BULLEl LIN 306 No. £~zbiCqtC 3UCO UNE 1957 N N S U M P TI O N of POULTRY PRODUCTS Factors Affecting Use of Eggs, Chicken, and Turkey in Alabama's Piedmont AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE E//M ALABAMA E. V. Smith, Director Auburn, Alabama CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION-------------------------------------------- Purpose of Study -4-------------- Method of Study------------------------Description of Families Studied CONSUMPTION OF EGGS, CHICKEN, AND Egg Consumption-----------------------------8 --------------Chicken Consumption Turkey Consumption-------------------14 -------------------TRY ------------------ 4 5 ---------- 7 11 RELATION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS TO CONSUMPTION OF POULTRY PRODUCTS------------------RELATION OF SOCIO-EcONOMIC STATUS, PER CAPITA INCOME, AND EDUCATION TO CONSUMPTION-PREFERRED METHODS OF COOKING POULTRY 15 17 PRODUCTS- 20 Preparation of Eggs-----------Preparation of Chicken and Turkey Family Use of Eggs---------------------------Reasons for Not Eating Eggs and SEASONAL USE OF EGGS_ ----------------- 21 ---------------- 20 -------------- 22 Chicken ----- 23 ----------QUALITIES -----__-------_--------__26 __-- 24--r STORAGE OF EGGS AND PoULTRY IN THE HOME---------CONSUMER Shell Color 24 2 PREFERENCES FOR EGG Preference ------------------------------------------ -------. Graded Eggs---------------------------------------------------------26 Size Eggs Preferred------------------------------------------------27 ----- 28 Brand Names------------------------------------------------Yolk Color Egg Preference _-- 25 Containers-------------_--------_---------------_--------- 28 Fertility and Bloodspots ------------------ _----------------28 KNOWLEDGE TOTAL SUMMARY OF EGG CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS-___---29 -------- PROTEIN FROM POULTRY PRODUCTS AS RELATED TO REQUIREMENT ------AND 8-----1 CONCLUSIONS---_----------------------------32 APPENDIX A----------------------------------------------------------37 ----------39 APPENDIX B--------------------------- FIRST PRINTING 3%M, JUNE 1957 CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS* Factors Affecting Use of Eggs, Chicken, and Turkey in Alabama's Piedmont MILDRED S. VAN DE MARK, Associate Home Economist MARY ELIZABETH PRATHER, Assistant in Home Economics** INTRODUCTION PER CAPITA consumption of poultry products in the United States, according to the 1955 report by the Agricultural Marketing Service, was 366 eggs, 20.9 pounds chicken, and 5.0 pounds turkey. Egg consumption in Alabama is estimated at 880 per capita, or slightly over 1 egg per person per day. Poultry consumption is estimated to be well over the national average. These figures indicate that the average Alabamian is getting near his pro rata share of poultry products. Distribution of these products among white and Negro families of varying economic and educational levels, however, has not been studied heretofore. Information on distribution and consumption trends as affected by race, income, education, socio-economic status, age, sex, and individuals within families would point to improvements in mar* This study was supported by funds provided by the Agricultural Research and Marketing Act of 1946 and by State research funds. It is part of an over-all regional food marketing research project, SM-18, in which nine southern states cooperated: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. ** The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance and cooperation given in this study by the 401 families in the Piedmont Area of Alabama, who supplied the information; the Regional Food Marketing Technical Committee; and the personnel of the Extension Service of the Alabama Polytechnic Institute. Acknowledgment is also due to the enumerators for collecting the data; to E. F. Schultz, Jr., biometrician, for assistance in design and analysis of the survey; and to staff members of the Agricultural Economics and Poultry Husbandry Departments for helpful suggestions throughout the study. 4 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION keting methods leading to increased consumption of poultry products. The region selected to be studied was the Piedmont Plateau, which is one of the relatively poor farming areas in Alabama. Seven counties were included. The families studied are a reasonably homogeneous group with respect to family composition and background. PURPOSE OF STUDY There is need for current information on poultry consumption and on factors affecting uses of poultry products. In the Southern Region, emphasis has been placed on production and marketing of eggs and poultry. The study of poultry consumption by families of the Piedmont Area in Alabama was designed: (1) To relate per capita consumption of eggs, poultry, and turkey to (a) economic level, education, and other related factors; (b) certain family characteristics and habits; and (c) the intake of other protein foods to determine where diets might be improved. (2) To determine the effect of quality and price on preparation practices and consumption of poultry products. (3) To compare per capita consumption of poultry products and other protein foods with recommended dietary allowances. (4) To determine the kinds and amounts of poultry products preferred and consumed by families in the Piedmont Area; and to locate groups of people that may have inadequate protein foods. (5) To determine family characteristics and habits, so that educational programs concerning diet improvement may be related to food habits of families in this region, thus making such programs more effective. METHOD OF STUDY The area was divided into three zones, Urban, Rural Place, and Open Country' and into 50 strata. Two sampling units were drawn at random within each of 50 strata, with the expected size of sampling unit approximately 4 occupied dwelling units. Integral numbers of strata were assigned to each zone and integral numbers of sampling units were assigned to each county within For definition see Appendix A, page 87. 'Urban, Rural Place, and Open Country Zone Areas, as defined in 1950 census. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 5 a zone. The expected size of each sampling unit within a given zone and county varied slightly, but the number of sampling units and the sampling rate (2/225) is exact for each stratum, county, and zone.2 Maps used for drawing the sample included half-inch and 1-inch county highway maps, enumeration district maps, city maps, and aerial photos. Data were collected from occupied dwelling units in each segment by personal interviews with householders. Interviewers were trained in each county. Schedules were collected and checked for completion during the spring months of 1956. A total of 401 family schedules were used in this study, representing 814 white families, and 87 Negro families. Of these families, 183 white and 43 Negro families lived in open country places, 131 white and 44 Negro families lived in towns. Information was collected from a total number of 1,139 white and 401 Negro people. The data from the urban and rural place zones indicated similarity in behavior patterns. Furthermore, the data from the rural place zone were inadequate to stand alone. For these reasons, therefore, the data from the two were combined into a single zone. They are referred to in this report as "Towns." Data were examined and studied for the effects of several variables to determine what factors were related to consumption of poultry products and consumption practices of the people. These variables include race, zone of residence, income, age, education, and socio-economic status. Percentages were based on the total number answering specific questions, rather than on the total schedules collected. DESCRIPTION OF FAMILIES STUDIED HOUSEHOLD SIZE. Occupied dwelling units in each segment were visited as designated in the statistical procedure. White households had an average of 3.6 members per family, whereas Negroes averaged 4.6 members per family. Average family size unit from which data were collected for this study consisted of 3.8 members. HOME AND FARM INFORMATION. More white families living in open country owned their homes than was found true of any 2 Sampling units for this study were drawn by the Survey Operations Unit, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 6 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION group in this study, 71 per cent. Sixty-four per cent of the white people living in towns owned their homes, and almost 40 per cent of the Negro families in all parts of the Piedmont Area were home owners, Appendix Table 1. Homes owned by families of both races averaged 25 years old. Homes occupied by white owners averaged 5.4 rooms per dwelling and those lived in by Negro families, 3.8 rooms per home. Houses of both races were principally of wood construction. Very few homes were constructed of brick. Average farm size in open country for white families was 70.6 acres with 27.4 acres under cultivation; for Negroes the average was 40.8 acres, with 17.8 acres under cultivation. Average size of farms owned by white townspeople was 52.5 acres per family and that of Negroes was 25.2 acres, Appendix Table 2. INCOME.3 Average net income of families covered by this study varied considerably for white and Negro people. However, it averaged almost the same for Negro families in both zones. White families in open country had an average income of $2,748 per year, or a per capita income of $722. White families in towns averaged $4,052 in yearly income and a per capita income of $1,192. Negro families in open country earned annually $1,831, or a per capita average of $246; in towns Negro families averaged $1,375 per year, with a per capita income of $358, Appendix Table 3. EDUCATION. The average educational level of white husbands and wives from open country areas was 8.4 grades, whereas that of husbands and wives from towns was 10.7 grades. The educational level of Negro husbands and wives in open country was 5.5 grades and that of husbands and wives from towns was 6.7 grades, Table 1 and Appendix Table 4. There were no outstanding differences in the educational levels of husbands and wives TABLE 1. EDUCATIONAL LEVEL OF HUSBANDS AND WIVES IN GRADES COMPLETED, BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Family member Open country Town White Grade Negro Grade White Grade Negro Grade Husband ... 8 Income .. ...-------------------8.2 8.6 4.9 6.1 10.7 10.7 6.8 6.6 Wife -----------------------. is defined as the total sum of net receipts from farm operations, wages, salaries, and other sources. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 7 within areas studied, with possible exception of Negro husbands in open country who were over 1 grade level lower than their wives. When comparing educational levels of husbands and wives by zone, it was found that Negro husbands were 2 grade levels lower in open country than those in town. SOURCE OF INCOME AND NUMBER OF EARNERS IN FAMILY. The main occupation of the principal earner in one-third of the white families and one-half of the Negro families was unskilled labor. Twenty per cent of the white families and 14 per cent of the Negro families received other than earned incomes. Only 10 per cent of the white and Negro families had incomes from skilled labor. Twenty-five per cent of families in open country areas had incomes from farm operations. The remaining respondents reported self employment, professional, and clerical work as sources of income, Appendix Table 5. About 70 per cent of the families in this study had only one income earner. The number of earners within families during the year averaged very near the same for both races in this study. White families living in open country had the highest number of earners, averaging 1.7 persons per family. All other divisions averaged about 1.3 earners per family per year, Table 2. Additional information is in Appendix Table 6. TABLE 2. AVERAGE NUMBER OF EARNERS PER FAMILY PER YEAR BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Negro 1.8 1.4 Area Open country ----------------------------------------. .. . .. ..------------------------------------------------.. Town . White 1.7 1.8 Three-fourths of the white homemakers in open country and almost two-thirds of those living in towns were not gainfully employed. Two-thirds of the Negro homemakers were not gainfully employed, with higher ratio in open country. There were more Negro homemakers who were the principal earner for the family than was the case with white families, 20 and 10 per cent respectively, Appendix Table 7. CONSUMPTION OF EGGS, CHICKEN, AND TURKEY One of the most important objectives of this study was to determine the effects of race, income, education, zone, socioeconomic status, age, and sex on consumption of poultry products. 8 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EGG CONSUMPTION EXPERIMENT STATION All groups were found to be using at least the recommended allowance4 of 4 to 7 eggs per person per week, with the exception of Negro children 1 to 16 years old. By every method of comparison, white people were consuming more eggs than were Negro people of the same classification. Per capita consumption averaged more than 7 eggs per person per week among white people, but only slightly more than the minimum allowance of 4 eggs per person per week among Negroes. On this basis annual consumption was estimated to be at least 365 eggs per person for white people, not including eggs used in prepared food mixes and table-ready food products, and at least 208 eggs per person for Negroes. White and Negro people reported using from 6 to 12 eggs per family per week in food preparation. People living in town were consuming more eggs than were people living in open country, Table 3. Even though the average per capita consumption of eggs appears very favorable, 10 per cent of the white people in open country and 7 per cent of the white townspeople consumed no eggs, except those used in food preparation. This was also true of 9 per cent of the Negro people in open country and 5.4 per cent living in town. Thirty-one per cent of the Negro townspeople and 16 per cent of Negro families in open country ate only 1 to 2 eggs per week. There were fewer white families than Negro families having the low consumption of 1 to 2 eggs per week, with only 10 per cent living in open country and 7 per cent in towns. TABLE 3. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF PEOPLE USING VARIOUS QUANTITIES OF EGGS PER WEEK BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 AREA OF Eggs per person per week White Open country Negro Town Open country Town No. No. None ------------- 68 Seldom_-----------... 0 1-2 -- 70 140 8-5 6-10 ---------- 290 11-17 ---------101 Over 17 ---------- 24 TOTAL -------------- Pct. 9.8 0 10.1 20.2 41.8 14.6 3.5 100.0 No. 81 2 30 76 249 44 9 441 Pct. 7.0 .5 6.8 17.2 56.5 10.0 2.0 100.0 No. 21 37 37 84 47 8 2 231 Pct. 9.1 16.0 16.0 36.4 20.3 1.3 .9 100.0 No. 9 0 52 25 75 6 0 167 Pct. 5.4 0 31.1 15.0 44.9 3.6 0 100.0 ------ 693 Family Living, Human Nutrition Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dept. Agr., Washington, D.C. March 1955. 'Rural CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 9 It was found that 56 per cent of the white townspeople and 45 per cent of the Negro townspeople were consuming between 6 and 10 eggs per person per week. In open country 42 per cent of the white people consumed 6 to 10 eggs per person per week, while only 20 per cent of the Negro people were in this higher consumption bracket. More white people in open country were in the consumption bracket of 3 to 5 eggs per week than white people in towns. Data show that 36 per cent of the Negro people of the open country and 15 per cent of those living in towns consumed from 3 to 5 eggs per person per week. Data pertaining to egg consumption according to age, sex, race, and zone show that all age groups in the white population were consuming recommended quantities of eggs on a per capita basis, Table 4. The Negro population over the age of 16 consumed at least the minimum recommended requirement. Detailed analysis was made of the adolescent group from the standpoint of recommended egg consumption. All age groups of white children of both sexes were found to consume from 4 to 7 eggs per person per week. Negro children between the ages of 1 and 16 fell below the minimum standard per person per week. Several age groups averaged only 2 eggs per child per week. White people in almost all age classifications were consuming more eggs than were Negroes. There were no significant differences by sex, in either race. TABLE 4. PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION OF EGGS PER WEEK,' BY AGE, SEX, RACE, AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White2 Age group Open country Town Negro' Open country Town Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female No. 1-8 years-.......... 4-6 years....... 7-9 years -10-12 years-........ 18-15 years...... 16-20 years -..... 21 years and over .. Weighted average5.0 5.8 6.5 5.8 5.7 7.2 8.9 7.7 No. 6.4 6.9 5.9 7.4 5.2 5.4 6.9 6.7 No. 5.1 6.6 6.2 6.8 6.2 5.7 8.7 7.8 No. 7.1 6.7 3.9 5.5 5.7 5.5 7.3 6.7 No. 2.2 8.9 2.1 1.8 3.3 4.1 4.4 3.5 No. 3.2 3.8 2.9 4.1 2.5 5.3 4.4 4.0 No. 5.8 6.9 5.2 5.8 5.2 4.7 6.4 5.9 No. 5.3 3.8 8.0 8.0 4.1 4.9 4.5 4.8 Average ------------ 7.1 7.1 3.8 5.2 consumed in prepared foods are not included. ' Children under 1 year of age excluded. Per capita consumption of eggs for all people, male and female, including children under 1 year of age. 'Eggs ' TABLE 5. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES REPORTING INCREASED CONSUMPTION OF EGGS AT VARIOUS PRICES BY FAMILY INCOME, RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Families in open country Families in town $000-1,499 $1,500-2,999 0 PriceAlAl $00041,499 $1,500-2,999 $3,000 and over incme incomeicms over $3,000 and Pct. No. Pet. Pet. 38.5 15.3 7.7 38.5 100.0 54 7 3 13 77 70.1 9.1 3.9 16.9 100.0 62.2 9.2 4.2 24.4 100.0 C No. White Use same no matter price-30 Pct. No. Pct. No. Pet. Pct. No. Pet. No. 56.6 5.7 5.7 32.0 100.0 34 4 1 8 47 72.3 8.5 2.1 17.0 99.9 53 4 1 12 70 75.7 68.8 6.5 2.9 21.8 100.0 10 0 0 6 16 62.5 0 0 37.5 100.0 10 4 2 10 26 Below $0.60 per dozen____-____ 3 3 17 5.7 1.4 17.1 99.9 Below $0.50 per dozen--------__ Below $0.40 per dozen TOTAL - ---------- 100 53 Negro Use same no price-------------Below $0.60 matter 11 42.3 0 4 0 0 6 10I ii 40.0 2 100.0 44.7 7 30.4 6 42.9 14.3 7.1 35.7 1 0 0 2 33.3 0 0 66.7 35.0 m dozen Below $0.50 per ___0 o 0 60.0 100.0 II I 0 0 0 2 ~I 0 0 0 0 0 55.3 0 0 16 23 o 0 69.6 100.0 2 1 5 14 5.0 2.5 57.5 X m dozen Below $0.40 per --------__. 0 0 57.7 100.0 I z -1 per dozen.--------15 26 A-~ TOTAL r\m It 100.0 ) 100.0L II l 100.0 3 100.0 100.0 CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 11 Upon relating egg consumption to price per dozen and family income, a fairly well established pattern was found among white families in all income groups, Table 5. Price of eggs did not affect egg consumption of about 66 per cent of the white people. In open country, 69 per cent of the white families reported using the same number of eggs regardless of price or income, as compared with 62 per cent in towns. Among Negro families where sufficient data were available, it was found that approximately 40 per cent consumed the same number of eggs the year around regardless of price or income. There were no significant differences in the consumption pattern between Negro families of open country and towns. As price dropped to $0.40 per dozen and below, increased purchasing and consumption of eggs in all groups studied was reported, averaging almost 56 per cent among Negro families and 23 per cent among white families. Few families were induced to buy more eggs when prices dropped to only $0.60 or $0.50 per dozen. It was not until prices dropped $0.20 or more per dozen that consumption increased. White homemakers used more eggs in food preparation than Negro homemakers. The majority of homemakers in both races, however, used 6 to 12 eggs per family a week in food preparation. For numbers of eggs reported purchased over a 7-day period and for those used in the preparation of foods, see Appendix Tables 8 and 9. CHICKEN CONSUMPTION Data on chicken consumption by people living in the Piedmont Area of Alabama was compared to the per capita consumption in the United States of 20.9 pounds per person for 1955.1 It was found that people of both races living in open country were consuming 19 pounds per person per year, which is slightly under the national average. People of both races living in town, however, reported consuming over 26 pounds per person per year, or about 5 pounds per person over the national average. White and Negro families living in open country consumed 1 serving 6 of chicken per person per week, whereas those living in town ate 1.4 servings per person per week. Chicken was served once a week by 42 per cent of all white families and by 52 per U.S. Dept. Agr., Agricultural Marketing Service, 1955 Report. SFor this study, a serving of chicken is defined as 4 ounces of meat without bone. 5 12 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION cent of all Negro families, Table 6. Even though chicken was a popular food with both races, data revealed that 8 per cent of the white families living in open country ate no chicken. In studying chicken consumption in relation to age, sex, race, and zone, it was found that townspeople in each age group both white and Negro, male and female, consumed more chicken than did those in open country. No other significant differences were found, Table 7. TABLE 6. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF PEOPLE USING VARIOUS AMOUNTS CHICKEN PER WEEK, BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 OF Servings' per person per week or month White Open country Town Negro Open country Town Number No. None .... __.......-----------------... 54 Seldom .....--------..-------- 9 1 ser. per month_ ..--------- 31 2 ser. per month____________ 169 . ... 1 ser. per week_............... 277 2 ser. per week_ ........ -109 More than 2 ser. per week ___- 32 TOTAL--................ 681 Pct. 7.9 1.3 4.6 24.8 40.7 16.0 4.7 100.0 No. 14 1 4 57 195 125 45 441 Pct. 3.2 .2 .9 12.9 44.2 28.3 10.2 99.9 No. 7 13 7 49 121 16 18 231 Pct. 3.0 5.6 3.0 21.2 52.4 6.9 7.8 99.9 No. 1 2 0 18 84 48 13 166 Pct. 0.6 1.2 0 10.8 50.6 28.9 7.8 99.9 No. consuming 1 or more servings per week ..--.. 418 61.4 865 82.7 155 67.1 145 87.3 1 For this study, a serving of chicken is defined as 4 ounces of meat without bone. TABLE 7. PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION' OF CHICKEN PER WEEK IN SERVINGS BY AGE, SEX, RACE, AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Age group White2 Open country Town Male Female Male No. 1.0 1.0 .9 1.2 .9 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.0 No. 1.4 1.8 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.4 No. 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.3 Negro 2 Open country Female No. 1.0 .6 1.1 .8 1.1 1.0 .9 No. 1.6 1.1 .9 1.0 .9 1.4 1.3 Town Female Male Male Female No. 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.7 1.7 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.4 No. 1.0 1.8 1.2 1.3 .8 1.4 1.4 1.8 L 3 No. 1-3 years- ..... 1.1 4-6 years-........... 1.1 7-9 years--------- 1.0 10-12 years . ..---------. 9 18-15 years __---. 1.0 16-20 years-__... .. .9 21 years and over ___1.0 WEIGHTED AVERAGE-........ AVERAGE 1 2 - 1.0 1.3 1.1 1.0 .9 - - Number of 4-ounce servings of meat without bone, includes all forms of chicken. Children under 1 year of age excluded. 3Per capita consumption of chicken for all people, male and female, including children under 1 year of age. A 0 TABLE 8. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES REPORTING INCREASED CONSUMPTION OF CHICKEN AT VARIOUS PRICES BY FAMILY INCOME, RACE, AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Families in open country Families in town Z C -1 0 Price $000-1,499$000,499 No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. All incomes $1,500-2,999 $3,000 and over.A No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. incomes Pct. 33.3 16.2 Pct. 0 '0 C 70 -t -I' White Use same no matter price-------------per pound Below $0.45 Below $0.40 per 34 68.0 25 54.8 2.2 43.5 37 2 29 54.4 2.9 42.6 58.5 9 1 5 60.0 6.7 33.3 7 3 14 29.2 12.5 58.3 23 15 40 29.5 19.2 51.8 8---------- 1 6.0 13 26.0 20 8.7 37.8 pound----------- 50.4 TOTAL------------_____ 50 100.0 46 100.0 68 99.9 100.0 15 100.0 24 100.0 78 100.0 99.9 Negro Use same no matter price------------6 Below $0.45 per pound----------------2 Below $0.40 - 15 per pound------------TTL23 26..1 8.7 65.2 100.0 rrr~~ rr 3 0 8 11 1~ 27.3 0 72.7 1[00.0 0 0 1 1 0 0 100.0 100.0 25.7 5.7 68.6 100.0 3 0 20 23 13.0 0 87.0 100.0 2 2 10 14 14.3 14.3 71.4 100.0 0 0 3 3 0 0 100.0 100.0 12.5 5.0 82.5 100.0 u~ w 14 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Homemakers of both races in towns were more strongly affected by price of chicken than were people of open country. This was possibly because of home production of chicken in the country. Consumption increased significantly in all groups studied when prices were reduced to $0.40 per pound and below. Negro homemakers were influenced by price more than were white homemakers, and those living in towns more so than families in open country. Price of chicken did not affect the consumption of about 48 per cent of the white families, Table 8. An unexpected reaction to price was found among white families. A higher percentage of families with low income reported using the same amount of chicken regardless of price than was observed for families of higher income. On the assumption that people with sufficient income to own a home freezer might be the ones taking advantage of low prices, the data were reexamined omitting these owners. The findings were changed slightly, but only to accentuate the original results. TURKEY CONSUMPTION Turkey, when served in the home, was found to be used mainly as a holiday food for Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners. Over 50 per cent of all white families and 70 per cent of all Negro families interviewed did not serve any turkey during the previous year, Table 9. Both white and Negro families using turkey served it more often on Christmas than on Thanksgiving. There were more white than Negro families who served turkey on both holidays by a margin of almost 3 to 1. Only 8 per cent of all families, white and Negro, reported serving turkey on occasions other TABLE 9. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES SERVING TURKEY PER YEAR BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Number times served per year White families Open country Town Negro families Open country Town No. 90 0--------------- ..... ... S1-------....------. 2--------------3--------------.0 Pct. 51.7 30.5 16.1 No. 66 85 21 Pct. 50.4 26.7 16.0 No. 84 8 1 Pct. 79.1 18.6 2.8 No. 28 13 2 Pct. 68.6 29.5 4.5 53 28 0 1 0 2 174 0 .6 0 1.1 100.0 5 1 3 0 181 8.8 .8 2.8 0 100.0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 100.0 0 0 0 1 44 0 0 0 2.3 99.9 4------------------5-6 -------------7-12 --------------TOTAL CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 15 TABLE 10. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES SERVING TURKEY ON STATED OCCASIONS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Negro families Open country Town Occasion SWhite families Open country Town No. Christmas- ......_-.Thanksgiving- .._.. Christmas and 28 23 Pct. 35.0 28.8 No. 20 18 Pct. 31.2 No. 5 3 Pct. 55.6 88.8 No. 5 7 Pct. 81.2 48.8 20.3 Thanksgiving- .----Other occasions- ---. TOTAL 27 2 80 33.7 2.5 100.0 21 10 64 32.8 15.7 100.0 1 0 9 11.1 0 100.0 2 2 16 12.5 12.5 100.0 .--. than Thanksgiving and Christmas, Table 10. method of preparation for turkey was roasting. The preferred RELATION OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS TO CONSUMPTION o POULTRY PRODUCTS Food expenditure and consumption patterns of people are fairly stable within families at various levels of living. Income alone does not explain the variability in consumption habits. This indicates that current data need to be supplemented with some other quantitative measures that would give a more complete understanding of factors affecting levels of living. An adapted socioeconomic scale was prepared. All eligible families in the study were interviewed and scored by this scale, which included type of house construction; ownership of such material possessions as television, radio, refrigerator, home freezer, and auto; household conveniences, to include electricity, telephone, power washer, and running water; newspaper subscription, and social participation. Individual family scores were ranked and the entire number divided into four groups. There was a possible score of 26. Families scoring 21 to 26 compose the highest group; 15 to 20 the second group; 9 to 14 the third; and 8 or less the fourth group, Table 11. TABLE 11. PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES IN VARIOUS SocIO-ECONOMIC CLASSES BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Socio-economic classes Percentages of white families Open country Town Percentages of Negro families Open country Town 21-26 . 15-20 TOTAL _ .....-----------. 16.4 .....------------44.8 _..... 100.0 25.9 55.7 18.8 0 99.9 2.8 11.6 84.9 51.2 100.0 4.6 16.8 84.9 44.2 100.0 9-14 . ..--------------29.0 8 or less- ........... .. 9.8 16 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION As may be noted from the summary Table 11, the percentage of families in the four socio-economic classes varied with race and zone. Twenty-six per cent of the white families in towns and 16 per cent of the white families in open country were in the 21 to 26 class. Among Negro families, only 4.6 per cent of the families living in towns and 2.3 per cent of the families in open country were in the 21 to 26 class. Almost half of all Negro families interviewed fell in the lowest socio-economic group with a score of 8 or less. On the other hand, 10 per cent of the white families in the open country and none in the towns were in the lowest group. There were relatively more white families in the 15 to 20 socioeconomic class and relatively more Negro families in the 9 to 14 class. The consumption data from this study were examined and compared by various factors to determine which were more importantly related to patterns of family consumption. Consumption was compared by income, education, size of family, age groups, and socio-economic status. It is recognized that families can fall into certain socio-economic brackets through various circumstances, which could cause families of diverse backgrounds to appear in the same socio-economic bracket. Larger families, even though falling in the lower income bracket on a per capita basis, may have more money within the family for items other than food. Therefore, large families tend to appear higher on the socio-economic score than do small families having the same per capita income. Thus, such items as television, radio, and home freezer, of which each family unit needs only one, may be obtained by large families more easily than by small families of the same per capita income. Families might attain a high socioeconomic status and be paying for it through inadequate food consumption. It is possible that a young married couple, falling within a low income bracket, might have a high socio-economic score through gifts, or parental help. Other families might come in a high socio-economic bracket through better rental property as is found in many textile mill villages. Furthermore, families might fall into a low socio-economic group while actually earning a fairly high income. For instance, because of early deprivations, they might not desire and appreciate conveniences. It is essential to keep in mind that these influencing factors are possible and that no conclusions can be entirely accurate concerning socio-economic status of families. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 17 RELATION o SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS, PER CAPITA INCOME, AND EDUCATION TO CONSUMPTION EGGS. It was found that egg consumption increased with socioeconomic status at incomes less than $600 per person a year, among people of both races, Figure 1 and Appendix Table 10. Above this income level, there were not sufficient Negroes to stabilize the data, and consumption by white people is not materially affected by socio-economic status or income. The educational level of both the white and Negro people was found to have little effect on the consumption of eggs, Figure 2 and Appendix Table 11. People on a low per capita income consumed fewer eggs in all grade levels. White people consumed more eggs than did Negro people. Size of family is inversely related to per capita income so that large families tend to have low per capita income. Thus, any effects because of income might also be attributed to family size. It may be assumed from the data collected that total egg consumption in the Piedmont Area of Alabama is adequate by recommended standards of 4 to 7 eggs per person per week. Furthermore, the daily egg requirement was met on a minimum basis by all people when grouping data according to education, income, and socio-economic score. However, Negro children when studied as a separate group were found to be receiving less than the recommended quantity of eggs, Table 4. This is not true of some other sources of protein and some household conveniences listed on the socio-economic scale. See Figures 1 and 2 for further comparative information. CmCKEN. There is a significant relationship between the socioeconomic status of families and the consumption of chicken, Figure 1 and Appendix Table 12. Data reveal that within each income group, the consumption of chicken increased as socioeconomic score increased. Within income groups the educational level of people in both races was found to have little if any effect upon consumption of chicken, Figure 2 and Appendix Table 13. TURKEY. The consumption of turkey is affected by the socio- economic status of families, Figure 1 and Appendix Table 14. At each level of per capita income, it was found that consumption of turkey increased with higher socio-economic scores. Practically 18 18 ALABAMA ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION White 6 Chicken s999 Negro gt Chicken 99 9 White g Negro FIGURE 1. Poultry consumption as related to socio-economic status and per capita income in the Piedmont Area of Alabama. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 19 White 9r Chicken e Negro Chicken r°des White & Negro FIGURE 2. Poultry consumption as related to education and per capita income in the Piedmont Area of Alabama. 20 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 20 ALABAMA AGRICUOLTURLEPRMN TTO no turkey was served in families with socio-economic scores of 8 or less. Income was also a factor. More turkey was consumed as per capita income, increased. There was found to be a relationship between educational level and consumption of turkey, Figure 2 and Appendix Table 15. While more turkey is used by white people, data reveal that consumption among both races increased as the educational level became higher, with one exception where there were inadequate data. PREFERRED METHODS OF COOKING POULTRY PRODUCTS PREPARATION OF EGGs Fried eggs were preferred by 55 per cent of the white homemakers, Figure 3 and Appendix Table 16. Thirty per cent reported preferring scrambled eggs. Among Negro families studied, erences in cooking methods were reverse to that of white families, pref- with almost 50 per cent preferring scrambled eggs and 88 per cent preferring fried eggs. More white town homemakers poached eggs than did any other group. This might be related to availWhite - Open Country "" "'4.2% oaaaa~A'Ae " " e~ 6r"" 2%' " White -Town " s e . . " e e a e " s " Negro - Open Country ........... Negro - Town °"."Fried Scrabled Poached '::: "Boi led N te FIGURE 3. Preferred methods of preparing eggs in Alabama's Piedmont Area. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 21 ability of high-quality eggs, as well as to personal preference. The fact that more Negro families scrambled eggs may also be related to price and grade of eggs used. The general practice of frying foods is characteristic of southern cookery. Comparison of preparation preferences by income groups was made to determine differences, but showed no significant trends. Homemakers were asked if eggs when used replaced a meat dish. Forty-two per cent of the white homemakers reported that it did, whereas the other 58 per cent supplemented eggs with some other food, such as sausage, ham, bacon, or brains. Negro families used eggs as a main dish in 39 per cent of the homes, whereas 61 per cent indicated that they supplemented eggs with another food. PREPARATION OF CHICKEN AND TURKEY Of the 401 homemakers interviewed, almost 90 per cent reported a family preference for chicken fried, Figure 4 and Appendix Table 17. Negro families had a slightly higher preference for fried chicken than did white families. Twenty-seven per cent of the white homemakers in towns reported baked chicken as their families' second choice, while 38 per cent of the white and White - Open Country White - Town Negro - Open Country Negro -Town Fried "'Broiled Baked °.Smothered Stewed Barbecued FIGURE 4. Preferred methods of preparing chicken in Alabama's Piedmont Area. 22 White - Open Country ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 65.4% White - Town Negro - Open Country 333% Negro - Town 61.5% Small fryers J Large fryers Hens Turkeys FIGURE 5. Preferred size of chicken and turkey in Alabama's Piedmont Area. Negro families in open country preferred stewed chicken. Miscellaneous preferences were reported by the few remaining homemakers. Homemakers' preference as to size of chicken 7 varied quite widely between white and Negro people, Figure 5 and Appendix Table 18. Sixty-six per cent of the white homemakers preferred small fryers, and 31 per cent large fryers. The remaining 3 per cent bought hens and turkeys. Among Negro homemakers, the data reveal that 58 per cent preferred the large fryers, 35 per cent small fryers, and less than 5 per cent purchased hens and turkeys. FAMILY USE OF EGGS Eggs are principally served as a main dish. Practically all households studied used eggs in this way one or more times a week. Sixty-five per cent of the Negro people living in towns indicated a preference for eggs served at breakfast, as compared with 46 per cent of the Negroes in open country, Table 12. Among white households, 28 per cent of the families in towns and 20 per cent of those in the open country preferred to use eggs for breakfast 'Small fryers refers to chickens weighing less than 2 pounds and large fryers, 2 pounds and over. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 23 TABLE 12. PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES PREFERRING EGGS AT STATED MEALS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Meal White Open country Town Negro Open country Town Per cent Never --------2.2 Per cent .8 Per cent 4.9 Per cent 2.5 Breakfast _------------Dinner .-__ __ Supper............... ___........ __...... 20.4 11.6 28.7 28.5 4.6 43.8 46.3 2.4 21.9 65.0 5.0 20.0 Dinner and supper________. 28.7 Breakfast and dinner ....... 2.8 Breakfast and supper .-----1.1 All 3 meals---------------4.4 TOTAL _ 99.9 16.9 0 1.5 3.8 99.9 17.1 2.4 0 4.9 99.9 7.5 0 0 0 100.0 only. This situation reverses itself by race in preference for eggs served as a main dish for supper. Forty-four per cent of the white people living in towns and 29 per cent of those in the open country served eggs for supper, while only 20 per cent of the Negro families in towns and 22 per cent of the Negro families in open country preferred eggs for supper. Even though several studies8 have reported that eggs are used primarily for breakfast, data from this study reveal that there is a definite trend among white people toward serving eggs quite often as a main dish for meals other than breakfast. Frequent use was made of eggs for dinner and supper in all groups studied. More white families served eggs for at least one meal in addition to breakfast than served them for breakfast only, Table 12. More low than high income families served eggs for breakfast only. REASONS FOR NOT EATING EGGS AND CHICKEN Although almost 80 per cent of both white and Negro people ate eggs and chicken, an effort was made to determine why the minority group of about 20 per cent did not eat poultry products. Expense and dislike were the reasons most frequently given. Numerous other reasons were offered. However, their importance was judged as negligible in comparison with cost and dislike. A greater number of white people reported a dislike for poultry products than was found true of Negro people, while more Negroes than white people cited expense as being the reason for lower consumption. ies," Production and Marketing Administration, Agriculture Information Bulletin 'U.S. Department of Agriculture: "Some Highlights from Consumer Egg Stud- No. 110. June, 1953. 24 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION SEASONAL USE oF EGGS Use of eggs was to some degree affected by season; however, 55 per cent of the white and Negro families consumed the same number of eggs the year around, Table 13. White families in both zones consumed more eggs during the winter months; 12 per cent of the white families in the open country used more eggs in the spring. Negro families varied slightly more in their use of eggs; 31 per cent of them consumed more eggs in the spring, whereas only 14 per cent of the Negro families in the open country used more during these months. More Negro families reported increased consumption of eggs in the summer than was true of white families for this season. Fifty-eight per cent of the Negro families in the open country consumed the same number of eggs the year around, whereas only 38 per cent of the Negro families in town had this stabilized pattern of consumption. A higher proportion of white families than Negro families had a more definite year-round pattern of egg consumption, with a total of 56 per cent of the open country and 66 per cent of the townspeople following this more stabilized trend. TABLE 13. PERCENTAGE OF FAMILIES REPORTING INCREASED CONSUMPTION EGGS AT VARIOUS SEASONS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 OF Season at which more eggs were consumed White Open country Town Negro Open country Town Per cent Same year-round .---------56.4 Per cent 66.2 Per cent 58.1 Percent 88.1 Spring ...-----------------Summer ---------------Fall ------------------WinterFall and winter Fall and spring-----. TOTAL_ ........... .. -__- 12.2 6.0 5.0 19.9 0 5 100.0 3.8 6.9 5.4 16.9 .8 0 100.0 13.9 20.9 4.7 2.3 0 0 99.9 81.0 11.9 7.1 11.9 0 0 100.0 STORAGE OF EGGS AND POULTRY IN THE HOME The majority of consumers now keep eggs under refrigeration in their homes, Table 14. Ninety-six per cent of the white families in towns and 75 per cent in open country stored eggs in the refrigerator. Twenty-two per cent of the white families in open CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 25 HOME TABLE 14. PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES STORING CHICKEN AND EGGS IN THE UNDER VARIOUS METHODS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Chicken Eggs Town pen Town pen Town country country country Place of storage White families Negro families White families Negro families Open Town o country Open Refrigerator .