8

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry ByProducts

D. POLIN Department of Animal Science, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI48824, USA

I. INTRODUCTION

The poultry industry recognized early in its development that to compete with the ruminant, feed costs would have to be kept as low as possible. So the industry turned to industrial and farm by-products that were considered waste as possible sources of cheap nutrients. These efforts have resulted in a regulatory system that consists of private (Association of the American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), American Feed Manufacturers Association (AFMA, and state and federal regulators, including the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to insure the cleanliness and wholesomeness of the products that are developed. The products are defined in the standards by AAFCO, and the scientific information on these products is based on reviews by the National Research Council, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. Such reviews have led to publication of the nutritive quality of the products as in the latest edition of Nutrient Requirements of Poultry (NAS-NRC, 1984), now undergoing an updating. The products covered in this chapter, which would ordinarily be considered waste, if used for animal feeding purposes, go through thorough testing and evaluation before being used commercially. Thus, recycling an upgraded waste is a benefit to the public, industry, and the environment. Recent societal pressures on restrictions involving animal waste disposal in registered land fills, on farm lands, and general dumping that could harm the quality of soil and water, demand an urgent re-evaluation of what is considered waste and its possible recycling. This chapter indicates how older and newer techniques in recycling poultry
177

A. M. Pearson et al. (eds.), Inedible Meat by-Products Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd 1992

178

D. Polin

wastes not only reduce contamination problems but also benefit all concerned with reduced costs and nutritional benefits.
II. FEATHERS

A. Yield of Feathers The percentage of feathers on poultry, based on body weight, depends upon the age and type of bird. Full-grown chickens, with live weights of 34-37kg, are reported to have from 4-4 to 50% of body weight as feathers (Japp & Turner, 1943), with younger chickens having a lower percentage of about 37% (Moran, 1977). A study of feather growth on geese revealed that feather yields averaged 38% of body weight at one day of age, decreased to 27% at 14 days of age, and then showed a marked increase to 74 and 81 % at 4 and 7 weeks, respectively (Nitsan et al., 1981). Turkeys at 12 weeks of age have feather yields from 91 to 9'2%, yields of71-77% at 18 weeks of age, and lower percentage yields of 67-68% at 24 weeks (Clayton et al., 1978). On an absolute basis, the weights of feathers obtained from the turkeys increase directly with age as they increase in body weight from 48 to 53 kg at 12 weeks of age, from 84 to 100 kg at 18 weeks of age, and from 114 to 143 kg at 24 weeks (Clayton et ai., 1978). These values are representative of three different strains, representing light, intermediate, and heavy weight turkeys. Salmon (1979) determined feather yields from 18 week-old, 5,9-8,8 kg body weight (BW), white turkeys at slaughter time to be 49% after removal of water from the wet plucking process-a value much lower than the 7,1-7,7% yields reported by Clayton et al. (1978). Percentage yield values for feathers become of importance when estimating returns from the slaughter process to arrive at costs and profit margins, and in formulating diets with the correct amount of protein for poultry as they form feathers and carcass tissue. The latter is illustrated in the section on nutritive value. B. Composition Feathers are about 87% protein (MacAlpine & Payne, 1977; Baker et al., 1981), which is primarily (80-90%) keratin (Harrap & Woods, 1964). Keratin is classified as an albuminoid or sclero-protein because it is insoluble in water, salt solutions, dilute acids and alkalis, and alcohol (Fruton & Simmonds, 1960; West et al., 1970). The albuminoids are the least soluble of all of the proteins. Schor & Krimm (1961) postulated that

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

179

NH2
/

CH2-CH-COOH

'\

CH2-CH-COOH NH2

LANTHIONINE
FIG.

8-1. Structural formula for lanthionine-the end product of cystine hydrolysis after heat and pressure treatment of feather meal.

feather keratin consists of a p-helix, an extended chain that coils to form a helix of relatively large pitch. These helices aggregate by hydrogen bonding to form cylindrical units that associate into cable-like structures, with the disulfide bonds from cystine stabilizing the cylindrical units into the cables (Schor & Krimm, 1961). Readers are referred to West et al. (1970) for a detailed description of the keratin structure as revealed by X-ray analysis. Older literature (Block & Bolling, 1951; Schor & Krimm, 1961) cite keratins as having 88% cystine by weight. With a protein content estimated to be about 72% in raw feathers, that would indicate cystine (CYS) to be in excess of 12% of the total protein. During the autodaving process, the abundant CYS in feather meal is reduced to about 4% of the product, although this can vary depending upon the process. Most feather meals prepared in research laboratories have a CYS content ranging from 398 to 42% of the protein (Jackson & Fulton, 1971; MacAlpine & Payne, 1977; Baker et al., 1981). Manuals listing the nutrient composition of feedstuffs indicate CYS to be 4% of the 864% protein in commercial feather meal (NAS-NRC, 1984). The CYS is converted to lanthionine (Fig. 8-1) when the feathers are subjected to heat and pressure. Papadopoulos et al. (1985) determined that CYS was reduced by 20-30% and lanthionine increased by 40% on increasing the processing time from 30 to 70 min. Other amino acids showed no change during autodaving. Assuming the D-isomer of lanthionine (Fig. 8-1) is totally inactive, then about 64% of the L-form is probably available (Robbins et al., 1980). Disulfide bonding within the keratin protein of feathers, which occurs with a large percentage of the amino acid CYS, is responsible for the inability of animals to digest feathers, and also that bonding resists break-

180

D. Polin

TABLE 8-1
A COMPARISON OF CHICK GROWTH USING VARIOUS RAW AND PROCESSED FEATHER MEALS

Type of diet
Isolated soybean protein + amino acids b Commercial feather meal A + amino acids Commercial feather meal B + amino acids Commercial feather meal C + amino acids Feathers, 30min @ 121C (no pressure) Feathers, l8h @ 121C (no pressure) Raw feathers

Weight at 3 wks of age

164 154 157 156

58 125 53

Adopted from Moran et af. (1966). bS upplementing with the amino acids methionine, lysine, histidine and tryptophan that are the essential limiting amino acids.

down by bacteria in the rumen of ruminants. An example of the type of growth response obtained with raw versus processed feather meal is provided in Table 8-1.

