Roosters And Calcium- What's the current thinking?

[Ridgerunner]

I hate to think how many years its been since I tasted Pepto Bismal but I can still remember how that tastess. I'm not sure I want to thank you for that memory. I'm not sure that would be a turnoff for chickens though.

It maybe extremely difficult, and yes it is possible that there was a trace of calcium even if they called it 0%. It was 0% added as they phrased it. Another assumption I know, but I'd assume that the people doing this study had access to some fairly sophisticated technology as far as formulating the feed. There may be a trace but I'd assume the base percent was effectively 0%.

Lots of assumptions here. Even with the full study we may not be able to answer that one.

 

[centrarchid]

I formulate a range of diets for fishes to figure out nutritional requirments. I generally eat a little myself or encourage students helping with experiement to do so as well. Some of the feeds taste like you would expect, some kind of like Cherios and other are flat out horrible. Fishy taste does not turn me or fishes off but other flavors do seem not to go well with the fish. What I have seen is that even though they will eat a given formulation, they may not have the appetite for it required to give good growth / performance, sometimes even when diet should be complete. My chickens are the same way with some layer formulations, especially the all plant based versions. The formulation may be nutritionally complete but simply not as tasty as the versions with animal protein.


The basal diet used in the rooster trial was in all likelihood made using a mixture of grain products and premixes to provide vitamins and minerals although calcium may have been excluding from the mineral premix. The grain products and especially if animal by-products where used had some level of available calcium. It none present, the control birds would have suffered grossly or even died before trial ended assuming no alternative routes of calcium uptake were available (i.e. water).

 

[Ridgerunner]

That was Fred's original question. What is the background calcium level to start with. I can't find the full study either.

I think you are right. Based on feed for a growing chick being in the range of 1% calcium, I would not expect the daily calcium intake needed for body maintenance of an already grown chicken that is not laying eggs to be very high. But I do think they have to have some for body maintenance if nothing else. And it would be hard to eliminate all calcium from the feed.

Anything I say about that base background calcium level is going to be a guess. My guess is that it is probably closer to 0% than 1%, but that is purely a guess. My logic is that if it were higher or high enough to be significant, it may have even been mentioned in the abstract.

Chris, what I meant by my comment is not that I disagree with you, I'm just not as convinced as I think you are based on some of your comments from other threads. I believe in moderation and I'm convinced too much of a good thing is often a bad thing. I've read studies where if a human is taking more than 800 units (whatever those units are) of calcium, they need to get some blood work done. They may be harming their body. I think you have a valid concern, I'm just not sure how bad it is. And as mentioned in 7&8's post, mine forage some anyway. I'm not that concerned about mine.

Something else I wish I'd mentioned right after I hit submit. I think these studies are for commercial operations. I suspect the hatcheries we're talking about don't keep their roosters around for many breeding seasons. I don't with mine. So the cumulative effect of too much calcium may not be all that bad if they don't live that long.

 

[centrarchid]

During breeding season my roosters get same ration as hens without ill effects. I keep my roosters long-term, some for 5 or more years of breeding but work is not nearly as strenous as it is for roosters in commercial flocks. My operational sex ratio is one rooster to at most six hens and it is often closer to one to one when breeding pens used. My production is also seasonal starting in January and closed at latest by middle September. Commercial producers are more intensive and year round.


Genetics of birds may also play a role.

 

[Chris09]

Quote: I understand that you don't disagree.

From what I understand the recommended amount of calcium for a rooster was right around 1.5% and I would assume that it would be the same for any non laying fowl, a high amount of calcium in a non-laying diet can lead to kidney problem and even a slow death. I find it much easier and safer just to feed a good feed that has a Calcium amount around 1 to 1.5 percent and offer calcium on the side.

Here is a good link on feeding breeding roosters,
http://202.196.80.249/jpkc/myhexiuyuan/gout/008.pdf

Chris

 

[centrarchid]

I understand that you don't disagree.

From what I understand the recommended amount of calcium for a rooster was right around 1.5% and I would assume that it would be the same for any non laying fowl, a high amount of calcium in a non-laying diet can lead to kidney problem and even a slow death. I find it much easier and safer just to feed a good feed that has a Calcium amount around 1 to 1.5 percent and offer calcium on the side.

Here is a good link on feeding breeding roosters,
http://202.196.80.249/jpkc/myhexiuyuan/gout/008.pdf

Chris

Chris,

I read the article. The calcium issue is addressed as I understand it with respect to bird long lived birds but very few poultry keepers actually tolerate birds living to such advanced ages for productivity reasons. The diets are may be too rich with respect realizing long life but do enable the enhanced level of egg production and fertility (based on characteristics of OP's cited paper) during the shorter productive life-span. Productivity is the overwhelming concern of most people.

Later it talks about dietary protein. The high protein levels of 20 to 21% seem to hot even for breeding adults. I get a good number of games to live close to 10 years of age on a diet that is usually in the 16 to 18% protein range and fertility is pretty good almost to the end. The higher end is restricted for periods of egg laying and molt while birds do neither can be down to 14% with little or no problems I can see, especially during winter months.

 

[Chris09]

Later it talks about dietary protein. The high protein levels of 20 to 21% seem to hot even for breeding adults. I get a good number of games to live close to 10 years of age on a diet that is usually in the 16 to 18% protein range and fertility is pretty good almost to the end. The higher end is restricted for periods of egg laying and molt while birds do neither can be down to 14% with little or no problems I can see, especially during winter months.

Most if not all the Breeder feeds I have seen are no less than 18% protein and I have seen Game Bird Breeder feed up in the 20's.
I feed a minimum of 20 percent protein in the breeding season, 22+ percent protein during molt and no less than 18 percent the rest of the year. I have had real good luck with these protein amounts.

Chris

 

[centrarchid]

We have similar changes in protein levels with respect to lifecycle stage but the absolute protein levels vary greatly. I use feeds heavy on animal protein side and cut them with intact grains / scratch to give overall protein levels I use. Are your feeds close to being all grain based?

 

[Fred's Hens]

We have similar changes in protein levels with respect to lifecycle stage but the absolute protein levels vary greatly. I use feeds heavy on animal protein side and cut them with intact grains / scratch to give overall protein levels I use. Are your feeds close to being all grain based?

Hahahaha... Sorry for the chuckle. Chris is one of the champions of animal protein in feed. Sorry for the tickled funny bone. Wholly inappropriate.

Doc, I love your posts, BTW.

 

[ChickensAreSweet]

Doc, I love your posts, BTW.

x2