16% layer feed vs 22% layer feed

[Bantams182]

Which is best for 16% or 22% layer, I have read that 16% is minimum and is fed due to cost, but for the health of the hen which percentage of protein is best?

 

[EddieSalita]

What breed of chicken? what kind of conditions? free ranging food sources.... pasture etc? These things matter.


It's not always a simple answer. Generally speaking a 22% will probably have more aminos. But there is nothing stopping it being deficient in one or more areas. A nicely balanced 16% with natural amino sources, and quality free range pasture may well be perfectly adequate and possibly even a better option in some instances.

Get a bag of each and see which the chickens like better and which seems to make them perform better and appear healthier. Or just go with your gut.

I think many will just default to the higher protien though. For a free ranging flock it makes sense to give them more protein. But that extra can come from supplemental, preferably imo animal sources. Fish, insects/larvae, meat scraps, dairy etc...

 

[TooCheep]

Are you sure the 22% is layer feed rather than all-flock feed? I've never heard of layer with that high protein, but it isn't impossible. I have a strong belief (for humans as well as chickens) in optimal, rather than minimum nutrition levels.

For example, I take about 6x the US RDA of iodine. The US RDA level was set to avoid goiter but not for optimal health. The level I use is non-toxic and protects against breast cancer, improves disease immunity and thyroid health, etc., etc. Iodine is literally used in every cell in the body.

I personally use 20% protein all-flock feed (Nutrena Naturewise All-Flock). It only lacks calcium for layers (they need a need alot for egg shells), so I give them calcium "on the side". My girls free range during the day, so the extra protein gives them a margin of error if their foraging don't deliver sufficient protein or imbalanced amino acids.

The 16% layer feed is ideal for factory farms. Those chickens don't have access to anything else and they want the cheapest feed possible to produce eggs, not the healthiest, longest-living hens. Higher protein allows them to grow more muscle (meat), be able to recover from wounds better, regrow feathers after molting, etc.

You might want to also consider switching from layer to all-flock feed + calcium. Again, layer feed is ideal for factory farms which use layers for two seasons and then generally cull them. Backyard chicken owners frequently have more complex issues (mixed ages, cockerels/roosters, semi-retired hens, winter molting periods with no/few eggs, etc) where excess calcium isn't good for them. All-flock + calcium can be used with all of those situations when layer feed is less than ideal and may even be harmful.

 

[Bantams182]

What breed of chicken? what kind of conditions? free ranging food sources.... pasture etc? These things matter.


It's not always a simple answer. Generally speaking a 22% will probably have more aminos. But there is nothing stopping it being deficient in one or more areas. A nicely balanced 16% with natural amino sources, and quality free range pasture may well be perfectly adequate and possibly even a better option in some instances.

Get a bag of each and see which the chickens like better and which seems to make them perform better and appear healthier. Or just go with your gut.

I think many will just default to the higher protien though. For a free ranging flock it makes sense to give them more protein. But that extra can come from supplemental, preferably imo animal sources. Fish, insects/larvae, meat scraps, dairy etc...

The breed is Old English Game Bantam, they are kept in a Coop and Run, they have no access to free range because of neighborhood dogs, we have been feeding Tucker Milling 22% Layer, we have had no evidence that's visual that this isn't what's right for them but I questioned myself if this is best???

 

[Bantams182]

Are you sure the 22% is layer feed rather than all-flock feed? I've never heard of layer with that high protein, but it isn't impossible. I have a strong belief (for humans as well as chickens) in optimal, rather than minimum nutrition levels.

For example, I take about 6x the US RDA of iodine. The US RDA level was set to avoid goiter but not for optimal health. The level I use is non-toxic and protects against breast cancer, improves disease immunity and thyroid health, etc., etc. Iodine is literally used in every cell in the body.

I personally use 20% protein all-flock feed (Nutrena Naturewise All-Flock). It only lacks calcium for layers (they need a need alot for egg shells), so I give them calcium "on the side". My girls free range during the day, so the extra protein gives them a margin of error if their foraging don't deliver sufficient protein or imbalanced amino acids.

The 16% layer feed is ideal for factory farms. Those chickens don't have access to anything else and they want the cheapest feed possible to produce eggs, not the healthiest, longest-living hens. Higher protein allows them to grow more muscle (meat), be able to recover from wounds better, regrow feathers after molting, etc.

You might want to also consider switching from layer to all-flock feed + calcium. Again, layer feed is ideal for factory farms which use layers for two seasons and then generally cull them. Backyard chicken owners frequently have more complex issues (mixed ages, cockerels/roosters, semi-retired hens, winter molting periods with no/few eggs, etc) where excess calcium isn't good for them. All-flock + calcium can be used with all of those situations when layer feed is less than ideal and may even be harmful.

 

[RoyalChick]

Mine are in a 20% layer feed. I haven’t seen a 22% one but if I did and it had the right balance of nutrients I would likely switch to it.