-----.. Pct. 65.7 Pct. 78.5 18.5 0 Pct. 57.1 2.4 0 Pct. 54.8 7.1 0 Pct. 74.6 0 22.1 Pct. 96.1 0 3.9 Pct. 58.1 0 25.6 Pct. 64.3 0 9.5 Freezer---------22.1 Shelf -.......-.--....----0 Do not store- --------. Other __-_____ TOTAL Cellar ________ .-0 Ice box ______________-... 0 12.2 0 __----------.. 100.0 0 0 3.0 0 100.0 0 14.3 26.2 0 100.0 0 16.7 21.4 0 100.0 1.1 1.7 0 .5 100.0 0 0 0 0 100.0 0 13.9 0 2.3 99.9 0 21.4 0 4.8 100.0 country still stored eggs on an open shelf, while only 4 per cent of the white townspeople interviewed followed this practice. Among the Negro families in open country places, 58 per cent stored eggs in the refrigerator, 26 per cent used shelf storage, and 14 per cent used ice boxes. In towns, it was found that 64 per cent of the surveyed Negro families used refrigerators, 9.5 per cent shelf storage, and 21 per cent used ice boxes. In home storage of poultry, more white families in towns used refrigerator storage than did the families in the open country, Table 14. However, the latter group used the home freezer for poultry storage slightly more than did townspeople. Twelve per cent of the white open country families do not store poultry, which was true likewise of 26 per cent of the Negro families in open country areas and 21 per cent of the Negro families in towns. The poultry was killed, dressed, and cooked within a half-day period or less without use of cold storage. CONSUMER PREFERENCES FOR EGG QUALITIES SHELL COLOR PREFERENCE Almost half of all homemakers, white and Negro, expressed a preference for brown eggs, Table 15. Thirty-two per cent of all homemakers had no shell color preference. Of those indicating a color preference, 25 per cent of the white homemakers living in towns preferred white eggs, while only 14 per cent of the Negroes in towns indicated this preference. Open country people in both 26 TABLE ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 15. EGG SHELL COLOR PREFERENCE BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Shell color preference White families Open country Town Pct. 51.9 3.8 8.7 35.5 99.9 No. 61 6 33 31 181 Pct. 46.5 4.6 25.2 23.7 100.0 No. Brown-........ _. -95 Cream ------------... 7 White- ----- 16 No preference -. 65 TOTAL.... 183 Negro families Open country Town No. Pct. No. Pct. 19 44.2 22 52.4 2 4.6 1 2.4 4 9.3 6 14.3 18 41.9 13 30.9 43 100.0 42 100.0 races were found to be more indifferent to color of eggs than was true of townspeople. YOLK COLOR PREFERENCE In both open country and town areas, it was found that approximately 50 per cent of all families studied preferred eggs with a dark yellow yolk, whereas 24 per cent chose the medium colored yolk, Table 16. Twenty per cent expressed no preference for yolk color. Deep color was often associated with richness. TABLE 16. EGG YOLK COLOR PREFERENCE BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Yolk color White families Open country Town Negro families Open country Town No. Dark yellow . 96 Medium yellow-85 Light yellow..... 8 No preference--- 48 TOTAL -.--..... 182 Pct. 52.7 19.2 4.4 28.6 99.9 No. 63 40 8 19 130 Pct. 48.5 80.8 6.1 14.6 100.0 No. 22 10 3 8 43 Pct. 51.1 23.8 7.0 18.6 100.0 No. 19 10 4 9 42 Pct. 45.2 23.8 9.5 21.4 99.9 GRADED EGGS To indicate consumer preference for quality of eggs, the interviewed families were asked for opinions concerning grading. In open country 58.6 per cent of the white families and 44 per cent of the Negro families indicated a preference for graded eggs. Among townspeople, 85.5 per cent of the white homemakers preferred graded eggs, whereas 65.5 per cent of the Negro families indicated such preference. When consumers were asked for a preference regarding a particular egg quality, it was found that AA quality egg was preferred by only 26 per cent of the white families and 10 per cent CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 27 of the Negro families, Table 17. Grade A was preferred by 44 per cent of the white families and by 40 per cent of the Negro families. Less than 1 per cent of the white and 5 per cent of the Negro families preferred Grade B. When graded eggs were selected, 58 per cent of the white and Negro homemakers in towns bought Grade A eggs. Grading did not matter to almost 83 per cent of all families interviewed, Table 17. TABLE 17. CONSUMER PREFERENCE FOR GRADED EGGS BY PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, RACE AND ZONE, 1956 Grade White families Open country Town No. ......... 389 Negro families Open country Town No. Pct. 5.9 4 29.4 15 8.8 0 10 55.9 100.0 29 Pct. 18.8 51.7 0 84.5 100.0 AA . .. A-- .. - ..... ..... . No preference- .. To)TAL-- ----B .... 45 1 60 145 Pct. 26.9 81.0 .7 41.4 100.0 No. 29 70 1 17 117 Pct. No. 2 24.8 10 59.8 8 .9 19 14.5 84 100.0 SAs reported by the housewife. SIZE EGGS PREFERRED Large size eggs were preferred by almost 70 per cent of the white and Negro families living in towns, Table 18. This was not true of open country places where both white and Negro families selected medium sized eggs almost as readily as large. Only 1 per cent of all families interviewed perferred small eggs. In open country, 20 per cent of the white families and 34 per cent of the Negro families bought according to price per dozen, rather than by size. TABLE 18. CONSUMER EGG SIZE PREFERENCE BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Size White families Town Open country Negro families Town Open country No. Jumbo Large -----------Medium Small -7 Pct. 4.5 86.9 31.2 0 No. 7 83 23 2 Pct. 5.6 65.9 18.2 1.6 No. 1 11 9 2 Pct. 2.4 26.8 21.9 4.9 No. 2 29 2 0 Pct. 4.8 69.0 4.8 0 58 49 0 Buy according to price per dozen__. No preference _ TOTAL _ 82 11 157 20.4 7.0 100.0 10 1 126 7.9 .8 100.0 14 4 41 84.1 9.8 99.9 8 1 42 19.0 2.4 100.0 28 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BRAND NAMES White homemakers living in towns indicated a greater interest in buying eggs by brand names than did any other of the groups studied. Forty-three per cent preferred buying a brand they had become accustomed to and liked, Table 19. Over half of all white homemakers and 75 per cent of all Negro homemakers indicated no interest in buying eggs by brand name. In open country only 22 per cent of the white families and 5 per cent of the Negro families bought eggs by brand name. In towns, 19 per cent of the Negro families bought eggs by brand name. EGG CONTAINERS Consumer preference as to type of containers varied considerably by race and zone. Sixty per cent of the white families and 40 per cent of the Negro families living in towns preferred cartoned eggs, Table 19. In open country 41 per cent of the white families preferred cartoned eggs, while only 17 per cent of the Negro families indicated this preference. Over 60 per cent of all Negro families interviewed were indifferent to the purchasing of eggs in cartons. According to other studies made, there has been undoubtedly a sharp increase in the number of consumers who purchase eggs in cartons, yet data reveal that much remains to be done on general acceptance. TABLE 19. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES PREFERRING TO PURCHASE EGGS BY BRAND NAMES AND IN CARTONS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 PreferenceWhite Open country families Town Negro families Open country Town No. Brand name over none-........ Cartons over Pct. 22.8 40.9 No. 58 76 Pct. 48.1 60.3 No. 2 7 Pct. 5.8 17.5 No. 8 17 Pct. 19.5 40.5 833 other ..------------63 FERTILITY AND BLOODSPOTS The data obtained on fertility of eggs indicate that 65 per cent of all white people and 80 per cent of all Negro families were not concerned over fertility of eggs. Almost 32 per cent of the white homemakers living in towns preferred infertile eggs, Table 20. Little has been known of the use made of eggs containing bloodspots. The data collected from 401 families reveal that more CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 29 TABLE 20. CONSUMER PREFERENCE TO FERTILITY OF EGGS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Preference Preference White families Negro families Open country Town Open country Town No. Fertile eggs----.....---. 28 Infertile eggs ..------29 No preference-- ----. 124 TOTAL-- _181 TABLE 21. Pct. 15.5 16.0 68.5 100.0 No. 8 41 81 180 Pct. 6.2 81.5 62.3 100.0 No. 4 1 87 42 Pct. 9.5 2.4 88.1 100.0 No. 6 5 27 88 Pct. 15.8 18.2 71.0 100.0 CONSUMER USE OF EGGS CONTAINING BLOODSPOTS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Use made White families Negro families of eggs Remove Open country No. Pct. 29.9 70.1 100.0 Town No. Pct. 40 82 122 Open country No. Pct. 18 25 48 Town No. Pct. 15 27 42 bloodspots ______ ... TOTAL _--- 52 174 32.8 67.2 100.0 41.9 58.1 100.0 85.7 64.8 100.0 Discard eggs .......... 122 white families than Negro families discarded these eggs, Table 21. Thirty per cent of the white families and 42 per cent of the Negro families living in open country tried to remove the bloodspots and use the eggs in cookery. In towns it was found that almost 34 per cent of both the white and Negro homemakers attempted to salvage the egg by removal of the spot. Almost 70 per cent of all white families and over 60 per cent of all Negro families discarded eggs containing bloodspots. KNOWLEDGE OF EGG CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS A study was included to determine homemakers' level of knowledge concerning how many eggs a man, woman, boy, and girl should eat per week. The majority of homemakers in both races reported that 6 to 10 eggs were needed per person per week, Appendix Table 19. There were, however, small groups not adequately informed about family egg requirements. Over 4 per cent of the open country white people believed that 1 to 2 eggs per week were adequate for a boy, girl, man, and woman. In towns, 4 per cent of the Negro families indicated that 1 to 2 eggs per week were sufficient for all members of the family. Opinions of people in both races indicated that men in open country needed more eggs (11 per week) than did any other member of 30 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 30 A~LBAMA AGRICULTUA XEIMN TTO TABLE 22. HOMEMAKER'S OPINION CONCERNING NUMBER OF EGGS PER WEEK NECESSARY FOR VARIOUS MEMBERS OF FAMILY BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Race White _----------- Man Boy Open Town Open To country countryT Woman Girl country 9.8 8.0 penOpen countryT 9.0 8.6 Negro_____________________ -----11.2 10.7 9.4 8.6 9.9 10.0 8.3 8.3 9.7 7.5 9.7 7.8 the family, Table 22. Opinions further indicated that boys in open country followed next in line, needing 10 eggs per week. Women and girls came third with the homemakers recommending an average of about 9 eggs per week, Well over the recommended weekly requirement, Table 22. Both races living in towns indicated a per person average of 8 eggs as being needed by all members of the family, with also a trend toward men requiring more eggs per parson per week than women. TABLE 23. TOTAL CONSUMPTION OF PROTEIN FROM ANIMAL AND LEGUME SOURCES BY WHITE FAMILIES OVER A PERIOD OF 7 DAYS, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Open country Commodity Total protein intake Grams' ----17,005.28 Percentage of intake Per cent Beef-- Fresh Ipork------------_______20,038.50 6.68 Lamb ---------- 200.20 .07 Bacon.