Ration Formulation

December 14 2016
 SESSION A
BASIC KNOWLEDGE FOR
RATION FORMULATION
 Why Balanced Nutrition?
• World food requirement by the year 2050 will
double that of 2010
• A significant part of this requirement will
emanate from the developing countries due to
increased human population, disposable
incomes and urbanization
• For livestock products about two-third of this
increased demand will need to be met by
improving the production efficiency of feed
 Why Balanced Nutrition?
• In addition to shortage of feed, it is well
documented that imbalanced nutrition is a
major factor responsible for low livestock
productivity
• Balance nutrition contributes to improving
animal output as well as reducing both the
cost of production and the emission of green
house gases per unit of animal product.
 Impact of balanced nutrition
( 11,500 animals at 7 locations of India)
Parameter unit Before After
balancing Balancing
Milk production Fat corrected milk 0.58 0.78
efficiency of cows yield per feed DM
intake

Efficiency of microbial g/MCP/kg DOM 67 83

protein synthesis
Fecal egg count Number per gram 184 77

Levels of serum igG 13.1 22.3

immunoglobulins
Reduction in enteric Percent per Kg of 15-20
methane emissions milk produced
 Current situation:

• Traditional feed resource base is decreasing

• Number of improved livestock/poultry is
increasing
• Demand for higher quality feed is increasing
• Number of commercial feed manufacturers is
increasing
• Need for enhancing technical efficiency and
economic viability of feed enterprises
 Major nutrients and Non nutrients
Major nutrients
- Energy (TDN, DE, ME, NEmgl; drives everything)
- Protein (natural, NPN, amino acids)
- Minerals (Ca, P, K, Mg, Na, S, Cu, Zn, Mn, I…)
- Vitamins (A, D, E, K, B/niacin, thiamin…)
-
 Nutrient units of measure
Common Units
Nutrient

Moisture %
Crude Protein %
Total Digestible Nutrients %
Neutral Detergent Fiber %
Acid Detergent Fiber %
Net Energy Megacalorie (Mcal) / kg
Calcium %
Phosphorus %
Copper, Zinc Parts per million (ppm)
Vitamins International unit (IU) / kg
 Feed nutrient content
Tabular (e.g. VSLP, AFRIS, NRC, ARC)
 Feed Analysis
With respect to livestock feed formulation, we
want to analyze feeds for those components
that have nutritional importance.
 Chemical Composition and Nutritive values of
Ethiopian Feeds: National Data Base & Technical
Manual
 Nutrient specifications
• Requirement references e.g
- NRC
- ARC
- CSIRO
- Genetics companies
Requirement references e.g
 SESSION B
RATION FORMULATION
 Objectives of Ration Formulation
• To combine available feeds in such a way as to
1. Meet nutrient specifications…
2. While minimizing cost

Training focus – tools and skills to support

Livestock producers, feed processing plants
and unions engaged in feed industry
 Nutrient requirements for a lactating zebu breed type dairy cow with a
mature cow body weight of 400 kg and producing milk with 5% fat.
Maintenance requirement includes 5% addition for grazing activity (limited
grazing each day).

NEl for NEl for

Avg. body Milk prod maint. milk CP req
wt. (kg) (liters/d) (mcal/d) (mcal/d) (g/d) Ca req (g/d) P req (g/d)

400.00 1.0 7.02 0.85 721 15 14

400.00 2.0 7.02 1.70 775 17 15

400.00 3.0 7.02 2.55 829 20 17

400.00 4.0 7.02 3.40 883 22 18

 Ration Formulation
1.Steps in Balancing a Ration
• Nutrient requirements generally represent the minimum
quantity of the nutrients that should be incorporated.
• Factors to be considered
– Age
– Sex
– Body Size
– Type of production
– Intensity of production
 2.Steps in Balancing a Ration

