Title: The effects of rice hull litter on the performance of broiler chicks
SCHOOL: Bishop Anstey High School East
ADDRESS: #1 College Avenue, Trinidad, and Tobago
STUDENT’S NAME: Kajol Ramrattan
SCHOOL NUMBER: 160195
CANDIDATE NUMBER: 1601951432
TEACHER: Mr. Kirk Williams
START DATE: May 22nd 2023
END DATE: June 08th 2023
Table of Contents
Literature Review........................................................................................................................................ 3
Problem Statement...................................................................................................................................... 5
Aim.............................................................................................................................................................. 5
Hypothesis................................................................................................................................................... 5
Methodology............................................................................................................................................... 5
Experimental Design.................................................................................................................................... 5
Data Recording............................................................................................................................................ 6
Data Analysis............................................................................................................................................... 6
Schedule of Activities:................................................................................................................................. 7
Description of Activities:.............................................................................................................................. 7
Results:...................................................................................................................................................... 10
Discussion.................................................................................................................................................. 25
Conclusion................................................................................................................................................. 26
Projected Budget....................................................................................................................................... 27
Actual budget............................................................................................................................................ 28
Limitations................................................................................................................................................. 29
Recommendations..................................................................................................................................... 29
References................................................................................................................................................. 30
Introduction
Literature Review
The broiler chicken is a special species of poultry as it is scientifically made to
produce more meat in a very short period say 6-9 weeks when they weigh around
6 pounds. In my SBA I would be studying the performance of broilers on different
types of local litter. One of the most dominant Broiler chickens being reared for
meat is the Cornish. In the broiler house, litter serves to absorb moisture, dilute
faecal material, and provide insulation and cushion between the birds and the
floor. Because birds are in constant contact with litter, litter conditions will
significantly influence bird performance and ultimately the profits of producers
and integrators. there are several types of litter commonly used in poultry houses
such as pine shavings, hardwood shavings, pine or hardwood chips, rice hulls,
peanut hulls, sand, crushed corn cobs, chopped straw, hay, or corn stover, and
processed paper.
https://www.hightoppoultry.com/broiler-chicken-farming-business-plan-for-broiler-production/
Problem Statement
The rearing of broiler birds on rice hull at Bishop Anstey High School East is
unknown. In our SBA we are comparing rice hull to sawdust which is our control
group.
Aim
To determine which litter material optimum performance for broiler birds.
Hypothesis
The chicks will perform best in rice hull compared to the performance of the chicks on the control
litter(sawdust)
Methodology
Experimental Design
This experiment was carried out at Bishop Anstey High School East on Monday 22nd May, 2023
Thursday 8th June 2023. The purpose of the experiment was to compare sawdust and rice hull
litter to see which form of litter was better for broilers. Since sawdust is a finer-grained form of
wood shavings, which are considered to be the ideal litter type for broilers, sawdust was chosen
as the control. Divided into separate enclosures, every broiler was raised, housed, and cared for
in the same home. Two pens were randomly assigned to a total of ninety-six hens. The hens had
free access to drinkers and feed dispensers for both water and food. The litter was consistently
kept at a depth of 5 inches, with each bird receiving a space of 1 square foot. Every day, the
bedding materials were raked and turned to avoid caking and becoming damp.
Data Collection
Using a pen and notepad, information was collected on metrics such feed consumption, weight increase,
morality rate, dressing percent, and chicken sales. To determine the above data values, a scale and bowl
were utilized. All of the data was collected every day, except on Friday, June 9, 2023, the last day of the
experiment, when the chicken sales were completed.
By weighing five randomly selected broilers, noting the weight, and dividing the weight by five, the
average weight of the broilers was determined. By deducting the starting weight from the weight from the
day before or the day after, the average daily increase for the broilers was determined. By deducting
leftover feed from the beginning feed weight, which was weighed that day, the feed consumption was
computed for the broilers kept in both the sawdust and rice husk litters. The weekly computation of the
feed conversion ratio (FCR) for both broiler types in the litter involved dividing the average weekly feed
consumption by the average weekly body weight growth. To ensure that the bird's crop was empty for
slaughter, the birds were fasted for seven to eight hours after the trial concluded.
