Show Off Your American Gamefowl and Chat Thread!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Restricting feed to make em smaller seems counterproductive to me. To make weight I get but that will only hurt the health if it’s not in the genes to make him smaller by nature.
There is flexibility in the genes. Restricting feed during the entire growth process will reduce skeletal growth somewhat, but will be very noticeable in muscle growth. This is a common practice used in "Broiler Breeders" the birds used to produce the rotisserie birds in the super market. By restricting the feed on the parents, about 30% less than what they would like to eat, they grow up smaller and leaner and actually lay better as adults.
 
Starting off with t
Flypen, why do you ask about the weight? There are two aspects, genotype and phenotype. Genotype is what the genes say, and there will be some variance. I don't know how many genes influence size in fowl, but quite a few, I would imagine. The phenotype is the outcome of those genes and their environment (feed, disease, weather), all of which can affect size. Weather is an interesting one, because when raising birds in a cold season, the chicks eat just to stay warm and grow. If too hot, food consumption drops, and so does growth. It is kind of like Goldilocks, if the temps are just right, the chicks eat well and grow well.

Feeding has a lot to do with the size of the miniatures I am playing with. Some really restrict the feed to keep them small. I am more interested in the genetic influence, so I weigh them and feed a standard diet.
I asked the question in regards to the post shubin made #31289 that he typically likes larger broodfowl. If his broodfowl weren't made from so many other type of fowl he could easily have them over 7 lbs. I hatched a few eggs from my blues and my greys late this year to see if I could raise a stag less than 3.12 lbs. So far I have one grey stag and one blue stag that might not make it to normal size. I've never kept feed away from them.
 
There is flexibility in the genes. Restricting feed during the entire growth process will reduce skeletal growth somewhat, but will be very noticeable in muscle growth. This is a common practice used in "Broiler Breeders" the birds used to produce the rotisserie birds in the super market. By restricting the feed on the parents, about 30% less than what they would like to eat, they grow up smaller and leaner and actually lay better as adults.
We can agree to disagree. Yes I know what they do to appease the markets. Results in weak *ss birds that drop over dead from a stiff breeze. Seems to me that I don’t know better than Mother Nature and I’m not in the business of altering animals for profit especially by restricting feed. As long as they are healthy and not fat I’m happy.
 
Humans in certain parts of the world are pretty d*mn small and skinny from the lack of food and harsh environments. They might survive (possibly through evolution) but they damn sure aren’t thriving. Plenty of diseases run rampant in them too. Pretty damn cheap to feed em too.
 
We can agree to disagree but this is complete horseshit
Took you longer than I thought. Lol
I have a few hatched in spring and then some just hatched the very end of oct. same breeding I guarantee you if you keep things equal and feed them a little more they will be pretty damn close to the same size as the birds born earlier.
 
Last edited:
So about these pyles how many lines truly produce pyles or are they just old English and Irish pyles?

from what I've read it's a recessive gene and can be hard to produce said color and can be SC/PC, yellow or white legged.
 
I love reading those kind of quotes “ could come sc, pc, yellow legged, green legged, blue legged, slate legged, short to high station, no blood added since disembarking off the Santa Maria” $72,000 a trio buy one get two free
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom