Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study was designed to determine the influence of: 1) age at and type of beak trimming (BT), and 2) injection of poults at hatch with 2 mL of a commercial mineral and vitamin solution versus noninjection of poults on the viability and growth rate of turkeys to market age. Mortality from 0 to 20 wk of age and BW at 8, 16, and 20 wk of age were recorded. At hatch, poults were BT 1.0 mm (Experiment 1) or 1.5 mm (Experiment 2) anterior to the nostril using an electric arc beak trimmer. In a second treatment (Experiments 1 and 2), one-third to one-half of the beak was removed at 11 days of age with a hot blade beak trimmer. In Experiment 1, offspring from three large-bodied crosses were used whereas in Experiment 2 birds were from a single large-bodied cross. The BT at 1.0 mm anterior to the nostril with an electronic beak trimmer (Experiment 1) increased mortality and decreased BW at 8, 16, and 20 wk of age relative to BT at 11 days of age with the hot blade beak trimmer. The BT at 1.5 mm (Experiment 2) at hatching did not affect mortality and reduced BW only at 8 wk of age relative to BT at 11 days of age. The use of an injectable commercial vitamin-mineral solution did not influence mortality in either experiment and significantly increased BW only at 8 wk of age in Experiment 2. The interactions of strain cross with either age of BT or injection vs. noninjection of poults were NS in Experiment 1.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Renner et al. (1989) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: