01997 Applied Poultry Science, Inc.
EFFECTS
OF INCRIZASED LIGHT
AND
ADDED METHIONINE
ON MOLTED
HENS'
HAFIZ ANWAR AHMAD2, DAVID A. ROLAND, SR., and M. M. BRYANT
Auburn University, Department of Poultry Science, 236 ADS,
Auburn University, AL 36849
Phone: (334) 844-2622
FAX: (334) 8442641
E-mail: ahmadha @mail.auburn.edu
JACK SELF
Cal-Maine Foods, Jackson, MS 39207
Primary Audience: Egg Producers, Nutritionists, Researchers, Poultry
Extension Specialists
amino acids during molt affect the progress
DESCRIPTION
OF PROBLEM
of feather replacement [2]. However, the
Induced molting is widely used in the
commercial layer industry to extend the hen's
reproductive lie. Feed deprivation remains
the most common method of molt induction
due to its efticacy [l, 21. This response is logical
because during the annual molt wild birds
exhibit anorexia [3] and lose body weight.
Feathers have been shown to be protein
based, with sulfur-containing amino acids a
major component. Research suggests that
availability of crude protein and specific
quantity of TSAA and protein fed during the
period immediately following feed withdrawal
and prior to the onset of egg production varies
among programs. 'P.vo of the most frequently
used molt programs involve feeding a corn-soy
molt diet containing 16% crude protein
supplemented with methionine [4] or a lowprotein corn-based molt diet containing 8 to
9% crude protein with no added methionine
[5]. Recent research indicates that 16% crude
1 Alabama Agricultural Experiment Journal Series No.
(Abs).
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed
12-965190; Poultry Sci. 73(Suppl. 1):105
LIGHT, METHIONINE, AND MOLTING
374
protein is higher than necessary to obtain
optimum postmolt performance [6,7].
One other common molt procedure is to
increase the photoperiod to 24 hr for 7 days
prior to molt [8]. However, no studies have
directly compared increasing the photoperiod
to 24 hr for 7 days prior to molt with no increase in photoperiod. Apparently, many
producers use increased light and methionine
because of the known relationship of light to
initiation and cessation of egg production, and
the relationship of protein (methionine) to
feather growth [2]. Since additional light
and methionine are expensive and there is
evidence that extended light reduces shell
quality [9], the effects of the additional light
and methionine commonly used in molt programs should be studied. Because many hens
are molted using additional light and methionine, these experiments were conducted to
further investigate the effect of additional light
and methionine supplementation on the reproductive performance of hens.
supplied at 45 g/hen/day in order to control
feed intake and prevent overeating. The molt
feed was provided ad libitum during the following 12 days. On Day 21 of the experiment
the photoperiod was increased to 13 hr. The
photoperiod was increased by 15 min/wk until
it reached 17 hr. The hens were fed the molt
feed until they reached approximately 5%
production (Days 15 to 28). At that time
(Week l), all hens were fed a layer feed
(Table 1) for the next 6 wk. House temperature was 28.8"C (21.1"C at night) prior to molt.
Environmental temperature was increased to 29.4"C (23.8"C at night) on the
1st day of molting, and further increased to
32.2"C (day and night) on the 2nd day to avoid
chill stress. On the 16th day of the experiment,
1 day after hens started receiving the molt
feed, the temperature was reduced to 29.4"C
in the daytime and 233°C at night. Three days
after the molt feed was fed (18th day of the
experiment) the temperature was further reduced to 26.7"C in the daytime and 21.1" at
night. Response criteria used in the two experiments were egg production, feed consumption, egg weight, egg specific gravity,
percentage body-checked eggs, and mortality.
Egg production, feed consumption, egg
weight, and egg specific gravity were determined weekly for 6 wk. Egg weight and egg
specific gravity were determined on all the
eggs laid on 2 separate days for this purpose.
The data were statistically analyzed [lo] using
GLM procedure of SAS Institute [ll]. This
experiment was conducted in accordance
with the guidelines of Auburn University for
the care and use of agricultural animals in
agricultural research and teaching.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
Tho experiments were conducted using
113- and 161-wk-old Hy-Line W-36 hens.
Within each experiment 960 hens were randomly divided into six treatment groups of
160 hens each. Each treatment group in both
experiments included eight blocks of five
cages (four hens per cage). The hens were
housed in a computerized control building
using two-tiered battery cages. Half of the
hens in each experiment continued to receive
a 17 hr photoperiod. For the other half, the
photoperiod was increased to 24 hr for 7 days
prior to molt. Within each light group the hens
received one of three molt feeds containing
0.73% (control), 0.60% (low), or 0.80% (high)
TSAA (Table 1). The diets' protein levels were
15.90, 15.90, and 17.50%, respectively.
