Mixed flock feeding (chicken/duck for eggs only)

[CrazyTalk]

So you're telling me that 1 link that doesn't specify a correlation and another that doesn't cite actual evidence negates all the other research?

I'm telling you that the study refererenced in link 1 does not contain a control group of male broilers that were fed a normal diet. Without knowing what the normal rate of uroliths is in 44 week old male broilers, the rate that the are found in those fed high calcium diets is irrelevant.

Also, that study is directly contradicted by the later ones that indicate that the presence of uroliths correlate highly with high levels of estrogen and estradiol in roosters, and don't correlate at all with calcium levels in feed and water. The later studies feature control groups, are properly done, and are thus more reliable.

 

[ChickenCanoe]

I'm done here.
Feed whatever you want.

 

[CrazyTalk]

This one (full paper linked) basically does exactly what I was looking for - multiple groups of roosters, fed different calcium feeds, all the same age, same breed, all put down at the same time - controlled. And finds no correlation between calcium levels of feed and stone formation.
http://www.reproduction-online.org/content/124/6/821.full.pdf

This means that any of the linked papers regarding lesser fertility/higher morbidity that ChickenCanoe referenced with regard to stones aren't really relevant, as we can be reasonably sure that the stones aren't a result of a high calcium diet. That doesn't mean a high calcium diet is safe/unsafe, but it means uroliths aren't a side effect.

Several of the studies referenced also indicate a higher incidence of uroliths in intensively reared chickens - basically commercial layers and broilers, regardless of feed type, so it may have something to do with excess food intake.

I suggest people read it if they're curious and make their own decisions.

 

[Chris09]

I'm not arguing that it doesn't.

Calcium isn't free - and feeds are typically formulated with large scale growers in mind where decisions are mostly made on a cost basis - so the question is, are the maintenance diets lower calcium because the excess calcium is unneeded, or because it's detrimental?. The fact that there's less of it doesn't indicate one way or the other. And it being detrimental to chicks doesn't mean its detrimental to adults.

Layer feed is formulated with lower protein because it's unneeded, not because 20% layer would be detrimental. Its entirely possible that the lower calcium feeds are the same way.

The large scale egg producer want quality eggs so they pound high amounts of calcium (and other vitamin/minerals) to there birds, they don't worry about the out come because the birds are not around long enough to worry about it.
The big egg producer do not have males around, they buy fertile hatching eggs from companies like Lohmann and Hendrix so they don't have to worry about the high amount of calcium there either.

As far as protein go's, the lower protein feeds (less than 18%) are designed for a Leghorn type egg producing birds like a ISA Brown or a Babcock White. These low protein feeds may be alright for some hatchery type bird as a low end feed but they would be far better off in a 18% protein feed, and the heritage breeds do better on a higher protein feed (20%) just do to there size.

More and more feed producers are seeing this and do make a 20% layer feed and a 20% flock feed for non-laying fowl.

 

[ChickenCanoe]

The large scale egg producer want quality eggs so they pound high amounts of calcium (and other vitamin/minerals) to there birds, they don't worry about the out come because the birds are not around long enough to worry about it.
...

X2
We can use their research as a guide but those of us that have our own rare breeder flocks want our roosters to live and have high fertility 6+ years and hens to produce viable hatching eggs longer than that must feed and manage much differently.

 

[CrazyTalk]

X2
We can use their research as a guide but those of us that have our own rare breeder flocks want our roosters to live and have high fertility 6+ years and hens to produce viable hatching eggs longer than that must feed and manage much differently.

Of course if you have different goals, you should feed differently.

But you still haven't shown any evidence that higher calcium load lowers life expectancy or fertility of adult roosters. You've shown that uroliths do, but you've also shown that uroliths correlate with hormonal issues, and not calcium levels in feed. You've shown that uroliths have a significantly higher incidence in roosters than hens, but this is true of pretty much every species - males form more stones.

"The large scale egg producer want quality eggs so they pound high amounts of calcium (and other vitamin/minerals) to there birds, they don't worry about the out come because the birds are not around long enough to worry about it. "

I agree and understand this, but the fact that large egg producers don't care about what their feed levels would do to roosters isn't evidence that it would do harm to roosters. It's entirely possible that the feed does shorten their lives, but nobody has posted good evidence of such.

 

[Chris09]

Of course if you have different goals, you should feed differently.

