lained in the group on 15 foot candles, pelleted feed, and 1 square foot 

 of floor space per bird. The poorest group with a conversion of 2.56 was 

 the 120 foot candles, mash, and -.{ square foot group. There were no differ- 

 ences between the corresponding 15 and 120 foot candles groups. Small 

 differences appeared between the corresponding mash and pellet groups 

 and the 1 square fool and % square foot groups. The analysis of variance 

 for the combined experiments I Table III shows that ration had a significant 

 influence on feed conversion. The differences among experiments were high- 

 ly significant. 



Table 8. The Effect of Feed Form, Space All<>linent aiul Light Iiiteii.<«it> I ptm 



Coefficient of Variability in Body \^'eight of Combined 



Sexes at 10 Weeks of Age. 



Light Intensity 

 Feed Form 

 Floor Space 



15 foot candles 120 foot candles 



Mash Pellets Mash Pellets 



1 sq. ft 7:s sq. ft 1 sq. ft % sq. ft 1 sq. ft 7:{ sq. ft 1 sq. ft 7:4 sq. ft 



Experiments and 

 Replicates 



Coefficients of \ ariabilitv 



Average of 3 

 Experiments 



8.79 



8.29 



9.50 8.63 



8.59 9.61 



8.43 9.04 



Intensity Average: 15 Foot Candles 8.80; 120 Foot Candles 8.92 



Feed Form Average: Mash 8.82; Pellets 8.90 



Floor Space Average: 1 Sq. Ft. 8.83; % Sq. Ft. 8.89 



(Coefficients of Variability 



Table 8 presents the coefficients of variabilil\ based upon the individual 

 body weight of males and females. The most uniform group was the 15 foot 

 candles, mash, 7:{ square foot groups with a coefficient of variability of 

 0.20. The poorest was the 120 fool candles, inash. -;! square foot group 

 uilh a value of 9.61. 



The analysis of variance of the tcunliined experiments (Table lit imli- 

 cates that in no instance was there a significant difference in iiidixidiial 

 variation in body weight. 



12 



