A Comparative Study on the Laying Performance and Egg Quality of Four Available Strains in Bangladesh



Abstract Views
673

Downloads
1313

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Nov 8, 2022
Published Dec 22, 2022
10.24018/ejfood.2022.4.6.602

Abstract viewed = 673 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Among all the sub-sectors of the livestock sector in Bangladesh, poultry stands as one of the most important ones. To evaluate the production performances and egg quality of four commercial layer strains in Bangladesh, a total of 128 laying pullets including NOVOgen brown, ISA brown, Hy-line brown, and Bovans brown were randomly allocated at 4 different treated groups (one individual strain treated as separate treatment) having 4 replications and 8 birds in each replication. The birds aged 20 weeks were considered for the experiment and continued until 35 weeks of age. A commercial layer diet purchased from Kazi Farms Group was fed to the experimental birds. Identical management was provided to the birds irrespective of their strains. Data on feed intake, egg production and body weight were recorded and thereafter egg mass and feed efficiency were calculated. Eggs were collected from the respective treatments and subjected to external and internal egg quality analysis. The results revealed that Hy-Line brown had significantly (p<0.001) lower feed intake compared to other strains. On the other hand, NOVOgen Brown had the significantly (p<0.05) higher shell thickness among others. Other laying performances such as hen-day egg production, average egg weight, egg mass and egg quality parameters such as shape index, Haugh unit, albumen index, and yolk color score did not affect significantly (p<0.05). Taken together, it may be concluded that there were almost no statistical differences in relation to laying performance and egg quality among the strains compared in this study and the strains are highly compatible to the local climatic condition.

Keywords: comparative study, egg production, egg quality, Haugh unit, layer strains.

References

  1. DLS 2022: Annual report on livestock (2022). Division of Livestock Statistics, Ministry of Fisheries and Livestock, Farmgate, Dhaka, Bangladesh. http://www.dls.gov.bd/site/page/22b1143b-9323-44f8- bfd8-647087828c9b/Livestock-Economy.
     Google Scholar
  2. BPICC 2020. Annual report on poultry (2020). https://bpicc- poultry.com/.
     Google Scholar
  3. Tolimir N, Mašić B. The results of European egg production tests in 1997–1998. Živinarstvo. 2000;35(5):66–8.
     Google Scholar
  4. Suk YO, Park C. Effect of breed and age of hens on the yolk to albumen ratio in two different genetic stocks. Poultry Science. 2001 Jul 1;80(7):855–8.
     Google Scholar
  5. Rizzi C, Chiericato GM. Organic farming production. Effect of age on the productive yield and egg quality of hens of two commercial hybrid lines and two local breeds. Italian Journal of Animal Science. 2005 Jan 1;4(sup3):160–2.
     Google Scholar
  6. Van Den Brand H, Parmentier HK, Kemp AB. Effects of housing system (outdoor vs cages) and age of laying hens on egg characteristics. British poultry science. 2004 Dec 1;45(6):745–52.
     Google Scholar
  7. Stadelman WJ. Quality identification of shell eggs. In Egg science and technology. 2017 Dec 14 (pp. 39–66). CRC Press.
     Google Scholar
  8. Silversides FG, Korver DR, Budgell KL. Effect of strain of layer and age at photo-stimulation on egg production, egg quality, and bone strength. Poultry science. 2006 Jul 1;85(7):1136–44.
     Google Scholar
  9. Samad MA. Poultry Science and medicine. Lyric-Epic Prokasoni, BAU Campus, Mymensingh. 2005;769.
     Google Scholar
  10. IBM SPSS: Statistical Computer Package Program 20.00. https://www.ibm.com/analytics/spss-statistics-software.
     Google Scholar
  11. Anderson KE, Tharrington JB, Curtis PA, Jones FT. Shell characteristics of eggs from historic strains of single comb white leghorn chickens and the relationship of egg shape to shell strength. International journal of poultry science. 2004;3(1):17–9.
     Google Scholar
  12. Bovans Brown Commercial Layer Management Guide. February 2022. https://www.hendrix-genetics.com/en/.
     Google Scholar
  13. Hy-Line Brown Commercial Layer Management Guide, February 2022. https://www.hyline.com/.
     Google Scholar
  14. ISA Brown Commercial Layer Management Guide. February 2022. https://www.isa-poultry.com/en/product/isa-brown/.
     Google Scholar
  15. NovoGen Brown Commercial Layer Management Guide, February 2022. https://NovoGen-layers.com/en/.
     Google Scholar
  16. Charles DR, Tucker SA. Responses of modern hybrid laying stocks to changes in photoperiod. British Poultry Science. 1993 May 1;34(2):241–53.
     Google Scholar
  17. Yakubu A, Salako AE, Ige AO. Effects of genotype and housing system on the laying performance of chickens in different seasons in the semi-humid tropics. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2007;6(6):434–9.
     Google Scholar
  18. Sazzad MH. Comparative study on egg production and feed efficiency of different breeds of poultry under intensive and rural conditions in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development. 1992 Dec;4(3):65–9.
     Google Scholar
  19. Johnston SA, Gous RM. Modelling the changes in the proportions of the egg components during a laying cycle. British poultry science. 2007 Jun 1;48(3):347–53.
     Google Scholar
  20. Ragheb G, Al-Nasser AE, Abdullah FK, Al-Bahouh ME, Al-Saffar A, Al-Khalifa H, Mashaly MM. Comparative study on production efficiency of two strains of brown and white egg laying hens in Kuwait. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2013 Jul 1;12(7):383–9.
     Google Scholar
  21. Petek M. Production traits and economic efficiencies of different genotypes of layers reared by enterprises in Bursa province and its near vicinity. Veteriner Fakultesi Dergisi Uludag Universitesi. 1999;18(1-2):65–77.
     Google Scholar
  22. Mehta VS, Lakhotia RL, Singh B. A study on forced resting and recycling of white layers. Indian J. Prod. Management. 1986; 2:138– 40.
     Google Scholar
  23. Singh R, Cheng KM, Silversides FG. Production performance and egg quality of four strains of laying hens kept in conventional cages and floor pens. Poultry science. 2009 Feb 1;88(2):256–64.
     Google Scholar
  24. Silversides FG, Scott AT. Effect of storage and layer age on quality of eggs from two lines of hens. Poultry Science. 2001 Aug 1;80(8):1240–5.
     Google Scholar
  25. Campo JL, Gil MG, Davila AS. Differences among white-, tinted-and brown-egg laying hens for incidence of eggs laid on the floor and for oviposition time. Archiv Fur Geflugelkunde. 2007 Jun 1;71(3):105–9.
     Google Scholar
  26. Lee MH, Cho EJ, Choi ES, Bang MH, Sohn SH. The effect of hen age on egg quality in commercial layer. Korean Journal of Poultry Science. 2016;43(4):253–61.
     Google Scholar
  27. Molnár A, Maertens L, Ampe B, Buyse J, Kempen I, Zoons J, Delezie E. Changes in egg quality traits during the last phase of production: is there potential for an extended laying cycle? British Poultry Science. 2016 Nov 1;57(6):842–7.
     Google Scholar
  28. Rodriguez-Navarro A, Kalin O, Nys Y, Garcia-Ruiz JM. Influence of the microstructure on the shell strength of eggs laid by hens of different ages. British poultry science. 2002 Jul 1;43(3):395–403.
     Google Scholar
  29. Liljedahl LE, Gavora JS, Fairfull RW, Gowe RS. Age changes in genetic and environmental variation in laying hens. Theoretical and applied genetics. 1984 Mar;67(5):391–401.
     Google Scholar
  30. Kraus A, Zita L. The effect of age and genotype on quality of eggs in brown egg-laying hybrids. Acta Universitatis Agriculture et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis. 2019 Apr 29;67(2):407–14.
     Google Scholar
  31. Wall H, Jönsson L, Johansson L. Effects on egg quality traits of genotype and diets with mussel meal or wheat-distillers dried grains with solubles. Poultry science. 2010 Apr 1;89(4):745–51.
     Google Scholar
  32. Coutts JA, Wilson GC. Egg quality handbook. Queensland Department of Primary Industries; 1991.
     Google Scholar
  33. Ledvinka Z, Zita L, Tyller M, Dobrovolny P, Klesalova L, Tyllerova H. Effect of genotype, feather growth-rate gene and the age of hens on the egg quality. Bulgarian Journal of Agricultural Science. 2014;20(6):1466–71.
     Google Scholar
  34. Rajkumar U, Reddy BL, Padhi MK, Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Bhattacharya TK, Chatterjee RN. Inheritance of growth and production traits in sex linked dwarf chicken in a laying cycle of 64 weeks. Indian Journal of Poultry Science. 2008;46(2):143–7.
     Google Scholar
  35. Rajkumar U, Sharma RP, Rajaravindra KS, Niranjan M, Reddy BL, Bhattacharya TK, Chatterjee RN. Effect of genotype and age on egg quality traits in naked neck chicken under tropical climate from India. International Journal of Poultry Science. 2009;8(12):1151–5.
     Google Scholar
  36. ROSSI M, Pompei C. Changes in some egg components and analytical values due to hen age. Poultry Science. 1995 Jan 1;74(1):152–60.
     Google Scholar
  37. Yasmeen F, Mahmood S, Hassan M, Akhtar N, Yaseen M. Comparative productive performance and egg characteristics of pullets and spent layers. Pakistan Veterinary Journal. 2008 Jan 1;28(1):5.
     Google Scholar
  38. Fletcher DL, Britton WM, Pesti GM, Rahn AP, Savage SI. The relationship of layer flock age and egg weight on egg component yields and solids content. Poultry Science. 1983 Sep 1;62(9):1800–5.
     Google Scholar
  39. Nys Y. Relationships between age, shell quality and individual rate and duration of shell formation in domestic hens. British Poultry Science. 1986 Jun 1;27(2):253–9.
     Google Scholar
  40. Roberts JR, Ball W. Egg quality guidelines for the Australian egg industry. Australian Egg Corporation Limited Publication. 2004;3(1):19–33.
     Google Scholar


Most read articles by the same author(s)