LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION INVESTIGATION SCHOOL BASED ASSESSMENT.

NAME OF STUDENT:

STUDENT REGISTRATION NUMBER:

TITLE OF PROJECT: The Effect of feed brands on broiler production at St Augustine Secondary

School, Trinidad & Tobago

NAME OF ANIMAL: Broiler

START DATE: 5th October, 2023

END DATE: 15th November, 2023

TEACHER’S NAME: Mrs. S. Hoyte

1|Page
 INTRODUCTION:

 This should be written as paragraphs.

 Follow the basic structure of an essay (introduction – body – conclusion)

 All information used must be cited

 Points of discussion includes:

o Basic information about the broilers, include scientific name & reason for rearing them

o Types of systems traditionally used to rear broilers & mention the type of system the

type of system used at St. Augustine Secondary.

o Brief description of the broiler including nutritional facts and common usage.

o What’s the main nutritional difference between the two brands used in your study

(Master Mix & National Mill). See what’s app pic of nutrition.

2|Page
PROBLEM STATEMENT:

 What is the problem?

- We didn’t know the effects of electrolyte on broiler birds at the ____ Secondary School.

HYPOTHESIS:

 What do you think will happen?

AIM:

State exactly what you want to research to show.

e. g. To determine the effect of spacing on weight gain in broilers birds at ____ Secondary School.

Or

2) To test or to see or to identify

PLEASE DO NOT COPY THIS. WRITE ONE BASES ON OUR RESEARCH!

3|Page
 METHODOLOGY

TOOLS AND MATERIAL LISTING (All tools and equipment used throughout the experiment.

PLEASE DISPLAY IN YOUR OWN FORMAT/WAY

TOOLS & EQUIPMENT MATERIALS

Infrared lamp 8 broiler chicks

Feeder Starter

Waterer Finisher

Broom

Scale 10kg

Shovel

Rake

Bucket

Broiler weighing cone

Garden hose

Wheel barrow

Feed bag

4|Page
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:

How did you set up your project?

 Set up of pens – pen spilt into two for the purpose of this experiment

 Which brands of feed were used and how often? every day for four weeks each pen was given

their respective brand of broiler feed.

 Size of pen – 25m width by 40m in length. The pen was split into two sections and labelled.

 Labels given to pens – control (Master Mix) and treatment (National Mill)

 Number of broilers per pen – 4

5|Page
DATA COLLECTION – (What was recorded)

 Broiler Livability

- Recorded the number of birds surviving weekly

 Broiler Live Weight

- Weighed the birds once a week

 Total feed Consumption

- Recorded how much feed was fed to each pen weekly.

 Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR)

- The feed Conversion Ration was calculated weekly using the total weight of feed eaten and

weekly total of weight gained.

- It was calculated using the formula

Feed Conversion Ratio = Total weight of feed eaten (kg)

Total weight gained (kg)

Source: (Ragoonanan, 2017)

Other Observations:

All other observations were recorded during the period of this investigation.

 It was observed that broilers that were feed National Mill’s feed, stool appeared runnier

resulting in their pen dirtying faster.

6|Page
PRODUCTION PRACTICES: Some activities done in this investigation and the process in which to

go about completing the activity successfully. Photographical evidence: These photographs show

various skills being completed.

Broiler Production Practices

 Brooding –

- What was done to set up the brooder for the chicks.

ADD PICTURE OF THE BROODER SET UP

 Housing –

- What type of system were your birds housed in? Intensive

- Mention the infrared light and why it is used.

ADD PICTURE OF YOU ADJUSTING THE FLUORESCENT LIGHT

 Nutrition –

- What were the birds fed and in what time frame?

- Week 1 – starter

7|Page
 - Week 2 – starter

- Week 3 – starter

- Week 4 – starter for three days and starter mixed with finisher for the other four days of

week 4,

- Week 5 – finisher

- Both groups were given fresh water every day with stress mix added to the day water every

other week.

- ADD PICTURE OF YOU FILLING WATER AND FEED

 Litter Management

- How was the litter managed? Turned regularly using a rake.

