2010
DOI: 10.4314/tjas.v5i2.50129
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of quantitative feed restriction on pullet development and subsequent egg production

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
2
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
2
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This corroborates the report of Renema et al, (2008) who stated that small degrees of over or underfeeding have been shown to negatively impact egg production. However, this report contradicted the findings of Sekoni et al, (2002) who concluded that quantitative feed restriction did not have any significance on feed consumption and efficiency of feed for egg production. Differences in total egg production observed in this study shows that bird fed two times a day (morning and noon) had better egg production compared with those fed once and thrice a day.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…This corroborates the report of Renema et al, (2008) who stated that small degrees of over or underfeeding have been shown to negatively impact egg production. However, this report contradicted the findings of Sekoni et al, (2002) who concluded that quantitative feed restriction did not have any significance on feed consumption and efficiency of feed for egg production. Differences in total egg production observed in this study shows that bird fed two times a day (morning and noon) had better egg production compared with those fed once and thrice a day.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 99%
“…This result is contrary to that of Tumova et al (2002), who indicated that intake of feed decreased by restricted feeding, which brought about a better feed efficiency when compared with those under unrestricted feeding. The results of this work agree with the findings of Sekoni et al (2002), who showed that controlled feeding did not influence the feed conversion ratio of birds. Novele et al (2009) also showed that feed restriction at early age of birds for a short period stimulated compensatory growth so that at the market age feed restricted birds performed similarly to those of the full fed groups.…”
Section: Growth Performancesupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The average egg weights from dietary treatments with 25 and 50% urea-treated BDG which compared favourably with the control indicated that these replacement levels lied within the optimum range of inclusion for positive synergistic effects on egg weights. Average egg weights obtained in this study were comparable to that of Sekoni et al (2002) and Ayanwale et al (2003) who fed cottonseed cake to pullet layers. The similarity of the hen day production of birds fed the control and the urea-treated and fermented BDG diets up to the 75% inclusion level is an indication that these levels of inclusion furnished adequate nutrients to the birds to support same production level.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%