c. Products Feathers have found their way into diets for animals, particularly poultry, and are used in clothing and bedding, and for fly fishing. The reader is referred to the anatomical book by Lucas & Stettenheim (1972) for the detailed structure and classification of feathers, particularly the 'down' feathers. The latter are used as insulation, particularly in cold weather clothing and sleeping bags, and for ornamentation in millinery products. The contour feathers and the down feathers are used for stuffing pillows, thus providing non-edible poultry products. The down feathers are the small fluffy or lax feathers with extremely short or absent rachis. They lack the hooklets on the barbules that are long and slender. Contour and remax (wing) feathers are utilized in archery for arrows. Domestic geese provide the most highly prized downs, but chickens, particularly females, are also a good source. However, water fowl provide the greatest percentage of downs on a body-weight basis. The downs are evenly distributed over the surface of the chicken and comprise about 30-80% of the feathers, depending upon the source of the feather tract (Lucas & Stettenheim, 1972). Other feathers, such as the contour feathers, after-feathers, and the lower sections associated with the closely knit upper pennaceous part of the feather, all have downy characteristics that are useful for insulation and softness.

Feathers. Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

181

III. FEATHER MEAL

A. Definition

'Hydrolyzed Poultry Feathers is the product resulting from the treatment under pressure of clean, undecomposed feathers from slaughtered poultry, free of additives, and/or accelerators. Not less than 75% of its crude protein content must be digestible by the pepsin digestibility method' (AAFCO, 1988).
B. Production Process

Feather meal is prepared by autoclaving or cooking the feathers and then driving off the excess water to create a dry product that is ground to be free flowing. This process requires a closed (pressure) cooker in which the raw feathers are subjected to live steam at 2,8-3,5 kg/cm 2 (40-60 psi) for 3060 min at 140-153C (Brinkley & Vasak, 1950; Thomas & Beeson, 1977). Then the pressure is removed and the slurry cooked for about one hour to remove excess water. The hydrolyzed feathers are passed through a steam tube to remove any additional water, yielding a product with 6-8% moisture (Thomas & Beeson, 1977). Finally, the feathers are ground to produce a free-flowing meal and are packaged having met the requirements of the Association of American Feed Control Officials, an industrial, non-governmental, self-regulating organization.

C. Composition A typical analysis of hydrolyzed feather meal is shown in Table 8-2. It is high in protein, but has very low percentages of certain essential amino acids including HIS, LYS, and MET. It is high in sodium, sulfur, and selenium in relation to the concentrations in most feeds. Furthermore, it is low in calcium and potassium. It has a low but tolerable metabolizable energy value, and is low in fiber. These nutritional characteristics create limitations for the use of feather meal.
D. Nutritive Value of Feathers

Scott et al. (1982) calculated the daily protein requirements for growing White Leghorn chickens using data on daily gains, body weight, digestibility, and feather weight of the bird. The requirements are based on 7% of the total body weight gain going into feathers that have 82% protein, with the digestibility of the diet at 61 %. The formula for meat-type chickens uses 67% efficiency for digestibility. Utilizing these values, the daily protein requirement for feathers at 4 or more weeks of age can be

182

D. Polin

AVERAGE ANALYSIS OF HYDROLYZED FEATHER MEAL (FM)" ITS ESSENTIAL AMINO ACIDS, AND HOW THEY COMPARE TO THE NEEDS OF LAYING HENS

TABLE 8-2

Item

Percent value

Amino acids!

% of Protein

AlB

A in FMb

B RqdC

Dry matter (%) Crude protein (%) MEn (kcal/kg), Ether extract (%) Crude fiber (%) Ca (%) P, total (%) K (%) Na (%) CI (%) S (%) Fe (mg/kg) Cu (mg/kg) Zn (mg/kg) Se (mg/kg)
a(NAS-NRC, 1984).

93 864 2360 33 10 033 055 031 071 028 150 760 70 540 084

Histidine Arginine Methionine Phenylalanine Threonine Isoleucine Leucine Lysine Tryptophan Valine MET + CYS Cystine

034 542 042 326 3-43 326 672 167 050 557 442 400

039 627 049 377 397 377 778 193 058 645 512 463

20 50 20 46 32 40 78 43 09 40 36 16

020d 125 024 082 124 094 100 045 064 1-61

142 289

bConverting the percent of the amino acid in FM to its value as a percent of the protein. CRequirements stated are the amino acid needed as a percent of the protein by laying chickens (Scott et al., 1982). dThe 020 indicates that HIS is at only 20% of the protein required by the laying hen, and thus inadequate. Values equal to I or more are adequate or in excess, respectively. 'MEn; n indicates nitrogen corrected.

calculated using the following formula: Protein required for feather growth = (0'07) x daily gain (g) x 082 0.67

The accuracy of the formula to predict protein needed for feathers is obviously dependent upon the precision and accuracy of each of the values in the formula. As one can discern from the brief review on feather yields, the values are only estimates and need additional confirmation as to the particular strain of bird on which the protein estimates are to be applied. The most limiting nutritional chracteristic of hydrolyzed feather meal is its inadequate essential amino acid profile for growth by rats (Routh, 1942) and poultry (Summers et aI., 1965; Potter & Shelton, 1978; Bielorai et at., 1982). Its success for feeding ruminants has been mixed (Jordan &

