Q1996Applied Poultty Scieooc, Inc
EFFECTS
OF FEATHER
MEALON THE
PERFORMANCE
OF TURKEYS'
CHARLES R. EISSLER and JEFFRE D.FIRMAN2
116A Animal Sciences Research Cente5 Universig of Missouri-Columbia,
Columbia, MO 65211
Phone: (314)882-9427
FAX;.(314)882-6827
Primary Audience: Turkey Producers, Nutritionists, Poultry Researchers
to be the most effective [l].Monitoring the
DESCRIPTION
OF PROBLEM
hydrolysis of feathers is important, as the
The disposal of feathers is a formidable
problem for the poultry industry. A very efficient and cost-effective method of disposal
is to feed the feathers back to poultry as
feather meal, provided this feed component
does not negatively affect performance.
Feathers in their natural state are high in
crude protein. Keratin is the major constituent
of feather protein, but due to cystine disulfide
bonds within keratin, keratin proteins are
poorly digested by animals. Researchers have
explored various methods of processing
feathers to make the protein available. Of
these methods, autoclave hydrolysis appears
proper time and pressure are required to ensure a highly digestible product [2,3].
The inclusion of up to 4% feather meal
in diets of broilers and laying hens does not
affect the performance of the birds. However,
inclusion of 5 to 8% feather meal results in
methionine, lysine, histidine, and tryptophan
deficiencies that reduce the performance of
chickens. Supplementation with the synthetic
form of the deficient amino acids at the higher
levels of feather meal inclusion results in
Research
improved performance [3,4,5,6,7J.
has shown that 10% of the dietary crude
protein in a 24% corn-soybeanmeal diet could
1 Contribution from the Agricultural Experiment Station. Journal Series Number
2 To whom correspondence should be addressed
12,481.
Research Report
247
EISSLER and FIRMAN
be supplied by feather meal with methionhe
and lysine supplementation [8].
Feeding feather meal to chickens is welldocumented, but few studies have explored
feeding feather meal to turkeys. Inclusion
rates of feather meal in turkey diets ranging
from 1-10% have been reported 19, 10, 111.
No research has been done to date to determine the maximum inclusion rate of feather
meal in turkey diets over the entire growing
period. We conducted two experiments with
male turkeys to determine the maximum desirable inclusion rate of feather meal in growing
turkey rations.
MATERIALSAND
We selected by-product meals on the basis of
amino acid profiles; these by-product meals
contained greater amounts of some amino
acids in which feather meal is deficient. In
each experiment, the eight isocaloric and
isonitrogenous diets were assigned to the
32 pens in a one-way random design with
four replicate pens per treatment. The diets
were formulated to meet NRC [12] recommendations for protein content, but the energy
content of each diet exceeded the NRC [12]
recommendation by 100 kcal MEkg of diet in
the first experiment and 200 kcal MEkg of
diet in the second experiment. All diets were
supplemented with the synthetic forms of the
amino acids lysine and methionine to meet
NRC [12] recommendations. All diets were
provided in mash form ad libitum in both
experiments.
METHODS
In two experiments conducted in 1991,
1600 tom turkeys were reared from 0-19 wk.
Nicholas turkeys were used in the first experiment and Hybrid turkeys in the second. In
each experiment, the birds were distributed
into 32 pens with 50 birdstpen. The birds
were housed in the brooder house with gas
and electric brooders from 0-6 wk, the intermediate house from 6-12 wk, and the finisher
house from 12-19 wk. All houses had automatic sidewall curtains. In both experiments,
the birds received a corn-soybean meal ration
meeting NRC [12] recommendations for
protein and energy the first 10 days and were
then switched to the different dietary treatments. Each experiment was divided into
five feeding periods, ending at 4, 8, 12, 16,
and 19 wk. The birds in Experiment 2 were
weighed at 13 wk instead of 12 wk due to a
mechanical problem with the scales. Birds
were weighed by pen; feed intake, feeagain,
and livability were calculated at the end of
each feeding period. Mortality was recorded
as it occurred. All birds that died were
weighed to permit adjustments in calculating
the feeagain. The data for the experiments
were analyzed using general linear models,
analysis of variance, and linear and quadratic
comparisons.
The eight diets in the first experiment
were isocaloric and isonitrogenous and contained 6 1 4 % feather meal in 2% increments
(Table 1). The second experiment also utilized
etght isocaloric and isonitrogenous diets. Four
diets contained 0,5 4, or 6% feather meal, and
four diets contained 6% feather meal plus 4%
either blood meal, fish meal, meat and bone
meal, or poultry by-product meal (Table 2).