 

[Wyorp Rock]

Which is best for 16% or 22% layer, I have read that 16% is minimum and is fed due to cost, but for the health of the hen which percentage of protein is best?

we have been feeding Tucker Milling 22% Layer, we have had no evidence that's visual that this isn't what's right for them but I questioned myself if this is best???

Mine are in a 20% layer feed. I haven’t seen a 22% one but if I did and it had the right balance of nutrients I would likely switch to it.

I can't say if it's "best" those that understand feed like @U_Stormcrow or @NatJ would have to weigh in.

My 2¢
If your birds are doing well on the Flock22, you find it's affordable, fresh, etc., then I see no reason why you need to change.

I've used various feeds over the years, sometimes due to convenience, price, availability, etc., but usually have stuck with 18% protein or higher feed.

I've been feeding Flock22 for a couple of years now, my birds seem to like it and so far seem to do well with this feed. Yes, I do have roosters and they eat it. It is what it is.

Photos of the bag front/bag for @RoyalChick and whomever else would like to see the ingredients.

edits to correct grammar.

 

[NatJ]

Which is best for 16% or 22% layer, I have read that 16% is minimum and is fed due to cost, but for the health of the hen which percentage of protein is best?

22% protein is not high enough to cause any health issues. 16% is probably not low enough to cause major problems either.

The breed is Old English Game Bantam, they are kept in a Coop and Run, they have no access to free range because of neighborhood dogs, we have been feeding Tucker Milling 22% Layer, we have had no evidence that's visual that this isn't what's right for them but I questioned myself if this is best???

Old English Game Bantams are not known for laying large numbers of eggs. So they may not need the amount of calcium that is in layer feed. You might consider an all-flock type feed with a separate dish of calcium, so they can self-regulate their calcium according to how much they are laying.


But if they are doing well, there is a lot to be said for continuing to use the product that is already working well. So you might just keep doing what you have been doing.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

So...

Complicated answer, I'll try and boil it down to the highlights.

Without substantial amino acid supplementation, 16% is generally considered the minimum for adult commercial layers.

Birds fed higher protein and/or superior AA profile protein do better on a host of metrics. Improved feed conversion rates, improved body condition, improved rate of growth, improved rate of lay, improved average egg weight, improved speed of molt, improved resistance to disease, improvements in the viability of fertilized eggs.

HOWEVER - the improvements are both slight and subject to diminishing returns. Going from 16% protein to 20% protein with near identical AA profile is associated with 1-3% improvements in egg size and rate of lay. For a prime commercial layer producing 300 xl eggs per year, that's around 6 extra eggs over the course of the year, and about 1 g in average egg weight improvement, maybe a gram and change. Measurable, but not the sort of thing you are likely to notice in a backyard flock. The nutrition of said egg improves slightly too - again, measurable, but not noticeable.

An adult bird has already done its growing, and its digestive system is well established - you won't see rapid growth relative to the other feed, or anything in improved feed conversion (based on protein alone, other factors may result in FCR improvements), and EOGB aren't exactly "productive" layers or famed for large eggs - those benefits will be even less pronounced in your bird.

Going from 20% to 22 or 24% results in improvements even smaller than the jump from 16-20%, all else being equal.

Effects on molting and disease resistance are much "squishier" in that they aren't well studied scientifically. Theory and anecdote both support, but its hard to offer estimates on how much better the improved protein will make your bird in those regards.

Too much protein? Its a possibility - but excess protein diet studies used protein levels MUCH higher than 22%. You aren't close to dangerous levels by a far measure.

That leaves calcium. As mentioned above (@NatJ) and my own comment, OEGB aren't famous for high production of large and extra large eggs. Your bird may be getting more calcium than it needs, which over long spans of time can be damaging - but that's equally the case with the 16% layer.

tl,dr? The 22% show flock is the superior feed. Is it cost effective? That depends entirely on local pricing and how you value the "unmeasurables" like faster molt, disease resistance, general body condition.

 

[U_Stormcrow]

Oh, and the AA profile on that feed is very good - it really is a multi-breed feed. Those Lys and et levels are intended to support good breast muscle development, strong connective tissues, good immune systems - they clearly had waterfowl in mind. Suspect, though they don't say so on the guaranteed nutrition label, that it has better than (chicken) typical levels of niacin as well.

I've used Tucker Milling feeds before - good numbers, wasn't displeased with the way my birds did. Wasn't really impressed, either, but I was paying for their non-GMO, because my egg buyers were willing to pay that premium. When I stopped selling eggs to those buyers, I stopped using that feed and went to a less expensive, higher protein feed for my hatchlings and adolescents that resulted in greater growth in the first weeks, generally better put together birds - but that was the difference between moderately expensive 18% non-GMO starter and less expensive 24% "who knows" starter feed. It wasn't a fair fight.