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

183

Croom, 1957; Thomas & Beeson, 1977; Church et al., 1982; Waltz et aI., 1989). A diet containing feather meal as the sole source of protein had a net protein value (a measure of protein quality determined in growth assays comparing nitrogen input to nitrogen output in excreta of poultry fed diets with and without protein) of263% as compared to a net protein value of 561 % for a corn-soybean meal diet (Fisher et al., 1962). The low digestibility (50-55%) of feather meal (Parsons et al., 1982; Bielorai et al., 1983), with only about 50% of the amino acids being absorbed, as compared to 85% for soybean meal (Bielorai et al., 1983) demonstrates the problem with its use in diets. Use of up to 6% feather meal without supplementation of essential amino acids reduced weight gains of meattype chickens (MacAlpine & Payne, 1977). However, when feather meal replaced soybean meal on the assumption of 50% availability, about 10% less abdominal fat was deposited without any sacrifice in weight gain (Cabel et al., 1987). This occurred during the last 14 days before the meat-type chickens were marketed. The diets met the nutrient requirements of NRC for meat-type chickens. Further studies are needed with feather meal to indicate if less fat is also deposited in the skin and other carcass areas so that poultry meat would have less fat as purchased. The use of higher protein-lower caloric diets to reduce carcass fat is an established fact, but is of limited value commercially because no price incentive is available for using more expensive diets to reduce carcass fat on finished poultry. Much of the difficulty for defining the quality of feather meal in earlier years was due to the lack of knowledge regarding the relationship of the amino acid pattern in feedstuffs in comparison to the pattern within the diet and the requirements of the animal. However, Sibbald et at.. (1962) recognized the limitation of feather meal in diets by noting its substituting ability for protein sources to be very poor in poultry diets low in protein and very good for diets high in protein. Table 8-2 reveals how current information allows such comparisons to be made. It lists the proportion of the essential amino acids in feather meal in comparison to the proportion needed in the diet for optimum egg production (Scott et al., 1982). Values under 100 indicate the essential amino acids that are limiting, while values above 100 indicate those that are in excess of requirements. The values in the last column of Table 8-2 reveal that HIS, MET, LYS, TRY, and PHE are limiting, with HIS being the most limiting amino acid for laying hens. HIS from feather meal accounts for only 020 (20%) of that needed in the diet (Table 8-2). The order of these essential amino acids is different when meat-type

184

D. Polin

TABLE 8-3
A COMPARISON OF THE MOST LIMITING AMINO ACIDS IN FEATHER MEAL CONSIDERED FOR LAYING-HEN REQUIREMENTS CHANGE THEIR STATUS WHEN COMPARED TO THE NEEDS FOR MEAT-TYPE (BROILER) CHICKENS

Amino acid

A in FMa

B Reqdb

AlB

MET HIS LYS TRY PHE

a FM

0486 039 193 058 377

=

1,8-2,2 1-4-1,5 4'7-5'2 09-1'0 30-3,1

027-022 028-026 041-004 064-058 130-121

bReqd

feather meal. Based on NAS-NRC table (1984). See Table 8-2 for explanation.

chickens are considered. Based on the NAS-NRC (1984) tables, a comparison of the amino acid pattern to meet the requirements of broilers can be made. This is illustrated by the data in Table 8-3, which shows that MET and HIS are the most limiting amino acids for broilers, while PHE is no longer limiting. The expectation of these mathematical calculations, particularly for growth, appear to be justified based on a review of experimental data (Moran et al., 1966; Luong & Payne, 1977; Baker et aI., 1981). Studies on the availability of limiting amino acids in feather meal revealed MET to be as low as 35% (Oh et al., 1972) or as high as 73% (Parsons et aI., 1982), and LYS at 73-89% (MacAlpine & Payne, 1977; Nordheim & Coon, 1984). All essential amino acids in feather meal were available at 71 % and non-essential amino acids at 66% (Papadopoulos et al., 1985). Thus, hydrolyzed feather meal has a limited use in animal diets unless the limiting essential amino acids are provided by supplementation, or by depending upon other animal protein sources to make up the deficiency.
IV. HACKLE FEATHERS FOR FLY TYING

A. Use Certain back-yard roosters that once roamed about the farm yard are in special demand, but not for reproduction purposes. Most of these barnyard roosters do not carry the special genes for high intensity egg production to pass onto their female offspring. Instead, these are the motley colored male chickens that any commercial egg producer would discard. But that variegated colored feathering is exactly what makes them prized

Feathers. Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

185

for a multi-million dollar business. Although they are prized for their feathers, it is not just any feathers. The feathers that are in demand are those about the neck (hackle feathers) that comprise the dorsal cervical tract (Lucas & Stettenheim, 1972). According to the latter authors, hackle feathers comprise 156% of the total feathers on the chicken. The feathers find their way into wet and dry flies for fly fishing. The demand is greater for flys that float on the water and stay dry, which means that the feathers have a water-resistant quality. Breeding for these special males to fill the demand for fly tying is now a speciality business. Some farms specialize in supplying the industry with hackle feathers for fly tying. In addition, these and other farms sell the baby chicks so that a fly tyer can raise his own birds to supply his needs to produce the flys that he sells. Some of the species of birds used for fly tying include the Andalusian blue-dunn, Indian Grey Jungle Fowl, Vulturine Guinea Fowl, Golden Pheasant, mongrel breeds of crosses that yield multi-colored roosters, and on occasion, the hackle feathers from slaughter plants in which the feathers are multi-colored, as is the case with Barred Plymouth Rocks. Because the roles are reversed in that the feathers are the primary product and the meat secondary, and because the industry is small with a high dollar value, the carcasses are either dispersed to needy families, used as food on the farms in which the roosters are raised, or discarded via waste pits. Some specialization and expansion is now occurring, and with sufficient carcasses available the intent is to supply the carcasses to the rendering industry. In 1990, a neck of hackle feathers sold for as little as $13 or as much as $60, depending upon the quality and color of the feathers. Obviously the value of the rooster for its feathers far exceeds its value for meat. A tied fly can range in value from a few dollars to as much as hundreds of dollars. Figure 8-2 illustrates that the colors of the feathers are quite varied. Fly fishermen require certain flys to use for specific fishing conditions. In addition, the ability to tie a fly rests with the 'quality' of the feathers used (Talleur, 1979), since sheen, length of the barbs on the feather, uniformity of the barbs along the shaft, the number and size of the barbules that hold the bards together, and the stiffness of the quill, all enter into the quality of the feather to be used for fly tying. All of these are genetically determined, and raising these birds to obtain the highest quality feathers is now a demanding aspect of what was once a discarded product from the poultry industry.

186

D. Polin

v.

BLOOD MEAL (BM)

A. Definition There are two types of blood meal whose definition depends upon the process (sprayed dried or flash dried) used to prepare the feedstuff.