RESULTS
AND DISCUSSION
EXPERIMENT 1
Table 3 shows weight and efficiency data.
At 4 and 8 wk of age, the birds fed the control
diet with no feather meal were sigoificantly
(P < .05) heavier than the birds fed the diets
containing feather meal. Birds fed the control
diet also had a significantly (P e .05) lower
feeagain than buds on the feather meal diets.
No differences were detected in livability
among any of the diets. At 12 wk of age, the
control birds were significantly (P .05)
heavier than all others except those fed the
2 and 6% feather meal diets. No differences
were detected among any of the diets in
fedgain or livability. At 16 wk of age, there
was no difference (P < .OS) among the control,
2,4, and 6%feather meal diets in body weight,
and there were no differences among any
of the diets in feeagain or livability. At 19 wk
of age, there were no differences (Pe.05)
among the control, 2, and 4% feather meal
diets. Feather meal had no detrimental effect
on feeagain or livabsty (livability data not
presented).
EXPERIMENT 2
At 4 wk there were no differences
(P< .05) among any of the diets in body
weight, feeagain, or livability (Table 3). At
8 wk no differences were detected in body
weight or livability. The 4% feather meal diet
had a signihntly (P < .05) higher feeagain
than the diets that contained 6% feather meal
JAPR
FEATHER MEAL AND TURKEYS
248
Lysine
1.74
Histidine
0.72
Tqptophan
0.38
1.74
0.72
0.38
1.66
0.70
0.36
plus 4% blood meal and 6% feather meal plus
4% fish meal. After U wk, body weight of the
birds on the diet containing 6% feather meal
plus 4% fBh meal was significantly higher
(Pc .05) than that of the birds on the 0 and2%
feather meal diets. The birds on the 6%
feather meal plus 4% fish meal diet had a
significantly lower (P c .OS) feeagain than
birds on the 0, 2, and 6% feather meal diets.
1.60
0.67
0.35
1.60
0.65
0.33
1.60
0.62
0.31
1.60
0.60
0.29
1.60
0.57
0.27
1.60
0.55
0.26
At 16 wk of age, no differences were found
among any treatments. After 19 wk, the birds
on the 2, 4, and 6% feather meal diets had
significantly higher (P c .05) body weights
than those on the 6% feather meal plus 4%
blood meal diet (Table 3). No differenceswere
found between the treatments in feed/gain.
Livability (data not presented) was similar
among treatments.
Research Report
EISSLER and HRMAN
249
TABLE 2. Composition of pre-starter and starter diets (t28 days (Experiment 2)*
Available
BDiet designations: 1 = 0% feather meal; 2 = 2% feather meal; 3 = 4% feather meal; 4 = 6% feather meal; 5 =
6% feather meal 4% blood meal; 6 = 6% feather meal 4% fish meal; 7 = 6% feather meal 4% meat and
bone meal; 8 = 6% feather meal 4% poultry by-product meal
+
+
+
+
%race mineral mixprovided the following per kgof complete diet: manganese, 140 m g zinc, 140 m g iron, 130 mg;
copper, 8 mg; iodine, 2 5 mg.
DSeleniurn mix provided the followingper kg of complete diet: 0.3 mg.
%itamin mix provided the followingrr kg of complete diet: vitamin A, 8,800 IU; vitamin DJ,
3,850 IU; vitamin E,
13.78 IU; vitamin By,0.011 m ribo avin, 6.6 m , niacin, 55 mg; d-pantothenic acid, 165 m g menadione, 1.64 mg;
folic acid, 1.38mg; pyridoxine,% mg; thiamin, l f m g d-biotin, 0.22 mg.
JAPR
FEATHER MEAL AND TURKEYS
250
TREAT-
EXPERIMEm 1
EXPERIMENT 2
MEW
WEIGd
I
4Wk
8Wk
12wk
0
1.w"
7.01'
14.w
O%FMB
2
l.%ib 651b
14.0Oab
4
1
.
e 637b
13.66"
6
1
.
e 6.42b
13.e
8
1.7Sd
6.13'
1353"
13.nb
10
1.73'
6.41b
12
1.82M
6.40b
13.23'
14
1.n'
6.13'
12.6Od
SEM
0.01
0.03
0.06
-
I FEEDlGAIN
I
1.4@
1.82'
2.16'
2.70'
lSSb
l.8p
2.15'
2.67"
4
15Sb
1.6Sab
2.17"
2.698
6
IS?
1.90bc
2.17"
2.68'
10
12
14
SEM
157b
159"
I
I
1.91'
I
1.&
2.13'
I
13Wk
16Wk
19Wk
6.81'
15.08'
20.93'
26.20ab
2%FM
6.67"
15.03'
21.29'
26.76'
4%FM
1.65'
6.&
1556'b
21.48'
26.81'
6% FM
1.60'
6.71"
15.4Tb
21.26'
2653'
BMC
1.65'
6.71'
15.Xab 20.88'
25.40b
15.43ab 21.22'
%.Slab
I
2
I
8Wk
1.67"
1.63'
I<
0
8
4Wk
2.63'
O%FM
3.11'
3Mab 2%FM
3.Mab 4%FM
6%FM
3.12'
I
I
2.9Sb
BM
2.13'
2.66'
3.0zab
F
lSb
1.90"
2.17"
2.70'
3.Wb
MB
1.61'
1.89"
2.16'
2.71'
3.flb
0.18
PM
0.006
I 0.006 I
0.006
I
0.011
I
I
1.86'
1.@iab 2.24'
2.48'
2.n"
1.w
15Qab
2.29'
2.498
2.76'
1.95'
lMb
2.Uab
2.48'
2.75'
2.24'
2.48'
l.Mab
l.%'
I
I
I
2 Z a b I 2.49'
1.78'
1.84'
1.85'
2.16b
1.86'
2.uab
2508
2.78'
1.94'
0.03
1.92ab
2.22ab
0.01
2.46'
0.01
2.72'
0.01
I
I
2.75'
l.@iab
1.86'
0.01
I
I
2.4Sa
I
2.79'
2.73'
I
*Weights arc presented in Ib.
%M = 6% feather meal
+ 4% blood meal.
% = 6% feather meal + 4% blood meal.
DMB = 6% feather meal
%M = 6% feather meal
+ 4% meat and bone meal.
+ 4%poultry by-product meal.
bc
Means in columns having different superscripts differ significantly(P c .OS).
As the turkeys grew, the percentage of
protein in their diet was decreased according
to NRC [12]recommendations. However, the
percentage of feather meal in the diets remained the same throughout the experiment.
Consequently, as birds on higher levels of
feather meal grew, ahigher percentage oftheir
protein came from feather meal instead of
soybean meal. Linear and quadratic comparisons between treatments revealed no linear
difference on the growth curves among the
control, 2, and 4% feather meal diets, and no
quadratic differences were detected among
the control, 2,4,6, and 8% feather meal diets.
I
The results of the first experiment agree
with the findings of Warnick [lo] and Waibel
[ll],who reported that feather meal added
at 1 and 4% to the diets of turkeys did not
significantly affect body weight. However,
Balloun and Khajarern [9] reported that 10%
feather meal, with methionine and lysine
supplementation, did not affect the body
weights of turkeys from 4-8 wk of age.
"bble 4 shows feed intake of the turkeys.
After 19 wk, there was no significant difference (P< -05) among the control, 2,4, or 6%
feather meal diets in feed intake. As the
feather meal level increased, feed intake de-
Research Report
EISSLER and FIRMAN
251
%FM
AGE (Wk)
0 4
0
2
4
6
I
I
1
I
12.7Sa
2Mab
I
I
2 . e
I
11.80"
2.7Bk
I
12.19b
2.92a
0-12
0-8
12.d
I
I
I
I
0-16
0-1 9
30Uab
I
I
58.21ab
I
I
29.69&
I
S8.16ab
1
83.61ab
30.1Sab
I
58.63'
I
8
4
a
a
30.92'
60.06'
88.00a
8.5.10a
8
2.74'
11.71"
28.8f
56.05"
79.6lbC
10
2.74'
12.04"
29.23&
55.09c
77.09
12
2.83'"
12.12b
28.73'
sO.ad
69.90d
14
2.75"
11.57'
27.22d
47.28=
63.78'
SEM
0.01
0.06
0.13
0.30
056
clined linearly. There was a reduction of
24.22 Ib in feed intake between the control
and the 14% feather meal diet over the 19wk.
We hypothesize that the difference in intake
between the control diet and the diets with
higher levels of feather meal is due to amino
acid imbalances. Feather meal is relatively
low in methionine, lysine, histidine, and tryptophan compared to other protein sources.
The amino acid profile of the feather meal
used in these studies is shown in Table 5. Because the diets were not supplemented for
deficient amino acids, diets containing higher
levels of feather meal were deficient in several
amino acids. This may have contributed to
lower feed intakes (Table 4) and lower body
weights of the birds on the high levels of
feather meal.
