Nutritional and physical characteristics of commercial hand-feeding formulas for parrots

Abstract

Hand-rearing is a common practice for the propagation of captive psittacines, however, research on their nutrition is limited and the requirements of growing chicks are not well understood. The nutrition of 15 commercially available parrot hand-feeding formulas was compared with the average content of the crops of free living Scarlet Macaw (Ara macao) chicks, as well as with the requirements of 6- to 12-week-old leghorn chickens. When the formulas were prepared for a 1-week-old chick, all except three maintained >90% of solids in suspension after 15 min and >60 after 30 min. On average the formulas had a similar metabolizable energy density as wild macaw crop samples. The concentration of crude protein in the formulas was higher than that of the crop sample average, while the crude fat was lower than the average crop samples. More than 50% of the formulas had concentrations of K, Mg, and Mn less than the crop sample average, and Ca and Na concentrations below the requirements established for 6- to 12-week-old leghorn chickens. For >45% of the formulas the concentrations of arginine, leucine, and methionine + cystine were below the requirements of 6- to 12-week leghorns. When commercial formulas were prepared according to the manufacturer's instructions, the different dilutions greatly magnified the nutritional differences among them. Overall, the inconsistency in the nutrient concentrations among the formulas suggests that there is no consensus among manufacturers of the correct nutrition for growing psittacines and the industry could benefit from continued research in this area.

Fatty acid profiles of crop contents of free‐living psittacine nestlings and of commercial hand‐feeding formulas

“…The variation in the lipid content of the hand‐feeding formulas implies that there is not a consensus among manufacturers about the correct nutrition for growing psittacines (Cornejo et al., 2013). It is clear that manufacturers may need to decide whether they wish to simulate a central average FA profile or match their formulations to specific taxonomic groups.…”

“…The same analysis was carried out on 15 commercial parrot hand‐feeding formulas available in the USA from 10 different manufacturers (for more details on these formulas see Cornejo, Dierenfeld, Bailey, & Brightsmith, 2013).…”

Conservation and the 4 Rs, which are rescue, rehabilitation, release, and research

“…; Cornejo et al. ). Similar experimental approaches could be taken for other aspects of care (Guy et al.…”

Nutrition of free‐living Neotropical psittacine nestlings and implications for hand‐feeding formulas

“…15 commercial handfeeding formulas (Cornejo et al, 2013) and the nutritional requirements of 6-12 weeks leghorn chicken (11.9 MJ/kg) (National Research Council, 1994).…”

“…Zinc concentrations were also relatively similar among psittacine species (Table 4), except for the lilac-crowned Amazon that had lower zinc concentration in crop samples (p < 0.05, Figure 5b). Zn concentrations in psittacine T A B L E 4 Macro and micro mineral analysis of crop contents from the five studied free-living psittacine species, from 15 commercial hand-feeding formulas (Cornejo et al, 2013), and the requirements of 6-12 weeks leghorn chickens (11.9 MJ/kg, National Research Council, 1994). Species included: CubanAmazon (Amazona leucocephala bahamensis), red-and-green macaw (Ara chloropterus), lilac-crowned Amazon (Amazona finschi), scarlet macaw (Ara macao), thick-billed parrot (Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha).…”