C.S.E.C.

Agricultural Science
School Based Assessment
(S.B.A.)
Year 2010

Name of Candidate: Adelaja Dalrymple

School: Queens College

Centre Number: 090041

Candidate Number: 0900410230

Teacher: Mr. Hector

Territory: Guyana

Year of Examination: 2010

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Research Project

The Effect of Rationing on the Carcass Weight of

Broilers

Done by: Adelaja Dalrymple

An Agricultural Science Project Report in Partial Fulfillment for

CSEC at Queens College

May/June 2010

.................................
Signature of Candidate

..................................
Date

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Acknowledgements

The researcher would like to thank the following persons for contribution
towards the completion of this project.

 First of all, God, for granting strength, life and hope towards finishing
this project.

 Mr. Hector for assisting with the chickens, feeds and all other
necessary contributions towards this project.

 My family and parents for encouraging me through to the end.

 My friends, in school and from my community, for staying by me

those late nights and sharing information towards the completion of
this project.

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Introduction

This School Based Assessment (S.B.A) is a necessary requirement of the

Secondary Examinations Certificate Course (C.S.E.C.) for the Agriculture
Science (Double Award). This assessment/project requires the researcher to
rear a batch of 100 chickens, plant crops and as well as make a marketing
sketch of the two preceding. The work in this document covers work done
by the researcher in his final 5 years of secondary school.

The researcher hopes that the information in this document is clear, precise
and hopes that anyone reading this will understand it and see that it fulfils
mandates set by C.X.C.

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Introduction
Statement of the Problem
The researcher noticed that the farmers of Sophia were not using the ad lib
method of feeding to feed their chickens and thus, they had loss at the end of
marketing periods. They claimed that ad lib was going to affect the average
chicken’s life if that method was used. The researcher carried out a study to
compare ad lib against rationing feeding.

Literature Review
Herren, Ray V., (1994), The Science of Animal Agriculture, Delmar
Publishers Inc., 3 Columbia Circlem Albany, Box 15-015, New York 12212
said “The amount of feed required per pound of live weight gain for broiler
chickens was cut in half from 4 pounds to around 2 pounds. The weight of
broilers at marketing increased from 2.8 pounds to 3.4 pounds. This means
that we can now produce a heavier broiler in half the time on half the feed...”

Elliot, Ian and Wolsey, Orville, (2004), Agricultural Science 1: A Junior

Secondary Course for the Caribbean, Pearson Education Limited,
Edinburgh, Harlow, Essex, CM20 2JE, England said “Another question is ,
‘How much feed should broilers be given?’ The answer is, “They should be
given as much as they want!’ This is referred to as ‘Ad lib feeding’. It does
not pay to ration their food. We want them to grow fast.”

Abstarct
This research was carried out to determine whether or not ad lib feeding
would yield greater carcass weight in broilers. This was done by rearing ten
(10) chickens; five (5) were subjected to controlled (rationing), and the
remaining five (5) were subjected to the treatment (ad lib). The broilers were
reared to be slaughtered; then killed, plucked and had their internal organs
removed. They were then weighed and their carcass weights recorded.

Objective
The aim of the research project is to determine whether ad lib or rationing
will ensure a higher carcass weight in chickens.

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Materials and Methods
Description of Site
This experiment was carried out in the Agricultural Science plot, in the
Queens College Compound, Camp and Thomas Roads, North Georgetown.

Design of Experiment
Treatment – AD LIB
Control – RATIONING

Broilers require 1.5 square feet per bird.

The pen, in which the broilers were kept, was,
The pen was divided in two sections. Section A for and Section B .
Ten broilers were taken from a batch of 100 chickens when they were (how
many weeks old) and randomly placed in Sections A and B.
Procedure
i. Duration of experiment – The experiment lasted for a period of
weeks.
ii. Pre-Treatment – The chicken pen was cleaned and disinfected.
Bags were placed behind the pen to cut out draft. The pen was then dived
and layers of wood shavings were placed on the floor. The necessary
equipment was then set-up.
iii. During the Experiment – The chickens were visited every two days
to ensure they were all healthy, their surroundings clean and also, that the
feed trough was always full.
iv. Post Treatment – After the chickens were slaughtered and
packaged, the entire pen was swept and disinfected.

Methods of Observation, Data

Collection and analysis of data
The chickens were each weighed in hanging scale after they were
slaughtered. The chickens were weighed one at a time and one group at a
time so that results could be as accurate as possible. The chickens subjected
to ad lib were weighed first then those subjected to rationing. The weight of
all the carcasses were added for one group and then divided by 5 to find the
average. All calculations were re-checked to make results as accurate as
possible.

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Results
The results below represent all data recorded and calculated after the chickens
were slaughtered:

Weight of each Chicken in Ad Lib Average weight of chickens in ad lib

Feeding feeding
1.7
2.6
3.6 6.3
4.7
5.5

Figure 1- Table showing weights and average weight of chickens under ad

lib feeding

Weight of each Chicken in ration Average weight of chickens in ration

Feeding feeding
1.6
2.5
3.4.5 5
4.5
5.4.5

Figure 2- Table showing weights and average weight of chickens under

rationing feeding.

Discussiom
From the data obtained, both statements mentioned earlier are proven true. The
chickens subjected to ad lib showed a higher average and also higher weight per
chicken after being slaughtered. This basically shows that the chickens had
more to eat at their disposal, they ate and ate giving the desired result of the
researcher, and also helping the Sophia farmers to change their practices.

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

As in any experiment, this experiment also had limitations. One limitation is
that one or more chickens could have eaten more than the other chickens,
allowing some chickens to have a lower weight than expected. The feeders had
to be replaced daily as in ad lib; the extremes of feeding are shown. There is
either much feed or too little to suffice hunger, therefore, feeders had to be
checked daily. Overall, the chickens responded better to the ad lib feeding
method as there was a 1.3 pound difference.

Conclusion
The objective of this experiment was to determine which method of feeding (ad
lib or rationing) would be better for weight gain in broilers. It was seen that the
chickens subjected to ad lib and had a higher weight gain than those in rationing
therefore concluding; that ad lib has a higher weight gain when compared to
rationing.

Recommendations
Based on the results, the farmers in Sophia should subject their chickens to ad
lib feeding to ensure maximum weight and profit gain.

References
The pieces of literature which helped to carry this assignment along include:
- Elliot, Ian and Wolsey, Orville, (2004), Agricultural Science 1: A Junior
Secondary Course for the Caribbean, Pearson Education Limited,
Edinburgh, Harlow, Essex, CM20 2JE, England

- Herren, Ray V., (1994), The Science of Animal Agriculture, Delmar

Publishers Inc., 3 Columbia Circlem Albany, Box 15-015, New York 12212

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Gallery

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

 Criteria for Marking Research Project
Item Description KC Marks Total
1. Research A short description of the project 1
Question with objectives
2. An abstract Précis of what was done 1
Results 1
3. Literature Relevance to topic 1
Review Depth 1
4.Research Relevance to topic 1
Methodology Choice of method 1
5.Results Accuracy 1
Totality 1
6.Data Analysis Statistical Method 1
Relevance to Project 1
Accuracy 1
Depth 1
7. Discussion Relevance to Results 1
Depth 1
8. Conclusion and Relevance to Discussion 1
Recommendations Relevance to objectives 1
9.Communication Relevance to objectives 1
of information in Topical 1
a logical manner
using correct
grammar.
Total 20

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009

Adelaja Dalrymple Agriculture Science S.B.A 2009