Feather meal contains high levels of the
amino acid cystine. Lerner and Taylor [U]
demonstrated that L-cystine inhibited the uptake of both D- and L-methionine in the chick
mucosal epithelial membrane. Featherston
and Rogler [14] showed that a growth depression occurred in chicks receiving diets
containing suboptimal levels of methionine
that were supplemented with L-cystine. The
diets in our first experiment that contained
I
I
I
I
higher levels of feather meal provided almost
three times the amount of cystine recommended by the NRC [12]. This high cystine
level could have added to the amino acid
imbalances of these diets and contributed to
the poor growth of the buds.
Although digestibility values of the
feather meal used were not available at the
time of the study, digestibility was determined using cecectomized turkeys (Table 5)
on samples stored for 2 yr. It is important to
note that lysine, methionine, histidine, and
tryptophan have lower digestibility in feather
meal than in other protein sources. Thus, the
results of Experiment 2 agree with the findings
of Waibel [ll]in that feather meal can be fed
in combination with some other by-product
meals without a detrimental effect on performance.
Interestingly, two of the diets containing
10%by-product meals - feather meal plus fish
meal or poultry by-product meal - had no
apparent detrimental effect on performance.
These results indicate that poultry producers
can include 10% poultry by-products in their
rations. This could be a very cost-effective
method of waste feather disposal for the
poultry industry.
JAPR
FEATHER MEAL AND TURKEYS
252
CONCLUSIONS
AND APPLICATIONS
The rations of growing turkeys can include up to 6% feather meal with no effect on
performance.
Feather meal at 6% of the diet can be fed in combinationwith 4% either fish meal or poultry
by-product meal with no effect on performance.
No complementary effect was seen by feeding feather meal in combination with the other
by-product meals.
Feeding feather meal to turkeys could be a very cost-effective way to dispose of waste
feathers left from poultry processing.
REFERENCES
ANDNOTES
1. PauadoDodos M.C.. 1985. Processed chicken
fehstufffor s u l t r y and swine. A review.
feathers
Agric. wastes 14275-290.
2. Papadopoulos, M.C., AR El bushy, and EH.
Kttelaam, 1985.Effectof different processing conditions
on amino acid digestibility of feather meal determined by
chick assay. Poultry Sci. 6431729-1741.
3. M o m W.C. and S.L Woun, 1973. Effect of
messing methods on utilization of feather meal by
&oiler chicks. Poultry Sci. 52858-866.
4. Naber, E C , SP. Touchburn, B.D. Bamelt, and
CL Morgan, 1961. Effect of processing methods and
amino acid supplementation on dietary utilization of
feather meal protein by chicks. Poultry SCI. 40:1234-1245.
5. Moran, ET., Jr., J.D. Summers, and SJ. S u r ,
1966.Keratin as a wurce of protein for the growing chick.
1.Amino acid imbalance as the cause for inferior performance of feather meal and the implication of disulfide
bonding in raw feathers as the reason for poor digestibility. Poultry Sci. 451257-1266.
6. Luong, V.B. and C.G. P a p t , 19V. Hydrolysed
feather rotein as a source of amino acids for laying hens.
Br. Pouftry Sci. 10523-526.
7. MacAIp.int, R and C.G. P a p t , 1977.Hydrolysed
feather rotein as a source of amino acids for broilers.
Br. Poul%y Sci. 18265-273.
8. Baker, D.H., RC. Blittnthal, K.P. Boebel, G.L
Czamecki, LL Southern, and G.M. Willis, 1981.
Research Report
253
EISSLER and FIRMAN
Proteinamino acid evaluation of steamed-processed
feather meal. Poultry Sci. 6031865-1872.
9.Worm, S.L and J.K. Khqlnnrn, 1974.The effects
of wh and yeast on di tibility of nutrients in feather
meal.’Toultry ~ c i~. ~ 8 1 0 9 5 .
10. Warnkk, RE,1987. Feather meal experiment.
Utah Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report
12159
11. WsiaCl, P., J. Lint, and S No&, 1987.Utilization
of feather meal, blood meal, and meat meal in market
turkey diets. Pages 101-110 in: Minnesota Conference on
Turkey Research, Minneapolis, MN.
12. Natlonal Rescnrch Conncll, 1984. Nutrient
Requirements of Domestic Animals. Nutrient Reuirements of Poultry. 8th Rev. Edition. Natl. Acad. %.,
%ashington, DC.
13. Lemer, J. and M.W.Taylor, 1%7. A common
step in the intestinal absorption mechanisms of D- and
L-methionine. Biochimica et Biophysica ACTA
135991-999.
14. Featherston, W.R. and J.C. Rogler, 1978.
Methionineqstine interrelations in chicks fed diets
containin suboptimal levels of methionine. J. Nutr.
lm1954-!958.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to thank Hudson Foods for providing
the feather meal and 1600 poults for the project
and Cuddy Farms for the other 1600 poults used in the
experiment.