Show I i N I re ft eI FORCED PULLETS ARE 1 l to 0 BEST EGG PRODUCERS f L James E. E Rice of ot the Cornell ornell university uni experiment station Issued at a ao bulletin relative to the possibilities of o t bulletin d der feeding early carly hatched pullets during Q the summer by retarded or forced W feeding By retarding Is 15 meant the Idea Idon that b feeding Is necessary during the late Inte my rummer Eummer to check the earl early tendency a i f of ot laying laving with the hope of getting a l larger egg g yield in the earl early winter Jle le By forced feeding Is meant the I 1 jn fag Ing of a n rich stimulating g mash to Induce In bt duce egg production t Concerning the time results of his work jjr Ir fr Rice has certain findings dm drawn wn ef from from data which are submitted be be- Ie a low Joff Or r. r 1 1 Forced pullets made a better pro prof- prof a It jt than retarded pullets l t 2 2 Forced pullets ate less f food od per perr r ben at nt less cost per hen lien than retarded retard retard- 8 4 ed pullets I. I g 8 3 Forced pullets produced more mores eggs f gs s of a larger size at less cost per dozen dozea than retarded pullets 4 L Forced pullets produced more eggs luring during early winter than retard retard- retarded ed pullets 5 5 Forced pullets have better hatch hatch- tog lag g results of eggs ebbs than retarded pui put It 0 C. C Forced pullets made a better percentage percentage percentage per per- of gain In weight than retarded retarded re re- pullets 1 7 Forced pullets showed less broodIness brood- brood mess Iness than retarded pullets S S. S Forced pallets had less mortality than retarded pullets 9 Forced pullets showed better vigor vig vig- or than retarded pullets 10 Forced pullets showed the first nature molt earlier than retarded pul pule Jets lets 11 Retarded pullets gave better fertility fertility fer fer- of eggs than forced pullets l 12 Hopper fed dr dry mash gave gare better better better bet bet- ter results In pain gain aln of weight production production tion of eggs gain In weight of eggs hatching power of e eggs tS days lost In molting mortality health and profit per hen than wet mash 13 Wet Yet mash and grain-fed grain pullets consumed slightly less food at nt less leEs cost and produced eggs nt at slightly less cost per dozen than dry mash and grain fed pullets 14 Wet mash and grain-fed grain pullets produced slightly larger eggs of slightly slight slight- ly better fertility and showed less broodiness than dry mash and grain- grain fed pullets p 15 L y Lt-y T y mash and grain-fed grain pullets pullets pullets pul pul- lets laid eggs of good size at an earlier earlier ear ear- lier her period than wet mash and grain grain- fed pullets 11 lC 10 Hopper-fed Hopper pullets ate more than hand-fed hand pullets 17 Pullets having whole grain ate t more grit and shell than those having havinga n a proportion of ground grain 18 IS Pullets fed on grain were more Inclined to develop bad habits than those having a n mash 19 ID Earliest producers did not give gIvens as ns many eggs In earl early winter 20 Early layers gaIned pained as rapidly In weight as those beginning later to lay 21 Prolificacy made by slight difference difference dif dIf- ference ferenee In n weight of hen and weight I of ekg egg 2 22 The most prolific pullets did not always lay carll earliest est |