Non ruminants same as

• Ruminants: Determine what
Ruminant, but:
feeds are available and list their
• Dry matter
respective nutrient compositions
• Protein
• Dry matter Essential AA
• Protein • Energy
• Energy Essential Fatty acids
• Phosphorus • Phosphorus
• Calcium • Calcium
• Vitamin A,D, E and B
• Vitamin A
complex
• Vitamin D if confined • Minerals
 3.Steps in Balancing a Ration
• Feed cost
• Processing Cost
• Transportation Cost
• Storage Cost
• Antioxidant
• Refrigeration Cost
• Nutritive value loss with storage
 4.Steps in Balancing a Ration
• Balance a ration that is useable.
– Can they eat that much, can they utilize that source of the
ingredient.
• Limitation of feed ingredients
– Consumption levels
– Limiting values such as: amount of forage that can be
consumed.
– Ingredients with anti-quality factors
 5.Steps in Balancing a Ration
• Convert to Dry Matter Basis:
1. Conversion of feed nutrients from an as fed to a dry matter
basis:
– a. Assume alfalfa silage analyzed 7 % crude protein on an
as-fed basis and contained 40% dry matter. What percent
crude protein would the alfalfa contain when expressed on a
dry matter basis? The solution for this example can be
obtained by the following equation:

– % Nutrient ( As fed basis) = % Nutrient (dry matter basis)

% Feed Dry Matter 100 % dry matter
 Step 6. Minimizing cost

• Single nutrient comparison

• Two nutrient comparison (energy, protein)

• Parametric pricing (least-cost)

 Single nutrient comparison

• Advantages
- Price/value based on nutrient content
- Quick
- Easy
• Disadvantage
- Price/value based on only 1 nutrient
- Assumes no interaction with level
and other ingredients.
 Single nutrient comparison

• Example:

Protein Birr/qtl Birr/kg protein

Noug cake 32% 350 ?

i.e. 100 kg x .32 = 32 kg protein

350 / 32 = 10.9 birr / kg protein
 Single nutrient comparison

Example
Calcium Birr/qt Birr/kg Ca
Limestone 34% 30 ?

i.e. 100 kg x .34 = 34 kg Ca

30 / 34 = .88 birr / kg Ca
Two nutrient comparison (energy, protein)

• The maximum value of the test feed as a source

of energy and protein.
• A = [(En bran x CP of test feed) - (CP of bran x En of test
feed)] ÷ [(En bran x CP of noug) - (CP of bran x En of noug)]
B = [(CP of test feed) - (CP of noug x A)] ÷ CP of bran
• Petersen's equations are used to calculate the comparative
value of a feed as follows:
• Birr value per quintal of test feed = (A x ETB price per qt
noug) + (B x Birr price per qt of bran)

• (Note: En = energy unit; CP = crude protein %)

 Two nutrient comparison (energy, protein)

• To use the ratio equations to determine the value of an

alternative feed:
- Multiply the price of noug cake by the noug ratio (A)
- multiply the price of bran by the bran ratio (B)
- add or subtract these two results as indicated

• The result is the maximum value of the test feed as a

source of energy and protein.
Two nutrient comparison (energy, protein)
• …combining feeds…
 Pearson square
• A simple procedure originally devised to blend milk
products to a known fat percentage, and can be
used for diet formulation too.
• The Pearson square ration formulation procedure is
designed for simple rations.
• In order for the square to work, follow specific
directions for its use.
• Nutrient contents of ingredients and nutrient
requirements must be expressed on the same basis
(i.e., dry-matter or “as-fed”).
Quick Facts About Pearson square
• The Pearson square or box method of balancing rations is a
simple procedure that has been used for many years.
• It is of greatest value when only two ingredients are to be
mixed. In taking a close look at the square, several
numbers are in and around the square.
• Probably one of the more important numbers is the
number that appears in the middle of the square. This
number represents the nutritional requirement of an
animal for a specific nutrient.
• It may be crude protein or TDN, amino acids, minerals or
vitamins.
 Considerations to make the square work
consistently
• The value in the middle of the square must be
intermediate between the two values that are used
on the left side of the square.
• Disregard any negative numbers that are generated
on the right side of the square. Be concerned only
with the numerical differences between the nutrient
requirement and the ingredient nutrient values.
• Subtract the nutrient value from the nutritional
requirement on the diagonal and arrive at a
numerical value entitled parts.
 Additional Procedures and Precaution
• By summing those parts and dividing by the total, you can
determine the percent of the ration that each ingredient
should represent in order to provide a specific nutrient
level.