-- - -- - -- 14,293.76 4.77 Ham_- ---------------5.85 17,545.12 Sausag :e----------------10,581.06 8.53 es ----- ----------------- 5.67 Town Total protein Percentage intake of intake Grams' Per cent 17,312.96 9.35 12,527.53 6.77 1,003.20 .54 13,197.99 7.13 10,751.04 5.81 13,171.79 10,866.68 6,707.86 13,028.21 13,936.48 Fish_--_ Seafooc ds -------- _- --- 6,814.92 Dried peas and beans--___ 81,058.21 Chicke ;n --------------15,984.20 Eggs-__ .____ ------------30,145.22 Milk____---------------------- 95,036.84 Dried milk------------5,468.83 TT AL--_-------- -------------------20,104.01 ------ 5,327.77 2.88 6.70 5.23 15,674.32 2.27 10.35 5.33 10.05 7.11 5.60 8.62 7.04 7.53 31.68 1.82 100.00 _-- 299%945.47 _ _ 19,207.31 45,138.02 3,471.37 185,148.21 - 10.37 24.38 1.87 100.00 Town 419.84 grams 59.98 grams ver~ days Per capita protein consumption for 1 day_________ Per capita protein consumption for 7 a a a r Open country 429.72 grams 61.38 grams p 1'Calculations were made according to Composition of Foods, U.S. Dept. Agr., Agriculture Handbook No. 8. 1950. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 31 PROTEIN FROM POULTRY PRODUCTS AS RELATED TO TOTAL REQUIREMENT On an average per capita basis, white families in the Piedmont Area are consuming adequate protein in their diets, Table 28. Protein foods studied included all foods from animal and legume sources consumed by the family over a 7-day period preceding the interview. Other proteins from grain sources consumed by white families are estimated to increase the total protein intake to well over the recommended daily food requirement. Negro families were falling approximately 25 per cent short of the recommended daily food requirement, considering only protein from animal and legume sources, Table 24. However, their high cereal intake is estimated to make up the difference for minimum protein adequacy. (See Table 25 for protein requirement by race.) For white families in open country and towns, eggs alone contributed 10 per cent of the recommended protein requirement. Chicken contributed a little more than 6 per cent, making a total TABLE 24. TOTAL CONSUMPTION OF PROTEIN FROM ANIMAL AND LEGUME SOURCES BY NEGRO FAMILIES OVER A PERIOD OF 7 DAYS, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Open country Town Commodity Total protein intake Percentage of intake Per cent 3.74 6.78 0 3.98 4.78 4.31 6.49 12.69 1.93 16.98 7.52 7.55 21.93 1.31 99.99 Total protein intake Grams 3,270.96 3,886.52 168.48 2,739.44 2,227.37 2,371.60 3,522.90 6,759.06 1,065.06 10,083.57 5,372.34 5,350.92 7,095.18 1,268.74 55,182.09 Percentage of intake Per cent 5.93 7.04 .30 4.96 4.04 4.30 6.38 12.25 1.93 18.27 9.74 9.70 12.86 2.30 100.00 Grams' Beef ---------------------2,628.33 Fresh pork--------------4,771.28 Lamb ------------0 Bacon -----------2,798.87 Ham---------------------3,364.06 Sausage 83,084.08 Cheese --------------- 4,563.76 Fish -----------------8,927.86 Seafoods -----------------1,861.12 Dried peas and beans-- -11,946.13 Chicken-5,289.90 Eggs ------5,312.31 Milk ----------------- 15,426.59 Dried milk 919.78 TOTAL_------------- 70,343.52 Open country Per capita protein consumption for 7 days ----------- 304.52 grams Per capita protein consumption for 1 day --------- 43.50 grams Town 324.60 grams 46.37 grams 1 Calculations were made according to Composition of Foods, U.S. Dept. Agr., Agriculture Handbook No. 8. 1950. 32 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT 1 STATION TABLE 25. WEIGHTED RECOMMENDED PROTEIN REQUIREMENT' OF PEOPLE COMPARED TO PER CAPITA CONSUMPTION BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Zone Race per individual Grams 62.80 60.95 60.24 59.82 Requirement Intake per individual Grams Percentage of requirement Per cent 97.7 98.4 72.2 77.5 White___.Open country ._. Town--__----------__ Negro...__ Open country .. Town ._____...-__-- 61.88 59.98 43.50 46.37 Requirements as set up by Home Economics Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Dept. Agr., Washington, D.C. Revised 1953. TABLE 26. PERCENTAGE OF PROTEIN REQUIREMENT FROM EGGS AND CHICKEN BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 1 1Weighted by age and sex. 'Recommended Race Zone Percentage from eggs 9.82 10.21 5.45 7.52 Percentage from chicken 5.21 7.41 5.48 7.55 White __-..-Open country-..... .. Town-____- Negro ....... Open country .....Town__------ 1Protein content of foods was calculated from Composition of Foods, U.S. Dept. Agr., Agriculture Handbook No. 8. 1950. of 16 per cent from poultry products, 9 Table 26. Negro families averaged a little more than 6 per cent of their protein requirement from eggs and from chicken, with an average total of 12 per cent from poultry products, Table 26. Families of both races living in town were consuming more poultry products than were families living in open country. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS A study of consumption of poultry products in the Piedmont Area of Alabama included 401 families, representing 314 white and 87 Negro families; 183 white and 48 Negro families lived in open country places and 131 white and 44 Negro families lived in town. A total of 1,189 white and 401 Negro people were included in the study. Per capita consumption of eggs averaged more than 7 eggs per person a week among white people and slightly more than 4 eggs per Negro per week. ' Turkey excluded. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 33 People living in town consumed more eggs than people living in open country. Ten per cent of the white people in open country, 7 per cent of the white townspeople, 9 per cent of the Negro people in open country, and 5.4 per cent of the Negro townspeople consumed no eggs except those used in preparation of other dishes. All age groups in the white population consumed at least the recommended allowance of 4 to 7 eggs per person a week. Negro children between 1 and 16 years of age were below this minimum standard. Price of eggs did not affect egg consumption of 66 per cent of the white families nor 40 per cent of the Negro families. White homemakers used more eggs in food preparation than did Negro homemakers. The majority of homemakers in both races, however, used between 6 and 12 eggs per family per week. People of both races living in open country ate 1 serving of chicken per person a week, while people of both races living in towns ate 1.4 servings per person a week. Both white and Negro homemakers in towns were more strongly affected by price of chicken than were homemakers in the country. Consumption was increased in all groups studied when prices were reduced to $0.40 per pound and below. Over 50 per cent of all white families and 70 per cent of all Negro families served no turkey. When turkey was served, it was for Thanksgiving and/or Christmas dinners. Egg consumption increased with socio-economic status up to the income level of $600 per person a year; above this income level, consumption was not affected by socio-economic status nor income. Educational level was found to have little effect on the consumption of eggs. People on a low per capita income consumed fewer eggs in all grade levels. Within each income group consumption of chicken increased as the socio-economic score increased. Within income groups the educational level of people in both races was found to have little effect upon the consumption of chicken. Turkey consumption increased with socio-economic status at each level of per capita income. Practically no turkey was served in families in the lowest socio-economic group. 34 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION Turkey consumption increased as educational levels became higher. Fried eggs were preferred by 55 per cent of the white people, while 30 per cent preferred scrambled eggs. These preferences were nearly reversed among Negro families studied where it was found that fried eggs were preferred by 38 per cent of the Negro families, and scrambled eggs by 50 per cent. Almost 90 per cent of all homemakers preferred fried chicken over other methods of preparing chicken. Sixty-six per cent of all white homemakers preferred small fryers while 58 per cent of all Negro homemakers preferred large fryers. Data reveal a trend among white people toward serving eggs quite often as a main dish for meals other than breakfast. Among Negro families, however, 65 per cent living in towns and 46 per cent living in open country indicated a preference for eggs served only at breakfast. Only a minority group reported not eating poultry products; expense and dislike were the reasons given most frequently. The use of eggs was to some degree affected by season; however, 55 per cent of all families, white and Negro, consumed the same number of eggs the year around. The majority of consumers stored eggs under refrigeration in their homes; however, it was found that 22 per cent open country white families, 4 per cent white townspeople, 22 per cent open country Negro families, and 9.5 per cent Negro townspeople still used shelf storage. The majority of consumers refrigerate poultry, yet it was found that 12 per cent white open country, 3 per cent white towns, 26 per cent Negro open country, and 21 per cent Negro townspeople killed, dressed, and cooked poultry within a half-day period or less without the use of cold storage. Almost half of all homemakers, white and Negro, expressed a preference for brown eggs over white or cream colored eggs. Approximately 50 per cent of all families preferred eggs with a dark yellow yolk. Grading of eggs did not matter to almost 33 per cent of all families studied; when graded eggs were preferred, however, grade A was selected by the largest percentage of all families, 44 per cent white and 40 per cent Negro. CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 35 Large size eggs were preferred by nearly 70 per cent of the white and Negro homemakers living in towns. This was not true of open country homemakers, who selected medium sized eggs almost as readily as large eggs. Over half of all white homemakers and 80 per cent of all Negro homemakers indicated no interest in buying eggs by brand name. Cartoned eggs were preferred by only 41 per cent white open country families, 60 per cent white townspeople, 17 per cent Negro open country families, and 40 per cent Negro townspeople. Sixty-six per cent of all white people and 80 per cent of all Negro families were not concerned over fertility of eggs. Almost 70 per cent of all white families and over 60 per cent of all Negro families discarded eggs containing bloodspots and did not attempt to use them. Homemakers' opinions concerning number of eggs per week necessary for various members of the family varied, but the average was over the recommended requirement per person per week. The homemakers believed that men needed more eggs per week than did any other member of the family, next boys, and last women and girls. White families were consuming adequate protein in their diets on an average per capita basis. Negro families were 25 per cent short of their recommended daily protein requirement, considering only protein from animal and legume sources. Eggs contributed 10 per cent of the protein requirement for all white families, while chicken contributed better than 6 per cent. Negro families were averaging a little more than 6 per cent of their protein requirement from eggs and almost 7 per cent from chicken. 