MOLT PROCEDURE
Seven days prior to feed deprivation 50
hens from each group were weighed. On Day 0
(1st day of feed deprivation, and of the experiment), feed was removed and light was reduced to 12 hr. After 14 days without feed,
body weight losses for third- and fourth-cycle
hens were 28 and 29%, respectively. On the
15th day, molt feed (Table 1, feed offered immediately after molting period) was provided
to all treatments. For the first 2 days, feed was
RESULTS
AND DISCUSSION
EXPERIMENT 1(THIRD-CYCLE HENS)
Increasing the photoperiod to 24 hr for
7 days prior to molt and added methionine
levels (0.185,0.212, and 0.05%) had no significant influence on average egg production or
feed consumption (Tables 2 and 3). Average
egg production and feed consumption values
were 48% and 91 g/hen/day, respectively, for
third-cycle hens. Photoperiod had no significant influence on egg weight; however, dietary
treatments influenced egg weight significantly
(Table 4). Hens fed the diet containing the
lowest added methionine level (0.05%) produced significantlysmaller eggs than those fed
Research Report
375
AHMAD et al.
TABLE 1. ingredient and nutrient composition of experimental diets
INGREDIENT
MOLT FEED
Control
PO!XMOLT FEED
High Methionine
Low Methionine
LayerA
970
Corn
73.11
69.07
73.28
61.53
Soybean oil meal (4870, CP)
20.03
24.08
20.00
25.03
4.12
4.11
4.12
7.21
Calcium carbonate
Di-calcium phosphate
1.39
1.37
1.39
1.59
Salt
0.41
0.40
0.40
0.48
Poultry oil
0.25
0.25
0.25
1.47
Vitamin DremixB
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
Mineral premix'
0.25
0.25
0.25
-
DL-Methionine
0.19
-
0.21
0.05
-
0.19
Hardshell (pullet size c a c o 3 )
15.90
Protein
2985
ME, kcalkg
-
1750
2946
15.90
2990
2.00
17.31
2816
Calcium
2.00
2.00
2.00
4.00
Total phosphorus
0.56
0.57
056
0.60
Available phosphorus
0.36
0.36
0.36
0.40
Sodium
0.18
0.18
0.18
0.20
Methionine
Methionine
(TSAA)
Lysine
Tryptophan
+ Cystine
0.47
0.52
0.34
0.48
0.73
0.80
0.60
0.76
0.80
0.91
0.80
0.92
0.20
0.23
0.20
0.23
diets containing either 0.185 or 0.212% added
methionine. Eggshell quality (Weeks 3 and 4)
as measured by egg specificgravity was significantly greater for third-cycle hens receiving
the 24-hr photoperiod than for those receiving
the 17-hr photoperiod (Table 5).
Methionine levels had no influence on
average egg specificgravity, although the hens
fed 0.212% additional methionine (0.80%
TSAA) produced significantly poorer-quality
eggs during Week 4 of the experiment. The
incidence of body-checked eggs was increased
five-fold from 5 to 26% within 1 day after the
photoperiod was increased from 17 to 24 hr
(Table 6). Within 6 days the incidence of bodychecked eggs returned to premolt values. The
total average mortality for hens receiving a
17 hr photoperiod was 2.08% compared to
3.75% for hens receiving a 24-hr photoperiod
(Table 7). There were no si&icant interactions found for any of the above-mentioned
parameters.
In third-cyclemolted hens, increasingthe
photoperiod to 24 hr for 7 days prior to molting had no beneficial effects on postmolt performance except that egg specific gravity was
significantly improved (Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5).
These results are not in agreement with those
of Andrews et al. [12], who found increased
egg production and feed consumption in hens
receiving a 24-hr photoperiod for 7 days prior
to molt. This difference could be due to the
JAPR
LIGHT, METHIONINE, AND MOLTING
376
VARIABLE
Week 1
Week 2
EGG PRODUCTION
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
-
X
70Hen Day
a’bMeanswithno common superscripts in a column differ significantly ( P < .OS).
TABLE 3. Influence of supplying 24 hr light for 7 days prior to molt vs. 17 hr light and additional methionine on
Dostmolt feed consumrJtion
FEED CONSUMPTION
VARIABLE
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
g/Hen/Day
THIRD-CYCLE HENS (EXPERIMENT 1)
FOURTH-CYCLE HENS (EXPERIMENT 2)
‘Significantly different (P < .05).
Week 6
-
X
Research Report
377
AHMAD et al.