Sprayed Dried Animal Blood-is produced from clean, fresh animal blood, exclusive of all extraneous material such as hair (sic . .. feathers) stomach belching, urine (sic . .. not a problem with poultry, but would refer to excreta), except in such cases as might occur unavoidably in good factory practice. Moisture is removed from the blood by a low temperature evaporator under vacuum until it contains approximately 30% solids. It is then dried by spraying into a draft of warm, dry air which reduces the blood to finely divided particles with a maximum moisture of 8% and a minimum crude protein of 85%. It must be designated according to its minimum water solubility (AAFCO, 1988). Blood Meal, Flash Dried-is produced from clean, fresh animal blood, exclusive of all extraneous material, such as hair, stomach belchings and urine, except in such traces as might occur unavoidably in good manufacturing processes. A large portion of the moisture (water) is usually removed by a mechanical dewatering process or by condensing by cooking to semi-solid state. The semi-solid mass is then transferred to a rapid drying facility where the more tightly bound water is rapidly removed. Then minimum biological activity of lysine shall be 80% (AAFCO, 1988).
B. Availability Blood loss at slaughter is about 31-42% (female versus male) of the body weight, accounting for about 50% of the blood in the bird (Moran, 1977). It comprises about 30-40% of poultry by-products on a wet-weight basis (offal) from slaughter plants. However, blood is about 90% water so its contribution to offal is estimated to be only about 3% on a dry-weight basis. Dried blood meal and offal (poultry by-product meal) each have their own specific protein and amino acid patterns, and are available as separate products for use by the animal nutritionist. C. Production Process Blood meals prepared by seven different methods (spray, flash, DeLavalAnderson, DeLaval-Conventional, continuous, and Pflauder) were shown to be superior to vat or fast conventional drying procedures when tested

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

187

NUTRIENT CONTENT OF SPRAY-DRIED BLOOD MEAL (BM)" ITS ESSENTIAL AMINO ACIDS AND HOW THEY COMPARE TO THE NEEDS OF LAYING HENS

TABLE 8-4

Item

Percent value

Amino acids"

Percent ofBMc

% of Protein
A inBM B Rqdd

AjB

Dry matter (%) Crude protein (%) MEn (kcaljkg) Ether extract (%) Crude fiber (%) Ca (%) P, total (%) K (%) Na (%) CI (%) S (%) Fe (mgjkg) Cu (mgjkg) Zn (mgjkg) Se (mgjkg)

93 889 34200 10 06 006 009 041 033 027 032 30000 80 3060

Histidine Arginine Methionine Phenylalanine Threonine Isoleucine Leucine Lysine Tryptophan Valine MET + CYS Cystine

526 3-81 075 655 394 088 1182 885 134 860 1-61 086

592 429 084 737 443 099 1329 996 151 967 1-81 097

20 50 20 46 32 40 78 43 09 40 3-6 16

296 086 042 160 138 025 170 232 167 241 050 060

"(NAS-NRC, 1984). bEssential amino acids. CRequirements stated are by egg-type laying chickens (Scott et al., 1982). dSee Table 8-2 for explanation.

with turkeys (Kramer & Waibel, 1978). The primary differences in the seven methods were shorter drying times and lower, equal, or higher temperatures, depending upon the process. Vat and fast conventional methods have drying procedures using temperatures of less than 200C and a long heating time (4-12 h), resulting in an inferior product compared to that from the other methods. Up to 6% of the diet could include the blood meal without depressing growth (Kramer & Waibel, 1978). Drying temperatures of 200-500C, and drying times of less than 5 min are associated with the flash, ring, and spray methods. A temperature of less than 100C with a 5 min drying time is characteristic of the Pfaudler system. LYS analysis in vitro and in vivo were used as a basis for a quality check (Kramer & Waibel, 1978).
D. Nutritive Value The amino acid pattern of blood meal is provided in Table 8-4 along with a comparison with the amino acid pattern of the dietary essential amino

188

D. Polin

THE ESSENTIAL AMINO ACIDS THAT ARE LIMITING IN BLOOD MEAL (BM) AS COMPARED TO THEIR NEED IN THE DIET FOR MEAT-TYPE CHICKENS (BROILERS)

TABLE 8-5

Amino acid

A inBM

B Reqd

AlB'

ILEU MET ARG

099 075 429

33-35 18-22 5,5-63

030-028 041-034 0,77-0,68

aSee Table 8-2 for explanation of amino acid as percent of protein in BM versus amino acid as percent of requirement in diet, A/B.

acids needed for laying hens. Based on the nutrient composition of spraydried blood meal, one notes that the protein concentration is very high. Energy value (ME) is in the range of corn meal, and the fiber and fat contents are very low. Blood meal is an excellent source of iron and zinc. Its essential amino acid pattern for feeding laying hens reveals ILEU to be the most limiting amino acid with MET and ARG being the second and third most limiting, respectively. It has an excellent TRY and LYS concentration. If blended with feather meal, which has a high cystine and a low TRY and LYS concentration, the amino acid patterns complement each other. When blood meal is considered for diets of meat-type birds, one has to consider the same essential amino acids that are limiting for laying hens, as shown in Table 8-5. Because plant protein sources are most often deficient in LYS, blood meal with its high LYS/Protein concentration serves as a source for this amino acid when it can compete in price with commercial-grade LYSHel, while taking into consideration that it also supplies other nutrients. Formulation of diets are developed using least-cost procedures determined by linear programming.
VI. INEDIBLE POULTRY BY-PRODUCT MEAL (PBPM)

A. Definition
Poultry By-Product Meal consists of the ground, rendered, clean parts of the carcass of slaughtered poultry, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs, and intestines, exclusive of feathers, except in such amounts as might occur unavoidably in good processing practices. The label shall include guarantees for minimum crude protein, minimum crude fat, maximum crude fiber, minimum phosphorus (P), and minimum and

Feathers. Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

189

maximum calcium (Ca). The calcium (Ca) level shall not exceed the actual level of phosphorus (P) by more than 2.2 times (AAFCO, 1988). B. PBPM Availability Poultry by-product meal generally is comprised of the entire digestive tract, reproductive organs, lungs, kidneys, head, and lower legs. It accounts for 97 (female) to 103% (male) of the live weight of a mediumsized turkey at 18 weeks of age, weighing 59 and 88 kg, respectively (Moran, 1977; Salmon, 1979), and about 12-13% for meat-type chickens at 7 weeks of age (Moran, 1977). These are the common slaughtering ages.