36 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 37 APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS AND METHODOLOGY DEFINITION, 1950 CENSUS. The Urban Zone comprises all persons living in (a) places of 2,500 inhabitants or more, incorporated as towns, cities, boroughs, and villages; (b) the densely settled urban fringe, including both incorporated and unincorporated areas, around cities of 50,000 or more; and (c) unincorporated places of 2,500 inhabitants or more outside any urban fringe. The Rural Place Zone consists of all incorporated places less than 2,500 in population and unincorporated places of 1,000 to 2,500 in population as defined by the Census. The Open Country Zone is the residual area not defined as Urban or Rural Place. Data from Urban and Rural Place Zones were combined and referred to as Towns. Examination of the data from these two zones indicated similarity in behavior pattern. Data collected from Rural Place Zones were not adequate in number to stand alone. PROTEIN DETERMINATION. The protein contents of meats and legumes were calculated from United States Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook No. 8, "1950 COMPOSITION OF FOODS - RAW, PROCESSED, PREPARED," according to amounts reported used by homemakers. Table 2 was used for all protein foods with the exception of poultry, eggs, and milk, which were calculated from Table 3. Per capita consumption of poultry products was calculated by the amount of each product reported used during the week prior to the interview. 38 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 38 ALABAMA AGRICULTURALNEXPRE Item r rv __ Answer Brick, stucco, wood Score 1. 2. Type of house construction Electricity Yes---- _ 3. Television set 4, Telephone NoYes----------Yes----____2 ------- 5. Refrigerator 6. 7. Radio No Yes -----__---- __ Auto Yes--------------------No---------------------------Yes--Yes------------ 8. Running water 9. 10. 11. 12. Home freezer Power washer Truck Daily newspaper Yes---Weekly -------______ ___----~- 2 0 13. Family participation None -------------All members 6 years and over in 1 or more organizations other than church -------- ---- __. Part members 6 years and over in 1 or more organizations other than church__-_______------_ All or part in church organizations or in no organization ----------- 0 TOTAL II i 111~V EcoNoMiC cSooEn Socio- _-______26 CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 39 CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 3 APPENDIX B APPENDIX TABLE 1. HOME OWNERSHIP BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White Open country Town Per cent Per cent Own home -__-_____71.0 641 Rent_____ ________-__-_w_ 26.8 32.8 Other -------------------2.2 3.1 Home ownership TOTAL______________ 100.0 100.0 Negro Open country Town Percent Per cent 39.5 39.5 53.5 7.0 58.1 2.3 100.0 99.9 APPENDIX TABLE 2. AVERAGE SIZE OF FARM AND ACREAGE UNDER CULTIVATION BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White Open country Town Acres Acres Size of farm________------------70.6 52.5 Acreage under cultivation---___ 27.4 27.1 Item Based on only those people reporting farms. 1 Negro Open country Town Acres Acres 40.3 25.2 17.8 19.0 1 APPENDIX TABLE 3. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES IN VARIOUS INCOME GROUPS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 families InoeWhite Inoe Open country Town No. Under $500_-----------______23 Negro families Open country Town No. 8 8 10 $500-$999 ----------------$1000-$1499 ---------.--- Pct. 12..9 7.9 10.2 No. 3 6 9 Pct. 2.4 4.9 7.3 Pct. 20.0 20.0 25.0 No. 9 13 3 Pdt. 21.4 30.9 7.1 14 18 $1500-$1999___------------$2000-$2499--------- $2500-$2999 -------------$5000-$7500 ---------.--TOTAL _-- 15 21 14 8.5 11.8 7.9 6 9 12 4.9 7.3 9.8 6 4 2 15.0 10.0 5.0 7 8 4 16.7 7.1 9.5 $3000-$3499----_-----19 $3500-$3999----16 $4000-$4999__------------16 -- 10.7 9.0 9.0 9.6 18 10 16 22 14.6 8.1 18.0 17.9 1 0 1 0 2.5 0 2.5 0 1 1 1 0 2.4 2.4 2.4 0 17 $7501-$10,000 and over-4 No information_----------___6 2.3 99.8 12 8 131 441 3.4 $4,052 $1,192 9.8 100.0 0 3 43 231 5.4 $1,331 $ 246 0 100.0 0 2 44 170 3.9 $1,375 $ 353 0 99.9 -------family- __ 183 Number of people_--------__698 size 3.8 Family $2,743 Per capita $ 722 Average income-----------income ------ APPENDIX TABLE 4. PERCENTAGES OF HUSBANDS AND WIVES TI VARIOUS EDUCATIONAL LEVELS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White families Negro families Husband Wife Husband Wife Open country Town Open country Town Open country Town Open country Town No. Put. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Pct. No. Put. No. Put. No schooling 5 3.7 0 0 5 3.3 0 0 1 3.8 1 3.7 0 0 3 7.1 1-3 grades _11 8.1 0 0 11 7.3 1 .9 7 26.9 5 18.5 7 18.9 7 16.7 4-6 grades_____________ 22 16.3 11 11.5 10 6.6 6 5.3 11 42.3 7 25.9 14 37.8 9 21.4 7-9 grades_______________ 44 32.6 26 27.1 62 41.0 28 24.8 6 23.1 6 22.2 12 32.4 12 28.6 10-12 grades 43 31.8 32 33.3 56 37.1 53 46.9 1 3.8 7 25.9 4 10.8 10 23.8 Some college-------6 4.4 12 12.5 3 2.0 13 11.5 0 0 1 3.7 0 0 1 2.4 Some vocational and business--0___ 0 0 1 1.0 1 .7 1 .9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bachelor's degree___ 2 1.5 10 10.4 2 1.3 10 8.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Over bachelor's degree 2 1.5 4 4.2 1 .7 1 .9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL__--------- _ 135 99.9 96 100.0 151 100.0 113 100.0 26 99.9 27 99.9 37 99.9 42 100.0 Education a ----------------- ------- P. a .I 1,.I ----------5. .I- 0 C APPENDIX TABLE NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES REPORTING VARIOUS INCOME SOURCES BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Nature of source White families Negro families Professional---- Self employed -_----------_--------__ ------_--- Open country Number Percent 8 4 Town Number Per cent 22 8 Open country Number Per cent 1 0 Town Number Percent 2 0 C m P 4.4 2.2 16.9 6.2 2.3 0 4.6 0 Clerical -Skilled ------ --------Fann operation -----------_-_-----____--------- 12 20 37 6.6 11.0 20.3 15 13 0 11.5 10.0 0 0 5 13 0 11.6 30.2 1 4 0 2.3 9.3 0 Income not Unskilled---------- ---TOTAL--____-- from work--------------__182 coz z -I -I zI 33 67 18.2 36.8 Oter---------------1 29 42 22.3 32.3 5 19 11.6 44.2 7 26 16.3 60.5 .5 100.0 1 130 .8 100.0 0 43 0 99.9 3 43 7.0 100.0 APPENDIX TABLE 6. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES WITH VARIOUS NUMBERS OF EARNERS WITHIN FAMILIES DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Number of earners eWhite families A 0 C Open country Town Negro families Open country Town -I 0 Number None ---1 One person 134 Two persons__-___---39 Three persons-6 Four persons --------------------2 Five or more persons------0 _-------------- --- Per cent 0.5 78.6 21.4 8.3 1.1 0 Number 0 Per cent 0 Number 2 Per cent 4.6 Number 0 Per cent 0 94 84 3 0 0 71.8 25.9 2.3 0 0 29 9 67.4 20.9 3 0 0 31 10 7.0 0 0 70.5 22.7 2 0 1 4.5 0 2.3 C '- "v TOTAL_______________ -_- 182 99.9 131 100.0 43 99.9 44 100.0 C 0 -I1 Hn APPENDIX TABLE 7. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF HOMEMAERS REPORTING VARIOUS TYPES OF EMPLOYMENT DURING THE YEAR PRIOR TO STUDY BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Employment Number 11 3 White families Open country Town Negro families Open country Town Professional ----Clerical and white collar Skilled ----------- --_--- Homemaker is principal earner. Self employed __0 Per cent 6.0 0 1.6 Number 21 2 3 Per cent 16.0 1.5 2.3 Number 8 0 1 Per cent 18.6 0 2.3 Number 9 1 0 Per cent 20.5 2.3 0 2 _ 1.1 .5 0 7 0 0 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Farm Income not from work ___0 operation ------ _ __ 1 0 24 2.3 0 0 Unskilled --------------------------_-Not gainfully employed______ Other ------ -___------- 0 13.1 0 19 140 2 76.5 1.1 77 2 58.8 99.9 14.5 1.5 0 0 4 0 9.3 2 4 4.5 9.1 30 0 69.8 0 25 2 56.8 4.5 TOTAL _______183 99.9 131 43 100.0 44 100.0 APPENDIX TABLE 8. NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES PURCHASING VARYING QUANTITIES OF EGGS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White families Number of eggs Negro families Town ---- Open country Open country Number None ------------94 6_ -___------- Per cent 51.4 6.0 2.2 11.5 18.1 ------ 12---------- 24 -------- _-______ 1 ____---____ 11 4 21 1 Number 12 12 1 Per cent 9.2 0 Number 18 Per cent 41.9 2.3 Number 9 2 Percent 20.5 4.5 a: .5 0 9.2 .8 22.9 27.5 11 1 25.6 0------ 21196.8 24 80 86 4 10 13 1 1 2 0 131 0 5 0 11.6 1 3 2.3 7.0 7 3 6 15.9 6.8 18.6 3 8 ___-------- 6.8 18.2 42_3 4. 840 -- 15 6 0 1 1 183 96---108___- TOTAL _ 1.6 8.2 8.3 0 0 .5 .5 99.9 8.0 7..6 9.9 .8 .8 1.5 0 100.0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 43 0 7.0 0 0 2.8 0 0 100.0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 44 0 9.1 4.5 0 0 0 0 99.9 C r m z .4 z n 0 z yn C .0 0 z APPENDIX TABLE 9. FAMILIES USING VARYING QUANTITIES OF EGGS IN PREPARATION OF FOODS BY NUMBERS AND PERCENTAGES RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 NWhite families or .0 0 C Negro families Town Open country Town Numuber of eggs Open country 1- 3. 