TABLE 4. Influence of supplying 24 hr light for 7 days prior to molt vs. 17 hr light and additional methionine on
post molt egg weight
0.185%
63.1
63.7
65.6
64.9
63.3
65.5
64.3
0.212%
62.7
62.9
64.6
65.0
65.4
65.3
64.3
a,bMeanswith no common superscripts in a column differ significantly (P < .OS).
differencein light periods compared in the two
experiments. Andrews et al. compared an
8-hr photoperiod for 28 days beginning
7 days prior to feed deprivation with a 24-hr
photoperiod for 7 days prior to feed deprivation followed by a 12-hr photoperiod for the
following 21 days. They made no comparison
between the normal and increased photoperiods as we did. Increased egg production
and feed consumption in hens receiving a
24-hr photoperiod vs. an 8-hr photoperiod
[12] was probably due to duration of light
stimulation.
EXPERIMENT 2 (FOURTH-CYCLE
HENS)
Increasing light from 17to 24 hr for 7 days
before molting and supplementingmethionine
in the molt feed had no sigdicant influence on
average egg production, feed consumption,
egg weight, and egg specific gravity of fourthcycle molted hens through peak production
(Weeks 1 to 6 of layer feed; Tables 2, 3, 4,
and 5). Egg production during the 2nd and
4th wk, however, was sigdicantly influenced
by dietary treatment (Table 2). Hens fed the
diet containing 0.185% added methionine
produced more eggs than those fed the diets
containing 0.212% methionine or 0.05%
methionine (Table 2).
The incidence of body-checked eggs
increased five times within 1 day after the
photoperiod was increased from 17 to 24 hr
(Table 6). The incidence of body-checked eggs
returned to premolt values within 6 days, The
total average mortality for hens receiving the
17-hr photoperiod was 5.0% compared to
6.67% for hens receiving the 24-hr photoperiod (Table 7). There were no interactions
between photoperiod and methionine treatments for any of the performance criteria
measured.
Increased photoperiod had no effect on
the performance of fourth-cycle molted hens
(Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5). These results do not
agree with those of Andrews et al. [12]. We
propose the same explanation as that presented for the third-cycle hens.
Increasing synthetic methionine in the
molt feed from 0.05 to 0.185 or 0.212% significantly increased egg weight in third-cycle
hens. There was no difference in egg weight
between the two higher levels of methionine.
These results are in agreement with those of
JAPR
LIGHT, METHIONINE, AND MOLTING
378
TABLE 5. Influence of supplying 24 hr light for 7 days prior to molt vs. 17 hr light and additional methionine on
EGG SPECIFIC GRAVITY
VARIABLE
Week 1
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 6
-X
FOURTH-CY( LE HENS (EXPERIMENT 2)
Photoperiod
17 hr
1.0722
1.0738
1.0743
1.0775
1.0763
1.0748
24 hr
1.0709
1.0738
1.0739
1.0780
1.0762
1.0746
0.05%
1.0708
1.0745
1.0746
1.0778
1.0765
1.0749
0.18570
1.0716
1.0737
1.0736
1.0774
1.0757
1.0744
0.212%
1.0722
1.0732
1.0741
1.0740
1.0781
1.0748
Methionine
a,bMeanswith no common superscripts differ significantly (P sl .OS).
'Significantly different (P < .OS).
BODY-CHECKED EGGS, 70
VARIABLE
17-HrA Photoperiod
24-Hr Photoperiod
Day 1
Day 2
Day 5
Day 6
11.8
29.0
23.2
8.5
7.1
Evening'
0.9
23.3
17.5
8.4
10.4
AverageD
5.0cde
26.0a
NOb
8.3*e
MorningB
9.3Cde
12.3
27.9
27.9
12.5
5.8
Evening'
0.5
26.1
2.5.2
11.4
10.5
AverageD
4.gde
26.9ab
2.5.7
11.8'
MorningB
8.6cd
Research Report
379
AHMAD et al.
Koelkebeck et al. [7], who reported increased
egg weight with methionine supplementation
in a 16% protein diet in winter experiments
but not in summer or fall experiments. This
seasonalresponse could be due to the environmental temperature and related feed intake
levels. None of the other postmolt performance variables were different. These results
are also in agreement with those of Roland [9],
who reported an increase in the incidence of
body-checked eggs from 7.7 to 18.3% when the
light was increased from 16 to 19 hr.
Methionine supplementation had no
effect on performance of fourth-cycle molted
hens (Tables 2, 3,4, and 5). These results are
in agreement with two of the experiments conducted by Koelkebeck et al. [qin summer and
fall but not in spring, when they found no
effects of methionine supplementation on
the postmolt performance of 65- or 96-wk-old
molted hens. Again, this seasonal response
could be related to environmental temperature and feed intake.