C. Nutritive Value Poultry by-product meal can enhance the nutritive value of feather meal (Naber, 1961; Naber et al., 1961; Jackson, 1971; Jackson & Fulton, 1971). A combination of the two products assaying at 559% crude protein was accepted at 125% in diets for laying hens without any adverse effect on egg production or food intake (Jackson, 1971). In a subsequent experiment, Jackson and Fulton (1971) found that meat-type chickens were not adversely influenced by replacing fish meal with a feather meal-offal meal combination at up to 10% of the diet. Poultry by-product meal (PBPM) is a very good source of protein, rivaling meat meal and fish meal, whose crude protein concentrations average 55 and 62%, respectively (Table 8-6). The caloric value is moderately low, despite a high fat (ether extract) content of 13%. Calcium, iron, potassium, and zinc are in good supply, as well as selenium. There are four moderately deficient essential amino acids when considered for the laying hen, namely, PRE, MET, and ILEU & LEU (Table 8-6). The total of the sulfur amino acids (MET + CYS) is also moderately deficient for the laying hen. In this case, the essential amino acid MET must be added to account for 2% of the protein, and then the remaining 16% can be either MET or CYS. The latter can be supplied by feather meal that has a very high CYS content, provided the amount of MET is not diluted to below the required percentages. When considering the requirements for the meat-type chicken that has a very demanding growth requirement, the data in Table 8-7 indicate that most essential amino acids are met by the use ofPBPM. The most limiting essential amino acid is LYS, and there is a requirement for CYS to fulfill the total sulfur amino acid requirement that could also be fulfilled by MET. Thus, PBPM can be successfully used in diets for meat-type

190

D. Polin

THE NUTRITIVE VALUE OF POULTRY BY-PRODUCT MEAL (PBPM)" AND ITS COMPARISON TO THAT NEEDED BY THE LAYING HEN

TABLE 8-6

Item

Percent value

Amino acids"

Percent ofBM

% of Protein

A/B

A inBM

Rq~

Dry matter (%) Crude protein (%) MEn (kcal/kg) Ether extract (%) Crude fiber (%) Ca (%) P, total (%) K (%) Na (%) Cl (%) S (%) Fe (mg/kg) Cu (mg/kg) Zn (mg/kg) Se (mg/kg)
a(NAS-NRC, 1984).

93 580 26700 130 20 300 170 030 040 054 051 4400 140 1200 075

Histidine Arginine Methionine Phenylalanine Threonine Isoleucine Leucine Lysine Tryptophan Valine MET + CYS Cystine

150 400 100 210 200 200 370 270 053 260 169 069

259 690 172 362 3-45 3-45 638 466 091 448 291 119

20 50 20 46 32 40 78 43 09 40

130 138 086 079 108 086 082 108 101 1-12 080 074

3-6 16

b Requirements stated are by egg-type laying chickens (Scott et al., 1982). See Table 8-2 for explanation.

chickens along with other animal protein, or to improve the amino acid profile of plant-type protein sources.
VII. POULTRY HATCHERY BY-PRODUCT

A. Definition

Poultry Hatchery By-Product is a mixture of egg shells, infertile, and unhatched eggs, and culled chicks which have been cooked, dried, and ground, with or without the removal of the fat (AAFCO, 1988).
B. Effect of Source on Nutritive Value Each source of hatchery waste (turkey, meat-type, and egg-type) differ in their nutritive value because of the proportion of birds to egg wastes. Both sexes of meat-type chicks and turkeys are used in grow-out operations; whereas, the males of the egg-type chick are destroyed at the hatchery for

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

191

THE AMINO ACID PATTERN OF POULTRY BY-PRODUCT MEAL (PBPM) IN COMPARISON TO THE REQUIRED PATTERN NEEDED BY MEAT-TYPE CHICKENS

TABLE 8-7

Amino acids

Percent ofPBPM

Percent of Protein A in PBPM 259 690 172 362 3-45 3-45 638 466 091 448 2-91 120 B Rqd 12-15 55-63 17-19 30-32 36-38 33-35 55-59 47-52 09-10 34-36 3-3-40 15-24

AlB"

Histidine Arginine Methionine Phenylalanine Threonine Isoleucine Leucine Lysine Tryptophan Valine MET + CYS Cystine
aS ee footnote to Table 8-2.

150 400 100 210 200 200 370 270 053 260 169 069

216-173 125-109 101-091 121-113 096-091 103-099 116-108 099-089 101-091 131-124 088-072 080-0-41

waste. Thus, hatchery products from the egg-type operations will have more body protein and less shell contents than those from the meat-type and turkey hatcheries. For example, on a dry-weight basis, crude protein accounts for 222 versus 323%, and calcium 246 versus 172% of the hatchery waste from meat-type and egg-type hatchery waste, respectively (Vandepopuliere et aI., 1977). The USDA (1990) reported the following data for the 1989 hatch: Meat-type birds hatched = 594 billion (B), and usable = 527 B Egg-type birds hatched = 384 million (M); Turkeys hatched = 209 M Based on these figures, some estimates of the total potential hatchery wastes can be calculated. Meat-type eggs that hatched yielded (based on the above data) 670 M wasted chicks. At 140z/chick this amounts to (USA) 29313 tons of wet matter. Eggs set, based on an 82 % hatch, were 724 B, and this at an estimated 18% waste would yield l3 039B eggs. At an estimated 56 g/egg (some weight loss during hatch) the yield is calculated to be 80417 tons (USA) of wet matter. So, the total wet-weight hatchery wastes for meat-type chicks in 1989 is estimated to be 109730 tons (USA) wet matter. Using estimated data on egg-type chicks (hatch @ 87%, 45% of the hatch is usable females, egg weight @ 53 g),