• Always subtract on the diagonal within the square in order

to determine parts and double check calculations

• It also is very important to work on a uniform basis. Use a

100-percent dry-matter basis for nutrient composition of
ingredients and requirements
 combining feeds…
• Pearson square example:
Original formula %
Wheat bran 57.13
Noug cake 36.32
Molasses 5.00
Salt 1.55
Calcium .36
Phosphorous .99
 Pearson square example:

Calculate limestone addition to raise calcium

to 1.5 x phosphorous
Mix .36 32.50
1.50
Limestone 34.00 1.14
33.64
• Calculate limestone addition to raise calcium
to 1.5 x phosphorous

Mix 0.36 32.5

1.5
Limestone
34.0 1.14
33.64
 Pearson square example:

• Calculate limestone addition to raise calcium

to 1.5 x phosphorous
• Mix 32.50 / 33.64 x 100 = 96.61%
• Limestone 1.14 / 33.64 x 100 = 3.39%
• 33.64

i.e. mix 3.39 kg limestone with 96.61 kg of

original formula
 Pearson square – with 2 ingredients
• Used to determine the proportion of 2
ingredients to achieve a specific nutrient
content in the mixture

• Example: Determine the right combination of

lentil straw (7.7% CP) and Tella atela (20.2%
CP) to create a mixture containing 13% CP.
 Steps in using Pearson square
Step 1
• Draw a square with lines connecting the opposite
corners.
• Write the desired percent of crude protein (13) in
the center of the square.

Step 2
• Write the feeds to be used and their crude protein
percents at the left hand corners of the square.
 Steps in using Pearson square
• Step 3
• Subtract the smaller number from the larger, along the diagonal lines.
Write the differences at the opposite end of the diagonals.

• The difference between the percent protein in the lentil straw and the
percent protein in the ration are the parts of tella atela needed.

• The difference between the percent protein in the tella atela and the
percent protein in the ration are the parts of lentil straw needed.

• The sum of the numbers on the right equals the difference in the
numbers on the left. This fact is used as a check to see if the square is set
up correctly.
 Steps in using Pearson square

7.2 Parts of Lentil straw

Lentil straw 7.7%
13

5.3 Parts of Tella atella

Tella atella 20.2%
12.5. Total parts

Divide the parts of each feed by the total parts to find the percent of each feed in the ration

Hence the percentage of lentil straw and tella atella to be mixed will be as follows.

Lentil straw = (7.2/12.5) x 100 = 57.6%

Tella atella = (5.3/12.5) x 100 = 42.4%.

The technique is applicable when the nutrient content of one of the two feeds is lower and that of
the other is higher than the target nutrient level shown in the center of the square.
 Pearson square – with 3 or more
ingredients
• Can determine the proportion of 3 or more
ingredients in a step-wise process.

Examples
• A farmer wants to use a diet mixture composed
of grass hay, wheat bran and cottonseed cake
to feed fattening lambs. The nutrient content
of these feeds is shown below.
 Pearson square – with 3 or more
ingredients
Feed DM (%) CP (%) ME (Mcal/kg Ca (%) P (%) NDF (%)
DM)
Native grass 92.3 6.4 1.98 0.24 0.01 73.2
hay
Wheat bran 89.7 16.8 2.15 0.15 1.2 45.9
Cottonseed 92.1 38.5 2.52 0.27 1.53 39.3
cake
 Pearson square – with 3 or more
ingredients
1. The farmer wants to mix 2 parts of wheat bran
and 1 part of cottonseed cake with native grass
hay and desires to have 12% CP content in the
overall mixed ration. Calculate the percentage
of the three feeds to be included in the ration
mixture?
Prepare a diet containing 12% CP using a mixture of 2
parts of wheat bran (16.8% CP) and 1 part of
cottonseed cake (35.8% CP) with native grass hay
(6.4% CP).
Step 1 – Determine the weighted average of
CP % for wheat bran and CSC
2 parts of WB x 16.8% = 0.336 part CP
1 part of CSC x 35.8% = 0.385 part CP
3 parts mix = 0.721 parts CP

Weighted average of CP to come from the 2

ingredients will be calculated as:
= (0.721 part CP/3 parts mix)x100 = 24% CP
 Step 2 – Use the Pearson square
• Determine the proportion of the mix of the
two ingredients on one side and that of native
grass hay on the other side

• Split the percentage of the mix of the 2

ingredients into wheat bran and CSC and state
the percentage of the 3 ingredients
 Step 2 – Use the Pearson square
12 parts of native grass
Grass hay 7.7% hay
12
5.6 parts of mix
Mix 24%
17.6 total parts
The % of the different ingredients to be included in the ration will be as follows:
Native grass hay = (12/17.6)x100 = 68.2%
Mix = (5.6/17.6)x100 = 31.8%