But you still haven't shown any evidence that higher calcium load lowers life expectancy or fertility of adult roosters. You've shown that uroliths do, but you've also shown that uroliths correlate with hormonal issues, and not calcium levels in feed. You've shown that uroliths have a significantly higher incidence in roosters than hens, but this is true of pretty much every species - males form more stones.

"The large scale egg producer want quality eggs so they pound high amounts of calcium (and other vitamin/minerals) to there birds, they don't worry about the out come because the birds are not around long enough to worry about it. "

I agree and understand this, but the fact that large egg producers don't care about what their feed levels would do to roosters isn't evidence that it would do harm to roosters. It's entirely possible that the feed does shorten their lives, but nobody has posted good evidence of such.

I hate to put it this way but you haven't yet posted evidence that feeding high amounts of calcium does not affect laying or non-laying fowl.

Quote:

"The large scale egg producer want quality eggs so they pound high amounts of calcium (and other vitamin/minerals) to there birds, they don't worry about the out come because the birds are not around long enough to worry about it. "

Here is my whole post, note the bold.

Quote:
Heres a link on renal failure in laying hen (note how calcium pop's up again)
nhjy.hzau.edu.cn/kech/synkx/dong/2bao/UrolithiasisChina.pdf


Quote: Calcium salts are the most common mineral deposited in avian tissues. They may form in damaged or necrotic tissue (dystrophic calcification), or when calcium reaches excessive blood levels as can occur in renal failure and in birds fed high calcium diets, such as broiler breeder hens or commercial layer hens that go out of egg production

 

[CrazyTalk]

I hate to put it this way but you haven't yet posted evidence that feeding high amounts of calcium does not affect laying or non-laying fowl.

I've never made that claim, so I don't need to post evidence. That's how these things work. I've never once said that layer feed isn't harmful to anything. I've asked for evidence to your claim that layer feed is dangerous to roosters.


Any you keep posting studies about hens.


nhjy.hzau.edu.cn/kech/synkx/dong/2bao/UrolithiasisChina.pdf


This is a gigantic waste of time - you should read links before you post them. We know that urolithiasis and kidney failure are common in these birds - we know that it presents as calcium stones in the urethra and kidneys - we know those things are bad for fertility and lifespan. We also know, from the studies that ChickenCanoe posted that uroliths were universally present in 96 week old broilers - REGARDLESS OF DIET. We also know that there was no correlation between calcium in the diet and weight or count of said uroliths. Adult birds fed high calcium diets had no difference in quantity or size of uroliths from birds fed a control diet.

The study above is a control of FEEDING 7 WEEK OLD CHICKS LAYER FEED. Of course it causes kidney problems -they're kidneys are immature. We know that. It's also completely irrelevant to this conversation. We're talking about ADULT ROOSTERS, not 7 week old pullets.

 

[Chris09]

I've never made that claim, so I don't need to post evidence. That's how these things work. I've never once said that layer feed isn't harmful to anything. I've asked for evidence to your claim that layer feed is dangerous to roosters.


Any you keep posting studies about hens.


nhjy.hzau.edu.cn/kech/synkx/dong/2bao/UrolithiasisChina.pdf


This is a gigantic waste of time - you should read links before you post them. We know that urolithiasis and kidney failure are common in these birds - we know that it presents as calcium stones in the urethra and kidneys - we know those things are bad for fertility and lifespan. We also know, from the studies that ChickenCanoe posted that uroliths were universally present in 96 week old broilers - REGARDLESS OF DIET. We also know that there was no correlation between calcium in the diet and weight or count of said uroliths. Adult birds fed high calcium diets had no difference in quantity or size of uroliths from birds fed a control diet.

The study above is a control of FEEDING 7 WEEK OLD CHICKS LAYER FEED. Of course it causes kidney problems -they're kidneys are immature. We know that. It's also completely irrelevant to this conversation. We're talking about ADULT ROOSTERS, not 7 week old pullets.

Yes it is a waste of time since your only reading or seeing what you want to.
You must have missed where they talked about laying HENS. (If I remember correctly 51 weeks of age. keep in mind that prime laying for most commercial layers is 18 to 90 wks)

Also it only gos to reason if high amounts of calcium is bad for a laying hen, a animal that can extract extra calcium into a egg than it is going to be bad to a rooster who does not lay a egg.

If your looking for information on ADULT ROOSTERS your going to be looking for a very long time since rooster are disposable and are not kept in the big egg industry...