192

D. Polin

the calculated hatchery wastes are estimated at 7380 tons of male chicks, 590 tons of female chicks, and 2203 tons of eggs = 10 173 tons (USA) of wet matter. Turkey waste from non-hatched eggs (based on a 70% hatch, and an 80 g egg (some HP lost) is 10 918 tons (USA) of wet matter. Poults lost at hatch (assumes 11 % not placed, poult weight at 65 g) is 2274 tons (USA). Therefore, total turkey hatchery wastes have a potential of 13 193 tons (USA). Adding the hatchery waste potential from meat-type and egg-type chickens with those of turkeys, yields are estimated at 133096 tons (USA) of wet matter. The moisture content of meat-type hatchery and egg-type waste was determined to be 65 and 71 %, respectively, and protein concentrations in the dried products to be 222 and 32 3%, respectively (Vandepopuliere et a!., 1977). The waste produced by each hatchery will vary considerably depending upon the type of eggs being set. Therefore, the nutritive value of these products is not uniform, making it difficult to arrive at a consensus for average values to be placed in tables of nutritive composition of feedstuffs. Wisman (1964) used 46% in diets for meat-type birds, and up to 15-16% was incorporated in diets for laying hen without any adverse effects (Wisman & Beane, 1965; Vandepopuliere et a!., 1977). The limitation for its use is the high calcium content. The wastes were dried using a triple pass dehydrator. Recent use of extruders operating at 140C with retention time of 10 s and a feeding line of 53 kg/min resulted in a chip-like product when the hatchery waste is blended wet with ground yellow corn at 75/25. The final product is 10-11 % moisture reduced from 60% for the hatchery product. The microbial count of the finished product after standing in air was 50 cfu/g, and a standard plate count of 0'95, with no Salmonella detected (Miller, 1984). The crude protein percentage averages from 222 to 32'3%, calcium from 172-246%, fat at 9'9-18%, phosphorus 033-0'6%, MET at 1,9-3,38% and LYS 41-57% of protein, depending upon the source from a meattype or egg-type hatchery (Wisman, 1964; Vandepopuliere, et ai., 1977).
VIII. OTHER POULTRY WASTES-HATCHERY WASTES, DEAD BIRDS, WASTAGE FROM EGG-BREAKING PLANTS, AND SLAUGHTER-HOUSE WASTES

A. Definition There are no product names assigned to several poultry waste products by AAFCO because of insufficient data, and their relative newness in recycl-

Feathers. Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

193

ing. These products are receiving attention by researchers, and some methodologies to allow recycling are still under development. B. Product Development for Recycling Hatchery Wastes, Dead Birds, Wastage from Egg Breaking Plants, and Slaughter-House Wastes Use of extruders for processing poultry wastes as feathers, hatchery wastes, and whole birds from mortality, spent hens (hens sold after laying declines), egg-shell wastes, and poultry by-product from processing plants opens a promising route for recycling these wastes into animal feed (Said, 1989). The use of the extruder to process semi-solid items (moisture to be in the range of 20-30%) at high temperatures of 140-160C, results in a low moisture (water driven off by steam), sterile product (Said, 1989). A high moisture waste material, as feathers direct from processing, are drained of free water, pressed and ground, and then blended with an enzyme to partially hydrolyze the keratin of the feathers. Finally, a dry feed product as ground yellow corn or soybean meal, depending upon the nutritive value of the final product desired, is blended in to optimize the moisture for the extruder. Other waste items, such as whole dead birds, do not need the enzyme treatment, but do need grinding to convert bone into small particles that can be handled by the extruder. The final products obtained through this procedure appear to have high nutritive value with excellent digestibility (Said, 1989). Current studies at poultry departments on these extruded products indicate favorable results with complete removal of the bacterial load (Vandepopuliere, 1988). One other favorable result of extrusion is the destruction of molds and the elimination of mold toxins, such as aflatoxin, by pretreatment with ammonia prior to hightemperature extrusion (Harper, 1981). C. Waste from Egg-Breaking Plants Eggshell waste is estimated at 200 million pounds from egg-breaking plants and is another product that has not yet received sufficient attention to be officially recognized in tables of nutrient composition. It comes from egg breakers and initially contains 59% water, and after centrifuging about 16% water. Analysis of the centrifuged material revealed 53% protein, 367% Ca, ash at 94%, and an amino acid profile that is excellent for MET and LYS (Walton et al., 1973). The high calcium and low protein concentrations limit its use in diets for meat-type chickens and turkeys. As a meal in diets for laying chickens it can be used to replace limestone, and

194

D. Polin

the protein is equivalent in quality from that of wheat middlings and meat and bone meal (Vandepopuliere et al., 1975). There is about a 5% breakage of whole eggs processed in egg cartoning plants (Britton, et al., 1986). This material analyzes at about 54% fat, 29% moisture, and 10% protein according to Britton et al. (1986). These researchers showed that extrusion reduced the bacterial count lOOO-fold and destroyed Salmonella and E. coli that was added by innoculation. Prior to extrusion of eggshell wastes, they may be blended with other feed products to improve the nutrient quality of the final extruded product. When processed. In that manner, greater percentages of the extruded product can be used in the final diet. The problem with eggshell wastes is their susceptibility to growth of molds and bacteria before the wastes can be extruded. Another problem is the lack of standardization of the product which limits its use by the industry. Thus, a decision should be made as to how the wastes will or will not be blended with other feedstuffs to derive a uniform product with a nutrient profile that could be widely distributed and used. In eggbreaking plants wash water contains egg albumen. This excellent protein is a detriment to the water-cleansing process. Its removal prior to water discharge and its subsequent concentration provides an opportunity to capture a nutritious product that could be recycled into animal feed. Recent tests indicate that the foam collection procedure yields the highest recovery of any method tried thus far. The reader is referred to several publications, released by Said (1989) as Insta-Pro Update, that summarize recent developments in this area of capturing wastes from processing plants.

IX. SUMMARY
Utilization of by-products from food industries for use in diets has been one method by which the poultry industry has kept feed costs competitive to provide eggs and meat at relatively low cost to the consumer. Inedible products from slaughter plants have been converted to edible food for poultry. Such recycling required much research. With careful inspection to avoid recycling contaminants, the poultry industry has continued to gain consumer acceptance. In 1991, poultry products exceeded red meat and pork as the leading protein sources on a per capita basis in the USA. Although a low carcass fat content has played a role in its acceptance, the low cost of poultry as a source of protein has been and continues to be a major factor.