The mix can be divided into wheat bran (2/3 or 66.7%) and cottonseed cake (1/3 or 33.3%).
Hence 2/3 of 31.8% would be 21.2% and its 1/3 is 10.6%. Therefore, the ration will be
composed of native grass hay, wheat bran and cottonseed cake in the following proportions.
Native grass hay 68.2%
Wheat bran 21.2%
Cottonseed cake 10.6%.
Total 100%
 Question 2
• Assume that the daily DM intake of the lambs will be 3% of
their body weight. Calculate the daily intake of each feed by
the lambs
a) On DM basis
b) On as fed basis

Feed % in the Intake on DM basis Intake on as-fed basis

diet (g/head/day) (g/head/day)

Native grass hay 68.2 600x68.2/100=409.2 409.2x100/92.3=443.

3
Wheat bran 21.2 600x21.2/100=127.2 127.2x100/89.7=141.
8
Cottonseed cake 10.6 600x10.6/100=63.6 63.6x100/92.1 =69.1
Total 100 =600 =654.2
 LEAST-COST FORMULATION
• The practice of ingredient interchange, known
as “least-cost formulation,” is widely practiced
within the commercial feed industry for
production animals.
• When the cost of one ingredient increases, a
lower cost ingredient may be used as a
substitute in order to produce a lower cost feed;
• Thus providing the customer with the most
economical feed.
 Least-cost formulation

• Calculation of ingredient combinations that:

- Meet constraints (min/max/equal) for
ingredients and nutrients
- While minimizing cost
 LEAST-COST FORMULATION
• The practice of ingredient interchange, known
as “least-cost formulation,” is widely practiced
within the commercial feed industry for
production animals.
• When the cost of one ingredient increases, a
lower cost ingredient may be used as a
substitute in order to produce a lower cost feed;
• Thus providing the customer with the most
economical feed.
 LEAST-COST FORMULATION

• Calculation of ingredient combinations that:

- Meet constraints (min/max/equal) for
ingredients and nutrients
- While minimizing cost
 Least-cost Formulation
• Least-cost feed formulation is a process that
helps to develop a feed formula that is both
nutritionally-complete (within limits) and with a
minimum ingredient cost (within limits)
• Now-a-days is developed and completed
through the use of computers using linear-
programming software
• Typical packages: Feed win
• used by most feed mills/manufacturers
 Least-cost Formulation
• Least-cost feed formulations require that the
following information be provided:
 cost of feed ingredients
 nutrient content of feed ingredients
 nutrient requirement of the animal
 availability of the nutrient to the animal
 minimum-maximum restrictions on levels
…combining feeds…
…combining feeds…
…combining feeds…
Least-Cost vs. Max-Profit
 Least-Cost vs. Max-Profit

Example: 300 kg fattening Boran bull

Scenario 1 %
Wheat bran 40.00
Tef straw 55.00
Supplement 5.00
NEm 1.39 Mcal
NEg .81 Mcal
Cost 112.70 B/q
 Least-Cost vs. Max-Profi
• Example: 300 kg fattening Boran bull

Scenario 2 %
Wheat bran 80.00
Tef straw 15.00
Supplement 5.00
NEm 1.63 Mcal
NEg 1.02 Mcal
Cost 117.90 B/q
 Least-Cost vs. Max-Profi

Example: 300 kg fattening Boran bull

Scenario 3 %
Maize grain 80.00
Tef straw 15.00
Supplement 5.00
NEm 2.00 Mcal
NEg 1.34 Mcal
Cost 307.50 B/q
 Least-Cost vs. Max-Profi
Item Scenario 1 2 3
• Body wt. (kg) 300 300 300
• Intake (kg DM) 7.14 7.32 6.85
• Gain (kg/day) .45 .71 .96
• Feed/gain 15.8 10.4 7.11
• Feed (ETB/day) 8.86 9.58 23.81
• Feed (ETB/kg gain) 19.7 13.6 24.7
• Fixed cost (ETB/day) 3.00 3.00 3.00
• Fixed cost (ETB/kg gain) 6.66 4.25 3.11
• Feed+Fixed (ETB/kg gain) 26.34 17.83 27.84
 Least-Cost vs. Max-Profit
Conclusions
• Least expensive ration (birr/kg) often does
not result in best cost
• High productivity dilutes maintenance costs
• High productivity dilutes fixed costs
 Chemical composition and nutritive values of common
feeds (%)

