure how to interpret their findings.
Best,
Karen

 

[hellbender]

I can only answer one of those questions: Is the width of the walls of the small intestine related to better uptake of nutrients inside it?

The more wall space, the more villi, the longer the villi, the more surface area for capillary beds, the more capillary beds, the more nutrient uptake.

Ok..and just how is one to breed for that capacious gut? In goats its simple enough..but in chickens...Still waiting.

I think there is, hellbender. I have been studying the effect of enzymes, probiotics, and other supplements on the growth and production of broilers. Because a Sussex is raised closer to a broiler than an egg layer, as it is first and foremost , historically, a meat bird. Different combinations of supplements have different effects on the growth and development of the broiler. However, the researchers already expect me to know the answers to these questions when they post their results. So unless I can find out the answers, I am not sure how to interpret their findings.
Best,
Karen

Alright Karen...I'll wait for truly satisfactory answers, but If my birds required that much worry...they would all face the blade and I'd just rise goats.

 

[3riverschick]

I can only answer one of those questions: Is the width of the walls of the small intestine related to better uptake of nutrients inside it?

The more wall space, the more villi, the longer the villi, the more surface area for capillary beds, the more capillary beds, the more nutrient uptake.

Does the bird require longer length to achieve this? Or can more and longer villi ( thus more surface area )
in the walls of the small intestine in a shorter intestine accomplish the same thing?

 

[Beekissed]

Does the bird require longer length to achieve this? Or can convolutions in the walls
of the small intestine in a shorter intestine accomplish the same thing?

Of course, longer length will mean more general space and wall area, but studies have shown an increase in the length of existing villi in broilers and layers alike after they were fed with fermented feed grains for a period of time(though no increase in the actual length of the intestines themselves). The test group not fed FF showed no additional lengthening of intestinal villi during the same time period.

 

[3riverschick]

Of course, longer length will mean more general space and wall area, but studies have shown an increase in the length of existing villi in broilers and layers alike after they were fed with fermented feed grains for a period of time(though no increase in the actual length of the intestines themselves). The test group not fed FF showed no additional lengthening of intestinal villi during the same time period.

Do you think the longer villi compensate for length of small intestine?

 

[Beekissed]

Do you think the longer villi compensate for length of small intestine?

It would definitely augment it, though I'm not sure it would compensate for an abnormally short bowel enough to keep a bird's nutritional uptake on par with birds with a normal bowel length fed on the same feeds.

I'm not sure I've ever heard that short bowel was a problem in poultry breeding. Is this something that they have found with certain types of breeding that has caused a problem with nutritional uptake and a resulting deficiency? That would be a tough thing to cull/breed for because you'd never know it existed until you killed a bird and found out.

 

[gjensen]

^^^ This ^^^ well said, and pretty much what I am doing, as of last year.

I'm still going over the data, but I saw some interesting results. Out of a dozen Silver Gray Dorking hens and 2 cocks, only 4 hens produced any pullets worth keeping. The 2 best producers of that subset also produced the only cockerels worth keeping, with the exception of one hen who only produced males and the best males at that.

Overall, I'm seeing better size and weight in the pullets. Most of the keepers are a pound heavier than the hens that produced them. Unfortunately, not the case with the cockerels, even though my largest hen produced the best type cockerels. I'm really disappointed in the males from last year, overall.

Before I was using the SOP, my flock developed tail angles that were way too high. So, I used a cock last year with a much lower tail. He has good length of back, and good type, but also one almost duck foot and a brush of white on his lobes. But I used him because he was my only option for lowering the tail angle. I hadn't been paying much attention to position of toes since type and size has been my focus. Now, I'm regretting that because almost all my youngsters have toes that point to center or have one duck foot. In addition, all the cockerels have a brush of white on the lobes. I only have 2 females with all red lobes. One of those I would cull if it weren't for her red lobes because her type is not as good as others.

So, I'm finding that I have some pullets with one trait that I need ie good feet or red lobes. I keep them because I hope that I can integrate that trait into the flock. I get a little frustrated because I feel like I have a lot of individual puzzle pieces but no completed puzzle. No one bird has all the traits that I want to meet Standard with none of the defects or dqs.

A very interesting post.

It sounds like you have made progress identifying who will help you most and not. I think that is an advantage in doing this.

It did not take me long to recognize that inheritance is just as much about the family behind the bird as the bird itself. Some call it pre potency etc., but really it is just family inheritance. Occasionally in a flock that is variable, someone may be fortunate and identify a bird that has it all lined up a bit better.
If I take a well bred bird where the quality traits are relatively fixed and put it on a hatchery bird where the type is all over the place, in the first generation, the parent with the fixed traits is going to have more influence.

Like you, I have underestimated some faults and made mistakes. I did that playing around with NHs before they became cool and I was dealing with little better than hatchery quality birds. That is also where I started considering single mating. I had devoted too much to a single male, and regretted it. The results are not especially predictable until you can get the upper hand, and get an understanding what is at play with what you have. Not so predictable that you could put all of your eggs in a single basket without risk.

All of this is simpler when you are starting with something that is in better shape than what we have.

Also like you, this new project I have is a bunch of pieces and parts. I had to shift from what was wrong to looking for what was right. Otherwise I was going to kill every bird I had. What I have now is pieces and parts.

BUT. I do not want to continue perpetually with pieces and parts. I am trying to identify a couple individuals and pairs that I can build from. I am afraid of chaos so I want to gain some control. The idea is that what is working best, is my best place to start. I want to build a family with that best possible start. I have an idea who that might be, but they are going to have to prove it. Even that I will single mate, it will be organized by families. Who starts a family will be based on results. I judge an individual by appearance, but a family is more than an individual.

I can do some side mating where I can preserve traits that can be used to introduce traits to a established family. In other words I already know that a given family is going to have weaknesses and strengths. I will be choosing what I think is best overall, and by introducing a trait a family is weak on, I have a chance at improving on that family's foundation.
An example is that I have a pair set up right now that is strictly a color mating. They both made the cut, so I think they are worth more than color. But by using strength on strength in this case, instead of strength and weakness, I am trying to accentuate this strength in their offspring. This in a sense is to preserve the strength, where I am as a whole weak. It seams that this would give me a tad more freedom in selecting for type and size in a given family. I do not want to lose what I have.
I do not intend to restrict these two individuals to that mating. I want their influence to reach farther. I just want a shot at preserving and improving color. And if I get lucky, maybe they will give me a couple birds that I get excited about.

Regardless of how it is done, some control has to be had, or the pieces and parts will go on forever. I think we need to build our families, hold on to the pieces and parts, and improve the families methodically and with caution. I think it takes some side mating if a family does not prove to have something.

I am also experimenting with a grading project on the side. I do not expect anything more from this than to learn.

Anyways I am just sharing ideas that I have had. Kind of how I am approaching this project. At the end of the year some of this may not matter. The birds have a lot to say in this. Kind of like shooting an error and drawing the bulls eye around it.