A tabulated comparison of practical pros and cons of using a variety of materials for deep litter in poultry houses.
| Material | Advantages and disadvantages |
|---|---|
| Pine shavings and sawdust | Preferred litter material but becoming limited in supply and expensive in areas. |
| Hardwood shavings and sawdust | Often high in moisture and susceptible to dangerous mold growth if stored improperly prior to use. |
| Pine or hardwood chips | Used successfully but may cause increased incidence of breast blisters if allowed to become too wet. |
| Pine or hardwood bark | Similar to chips or shavings in moisture absorption capacity. Medium-sized particles preferred. |
| Rice hulls | A good litter material where available at a competitive price. Young chicks may be prone to litter-eating (not a serious problem). |
| Peanut hulls | An inexpensive litter material in peanut-producing areas. Tends to cake and crust but can be managed. Susceptible to mold growth and increased incidence of aspergillosis. Some problems with pesticides have been noted in the past. |
| Sand | Field trials show comparable performance to pine shavings. Long-term reuse potential with de-caking. More difficult to maintain suitable floor temperatures during cold weather brooding. Need ample time and ventilation prior to brooding to assure dryness. |
| Crushed corn cobs | Limited availability. May be associated with increased breast blisters. |
| Chopped straw, hay or corn stover | Considerable tendency toward caking. Mold growth can also be a disadvantage. |
| Processed paper | Various forms of processed paper have proven to be good litter material in research and commercial situations. Tendency to cake with increased particle size. Top dressing paper base with shavings may minimize this problem. Careful management essential. |
(Source)
Leave a Reply