4- 6__ Number 5 32 __ Per cent 2.9 18.9 Number 7 23 Per cent 5.9 19.5 Number 4 13 Per cent 12.1 39.4 Number 3 12 Per cent 7.5 30.0 0 0 0 v C A N- 7- 9 10-12_65 13-15 16-18._____ 23 - 13.6 38.5 4.1 5.3 26 33 1 8 22.0 28.0 .8 6.8 6 6 0 3 18.2 18.2 0 9.1 7 18 0 0 17.5 45.0 0 0 0 100.0 7 9 19-21__ 22-24__16 Over 24_-__10 2 169 TOTAL ____ 1.2 9.5 5.9 99.9 1 17 2 118 .8 14.4 1.7 99.9 0 1 0 33 0 3.0 0 100.0 0 0 0 40 Iw APPENDIX TABLE 10. EGG CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO SOcIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 $000-599 Soo-economic score Families Number White 21-26-----------------15-20____----------------- $600-1,199 Average egg consUmPtion per week Number 6.40 5.98 5.61 5.48 $1,200 and over egg con intnfaly per week Number 7.02 8.20 Average size familyfh Number 4.67 5.23 4.15 Families Number 21 62 14 size family Number 4.19 3.76 2.71 Average Fes size Average egg con Slltol per week Number 87 45 12 Number 3.24 2.51 2.33 Number 7.86 6.90 8.18 rvr 3 39 48 8.I. 9-14_____-----TOTAL___ Negro _------- 8 and under __ 16 106 1 5 22 3.50 1 1.00 4.46 4.00 6.60 4.91 5.75 7.00 5.88 4.27 98 1 4 5 3.67 4.00 2.75 2.40 4.00 7.67 7.00 5.25 5.40 6.56 1 95 1 3 0 1.00 2.76 2.00 2.00 0 7.00 7.44 7.00 10.00 0 0 6..I. 21-26___----------15-20__---__--- c 9-14-----------------8 and under___-~TOTAL_66 . -l c - 38 4.61 4.85 4.50 3.99 4.27 6.55 1 11 22 2.00 2.64 4.18 10.50 5.95 7.02 0 4 38 0 2.00 3.21 0 9.25 m 7.84 White and Negro combined 21-26--_ _ .-- 4 X m 15-20__ _ 44 70 54 5.39 4.61 9-14---______ 8 and __--- under TOTAL_ 4.39 4.28 5.97 5.19 4.43 66 19 2 3.70 2.63 1.50 8.02 6.26 7.25 48 12 1 2.48 2.33 1.00 7.09 8.18 7.00 'Per 172 5.81 109 8.57 7.50 99 2.73 7.51 z -4 person consumption for each member within the family. z n 0 z C APPENDIX TABLE 11. EGG CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO EDUCATION AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 ygI' z 0 0 $000-599 Educationeg EuainAverage Families Number sie family Number 4.20 5.07 4.00 4.66 egCOfl sumption pfer week Number 5.39 egco Average Families Number 6 $1,200 and over $600-1,199 Average Average egg Average egcn ie size aie Ffaily family per week Number Number Number Number con- sumphon 8.76 7.67 7.86 Average egcn per week Number 8.21 7.22 7.03 0 c I sumption -v 0 C c -I White 0-6 grades-__________ 35 3..88 7-12 grades--------Over 12 grades------Negro 0-6 grades----------___ 7-12 grades---------__ Over 12 grades----- 45 3 41 20 0 61 6.07 5.83 5.75 70 11 87 TOTAL____---______-- 83 8.69 3.91 8.73 2.67 2.67 8.00 2.70 5 52 26 8.00 2.73 2.88 7.71 5.17 5.92 4.00 5.50 88 1 3 0 4 2.79 2.00 2..00 0 2.00 7.22 14.00 7.67 0 9.25 TOTAL TOTAL 4.51 5.15 0 4.72 4.56 8.55 0 .4.23 8 6 1 10 - - White and Negro combined 76 0-6 grades----------___ 65 7-12 grades - ---- ___ 8 Over 12 grades----- 4.37 5.09 4.00 4.69 4.94 5.81 5.88 5.12 9 '76 12 97 'Per - 144 8.44 8.61 8.88 8.62 7.56 7.53 7.08 7.48 6 55 26 87 2.83 2.69 2.88 2.76 9.18 7.25 7.03 7.82 person consumption for each member within family. N APPENDIX TABLE 12. CfICKEN CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO SOcIo-ECONOMIC STATUS AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Socio-economic score Families Number $000-599 Average size family Number 4.67 5.24 4.24 3.71 4.56 4.00 6.60 4.91 4.68 4.90 4.50 5.40 4.46 4.41 4.69 Average' ken conFamilies $600-1,199 erage A chice size cverve SUptionsuption $1,200 and over Average chickenconper week sulptlmilyamily per week Number Number 1.60 1.15 .80 .61 .93 1.00 1.47 1.14 1.00 1.08 1.45 1.18 .91 .90 .99 21 61 14 0 96 1 4 5 1 11 22 65 19 1 107 per week Number 4.19 3.77 2.71 .00 3.71 4.00 2.75 2.40 2.00 2.64 4.18 3.71 2.63 2.00 3.60 Number 1.5187 1.26 1.03 .00 1.28 .1.00 1.38 2.00 1.00 1.59 1.48 1.26 1.29 1.00 1.31 Number 45 12 1 95 1 3 0 0 4 38 48 12 1 99 Number 3.24 2.51 2.33 1.00 2.76 2.00 2.00 0 0 2.00 3.21 2.48 2.33 1.00 1.00 Number 1.37 1.19 .79 .50 1.20 1.00 1.33 0 0 1.25 1.36 1.12 .79 .50 .50 rer White 21-26__ . 15-20_ 9-14 8 and under,,,_lTOTAL _101 L Negro 21-26_ 15-20:_5 9-14 -__ 8 and under --- _ 3 38 46 14 I A ~~7v C - 1 22 37 65 4 68 51 166 C 1.p. . TOTAL Negro combined White and r- -21-26 15-20 __43 9-l14__ 8 and under----TOTAL_ x 1<5 WI 1..4 m _ ' Servings per person for each member within family. z A C APPENDIX TABLE 13. CHICKEN CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO EDUCATION AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Education $000-599 Aeae Average' Families size family cikncn $600-1,199 Average Families size $1,200 and over Average' chicken consumption per week Number 1.60 1.17 1.15 1.19 2.00 1.00 0 1.25 1.67 1.16 1.15 1.19 z O Number White 0-6 grades-----31 7-12 grades___4 Over 12 gradesTOTAL Negro Number 4.42 5.16 4.00 4.82 4.51 5.15 0 4.72 4.51 5.16 4.00 4.80 per week Number .93 1.21 1.17 1.10 1.15 .99 0 1.10 1.06 1.14 1.17 1.10 sumption family Number 6 68 1185 3 6 1 10 9 74 12 95 Number 8.83 3.74 3.91 chicken consumption per week Average' Average Families Number 5 52 26 83 1 3 0 4 6 55 26 87 size family Number 3.00 2.73 2.88 2.79 Number 1.52 1.36 1.12 1.34 1.83 1.50 2.00 1.65 1.62 1.37 1.20 1.37 "0 C n . 77 3 3.77 2.67 2.67 3.00 2.70 3.44 3.65 3.83 3.65 0-6 grades _______ 7-12 grades---------___ Over 12 grades----- 40 20 0 TOTAL-__60 White and Negro combined 71 0-6 grades _______ 63 7-12 grades------8 Over 12 grades---- 2.00 2.00 0 2.00 2.83 2.69 2.88 2.76 TOTAL __----- . 137 'Servings per person fore each member within family. APPENDIX TABLE 14. TURKEY CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 $000-599 Socio-economic Families Score scoreFamilies Number White 21-26 Average size size family Number 4.67 5.28 turkey $600-1,199 Aveageerage sumption per year Number .83 .44 con- Families size $1,200 and over AAverage SUfPtiof family Number 21 59 SUmPtioflfamily per year Number 1.05 .65 .50 per year erI. eI- Number 4.19 3.85 Number 35 42 12 Number 3.29 2.50 2.83 Number 1.26 1.00 .50 A _---------15-20--------- --------------------- 3 46 ---15 100 36 nIF 9-14-----------_ 8 and under_____-TOTAL_____-----Negro 21-26---------- 4.22 3.40 4.49 4.00 6.60 .28 .20 .33 0 1.00 14 1 95 1 3 2.71 1.00 3.73 4.00 2.67 0 .71 7.00 1.00 1 90 1 3 1.00 2.77 0 1.02 1.00 1.67 A W ~CrtC L.G1 15-20 -----------------9-14------- - 8 and under----- --- 22 38 _. 1 5 2.00 2.00 C- 4.91 .27 5 2.40 0 0 0 0 TOTAL--------66 4 --------- 4.61 4.85 4.50 5.44 4.44 .11 .23 .25 .51 .28 1 10 22 62 19 2.00 2.60 4.18 3.79 2.63 0 1.00 0 4 36 45 12 0 2.00 3.25 2.47 2.33 0 1.50 1.25 1.04 .50 C in F White and Negro combined 21-2615-20----9-14------- ---___-- 41 68 1.32 .67 .37 8 and under___ TOTAL 1 53 166 4.26 4.63 .13 .29 2 105 1.50 3.62 0 .74 1 94 1.00 2.74 0 1.04 z AI OI ZI _------- Times served per year. 0 A z Hn C -I APPENDIX TABLE 15. TURIEY CONSUMPTION AND FAMILY SIZE AS RELATED TO EDUCATION AND PER CAPITA INCOME BY RACE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 0 0 $000-599 Education $600-1,199 Average' turkey conmmponizeFsize per year Number .80 .50 .67 .42 .15 .25 0 .18 $1,200 and over tukey con- z *0 e Families Number es s family verage Average Average F Average' Average turkeyco family Number 8.88 3.74 8.91 3.77 2.67 2.60 8.00 2.67 per year Number .50 family Number 5 per year Number .20 C -I Number 4.15 5.18 4.00 4.65 4.51 5.15 0 4.72 Number 6 68 11 85 8 5 1 9 Number 8.00 2.75 2.88 2.81 White 0-6 grades----88_7-12 grades________ Over 12 grades----8-. 33 0 C n -I TOTAL--------------- 39 3 75 41 20 0 61 .68 .78 .67 48 25 78 .85 1.44 1.00 Inl Negro 0-6 grades________ 7-12 grades---------___ Over 12 grades--- TOTAL____---- .88 1.80 0 1.11 1 8 0 4 2.00 2.00 0 2.00 2.71 2.00 1.88 0 1.50 White and Negro combined 74 0-6 grades_______ 7-12 grades 4.85 5.14 .28 .82 Over 12 _____ -grades ----- 59 TOTAL__-_____. 3 186 4.00 4.68 .41 .67 9 73 8.44 3.66 .44 .75 6 51 2.88 2.88 2.77 .50 .88 12 94 3.88 8.66 .67 .71 25 82 1.44 1.02 'Times served per year. 50 ALABAMA AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION 50 ALABAMA AGRICULTURLEP~MN TTO APPENDIX TABLE 16. PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES PREFERRING VARIOUS METHODS OF PREPARING EGGS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARYI-APRIL, 1956 Negro families White families First Second Second First preference preference preference preference Method Open Town Open Town Open Town Town country country country country Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pct. Pet. 5.1 2.7 7.1 7.3 4.2 6.2 6.2 10.9 _ d_--Poached_ 24.3 43.9 41.0 10.6 14.2 83.3 46.4 Fried_____------------64.6 35.1 48.8 38.5 36.3 47.6 34.9 43.0 24.2 Scrambled---__l-_. 32.4 0 10.3 35.2 38.6 11.9 7.0 Boiled ________--_ 3.9 0 5.1 5.4 6.3 6.2 0 1.1 0 Deviled__ ____0 0 0 .7 0 0 0 .8 Raw-----0_______________ 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.5 0 Steamed___-___----99.9 100.0 100.0 99.9 TOTAL---------- 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Open APPENDIX TABLE 17. PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES PREFERRING VARIOUS METHODS OF PREPARING CHICKEN BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White families Negro families Method First Second First Second preference preference preference preference Open Town Open Town Open Town Open Town country country country country Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Pet. Fried - ---- Broiled _____ 90.7 1.2 2.9 81.4 2.3 4.8 92.8 88.6 5.5 Baked------____ 3.1 3.9 7.0 32.0 18.1 26.7 0 2.4 4.5 2.3 5.5 16.7 18.9 21.6 8.1 Smothered-______ Stewed--------_____ Barbecued__-_. TOTAL-__ 1.7 2.3 1.2 100.0 5.4 3.1 3.1 100.0 9.4 36.7 12.5 99.9 7.6 25.7 17.1 100.0 4.8 0 0 100.0 2.8 2.3 0 100.0 25.0 38.9 8.3 99.9 29.7 16.2 5.4 99.9 CONSUMPTION of POULTRY PRODUCTS 51 CO~SUMPTIONI of PULTRY PROIDUCTS 5 APPENDIX TABLE 18. PERCENTAGES OF FAMILIES PREFERRING VARIOUS SIZES OF CHICKEN AND TUCEY BY RACE AND ZON, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 White families Negro families First Second First Second preference preference Size preference preference Open Town Open Town Open Town Open country country country country Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct. 88.0 11.1 8.8 Small fryers 65.3 66.4 0 4.0 83.3 23.1 31.4 30.8 6.2 10.7 61.5 54.8 16.7 Large fryers2__-____-__ Town 57.7 15.4 Hens Turkeys TOTAL__---------____ ---------------------- -------0 _------ 3.3 100.0 2.5 .8 100.0 68.1 30.7 100.0 65.3 20.0 100.0 5.1 0 4.8 2.4 44.4 27.8 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 'Large 'Small fryers refers to chickens weighing less than 2 pounds. fryers refers to chickens weighing 2 pounds and over. APPENDIX TABLE 19. PERCENTAGES OF HOMEMAKERS REPORTING VARIOUS EGG CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS FOR FAMILY MEMBERS BY RACE AND ZONE, PIEDMONT AREA OF ALABAMA, FEBRUARY-APRIL, 1956 Number of eggs' per week Open country White Town Pct. Negro Open Town country couty White en Town conr Open Pct. Negro Town Pct. 4.6 5.8 59.3 6-10--_---_---_20.9 11-17--- Pet. Boy 0 9.5 61.9 19.0 Pdt. 4.8 4.3 78.3 18.0 Pct. 3.4 5.6 62.9 21.3 Pct. Girl 1.9 0 96.2 1.9 Pct. 8.8 3.8 88.5 3.8 1-2 -------------8- 5------------- More than -----TOTAL -- 17_-------_9.3 ----99.9 4.1 .4 42.5 4.2 2.1 85.3 6.3 0 9.5 61.9 23.8 2.1 9.5 99.9 0 99.9 6.7 99.9 0 100.0 4.8 100.0 0 99.9 100.0 Man 2.9 Woman 0 6.3 56.2 2.9 14.7 58.8 4.7 8.1 64.2 4.6 3.7 78.7 0 6.3 68.7 5.1 12.8 76.9 1- 2------_ 3- 5__-----8---_ 6-10-------_--- 8.9 68.6 11-17_________"_ More than 17_-------_8.2 41.8 20.6 28.1. 23.5 19.6 9.3 18.7 5.1 3.9 99.9 9.4' 100.0 0 99.9 3.4 100.0 3.7 100.0 6.3 100.0 0 99.9 TOTAL ------ 100.0 'Wegdaverages, Table 22, page 30.