Data Analysis
The data was analyzed using Microsoft Excel.
Data Recording
By weighing five randomly selected broilers, noting the weight, and dividing the weight by five, the
average weight of the broilers was determined. By deducting the starting weight from the weight from the
day before or the day after, the average daily increase for the broilers was determined. By deducting
leftover feed from the beginning feed weight, which was weighed that day, the feed consumption was
computed for the broilers kept in both the sawdust and rice husk litters. The weekly computation of the
feed conversion ratio (FCR) for both broiler types in the litter involved dividing the average weekly feed
consumption by the average weekly body weight growth. To ensure that the bird's crop was empty for
slaughter, the birds were fasted for seven to eight hours after the trial concluded.
LIST OF MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT
Feed Hay Fork File
Water Pot Feeder Scale
Sawdust Disinfectant Poly bags
Shovel Knife Day-old chicks
Newspapers Broom Waterers
Rake Brooding Lights Defeating Machine
Pen Notebook Freezers
Plastic bags Sponge Hose
Schedule of Activities:
Table 1: Schedule of Activities
Date Activity
Daily as of 22/05/23 Changing of water
Daily as of 22/05/23 Feed added to container recorded
Daily as of 22/05/23 Average weight of broiler from each group
recorded
Daily as of 22/05/23 Recording of data
Daily as of 22/05/23 Turning of litter
9/06/23 Slaughtering of chickens
9/06/23 Selling of chickens
Description of Activities
Figure 1: the cleaning of the water and feeders which were done twice a day. The birds
were given water and fed daily to ensure the levels were maintained. Stress mix was added to
water to combat stress in birds
Figure 2: showing the weight of the chicks was recorded daily to get the average daily weight
gain of birds.
Figure 3: showing the preparation of the chicken for slaughter. The broilers were killed and
plucked.
Figure 4: showing the cutting and gutsing of chicken after killing. The chickens were weight
just before slaughter to calculate dressing percentage. Marketing- Birds were sold wholesale to
the pluck shop that slaughtered the chickens.
Results
TABLE 1 SHOWING THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL IN POUNDS
Day 1 2 3 4 5
Rice Hull (lbs) 0.44 6.03 4.97 0.75 5.15
Control (lbs) 8.47 11.29 2.24 -11.81 7.11
FIGURE 1: THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL IN KILOGRAMS
Figure 1 shows that for days 1 and 2 more feed was consumed in the control litter than the rice
hull litter, for days 3 and 4 more feed was consumed in the rice hull litter than the control litter,
the control litter had a significnt decrease on day 4, on day 5 the feed consumed in the control
litter increased once more surpassing the amount of feed that was consumed in the rice hull litter.
Over the five days more feed was consumed in the control litter compared to the rice hull
litterfor week 1.
TABLE 2 SHOWING THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL IN POUNDS FOR WEEK 2
Days 6 7 8 9 10
Rice Hull (lbs) 3.42 4.18 4.18 4.59 6.67
Control (lbs) 3.53 4.28 1.02 6.83 4.38
FIGURE 2: THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL IN KILOGRAMS FOR WEEK 2
Figure 2 shows that for week 2 the amount of feed consumed in control litter increased on days 6
and 7 meaning that more feed was consumed in the control litter compared to the rice hull litter,
however on day 8 the amount of feed consumed in the control litter significantly decreased
meaning that on day 8 more feed was consumed in the rice hull litter compared to in the ocntrol
litter, on day 9 the amount of feed consumed in the control litter notably increased while the
amount of feed consumed in the rice hull litter stayed approximately the same amount as on day
8, on day 10 the feed consumed in the rice hull litter increased significantly compared to the
prior day surpassing the amount of feed consumed in control litter on day 10.
