372 POULTRY PRODUCTION 



111 formulating the ration, not one, but several kinds of 

 hotli whole and ground grains and as many sorts of animal 

 food and greenness should be furnished as possible. Variety 

 stimulates the appetite and offers an opportunity for the 

 fiiwl to exercisi' some choice in the selection (jf the ration. 

 It als(.> makes likely a supply of the vitamins so far recognized 

 anfl perhaps others not yet discovered. 



Philips' reports observations upon the feeding habits of 

 hens, wherein he found in feeding a grain ration containing 

 corn, oats, and wheat, that certain hens preferred corn to the 

 exclusion of the other grains, others preferred wheat, while 

 still others showed a marked preference for oats. If any one 

 of the grains had been fed to the exclusion of the others, 

 even though properly balanced with a mash, the birds would 

 not luu'e been quite satisfied and production would probably 

 have been lessened. 



Adaptation to Purpose. — There is usually one of four pro- 

 ductive purposes in view in feeding. These are (1) laying, 

 {'2) fattening, (3) growing, and (4) breeding. In addition 

 to these, there are the factors of age, class, and species 

 to consider. The most characteristic differences between 

 rations formulated for these respective purposes are as 

 follows: An egg ration is composed, in addition to grit, shell, 

 charcoal, bone and water, which are before the fowls at all 

 times for all purposes except fattening, of whole or cracked 

 grains and mash mixtures. A laying ration should have a 

 nutritive ratio between 1 to 4 and 1 to 5, the lighter hens 

 recjuiring a proportion coming nearer to the latter and 

 heavier hens coming nearer to the former ratio. 



A fattening ration is usually composed entirely of finely 

 ground grains or grain by-products, mixed with buttermilk 

 or skim milk to a consistency of a porridge. Wheeler^ suggests 

 a nutritive ratio of 1 to 8 as proper for a fattening ration for 

 mature fowls. Bittenbender and Lippincott'* found a ratio 

 of 1 to 6.3 gave better gains than any narrower ratio, while 

 Lee^ reports that in commercial establishments and packing 



' Kansas BulleUii No. 104. ^ Jordan's Feeding of Animals. 



' Unpublished data, Iowa State College. 



^ Bureau of Anitnal Industry, Bulletin No. 146. 



