Effect of beak trimming at different ages on cost economics of Kadaknath chickens under intensive rearing system

Introduction

Indigenous poultry farming plays an important role in the socioeconomic development of rural communities due to its low input requirement, adaptability, and high consumer preference. Among indigenous breeds, Kadaknath chicken is recognized for its unique black meat, disease resistance, and superior nutritional quality. However, managemental factors such as feed wastage adversely affect productivity and profitability in intensive production systems (Rao and Thomas) [1] . Beak trimming is a widely accepted management practice employed to reduce feed wastage and improve economic efficiency in poultry production. Several investigators have reported that beak trimming reduces feed spillage, improves feed utilization, and enhances economic returns without adversely affecting long-term production performance. Gentle et al. (1986) [2] observed that beak trimming resulted in a temporary reduction in feed intake due to reduced feed wastage. Blokhuis et al. (1987) [3] reported a 13.3% reduction in feed consumption in beak-trimmed birds compared with untrimmed birds. Similarly, Craig et al. (1992) [4] observed that intact birds wasted more feed, resulting in poorer economic efficiency. Several studies have demonstrated that age and severity of beak trimming influence feed intake and production economics. Honaker and Ruszler (2004) [5] reported lower feed consumption in birds trimmed at hatch compared with birds trimmed at seven days of age and untrimmed controls. Likewise, Damme and Urselmans (2013) [6] concluded that beak trimming significantly reduces feed wastage and improves feed utilization efficiency. Recent studies by Vieira Filho et al. (2018) [7] and Pelicia et al. (2019) [8] further confirmed that beak trimming improves economic returns through reduction in feed expenditure. Although several studies have been conducted on commercial poultry strains, information regarding the economics of beak trimming in indigenous breeds such as Kadaknath remains limited.

Therefore, the present investigation was undertaken to evaluate the effect of beak trimming at different ages on the cost economics of Kadaknath chickens under intensive rearing conditions.

Materials and Methods

Experimental location

The experiment was conducted at the Poultry Demonstration and Experimental Unit, College of Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry, Anjora, Durg, Chhattisgarh.

Experimental birds and design

A total of 300 day-old Kadaknath chicks were randomly allotted into five treatment groups with three replicates of 20 birds each. The birds were reared under identical management and feeding conditions up to 20 weeks of age. Treatment groups are given as below: 1. T0: Control (no beak trimming) 2. T1: Beak trimming at day 1 3. T2: Beak trimming at day 7 4. T3: Beak trimming at day 49 5. T4: Beak trimming at day 84

Economic analysis:

Economic analysis is an essential component of animal nutrition studies because it evaluates the financial feasibility and efficiency of different dietary treatments. In the present study, the economic performance of each treatment was assessed by determining the feed cost per kilogram of live body weight. This parameter provides a practical measure of the cost incurred in producing one kilogram of live weight and enables comparison of the costeffectiveness of the experimental diets. The feed cost per kilogram of live body weight was calculated using the following formula: Feed cost per kg live weight = Total feed consumed × Cost of feed / Live body weight

Statistical analysis

The experimental data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance under a completely randomized design (CRD). Treatment means were compared using Duncan's multiple range test and significance was tested at P<0.05.

Results and Discussion

Effect of beak trimming on feed consumption

The cumulative feed consumption of birds in T0, T1, T2, T3, and T4 was 4.032, 3.669, 3.563, 3.744, and 3.725 kg, respectively. Although the differences among treatment groups were statistically non-significant (P>0.05), the feed consumption of beak-trimmed birds was comparatively lower than that of the control group. The reduced feed consumption observed in beak-trimmed birds may be attributed primarily to reduced feed wastage rather than reduced nutrient intake. Similar findings were reported by Blokhuis et al. (1987) [3] , who observed a 13.3% reduction in feed consumption among beak-trimmed pullets. Deaton et al. (1987) [9] also reported significantly lower feed intake in beak-trimmed birds, particularly when fed pelleted diets. Craig et al. (1992) [4] concluded that intact birds wasted considerably more feed than trimmed birds, resulting in poor economic efficiency. Similarly, Davis et al. (2004) [10] reported significantly lower feed consumption in beak-trimmed White Leghorn hens compared with non-trimmed controls until 16 weeks of age. Honaker and Ruszler (2004) [5] observed that birds subjected to beak trimming at hatch consumed less feed than birds trimmed at seven days and untrimmed controls. Marchant-Forde and Cheng (2010) [11] reported that feed intake was highest in control birds and lowest in hot-blade beak-trimmed birds during the initial weeks following trimming. The findings of the present study also agree with those of Damme and Urselmans (2013) [6] , who reported that beak trimming reduced feed wastage and altered feeding behavior, thereby improving feed utilization efficiency. Similarly, Vieira Filho et al. (2018) [7] , Garcia et al. (2019) [12] and Pelicia et al. (2019) [8] reported lower feed consumption in beak-trimmed birds compared with untrimmed controls.