TABLE 3 SHOWING THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL, IN KILOGRAMS FOR WEEK 3
Days
11 12 13 14 15
Rice Hull (lbs) 7.52 9.20 9.20 10.10 14.67
Control (lbs) 7.77 9.42 2.24 15.03 9.64
FIGURE 3: THE FEED CONSUMED DAILY IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL, IN KILOGRAMS FOR WEEK 3
Figure 3 shows that for week 3 on days 11 and 12 the feed consumed in the control litter was
more than the feed consumed in the rice hull litter however not by much, on both those days the
amount of feed consumed in the rice hull litter came quite close to surpassing the amount of feed
consumed in the control litter, on day 13 the amount of feed consumed in the control litter had a
notable decrease meaning that the amount of feed consumed in the rice hull litter was
significantly more for that day, on day 14 the amount of feed consumed in the control litter had
an astronomical increase surpassing the amount of feed consumed in the rice hull litter for that
day, however the total opposite happend on day 15 where the amount of feed consumed in the
rice hull litter had a significant increase and the amount of feed consumed in the control litter
notably dcreased meaning that for that day more feed was consumed i the rice hull litter
compared to the amount of feed consumed in the control litter.
TABLE 4 SHOWING THE FEED CONSUMED IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER, DAILY, IN
POUNDS FOR WEEK 4
Day 16 17 18
Litter
Rice Hull (lbs) 8.49 11.90
Control (lbs) 26.93 18.68
FIGURE 4: SHOWING THE FEED CONSUMED IN RICE HULL LITTER AND THE
CONTROL LITTER, DAILY, IN POUNDS FOR WEEK 4
Figure 4 shows that for week 4 on day 16 the amount of feed consumed in the control litter was
significantly more than the amount of feed consumed in the rice hull litter, while on day 17 the
amount of feed consumed in the control litter decreased it was still more than the amount of feed
consumed in the rice hull litter.
TABLE SHOWING AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS IN RICE HULL LITTER
COMPARED TO CONTROL LITTER IN WEEK 1 IN POUNDS
Day 1 2 3 4 5
Litter
Rice Hull (lbs) 3.04 3.52 3.37 3.28 3.85
Control (lbs) 2.79 3.48 3.50 3.52 3.76
5.83 7.61
FIGURE 5: AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS IN RICE HULL LITTER
COMPARED TO CONTROL LITTER IN WEEK 1 IN POUNDS
Figure 5 shows thatfor week 1 for days 1 and 2 the chickens gained more weight on the rice hull
litter compared to the weight of the chickens that were on the control litter gained,however not
by much, on days 3 and 4 the complete opposite occured where the chickens gained more weight
on the control litter compared to the weight of the chickens that were on the rice hull litter
gained, it was also observed that for both days 3 and 4 the weigth gained by the chickens on the
rice hull litter were almost the same, and also the weight gained by chickens that were on the
control litter were approximately the same, on day 5 the chickens gained more weight on the rice
hull litter compared to the weight of the chickens that were on the control litter gained.
TABLE SHOWING AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS IN RICE HULL LITTER
COMPARED TO CONTROL LITTER IN WEEK 2 IN POUNDS
Days 6 7 8 9 10
Litter
Rice Hull (lbs) 3.85 4.07 4.31 4.73 4.71
Control (lbs) 3.67 4.05 3.83 4.49 4.95
FIGURE 6: AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS IN RICE HULL LITTER
COMPARED TO CONTROL LITTER IN WEEK 2 IN POUNDS
Figure 6 shows that for week 2, days 6 and 7 the average daily weight gaine by the chickens on
the rice hull litter was more that the weight gained by the chickens on the control litter, however
it was not a big difference in weight gain, for days 8 and 9 the same thing happened where eight
gaine by the chickens on the rice hull litter was more that the weight gained by the chickens on
the control litter, however on day 10 the complete opposite happened where the chickens on the
control litter gained more weight compared to the chickens on the rice hull litter but not by
much.