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

195

Who would have thought that inedible feathers would become an edible product to recycle back into animal diets? In this chapter the feather's structure and composition is discussed so that one can understand the manufacturing process that makes these feathers usable as a feather meal (FM). In addition, the nutrient limitations of FM are considered so that one can also determine how to use this product in any animal's diet. Knowing its essential amino acid composition, which is presented, and the needs of the animal, allows one to formulate diets with FM. Its use in the diets for meat-type and egg-type chickens is illustrated with tables, indicating how its essential amino acids must be considered to gain optimum use of the product. Furthermore, the yields of feathers from poultry and their nutrient composition is considered. Substituting this information into a given equation allows one to estimate the nutrient requirements of the growing chicken so that its need for protein in the diet to make feathers can be matched by that put into the diet. Feathers are more important for fly fishing than the meat of the chicken. The use of certain feathers for fly tying is discussed. Also considered is how a small but growing industry to supply feathers for fly tying can influence use of what was once considered a waste product from motley multicolored chickens. When one considers that the nape (hackle) feathers can have a value as much as 50 times that of the meat, then meat becomes the waste product in this niche of an industry. What happens to this meat is discussed, along with what considerations the future holds. Feathers also playa role in clothing, sporting equipment, and bedding. The use of these down and remax feathers is discussed; they can constitute as much as 80% of the feathers on a bird. Blood meal is a standardized product from slaughter plants. Its processing is discussed, and how processing influences its nutritive value. Its use alone, as a supplement in diets, or its combination with inedible poultry by-product meal is considered. The latter utilizes the waste parts of poultry that do not go into human food channels. Both are excellent sources of protein, but the limitations on essential amino acids for blood meal, and how this blends with the poultry by-product meal is provided. Recent processing using extrusion machinery is discussed for producing a sterile product that may find its use in different animal diets. Poultry hatcheries have considerable waste that must be handled once the eggs hatch. There are dead poultry at hatch, eggs with embryos that did not hatch, shells remaining from hatched egs, and infertile eggs. Data are provided to show that hatchery waste based on 1989 figures account for 133265 tons (USA) of wet matter. This considerable output has the

196

D. Polin

potential for being recycled back into poultry diets. The nutritive value of these products is considered, with current research indicating a sterile nutritious product can be produced. Wastes from eggbreaking plants, slaughter-house wastes in the wash water, and dead birds on factory farms are all being considered for recycling. Recent techniques using recovery methodology, and processing the captured waste thorugh extrusion machinery are presented to show how sterile, nutritious products can be obtained. Limitation in the amount of product available may be overcome by eventually making machinery cost effective in size to match the amount to be recycled. With environmental concerns prodding the poultry industry to find new methods for recycling its wastes, the poultry industry is approaching the time when the only loss will be the bird's crow or cluck. And those sounds can be captured on a tape or CD, to be played if desired.

x.

REFERENCES

AAFCO (1988). Animal Products, Vo1.9, p. 264. Association of American Feed Control Officials, Charleston, Vancouver. BAKER, D., BLITENTHAL, R.C., BOEBEL, K.P., CZARNECKI, G.L., SOUTHERN, L.L. & WILLIS, G.M. (1981). Protein-amino acid evaluation of steam-processed feather meal. Poult. Sci. 60, 1865. BmLORAI, R., IOSIF, B., NEUMARK, H. & ALUMoT, E. (1982). Low nutritional value of feather-meal protein for chicks. J. Nutr. 112, 249. BmLORAI, R., HORDUF, Z., IOSIF, B. & ALUMONT, E. (1983). Apparent amino acid absorption from feather meal by chicks. Brit. J. Nutr. 49, 395. BLOCK, R.J. & BOLLING, D. (1951). The Amino Acid Composition of Proteins and Foods. Charles e. Thomas, Springfield, Ohio. BRINKLEY, C.H. & VASAK, O.R. (1950). Production of a Friable Meal from Feathers. U.S. Dept Agric., Agric. Res. Servo Bull. #AIC-274. BRITTON, D.E., VANDEPOPULIERE, J.M. & COTTERILL, O.J. (1986). Deep-fat frying inedible eggs for use in animal feeds. Poult. Sci. 65, 935. CABEL, M.e., GooDWIN, T.L. & WALDROUP, P.W. (1987). Reduction in abdominal fat content of broiler chickens by the addition of feather meal to finisher diets. Poult. Sci. 66, 1644. CHuRCH, D.C., DAUGHERTY, D.A. & KENNICK, W.H. (1982). Nutritional evaluation of feather and hair meals as protein sources for ruminants. J. Anim. Sci. 54, 337. CLAYTON, G.A., NIXEY, e. & MONAGHAN, G. (1978). Meat yields in turkeys. Brit. Poult. Sci. 19, 755. FISHER, H., SUMMERS, J.D., WESSELS, H.P.H. & SHAPIRO, R. (1962). Further evaluation of proteins for the growing chicken by the carcass retention method. J. Sci. Food Agric. 13, 658. FRUTON, J.S. & SIMMONDS, S. (1960). General Biochemistry. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.