Additional light and methionine supplementation had no beneficial effects on egg
production, feed consumption, or egg weight
(except in third-cycle hens), but did increase
feed cost, utility cost, and the incidence of
body-checked eggs in third- and fourth-cycle
hens.
This increase in cost and lack of corresponding benefits leads us to question the
common practice of supplying 24 hr light for
7 days prior to molt and using a molt feed
containing more than 0.60% TSAA or 15.90%
protein as opposed to reducing the photoperiod from approximately 17 to 12 hr during
molt.
17 HR
24 HR
Fasting (2 wk)
0.63
1.25
Molt feed with added methionine (2 wk)
0.63
0.42
Layer feed (6 wk)
0.85
2.11
Total
2.08
3.7SA
Fasting (2 wk)
2.50
2.08
Molt feed with added methionine (2 wk)
1.50
2.55
Layer feed (6 wk)
1.09
2.18
Total
5 .oo
6.67B
MORTALITY
CONCLUSIONS
AND APPLICATIONS
1. Incidence of body-checked eggs increased from 5 to 26% in both experiments within 24 hr
after the photoperiod was increased from 17 to 24 hr.
2. Additional light or methionine in molt feed had no subsequent effects on feed consumption
or egg production in third-cycle and fourth-cycle hens. It did not affect egg weight or egg
specific gravity in fourth-cycle hens.
3. Additional methionine significantly increased egg weight for third-cycle hens only.
Depending on price spread between large, extra large, and jumbo eggs, the increase in
egg weight could have little or no economic value.
JAPR
LIGHT, METHIONINE, AND MOLTING
380
4. Additional light si&icantly increased egg specific gravity for third-cycle hens only.
5 . Additional light and methionine supplementationhad no beneficial effects on egg production or feed consumption; however, they increased feed cast, utility cost, and incidence of
body-checked eggs in third- and fourth-cycle molted hens. The common practice of
supplying 24 hr light for 7 days prior to molt and using a molt feed containing more than
0.60% TSAA or 15.90% protein therefore seems less efficient than reducing the photoperiod from approximately 17 hr to 12 hr during molt.
REFERENCES
AND NOTES
1. Harms, RH., 1983. The relationship of molted
primaries of commercial layers to first eggs after molt.
Poultry Sci. 62:1123-1124.
2. Brake, J.T., 1992. Mechanisms and metabolic
requirements for complete and rapid reproductive
rejuvenation during an induced molt - A brief survey.
Ornis Scand. 23335-339.
3. Mrosovsky, N. and D.F. Sherry, 1980. Animal
anorexias. Science 207837442.
4. Brake, J.T., P. Thaxlon, J.D. Garlich, and D.H.
Shemood, 1979. Comparison of fortified ground corn
and pullet grower feeding regimes during a forced
molt on subsequent layer performance. Poultry Sci.
58:785-790.
5. Swanson, M.H. and D.D. Bell, 1974. Force molting
of chickens. 11. Methods. Univ. of California Leaflet 2650,
University of California, Davis, CA.
6. Hoyle, C.M. and J.D. Garlich, 1987. Post fasting
dietaIy protein requirements of induced-molted hens.
Poultrj Sci. 661973-1979.
7. Koelkebeck, K.W., C.M. Parsons, RW. Leeper, and
J. Moshtaghian, 1991. Effect of protein and methionine
levels in molt diets on postmolt performance of laying
hens. Poultry Sci. 70:2063-2073.
8. Brake, J. and J.B. Carey, 1983. Induced molting of
commercial layers. North Carolina A Ext. Sew. Poultry
Sci. and Technique Guide No. 10. &Ah Carolina State
Univ., Raleigh, NC.
9. Roland, D.k, Sr., 1984. Eggshell quality. I. The
body-checked egg. World’s Poultry Sci. J. 40250-254.
10. Statistical procedure. In both experiments data
were statistically analyzed as a 2 X 3 factorial with two
light schedules and three methionine levels as main factors, using a com letely randomized block design. Means
were further difgrentiated by Duncan’s multiple range
test using GLM procedure of SAS Institute.
11. SAS Instilute, 1993. SAS User’s Guide:
SAS/STAT. Version 6 Edition. SAS Institute, Inc.,
Cary, NC.
12. Andrews, D.K., W.D. Berry, and J. Brake, 1987.
Effect of lighting program and nutrition on reproductive
performance of molted SCWL hens. PoultIy Sci. 6612981305.