TABLE 3 SHOWING AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHCIKENS OF WEEK 3 IN
POUNDS
Days 11 12 13 14 15
Litter
Rice Hull (lbs) 5.04 4.93 4.93 5.35 5.37
Control (lbs) 4.95 4.88 5.28 4.70 5.35
FIGURE 7: AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHCIKENS OF WEEK 3 IN POUNDS
Figure 7 shows that for week 3, day 11 and 12 the weight gained by the chickens on the rice hull
litter were more compared to the chickens on the control litter, however the weight for both types
of litter decreasedslightly on day 12, on day 13 the weight gained by the chickens on the control
litter significantly increased meanning that it was more than the weight gained by the chickens
on the rice hull litter, it was also observed that the weight gained by the chickens on the rice hull
stay approximately the same on days 12 and 13, on day 14 and 15 the weight gained by the
chickens on the rice hull were approximately the same however the weight gained by the
chickens on the control litter increased significantly on day 15 meaning that the chickens gained
more weight on the control litter on day 15 compared to day 14.
TABLE SHOWING THE AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS OF WEEK 4 IN POUNDS
Day 16 17 18
Litter
Rice Hull (lbs) 5.37 5.808 5.984
Control (lbs) 5.24 5.72 5.676
FIGURE 8: THE AVERAGE DAILY GAIN OF THE CHICKENS OF WEEK 4 IN POUNDS
Figure 8 shows that for week 4 on day 16, 17 and 18 the average daily weight gained by the chickens on
the rice hull increased steadily for this 3-day period, but the weight gained by the chickens on the control
litter increased on day 17 but slightly decreased on day 18, overall more weight was gained by the
chickens on rice hull compared to the chickens on the control litter.
Table showing the average dressing percent for rice hull litter and
the control litter type
Litter Dressing Percentage
Rice 79.73%
Control 81.10%
FIGURE 9: THE AVERAGE DRESSING PERCENT FRO RICE HULL, LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER TYPE
Figure 9 shows that the average dressing percentage for control litter was more that the dressing
percentage for rice hull litter.
TABLE SHOWING NUMBER OF DEATHS IN RICE HULL COMPARED TO CONTROL LITTER AND
MORTALITY RATE
Litter Number of
Deaths
Rice 0
Control 0
Morality Rate = 0%
FIGURE 10: NUMBER OF DEATHS IN RICE HULL COMPARED TO CONTROL
LITTER
Figure 10 shows that there were no deaths for both of the litter types.
TABLE SHOWING LIVE WEIGHT, DEAD WEIGHT, DRESSING PERSENTAGE AND
AVERAGE FOR EACH
Live Weight Dead Weight(lbs) Dressing
(lbs) Percentage
5.126 4.048 78.97%
4.994 3.96 79.30%
6.93 5.5 79.37%
6.71 5.368 80.00%
6.028 4.884 81.02%
Average 5.9576 4.752 79.73%
FIGURE 11: DRESSING PERSENTAGE AND AVERAGE FOR EACH OF THE 5
CHICKENS
Figure 11 shows that for chickens 1 to 5 the dressing percentage increased steadily.
Table showing the dressing percent
for rice hull litter and the control litter
Chicken Number Dressing Percentage
Rice Hull Control
1 78.97% 77.42%
2 79.30% 81.16%
3 79.37% 82.03%
4 80.00% 82.24%
5 81.02% 82.67%
Average 79.73% 81.10%
FIGURE 12: SHOWING THE DRESSING PERCENT FOR RICE HUL LITTER AND
THE CONTROL LITTER
Figure 12 shows that for chickens 1 to 5 the live weight was consistently more than the dead
weight of chickens 1 to 5, it was also oserved that from chickens 1 to 3 the live weight of the
chickens increased steadily, howver from chickens 4 to 5 it had a minore decrease, interestingly
the average live weight of all 5 chickens and the live weight for the fifth chicken was the same
amount of pounds.
TABLE SHOWING LIVE WEIGHT, DEAD WEIGHT, DRESSING PERECENTAGE
AND AVERAGE OF EACH
Live Weight(lbs) Dead Weight(lbs) Dressing Percentage
6.82 5.28 77.42%
6.072 4.928 81.16%
4.774 3.916 82.03%
5.698 4.686 82.24%
4.95 4.092 82.67%
Average 5.6628 4.5804 81.10%
FIGURE 13: SHOWING THE DRESSING PERCENTAGE OF 5 CHICKENS FROM THE
CONTROL LITLER AND THE AVERAGE OF THE DRESSING PERCENT
Figure 13 shows that from chickens 1 to 2 the dressing percentage significantly increased, from
chicken 2 to 4 the dressing percentage continued to increase however not by much, the dressing
percentage for the fifth chicken had a minor increase, the average dressing percentage was
interestingly approximately the same amount as chicken 2.
