FEEDING FOR EGG PRODUCTION. 



IOI 



EGG RECORDS OF HENS— CONCLUDED. 

 FROM 56 LICiHT BRAHMAS. 



. 5 



1898. 



1899. 





3/— ' 



SCO 



> 



c 



55 



6 



<•$ 



fa 





< 





aJ 



° 



< 



^7 



u 



C 



> 



55 



6 



C 



'S 



o 



„ 





11 



4 



5 



19 

 11 

 12 



IS 



•20 

 20 

 IS 

 21 

 2! 

 •20 

 IS 

 10 

 3 

 6 

 



21 

 19 

 21 

 21 

 ■>•> 



20 

 14 

 10 

 14 

 1> 



19 

 21 

 14 

 19 

 17 

 14 

 6 

 1 

 16 

 7 

 3 



20 

 19 

 21 

 22 

 16 

 14 

 14 

 14 

 IS 

 S 

 10 



21 

 •21 

 19 

 16 

 15 

 13 

 10 

 15 

 3 

 6 



18 

 21 

 15 

 19 

 16 

 10 

 5 



s 



7 



19 

 22 



10 

 21 

 10 

 13 



S 







S 



1 



20 

 10 

 3 

 13 

 5 

 4 

 5 



5 



IS 



6 



194 



139 



01 



43 





194 

 190 

 1S1 



•29-1 



13 



IS 



20 



181 



50 .... 

 296 





17 



19 



17 19 

 10 K 



179 



87 



198 









14 

 10 

 •24 

 11 



17 

 10 

 S 

 9 







S6 



■>43 















75 











59 











8 



1 









55 













A study of the monthly record sheets shows great differences 

 in the capacities of hens, and marked variations in the regularity 

 of their work ; some commencing early and continuing laying 

 heavily and regularly month after month while others varied 

 much, laying well one month or poorly or not at all the next. 



It is impossible to account for these vagaries as the birds in 

 each breed were bred alike and selected for their uniformity. 

 All pens were of the same size and shape and contained the same 

 number of birds. Their feeding and treatment were alike 

 throughout. Whenever changes were made in the feed in one 

 pen, they were made in the others. That they were in good 

 health is shown by the fact that but two were ailing, and were 

 taken out early; two crop bound; and one injured by rough 

 treatment by a cockerel. Many of the lightest layers gave evi- 

 dence of much vitality and in many instances there were no 

 marked indications in form or type by which we were able to 

 account for the small amount of work performed by them. 

 Numbers 234. 70 and 236 yielded respectively 36, 37 and 38 

 eggs in the year. They were of the egg type and gave no evi- 

 dence of weakness or masculinity. 



Number 101, 286, 36, 47 and 14, with their yields of 204, 206, 

 201, 200 and 208 eggs during the year, were typical birds with 



