﻿30 BULLETIN 21, TJ. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



Table 16. — Comparative data of feeding experiments of 1910, 1911, and 1912. 













Average 



Average 



Average 



Average 



Experiment. 



Year. 



Number 

 of head. 



Average 

 weight. 



Average 

 per cent 



grain 

 per 



cost of 

 feed per 



cost of 

 labor per 



total 

 cost per 









of gain. 



pound. 



pound 



pound 



pound 













of gain. 



of gain. 



of gain. 



of gain. 









Pounds. 



Per cent. 



Pounds. 



Cents. 



Cents. 



Cents. 



A 



1910 



43,944 



2.42 



18.1 



3.26 



6.45 



1.40 



7.85 





1911 



60, 144 



2.47 



18.6 



3.62 



7.83 



1.35 



9.18 





1912 



90, 069 



2.44 



18.6 



4.42 



8.74 



1.63 



10.37 



B 



1910 



61.706 



" 2.82 



18.7 



3.26 



7.74 



2.59 



10.33 





1911 



102,684 



2.56 



26.0 



3.33 



7.20 



2.00 



9.20 





1912 



90,000 



2.36 



26.7 



3.58 



7.70 



1.99 



9.69 



C 



1910 

 1911 



113,217 

 117, 151 



2.48 



20.2 

 20.4 











4.45 



7.15' 



1.81 



8.96 





1912 



211,560 



2.21 



20.7 



3.72 



6.61 



1.37 



7.98 



D 



1910 



1911 



89,319 

 109, S00 





20.1 

 18.0 











2.68 



4.18 



8.71 



1.56 



10.27 





1912 



107. 052 



2.69 



15.7 



4.98 



9.95 



1.59 



11. 54 



CONCLUSIONS. 



The average cost and the amount of feed consumed in fattening 

 394,744 chickens at the four feeding experiments in alphabetical 

 order during the season of 1911 were, respectively, as follows: Grain 

 per pound of gain, 3.62, 3.33, 4.45, and 4.18 pounds; cost of feed 

 per pound of gain, 7. S3, 7.20, 7.15, and 8.71 cents; total cost per 

 pound of gain, 9.18, 9.20, 8.96, and 10.27 cents. The averages in 

 1912 for 498,681 chickens were: Grain per pound of gain, 4.42, 3.58, 

 3.72, and 4.98 pounds; cost of feed per pound of gain, 8.74, 7.70, 

 6.61, and 9.95 cents; total cost per pound of gain, 10.37, 9.69, 7.98, 

 and 11.54 cents. 



Tallow, while making the fat on the birds more pronounced, in- 

 creased the cost of gains. Thick condensed buttermilk in place of 

 tallow produced better results. 



Oat flour produced greater gains than low-grade wheat flour, but 

 the latter feed produced cheaper gains. 



Beef scraps added to the buttermilk in a fattening ration did not 

 increase the gain. The addition of condimental feeds did not increase 

 the appetite of the birds or help the gains. Grit is of no value in 

 fattening for any period under 15 days. 



Under commercial conditions in the Middle West the best results 

 are secured by fattening for about 14 days until the middle of Sep- 

 tember, and then gradually shortening the period to 6 or 7 days. 



The birds ate more feed on three feeds a day but used feed more 

 efficiently when fed only twice. 



Mechanical labor-saving devices reduced the cost of fattening by 

 reducing both the total amount of labor and the proportion of skilled 

 labor required. The portable feeding battery turned out the birds in 

 better condition and reduced the cost of labor per pound of gain. 