FIGURE 14: LIVE WEIGHT, DEAD WEIGHT, DRESSING PERECENTAGE AND
AVERAGE OF EACH IN POUNDS
Table showing the weight of a carcass from rice hull litter and the
control litter in pounds
Chicken Rice Control
1 4.048 5.28
2 3.96 4.928
3 5.5 3.916
4 5.368 4.686
5 4.884 4.092
Average 4.752 4.5804
Table showing the average carcass weight from rice hull litter and
the control litter in pounds
Carcass
Litter Weight (lbs)
Rice 4.752
Control 4.580
Table showing the average carcass weight from rice hull littter and
the control liiter as a percentage
Carcass
Litter Weight
Rice 50.92
Control 48.26
FIGURE 15: AVERAGE CARCASS WEIGHT FROM THE RICE HULL LITTER AND
THE CONTROL LITTER AS A PERCENTAGE OF A WHOLE
Figure 15 shows that the the average carcass weight from the rice hull litter is more than the
average carcass weight of the control litter
Table showing the total weight of the feed consumed in the week 2 in pounds by chickens from the rice
hull litter and the control litter
Day Rice Control
6 3.24 3.53
7 4.18 4.28
8 4.18 1.02
9 4.59 6.83
10 6.67 4.38
Total 22.86 20.04
FIGURE 16: TOTAL WEIGHT OF FEED CONSUMED IN THE WEEK 2 IN POUNDS
BY CHICKENS FROM THE RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER
Figure 16 shows that for day 6 the weight of feed consumed from the control litter was more
compared to that of the rice hull litter, on day 7 the weight of feed consumed for both the control
litter and the rice hull litter were the same, on day 8 the weight of feed consumed from the
control litter decreased meaning that for day 8 the weight of feed consumed from the rice hull
litter was more, on day 9 the weight of feed consumed from the control litter had a major
increase, therefore it was more than the weight of the feed consumed from the rice hull litter, on
day 10 the weight of feed consumed from the control litter had a significant decrease meaning
that it was less than the weight of feed consumed from the rice hull litter, over this 5 day period
it was observed that the weight of feed consumed from the rice hull litter was more that the
weight of the feed consumed from the control litter.
Table showing the total weight of the feed consumed in the week 3 in pounds by chickens from the rice
hull litter and the control litter
Day Rice Control
11 7.52 7.77
12 9.2 9.42
13 9.2 2.24
14 10.1 15.03
15 14.67 9.64
Total 50.69 44.1
FIGURE 17: TOTAL WEIGHT OF FEED CONSUMED IN THE WEEK 3 IN POUNDS
BY CHICKENS FROM THE RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER
Figure 17 shows that for days 11 and 12 the total weight of feed consumed from the rice hull
litter and control litter increased on day 12 but for both days the amount of each litter type stayed
the same, on day 13 the weight of feed consumed from the control litter significantly decreased
but weight of feed consumed from the rice hull litter stayed the same meaning that the weight of
feed consumed from the rice hull litter was more than that of the control litter, on day 14 the
weight of feed consumed from the rice hull litter stayed the same while the weight of feed
consumed from the control litter had a major increase, however on day 15 the weight of feed
consumed from the control litter decreased while the weight of feed consumed from the rice hull
litter increased, at the end the total weight of feed consumed from the control litter was less than
that of the rice hull litter.