Feed DM CP NDF DOM ME (MJ)

Native grass hay 92.5 4.4 77.3 44.5 6.7

Field pea straw 91.6 11 49.1 69.8 9.9
Lentil straw 92.4 7.7 59.8 54.3 8.4
Chickpea straw 92.2 6.2 53.1 52.8 8.0
Tef straw 92.7 5.3 75.2 53.3 8.0
Barley straw 92.9 5.9 72.9 48.1 7.2
Wheat straw 93.0 3.8 77.2 45.5 6.8
Sugar cane tops 91.0 4.9 62.2 60.0 9.0
Noug cake 93.2 32.7 33.8 62.1 9.3
Peanut cake 92.9 57.2 17.0 88.3 13.2
Source: Seyoum Bediye, Zinash Sileshi and Dereje Fekadu.2007. Chemical composition
and nutritive values of Ethiopian Feeds: EIAR Research Report.73
Chemical composition and nutritive values of
common feeds (%)
Feed DM CP NDF DOM ME (MJ)

Cottonseed cake 92.5 26.9 65.11 59.0 6.9

Fish meal 94.0 55.0 -- 70.8 10.6

Rapeseed cake 90.9 36.4 27.6 72.3 10.8
Linseed cake 94.3 26.8 36.9 75.7 11.4
Wheat bran 93.3 18.9 53.1 87.1 13.0
Wheat middling 92.9 19.3 45.0 79.6 11.9
Areke attela 14.1 17.8 37.0 78.8 11.8
Tela attela 13.2 20.2 52.8 66.8 10.0
Molasses 75 4.4 -- -- 5.3
Source: Seyoum Bediye, Zinash Sileshi and Dereje Fekadu.2007. Chemical composition
and nutritive values of Ethiopian Feeds: EIAR Research Report.73
 Nutrient requirement of crossbred cows
Body Daily milk Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
weight yield (lt) (DM) kg % of live weight MCal gram

250 6.0 6.4 2.5 20.4 1076

8.0 6.4 2.5 22.6 1218
10.0 6.4 2.5 24.7 1360
300 6.0 7.3 2.4 19.6 1112
8.0 7.3 2.4 23.7 1254
10.0 7.3 2.4 25.9 1396
12.0 7.3 2.4 28.2 1568
14.0 7.3 2.4 30.6 1680
350 6.0 8.1 2.3 22.8 1147
8.0 8.1 2.3 25.0 1289
10.0 8.1 2.3 27.1 1431
 Nutrient requirement of crossbred cows
Body Daily milk Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (lt) (DM) kg % of live weight MCal gram
350 12.0 8.1 2.3 29.4 1603
14.0 8.1 2.3 31.8 1725
400 6.0 8.9 2.2 23.9 1183

8.0 8.9 2.2 25.6 1325

10.0 8.9 2.2 28.2 1467

12.0 8.9 2.2 30.5 1639
14.0 8.9 2.2 32.9 1751

450 6.0 9.6 2.1 25.0 1219

8.0 9.6 2.1 26.7 1361

10.0 9.6 2.1 29.3 1503
12.0 9.6 2.1 31.6 1675

14.0 9.6 2.1 34.0 1787

Nutrient requirement of beef cattle
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live MCal gram
weight

100 0.50 3.0 3.0 5.82 379

0.75 3.2 3.2 6.88 448

1.00 3.3 3.3 7.94 541

150 0.50 4.2 2.8 8.02 474

0.75 4.4 2.9 9.55 589

1.00 4.5 3.0 10.93 607

200 0.50 5.2 2.6 9.90 554

0.75 5.4 2.7 11.70 622

1.00 5.6 2.8 13.51 690

250 0.50 6.2 2.5 11.64 383

0.75 6.4 2.6 13.78 438

Nutrient requirement of beef cattle
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live MCal gram
weight
250 1.00 6.6 2.6 15.84 492
300 0.50 7.0 2.3 13.40 679
0.75 7.4 2.5 15.80 753
1.00 7.5 2.5 18.23 819
350 0.50 7.9 2.3 14.94 731
0.75 8.3 2.4 17.66 806
1.00 8.5 2.4 20.38 874
 Nutrient requirement of sheep
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live MCal gram
weight
10 0 0.33 3.3 0.52 26
25 0.36 3.6 0.64 30
50 0.39 3.9 0.76 35
100 0.42 4.2 1.00 43
15 0 0.45 3.0 0.71 36
25 0.49 3.3 0.87 42
50 0.53 3.5 1.04 49
100 0.56 3.7 1.37 58
150 0.52 3.5 1.69 65
20 0 0.55 2.8 0.88 44
25 0.61 3.0 1.08 52
 Nutrient requirement of sheep
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live weight MCal gram

