Were assessed the effect of five traditional diets backyard turkeys in confinement. The experiment lasted 36 weeks, the turkeys were randomized to one of five diets: kitchen waste + fresh forage (T1), kitchen waste (T...Were assessed the effect of five traditional diets backyard turkeys in confinement. The experiment lasted 36 weeks, the turkeys were randomized to one of five diets: kitchen waste + fresh forage (T1), kitchen waste (T2), commercial feed + fresh forage (T3), cracked corn + fresh forage (T4) and commercial feed (T5). Food and water were provided ad libitum. Each treatment with birds of both sexes had two repetitions with four birds and each bird was considered as an experimental unit. Were evaluated daily weight gain, total weight gain, final live weight, total length peak-tail, monthly gain peak-tail, total length, total length of wings, monthly gain wings length, and feed cost. The data were analyzed in a completely randomized arrangement with adjusted means and Tukey’s mean comparison, then an evaluation of treatment groups by analyzing clusters for semi quantitative data. The biggest daily gain, total weight gain and final live weight was obtained with treatment T3, while the highest increase in peak-length tail and wings was obtained with treatment T1 (P < 0.05). T2 treatment turned out to be most economical, but the treatment that best scores obtained was T1. We conclude that the use of kitchen waste + fresh forage is a feasible strategy to feed slow-growing turkeys.展开更多
文摘Were assessed the effect of five traditional diets backyard turkeys in confinement. The experiment lasted 36 weeks, the turkeys were randomized to one of five diets: kitchen waste + fresh forage (T1), kitchen waste (T2), commercial feed + fresh forage (T3), cracked corn + fresh forage (T4) and commercial feed (T5). Food and water were provided ad libitum. Each treatment with birds of both sexes had two repetitions with four birds and each bird was considered as an experimental unit. Were evaluated daily weight gain, total weight gain, final live weight, total length peak-tail, monthly gain peak-tail, total length, total length of wings, monthly gain wings length, and feed cost. The data were analyzed in a completely randomized arrangement with adjusted means and Tukey’s mean comparison, then an evaluation of treatment groups by analyzing clusters for semi quantitative data. The biggest daily gain, total weight gain and final live weight was obtained with treatment T3, while the highest increase in peak-length tail and wings was obtained with treatment T1 (P < 0.05). T2 treatment turned out to be most economical, but the treatment that best scores obtained was T1. We conclude that the use of kitchen waste + fresh forage is a feasible strategy to feed slow-growing turkeys.