Table showing the total weight of the feed consumed in the week of the slaughter in pounds by
chickens from the rice hull litter and the control litter
Day Rice Control
16 8.49 26.93
17 11.9 18.68
Total 20.39 45.61
FIGURE 18: THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF FEED CONSUMED IN THE WEEK OF THE
SLAUGHTER IN POUNDS BY CHICKENS FROM THE RICE HULL LITTER AND
THE CONTROL LITTER
Figure 18 shows that for days 16 and 17 the totalo weight of feed consumed from the control
litter was more than that of the rice hull litter even though both of the litter types decreased on
day 17, the total weight of feed consumed over the two days from the control litter was more
than that of the rice hull litter
Table showing the total weight of feed consumed by chickens from the rice hull litter and the control
litter in each week in pounds
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Slaughter
Week
Rice 17.34 22.86 50.69 20.39
Control 17.33 20.04 44.1 45.61
Total 34.67 42.9 94.79 66
FIGURE 19: TOTAL WEIGHT OF FEED CONSUMED BY CHICKENS FROM THE
RICE HULL LITTER AND THE OCNTROL LITTER IN EACH WEEK IN POUNDS
Figure 19 shows that over the 3 week period the total weight of feed consumed from the rice hull
litter and controlled litter increased steadily, however the total weight of feed consumed from te
rice hull was consistently more than the weight of feed consumed from the control litter over the
3 week period. But during slaughter week it was the opposite because the total weight of feed
consumed from the control litter was more than that of the rice hull litter. The total weight of
feed consumed from both litter types increased throughout the 3 week period but decreased
significantly at slaughter week.
Table showing the weight of 5 chickens and the average weigth of 5
chickens of rice hull litter and control litter at the end of week 1 in
pounds
Days Rice (lbs) Control (lbs)
1 3.432 4.686
2 4.004 3.52
3 3.608 3.894
4 3.432 3.344
5 4.73 3.41
Average 3.8412 3.7708
FIGURE 20: THE WEIGHT OF 5 CHICKENS AND THE AVERAGE WEIGHT OF 5
CHICKENS OF RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER AT THE END OF
WEEK 1 IN POUNDS
Figure 20 shows that on for chicken 1 the weight of the chicken on rice hull litter was less than
that of the chicken on control litter while for chicken 2 it was the complete opposite where the
weight of the chicken on rice hull litter was more than that of the control litter, for chicken 3 the
weight of the chickenon rice hull litter decreased while the weight of the chicken on control litter
increased meaning that the wieght of the chicken on control litter was more than that of the
chicken on rice hull litter, for chicken 4 the weight of the chicken on roce hull was more than
that of the chicken on control litter, for chicken 5 the weight of the chicken on rice hull increased
significantly from chicken 4 and the weight of the chicken 5 on control litter stayed
approximately the same as the weight of the chicken 4 on control litter
Table showing the weight of 5 chickens and the average weight of 5 chickens of rice hull
litter and control litter at the end of week 3 in pounds
Days Rice (lbs) Control (lbs)
1 5.852 4.686
2 6.006 6.05
3 4.95 6.138
4 5.104 4.818
5 4.906 5.06
Average 5.3636 5.3504
FIGURE 21: THE WEIGHT OF 5 CHICKENS AND THE AVERAGE WEIGHT OF 5
CHICKENS OF RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER AT THE END OF
WEEK 3 IN POUNDS
Figure 21 shows that for chicken 1 the weight of the chicken on rice hull litter was significantly
more than that of the chicken on control litter, whereas it was the opposite for chicken 2 meaning
that the weight of the chicken on control litter was more than that of the chicken on rice hull
litter, for chicken 3 the weight of the chicken on rice hull decreased majorily meaning that the
weight of the chicken on control litter remained more than that of the chicken on rice hull litter,
on chicken 4 the weight of the chicken on rice hull liter was more than that of the chicken on
control litter meaning the weight of chicken 4 on control liter decreased from that of the chicken
3 on control litter, for chicken 5 the weight of the chicken on control litter was more than that of
the chicken on rice hull litter, the average weight for both litter types were equal amounts.