Feathers, Feather Meal and Other Poultry By-Products

197

HARPER, M.J. (1981). Extrusion of Foods, Vols.1 & 2. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida. HARRAP, B.S. & WOODS, E.F. (1964). Soluble derivatives of feather keratin. 2. Molecular weight and confirmation. Biochem. J. 92, 19. JACKSON, N. (1971). Composition of feather and offal meal and its value as a protein supplement in the diet of caged laying hens. J. Sci. Food Agric. 22, 43. JACKSON, N. & FULTON, R.B. (1971). Composition of feather and offal meal and its value as a protein supplement in the diet of broilers. J. Sci. Food Agric. 22, 38. JAPP, R.G. & TURNER, K. (1943). Number of feathers on different breeds and varieties. U.S. Egg Poult. Mag. 49, 74. JORDAN, R.M. & CROOM, H.G. (1957). Feather meal as a source of protein for fattening lambs. J. Anim. Sci. 16, 118. KRAMER, S.L. & WAIBEL, P.E. (1978). Lysine availability of blood meals as influenced by processing and the effect of feeding ring or spray blood meal to turkey poults. Minn. Turkey Res. Rpt. 165, 35. Agric. Expt. Sta., U. MN. LUCAS, A.M. & STETTENHEIM, P.R. (1972). Structure of the Feathers. In Avian Anatomy, Integument, Part 1, Ch.5 Agric. Handbook 362. Avian Anatomy Project, Poultry Branch Animal Science Research Division, Agric. Res. Service, USDA. LUONG, V.B. & PAYNE, c.G. (1977). Hydrolyzed feather meal as a source of amino acids for laying hens. Brit. Poult. Sci. 18, 523. MACALPINE, R. & PAYNE, C.G. (1977). Hydrolyzed feather protein as a source of amino acids for broilers. Brit. Poult. Sci. 18, 265. MILLER, B.F. (1984). Extruding hatchery waste. Poult. Sci. 63, 1284. MORAN, E.T. (1977). Growth and meat yield in poultry. In Growth and Poultry Meat Production, K.N. Boorman & B.J. Wilson, Eds., pp. 145-73. British Poultry Science Ltd, Edinburgh. MORAN, E.T., SUMMERS, J.D. & SLINGER, S.J. (1966). Keratin as a source of protein for the growing chick. 1. Amino acid imbalance as the cause for inferior performance of feather meal and the implication of disulfide bonding in raw feathers as the reason for digestibility. Poult. Sci. 45, 1257. NABER, E.C. (1961). Processing of poultry by-products and their utilization in feeds. Part 2. Utilization of poultry by-products in feeds. Utilization Research Report No.3, pp. 22-23. USDA, Washington DC. NABER, E.C., TOUCHBURN, S.P., BARNETI, B.D. & MORGAN, c.L. (1961). Effect of processing methods and amino acid supplementation on dietary utilization of feather meal protein by chicks. Poult. Sci. 40, 1234. NAS-NRC (1984). Nutrient Requirements of Poultry, 8th Rev, Ed, p. 42. National Academy Press, Washington DC. NITSAN, Z., DVORIN, A. & NIR, I. (1981). Composition and amino acid content of carcass, skin, and feathers of the growing gosling. Brit. Poult. Sci 22, 79. NORDHEIM, J.P. & COON, C.N. (1984). A comparison of four methods for determining available lysine in animal protein meals. Poult. Sci. 63, 1040. OH, S., SUMMERS, J.D. & WOOD, A.S. (1972). Availability of methionine in various protein supplements as determined by chick bioassay. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 52,171. PAPADOPOULOS, M.C., EL BUSHY, A.R. & KETELAARS, E.H. (1985). Effect of different processing conditions on amino acid digestibility of feather meal determined by chicken assay. Poult. Sci. 64, 17291.

198

D. Polin

PARSONS, C.M., POTTER, L.M. & BROWN, RD., JR. (1982). Effects of dietary protein and intestinal microflora on excretion of amino acids in poultry. Poult. Sci. 61, 939. POTTER, L.M. & SHELTON, J.R.(1978). Evaluation of corn fermentation solubles, menhaden fish meal, methionine, and hydrolyzed feather meal in diets for young turkeys. Poult. Sci. 57, 1586. ROBBINS, K.R., BAKER, D.H. & FINLEY, J.W. (1980). Studies on the utilization of Iysinoalanine and lanthionine. J. Nutr. 110, 907. ROUTH, J.L. (1942). Nutritional studies on powdered feathers. J. Nutr. 24, 399. SAID, N. (1989). Dry extrusion. A solution to the wet waste problem. Proc. 1989 North Carolina Broiler Breeder and Hatchery Management Conference, 1-2 Nov. 1989, pp. 19-31. Wilkes Community College, Wilkesboro, Ne. SALMON, RE. (1979). Slaughter losses and carcass composition of the medium white turkey. Brit. Poult. Sci. 20, 297. SCHOR, R. & KRIMM, S. (1961). Studies on the structure of feather keratin. II. A f1-helix model for the structure of feather keratin. Biophysical J. 1, 489. SCOTT, M.L. NESHEIM, M.e. & YOUNG, R.J.(1982). Nutrition of the Chicken, 3rd edn. M.L. Scott & Associates, Ithaca, NY. SIBBALD, I.R, SLINGER, S.J. & PEPPER, W.F. (1962). The utilization of hydrolyzed feather meal by growing chicks. Poult. Sci. 41, 844. SUMMERS, J.D., SLINGER, S.J. & ASHTON, G.C. (1965). Evalution of meat meal and feather meal for the growing chicken. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 45, 63. TALLEUR, RW. (1979). Mastering the Art of Fly-Tying, p. 223. Stackpole Books, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. THOMAS, V.M. & BEESON, W.M. (1977). Feather meal and hair meal as protein sources for steer cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 45, 819. USDA (1980). Hatchery Production, 1989 Summary. USDA National Agric. Statistics Services. March, 1990, p. 17. VANDEPOPULIERE, J.M. (1988). High temperature extrusion used to process poultry by-products. pp. 131-4. Paper presented at the 18th World's Poultry Science Meeting, Nagoya, Japan. VANDEPOPULIERE, J.M., WALTON, H.V. & COTTERILL, 0.J.(1975). Nutritional value of egg shell meal. Poult. Sci. 54, 131. VANDEPOPULIERE, J.M., Voss, L.A. & JoNES, H.B. (1977). The Potential of Hatchery Waste as a Feed Ingredient, p. 12. SR 200, Agric. Expt. Stat. Univ. MO-Columbia. WALTON, H.V., COTTERILL, O.J. & VANDEPOPULIERE, J.M. (1973). Composition of shell waste from egg breaking plants. Poult. Sci. 52, 1836. WALTZ, D.M., STEIN, M.D. & ILLG, D.J. (1989). Effect of ruminal protein degradation of blood meal and feather meal on the intestinal amino acid supply to lactating cows. J. Dairy Sci. 72, 1509. WEST, E.S., TODD, W.R., MASON, H.S. & VAN BRUGGEN, J.T. (1970). Fundamental role of proteins in life. In Textbook of Biochemistry, 4th edn, Ch.8, CollierMacmillan Ltd, London. WISMAN, E.L. (1964). Processed hatchery by-products an ingredient in poultry rations. Poult. Sci. 43, 871. WISMAN, E.L. & BEANE, W.L. (1965). Utilization of by-product meal by the laying hen. Poult. Sci. 44, 1332.