- How often was your litter changed?

ADD PICTURE OF YOU TURNING THE LITTER WITH THE RAKE

 Health Management

- Feeders and waterers were sanitized on a regularly basis.

ADD PICTURE OF YOU WASHING THE WATERER

 Slaughter

- How you prepared the birds for slaughter and summarized process.

ADD PICTURE OF YOU Slaughting broiler

8|Page
 RESULTS

GROUP A: Control

GROUP B: Treatment

 State what each table is showing. E.g.

Table 1 shows the number of broilers that survived over the experimental period. All 12 birds survived

in both the treatment and control sections of the pen.

Broiler Liveability

WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6

Group 4 4 4 4 3 3

Group 4 4 3 3 0 0

9|Page
Table 2 shows: Average live weight of broilers in kg

Average live weight of broilers (Kg)

Start Week WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6

Group 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.5 2.9

Group 0.05 0.2 0.5 1 1.8 - -

Table 3 shows:

Total Feed Consumption

(kg/week)

Start Week WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6

Group 0 2.3 2.3 4.6 6.8 3.9 5.1

Group 0 2.3 3.6 5 7 0 0

10 | P a g e
Table 4 shows

Feed Conversion Ratio of broilers

Feed Conversion Ratio = Total weekly weight of feed eaten (kg)

Total weekly weight gained (kg)

WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6

Group 3.8:1 1:8:1 2.2:1 2.3:1 9.8:1 4.3:1

Group 5.6:1 2.6:1 4.5:1 3.2:1 - -

GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF RESULTS: State what each (GRAFT/CHART) is

showing without giving explanations why.

Graph1:____________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

Graph2:____________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

Graph3:____________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

Graph4: >>>> 2.4:1 LEAVE OUT THE RATIO WHEN CREATING YOUR GRAPH

____________________________________________________________________________

11 | P a g e
 DISCUSSION

· Here is where you discuss your findings/results. Give supporting evidence – use articles from

books or online to support your points (source all articles used). Remember to take into account the

death of birds at the respective weeks when discussing each point. Your discussion points should be on

 Broiler Livability

 Average live weight of broilers

 Broiler Feed Consumption

 Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR)

e.g. DO NOT COPY AND PASTE THIS USE AS AN EXAMPLE

Feed Conversion Ratio (FCR) At Week 3 and Week 4, the FCR for the birds in the treatment section

(0.14 m2 /bird) was the same as the FCR for those in the control section (0.09 m2 /bird). This was

probably due to the birds having more than adequate space to move around thereby using the same

amount of energy and eating the same amount of feed. The overall FCR for both the treatment and the

control sections was the same (2.1:1); this was higher than what was reported by Fairchild (2005) who

found that birds reared at 0.09 m2 had an FCR of 1.83:1 with an average body weight of 2.72 kg.

12 | P a g e
CONCLUSION:

What did you find out at the end of the research? This must be linked to your aim

LIMITATIONS:

Issues that occurred throughout the research.

Please list at least 3

RECOMMENDATION:

This is made to improve on future projects. List how you think each problem listed in your limitation

can be solved.

13 | P a g e
 REFERENCES

CHICAGO STYLE

14 | P a g e
 APPENDIX 1

Table _ shows: The weekly weight of broilers throughout this experiment.

Pen Broiler WEIGHT OF BROILERS

Number

START WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK WEEK

DATE
1 2 3 4 5 6

C1 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.6

Control C2 0.05 0.2 0.6 0.9 2.0 2.7 3.4
Master C3 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.7 2.5 2.7
Mix C4 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.6 died died

Total 7.5 8.7

weight 0.2 0.8 2.1 4.2 7.1

Average 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 2.5 2.9

Weight

T1 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.1 1.8 died died

Treatment T2 0.05 0.2 0.5 1.1 2.1 died died
National T3 0.04 0.1 0.5 0.9 1.4 died died
Mill T4 0.05 0.1 0.5 died died died died

Total - -
Weight 0.19 0.6 2 3.1 5.3

Average 0.05 0.2 0.5 1 1.8 - -

Weight

15 | P a g e