Table showing the average weight of the chickens in rice hull litter and control litter each
week in pounds
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Slaughter
Week
Rice 3.8412 4.7124 5.3636 5.9576
Control 3.7708 4.9456 5.3504 5.6628
Total 7.612 9.658 10.714 11.6204
FIGURE 22: THE AVERAGE WEIGHT OF THE CHICKENS IN RICE HULL LITTER
AND CONTROL LITTER EACH WEEK IN POUNDS
Figure 22 shows that for week 1 the average weight of the chicken on rice hull litter was more
than that of the chicken on control litter, for week 2 the complete opposite happened where the
average weight of the chicken on control litter was more than that of the chicken on rice hull
liter, for week 3 the average weight of the chicken on the rice hull litter and the control litter
were equal amount, for slaughter week the average weight of the chicken on rice hull litter
increase meaning it was more than that of the chicken on control litter, the total weight of both
litter types for each week steadily increased.
Table showing the weight of 5 chickens and the average weight of 5 chickens of rice hull
litter and the control litter before slaughter in pounds
Days Rice (lbs) Control (lbs)
1 5.126 6.82
2 4.994 6.072
3 6.93 4.774
4 6.71 5.698
5 6.028 4.95
Average 5.9576 5.6628
FIGURE 23: THE WEIGHT OF 5 CHICKENS AND THE AVERAGE WEIGHT OF 5
CHICKENS OF RICE HULL LITTER AND THE CONTROL LITTER BEFORE
SLAUGHTERING IN POUNDS
Figure 23 shows that the weight of chicken 1 and 2 on the control litter before slaughtering was
more than that of the weight of both chickens on the rice hull litter, however for chickens 3, 4
and 5 the complete opposite happened where the weight of the chicken on the rice hull litter was
more than that of the weight of the chickens on the control litter, the average weight of the
chicken on the rice hull before slaughtering was more than that of the chickens on the control
litter
Table showing total amount of feed consumed and total weight of the chickens each week
Slaughter
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week
Rice 4.5 : 1 4.9 : 1 9.5 : 1 3.4 : 1
Control 4.6 : 1 4.1 :1 8.2 : 1 8.5 : 1
Total 4.6 :1 4.4 : 1 8.8 : 1 5.7 : 1
Table showing the average weight of the chickens in each litter each week in pounds
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Slaught
er Week
Rice 3.8412 4.7124 5.3636 5.9576
Control 3.7708 4.9456 5.3504 5.6628
Total 7.612 9.658 10.714 11.6204
Using table for division
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week Slaughter
3 Week
Rice 4.514214 4.85103 9.4507 3.4225191
308 1322 42039 35
Control 4.595841 4.05208 8.2423 8.0543194
731 6703 74402 18
Total(using the total values of feed consumed and 4.554650 4.44191 8.8473 5.6796667
carcass weight) 552 344 02595 93
Approximated values of division table
Litter Week Week Week Slaughter
1 2 3 Week
Rice 4.5 4.9 9.5 3.4
Control 4.6 4.1 8.2 8.1
Total 4.6 4.4 8.8 5.7
Total = using the total values of feed consumed and
carcass weight
Table showing the total weight of feed consumed by chickens from the rice hull litter and
the control litter in each week in pounds
Litter Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Slaught
er
Week
Rice 17.34 22.86 50.69 20.39
Control 17.33 20.04 44.1 45.61
Total 34.67 42.9 94.79 66
FIGURE 24: THE FEED CONVERSION RATIO OF RICE HULL AND CONTROL
LITTER AND THE FEED CONVERSION RATIO OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF
FEED CONSUMED AND THE TOTAL WEIGHT OF THE CHICKENS EACH WEEK
Figure 24 shows that the feed conversion ration of both litter types were approximately the same amount
for week 1, however for week 2 the feed conversion ration for the chickens on the rice hull litter was
more than that of the feed conversion ratio of the chickens on the control litter, for week 3 the same thing
occurred as week 2, however for slaughter week the feed conversion ratio of the chickens on the control
litter was more than that of the feed conversion ratio of the chickens on the rice hull litter, for weeks 1
and 2 the total feed conversion ratio for both litter types were approximately the same amount however it
significantly increased for week 3 and then significantly decreased for slaughter week.
FCR= (total feed consumed)/(total carcass weight)
Discussion:
In an experiment conducted by M. Anisuzzaman and S. D. Chowdhury , they stated that “Birds
reared on rice husk litter showed the greatest food consumption, greatest weight gain, best food
conversion efficiency and scored highest in production number.” The evidence I have from my
SBA shows the same as what was discovered by M. Anisuzzaman and S. D. Chowdhury .
