Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 65 - Sayı: 1

Farklı kafes sistemlerinde barındırılan iki yumurtacı hibritte bazı yumurta kalite özellikleri

Some egg quality traits of two laying hybrids kept in different cage systems

Pages
51–55
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Consequently, albumen index, yolk index and Haugh Unit were enhanced by the enrichment of the cages and interactions among cage type, hybrid and layer age should be taken for the egg quality traits

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Interest has been increasing about enriched cages affecting the laying hens and the producers.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Whence, the purpose of this study was to determine the differences in egg quality traits of two laying hybrids reared in conventional and enriched cages at different ages. 532 Lohmann Brown Classic (LB) and 532 Lohmann LSL Classic (LW) hens were kept from 16 to 73 weeks in either conventional cages or enriched cages.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Consequently, albumen index, yolk index and Haugh Unit were enhanced by the enrichment of the cages and interactions among cage type, hybrid and layer age should be taken for the egg quality traits
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Interest has been increasing about enriched cages affecting the laying hens and the producers. Egg quality traits are important for economic impact. Whence, the purpose of this study was to determine the differences in egg quality traits of two laying hybrids reared in conventional and enriched cages at different ages. 532 Lohmann Brown Classic (LB) and 532 Lohmann LSL Classic (LW) hens were kept from 16 to 73 weeks in either conventional cages or enriched cages. Twenty eight eggs were selected randomly from each hybrid and cage group at 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 and 70 wk of ages at from 08.00 to 10.00 o’clock to evaluate egg quality traits. For this aim, a total of 672 eggs were used. Egg weight, shape index, breaking strength, shell thickness, albumen index, yolk index and Haugh Unit were determined. Yolk index, albumen index and Haugh Unit in eggs of hens were reared in conventional cages were lower than those of in enriched cages. Egg weight, shape index and shell thickness were higher in eggs laid by LB hens. Layer age was affected all examined egg quality parameters. Consequently, albumen index, yolk index and Haugh Unit were enhanced by the enrichment of the cages and interactions among cage type, hybrid and layer age should be taken for the egg quality traits

Özet

Yumurtacı tavukları ve üreticileri etkileyen zenginleştirilmiş kafeslere olan ilgi artmaktadır. Yumurta kalite özellikleri ekonomik öneme sahiptir. Bu nedenle bu araştırmanın amacı geleneksel ve zenginleştirilmiş kafeslerde barındırılan iki yumurtacı hibritte farklı yaşlarda yumurta kalite özelliklerini araştırmaktır. Toplam 532 Lohmann Kahverengi (LB) ve 532 Lohmann Beyaz (LW) yumurtacı tavuk 16 haftalık yaştan 73 haftalık yaşa kadar geleneksel ve zenginleştirilmiş kafeslerde barındırıldı. Yumurta kalite özelliklerinin incelenmesi için 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 ve 70 haftalık yaşlarda saat 8.00-10.00 arasında her bir genotip ve kafes grubundan 28 yumurta rastgele seçildi. Bu amaçla toplam 672 yumurta kullanıldı. Yumurta ağırlığı, şekil indeksi, kırılma mukavemeti, kabuk kalınlığı, ak indeksi, sarı indeksi ve Haugh birimi belirlendi. Geleneksel kafeste yetiştirilen tavukların yumurtasında sarı indeksi, ak indeksi ve Haugh birimi zenginleştirilmiş kafeste yetiştirilenlerinkine göre daha düşük bulundu. Yumurta ağırlığı, şekil indeksi ve kabuk kalınlığının kahverengi yumurtacılardan elde edilen yumurtalarda daha yüksek olduğu görüldü. Yumurtacı tavukların yaşı, incelenen tüm yumurta kalite özelliklerini etkiledi. Sonuç olarak, zenginleştirilmiş kafesler ak indeksi, sarı indeksi ve Haugh birimini arttırmıştır ve kafes tipi, hibrit ve yaş arasındaki interaksiyonlar yumurta kalitesi bakımından dikkate alınmalıdır

🔖

Cite This Article

ÜNAL, N., ONBAŞILAR, E. E., ERDEM, E. (2022). Farklı kafes sistemlerinde barındırılan iki yumurtacı hibritte bazı yumurta kalite özellikleri. Ankara Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 65 - Sayı: 1, 51–55. https://ajindex.com/articles/444601

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Ahammed M, Ohh SJ (2013): Effect of housing systemsbarn vs cage on the first phase egg production and egg quality traits of laying pullet. Korean J Poult Sci, 40, 67-73
  2. Ahmed, AMH, Rodriguez-Navarro AB, Vidal ML, et al. (2005): Changes in eggshell mechanical properties, crystallographic texture and in matrix proteins induced by moult in hens. Br Poult Sci, 46, 268-279
  3. Dawson B, Trapp RG (2001): Basic and clinical biostatistics, 3rd ed. Lange medical books. McGraw-Hill Medical Publishing Division, New York
  4. Dikmen BY, İpek A, Şahan Ü, et al. (2016): The egg production and welfare of laying hens kept in different housing systems (conventional, enriched cage, and free range). Poult Sci, pew082
  5. Johnston SA, Gous RM (2007): Modelling the changes in the proportions of the egg components during a laying cycle. Br Poult Sci, 48, 347-353
  6. Jones DR, Karcher DM, Abdo Z (2014): Effect of commercial housing system on egg quality during extended storage. Poult Sci, 93, 1282-1288
  7. Kalmendal R, Johansson F, Wall H (2013): Effects of fiber supply in furnished cages on performance, egg quality, and feather cover in 2 egg-laying hybrids. J Appl Poult Res, 22, 109-117
  8. Küçükyılmaz K, Bozkurt M, Herken EN, et al. (2012): Effects of rearing systems on performance, egg characteristics and immune response in two layer hen genotype. Asian Australas J Anim Sci, 25, 559-568. doi:10.5713/ajas.2011.11382
  9. Ledvinka Z, Tůmová E, Arent E, et al. (2000): Egg shell quality in some white-egg and brown egg cross combinations of dominant hens. Czech J Anim Sci, 45, 285- 288
  10. Ledvinka Z, Tůmová E, Englmaierová M, et al. (2012): Egg quality of three laying hen genotypes kept in conventional cages and on litter. Arch Geflűgelkunde, 76, 38-46
  11. Lewko L, Gornowicz E (2011): Effect of housing system on egg quality in laying hens. Ann Anim Sci, 11, 607-616
  12. Onbaşılar EE, Ünal N, Erdem E, et al. (2015): Production performance, use of nest box, and external appearance of two strains of laying hens kept in conventional and enriched cages. Poult Sci, 94, 559-564
  13. Padhi MK, Chatterjee RN, Haunshi S, et al. (2013): Effect of age on egg quality in chicken. India Int J Poult Sci, 48, 122-125
  14. Pavlovski Z, Masic B, Josipovic S, et al. (1992): The effect of system of housing on the laying performance of hens in small flocks. Biotech U Stocarstvu, 8, 57-63
  15. Peebles ED, Zumwalt CD, Doyle SM, et al. (2000): Effects of breeder age and dietary fat source and lev