20 50 0.66 3.3 1.29 59

100 0.71 3.6 1.69 72
150 0.65 3.3 2.10 81
25 0 0.65 2.6 1.04 53

25 0.72 2.9 1.28 61

50 0.78 3.1 1.52 70

100 0.83 3.3 2.00 85

150 0.77 3.1 2.48 96

30 0 0.75 2.5 1.19 59

50 0.89 3.0 1.74 81

100 0.95 3.0 2.29 98

125 0.94 3.1 2.57 103

140 0.87 2.9 2.73 106
 Nutrient requirement of goat
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live weight MCal gram

10 0 0.32 3.2 0.58 25

25 0.36 3.6 0.75 32

50 0.37 3.7 0.92 39

75 0.35 3.5 1.09 46

15 0 0.44 2.9 0.79 33

25 0.45 3.0 0.86 36

50 0.50 3.3 1.13 48

75 0.50 3.3 1.30 55

20 0 0.54 2.7 0.98 41

25 0.58 2.9 1.15 49

50 0.60 3.0 1.32 56

 Nutrient requirement of goat
Body Daily gain Daily feed Daily feed ME CP
Weight (Kg) yield (Kg) (DM) kg % of live weight MCal gram

20 75 0.62 3.1 1.49 63

100 0.62 3.1 1.66 70

25 0 0.64 2.7 1.16 49
25 0.68 2.7 1.33 56
50 0.71 2.8 1.50 63
75 0.73 2.9 1.67 71
100 0.74 3.0 1.84 78
125 0.71 2.8 2.03 86

30 0 0.74 2.5 1.33 56

25 0.77 2.6 1.50 63
50 0.80 2.7 1.67 71
75 0.83 2.8 1.84 78
100 0.84 2.8 2.01 89
125 0.84 2.8 2.18 92
 Nutrient requirement of poultry
(layers ration) in percent
Layers Broilers
Nutrient
Starter Grower Layer Starter Finisher

Protein ( minimum) 22 16 18 23 20
CF ( maximum) 7 8 10 6 6
Ca ( minimum) 1 0.8 2.75 1 1
P ( minimum) 0.7 0.6 0.75 0.7 0.7
ME (Kcal) 2800 2600 2700- 2800 2900
2750
Lysine (minimum) 1.0 0.7 0.5 1.0 1.0
Methionine 0.35 0.25 0.25 0.35 0.35
(minimum)
 Maximum safe inclusion level of some
ingredients in poultry ration
Layers Broilers

Ingredient Starter 0- Grower Growers

6 week > 6 weeks >14 weeks Layers
Dried and ground alfalfa leaf 3 5 5 5 3

Barley 20 30 45 50 10
Blood meal 3 3 4 4 4
Bone meal 7 7 7 7 7
Brewers dried grain 20 20 30 -

Brewery yeast 2 3 3 3 -
Maize 60 60 60 60 60
Decorticated cotton seed 5 10 15 15 10
cake
Animal tallow 5 5 5 5 8
Fish meal 10 10 10 10
 Maximum safe inclusion level of some ingredients in
poultry ration
Layers
Ingredient Starter Grower Growers Broilers
0-6 week > 6 weeks >14 weeks Layers

Peanut cake 10 15 15 30 10
Linseed cake 3 3
Meat & bone meal 6 6 6 10 6
Noug cake 15 20 25 30 15
Oats grain 20 20 20 25 20
Sesame cake 15 15 20 20 15
Rape seed cake 5 5 5 5 5
Rice bran 10 15 15 15 10
Soybean cake 35 35 35 35 35
Wheat bran 5 10 10 15 5
Wheat middling 10 15 15 30 20
Wheat short 20 25 25 35 20
THANK YOU