However, another experiment done by Abasali Gheisari, , Mehrdad Modaresi , Sayed Ali
Tabeidian , Mehdi Toghyani had a completely different outcome from both my eperiment and M.
Anisuzzaman and S. D. Chowdhury experiment . They stated "In the present study broilers
reared on rice hulls had the lowest body weight in comparison to others litter”. Rice hull had an
Conclusion
Limitations:
Some limitation experienced in my investigation were the possibility of the food spilling this
would cause the feed conversion to be incorrect which would change the entire investigation.
There was also a possibility that the food may have been weighed incorrectly, the scale may have
been zeroed and the weight of the container may have also been takin instead of just the weight
of the feed. The same chicken could have been weighed repeatedly if this occurred then the
weight of the chicken would be compromised.
Recommendations:
Some recommendation to fix the possible limitation are; have a funnel to pour the feed into the
feeder with better precision. There should always be two or more people present when the weight
of the food is being taken to help limit mistakes like this. The chicken that was already weighed
can be tagged for example tying a piece of cloth around their waist to help identify them. The
recommendation listed would not completely erase the possibly of these events happening, but it
should hopefully lower the possibility of them happening.
References:
https://www.hightoppoultry.com/broiler-chicken-farming-business-plan-for-broiler-production/
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00071669608417883#:~:text=Birds%20reared
%20on%20rice%20husk,attributable%20to%20types%20of%20litter
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168159109003219#:~:text=In%20the
%20present%20study%20broilers,on%20floor%20(no%20litter
Cost Analysis:
TABLE 1 SHOWING THE ESTIMATED BUDGET
EXPENSE UNIT UNIT QUANTITY AMOUNT
ITEM PRICE
Fixed expenses
Litter material $180 2 $360
Wheelbarrow $200 1 $200
Rake $160 1 $160
Scale $175 2 $350
Pitchfork $280 1 $280
Gloves $20 6 $120
Feeder $50 4 $200
Heat bulbs Half dozen $150 1 dozen $300
Broom $50 1 $50
Newspaper $4 50 $200
Fence 1 Yard $35 6 Yards $210
Variable
Expenses
Chicken feed Per bag $95 5 $475
Broilers $20 100 $2000
Total Expenses $4905
Gross Income Per chicken $75 100 $7500
Projected
Profit $2595
TABLE 2 SHOWING THE ACTUAL BUDGET
EXPENSES QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL
VARIABLE
Day old chicks 100 $10 $1000
Broilers starter 4 $260 $1040
Grower 1 $240 $240
Broiler finisher 4 $245 $980
2 gallon drinkers 2 $52 $104
3 gallon drinker 2 $75 $150
Bio-pro Q 1 $112.50 $112.50
Champrix 1 $35 $35
Wood shavings 10 $10 $100
TOTAL VARIABLE $3761.50
EXPENSES
At the conclusion of the experiment, the broiler SBA yielded $2,638.50, falling short of the
anticipated $5,898.50TT. Despite making a profit, the $3,260TT earned was still below
expectations. The hens weighed 170 pounds less than projected, contributing to this outcome.
This discrepancy may have arisen due to the possibility that not all chickens were sold; even if
they were, only an additional $1,600TT would have been generated, still falling short of
projections. Furthermore, the chickens were sold for $16TT instead of the anticipated $20TT,
leading to reduced revenue. Customer objections during the marketing campaign resulted in a
shortened purchasing notice period, necessitating a price reduction to stimulate sales volume,
leading to a $4TT per chicken reduction. If all chickens were sold at the predicted price, the
experiment would have generated $3,400TT. Notably, while the predicted budget listed fixed
expenses at $300TT, the actual budget revealed these costs were $0TT, as supplies were already
available, potentially boosting revenue. Additionally, reductions in costs for refrigerators,
freezers, newspapers, and various broiler feeds as factored into the projected budget contributed
to a significant increase in profit.