Effect of beak trimming on cost economics

The economic analysis revealed significant differences among treatment groups. The feed cost per kilogram live body weight was highest in birds trimmed at day 1 and lowest in birds trimmed at 49 days of age. Effect of beak trimming on cost economics of Kadaknath chickens is presented in Table 1. The lowest feed cost per kilogram live body weight recorded in birds trimmed at 49 days of age indicates superior economic efficiency (Figure 1). The improvement in economics may be attributed to reduced feed wastage and more efficient utilization of feed resources. Craig et al. (1992) [4] reported that feed wastage in intact birds substantially increased the cost of production. Honaker and Ruszler (2004) [5] observed poorer economic performance in untrimmed birds due to increased feed loss. Damme and Urselmans (2013) [6] also concluded that beak trimming significantly reduced feed wastage and improved economic efficiency. Vieira Filho et al. (2018) [7] demonstrated that birds subjected to beak trimming exhibited better feed utilization and lower production costs. Pelicia et al. (2019) [8] reported that beak trimming significantly improved production efficiency by reducing feed expenditure. Baggio et al. (2020) [13] also observed improved economic performance in beak-trimmed birds compared with non-trimmed controls. The superior economic performance observed in birds trimmed at 49 days of age in the present study may be attributed to optimum reduction in feed wastage without adversely affecting feed consumption or growth performance. Similar observations have been reported by several workers who concluded that proper timing of beak trimming significantly improves the economics of poultry production (Honaker and Ruszler, 2004; Damne and Urselmans, 2013 and Vieira Filho et al., 2018) [5][6][7]. Pelicia et al. (2019) [8] reported that beak trimming significantly improved production efficiency by reducing feed expenditure. Baggio et al. (2020) [13] also observed improved economic performance in beak-trimmed birds compared with non-trimmed controls. The superior economic performance observed in birds trimmed at 49 days of age in the present study may be attributed to optimum reduction in feed wastage without adversely affecting feed consumption or growth performance. Similar observations have been reported by several workers who concluded that proper timing of beak trimming significantly improves the economics of poultry production (Honaker and Ruszler, 2004; Damne and Urselmans, 2013 and Vieira Filho et al., 2018) [5][6][7]

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementThe authors are thankful to the Dean, College of Veterinary Science & A.H., Anjora, durg for providing necessary facilities during the study period.

References

1. Rao DR, Thomas PC. Studies on the performance of Kadaknath chickens under intensive management system. Indian Veterinary Journal. 1984.
2. Gentle MJ, Hughes BO, Fox A, Waddington D. Behavioural and anatomical consequences of two beak trimming methods in laying hens. Research in Veterinary Science. 1982;33:179-184.
3. Blokhuis HJ, van der Haar JW, Koole PG. Effects of beak trimming and floor type on feed consumption and welfare of laying hens. Poultry Science. 1987;66:623625.
4. Craig JV, Craig JA, Milliken GA. Beak trimming effects on growth, feed utilization and economics in laying hens. Poultry Science. 1992;71:1472-1480.
5. Honaker CF, Ruszler PL. Effects of beak reduction on growth performance and economics in Leghorn chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 2004;13:656-663.
6. Damme K, Urselmans U. Effects of infrared beak treatment on performance and feed utilization in pullets. Lohmann Information. 2013;48(2):36-42.
7. Vieira Filho JA, Garcia EA, Oba E, Santos TA, Molino AB, Silva AP, et al. Production indicators and levels of corticosterone in pullets treated with beak-trimming protocols. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science. 2018;20(3):63-70.
8. Pelicia K, Garcia EA, Santos TA, Santos GC, Vieira Filho JA, Silva AP, et al. Beak trimming by infrared radiation of layers. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science. 2019;21(1):1-10.
9. Deaton JW, Reece FN, McNaughton JL. Effect of beak trimming on feed intake and performance of pullets. Poultry Science. 1987;66:1552-1554.
10. Davis GS, Anderson KE, Jones DR. Effects of beak trimming techniques on performance of White Leghorn hens. Poultry Science. 2004;83:1624-1628.
11. Marchant-Forde RM, Cheng HW. Effects of hot-blade and infrared beak trimming on feed intake and behavior. Poultry Science. 2010;89:255-264.
12. Garcia J, Mandalawi HA, Fondevila G, Mateos GG. Influence of beak trimming and inclusion of sodium butyrate in the diet on growth performance and digestive tract traits of brown egg pullets differing in initial body weight. Poultry Science. 2019;98:39373949.
13. Baggio RA, Lunardi SJ, Testa M, Boito JP, Boiago MM, Zampar A, et al. Performance and well-being of laying hens subjected to various beak trimming methods and rearing systems. Research, Society and Development. 2020;9(7):1-24.