Manufacture and evaluation of a semi-automatic incubator for hatching quail eggs

This research evaluates a semi-automatic incubator designed for hatching quail eggs using locally available materials, with the aim of increasing the quail population, since quails do not naturally incubate their eggs. The objective is to produce meat that competes with broilers as a rich source of protein. The study includes three experimental variables: three incubation temperatures (37, 37.5, and 37.7°C), three turning times (2, 6, and 12 times per day), and three post-hatching periods for chicks to remain in the incubator (2, 6, and 12 hours). The measurements include the percentage of total hatchability within the first 3 hours, as well as rates of deformation and mortality. The results of this research indicated that the manufactured semi-automatic incubator was able to maintain a high hatching percentage, low deformation percentage, and a low mortality percentage when using an incubation temperature of 37.5°C, turning the eggs 12 times per day, and allowing the chicks to stay in the incubator for 12 hours after hatching. Therefore, it is recommended to utilize the manufactured semi-automatic incubator for hatching quail eggs under the above-mentioned parameters.

Manufacture and evaluation of a semi-automatic incubator for hatching quail eggs

This research evaluates a semi-automatic incubator designed for hatching quail eggs using locally available materials, with the aim of increasing the quail population, since quails do not naturally incubate their eggs. The objective is to produce meat that competes with broilers as a rich source of protein. The study includes three experimental variables: three incubation temperatures (37, 37.5, and 37.7°C), three turning times (2, 6, and 12 times per day), and three post-hatching periods for chicks to remain in the incubator (2, 6, and 12 hours). The measurements include the percentage of total hatchability within the first 3 hours, as well as rates of deformation and mortality. The results of this research indicated that the manufactured semi-automatic incubator was able to maintain a high hatching percentage, low deformation percentage, and a low mortality percentage when using an incubation temperature of 37.5°C, turning the eggs 12 times per day, and allowing the chicks to stay in the incubator for 12 hours after hatching. Therefore, it is recommended to utilize the manufactured semi-automatic incubator for hatching quail eggs under the above-mentioned parameters.

___

  • Abdul-Rahaim L, Mohammed A, Ali A (2015) Remote Wireless Automation and Monitoring of Large Farm using wireless sensors networks and Internet. International Journal of Computer Science & Engineering Technology 6(3): 118-137.
  • Aggrey S, Ankra-Badu B, Marks H (2003) Effect of long-term divergent selection on growth characteristics in Japanese quail. Poultry Science 82: 538-542. doi: 10.1093/ps/82.4.538.
  • Ali F, Amran N (2016) Development of an Egg Incubator Using Raspberry Pi for Precision. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Plantation 2: 40-45.
  • Aru O (2017) Development of a Computerized Engineering Technique to Improve Incubation System in Poultry Farms. Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research 4(6): 109-119.
  • Bayomy H, Rozan M, Mohammed G (2017) Nutritional Composition of Quail Meatballs and Quail Pickled Eggs. Journal of Nutrition and Food Sciences 7: 584. doi: 10.4172/2155-9600.1000584.
  • Deka P, Borgohain R, Barkalita L (2016) Design and Evaluation of a Low Cost Domestic Incubator for Hatching Japanese Quail Eggs. International Journal of Livestock Research 6(1): 92 doi: 10.5455/ijlr.20160109075228.
  • Kaur S, Mandal A, Singh K, Kadam M (2008) The response of Japanese quails (heavy body weight line) to dietary energy levels and graded essential amino acid levels on growth performance and immuno-competence. Livestock Science 117: 255-62. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2007.12.019.
  • Mashhadi S, Yekan J, Dashtaki M (2012) Incubator with Fuzzy Logic. The Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science 3(3): 197-204.
  • Nakage E, Cardozo J, Pereira G, Boleli C (2003) Effect of temperature on incubation period, embryonic mortality, hatch rate, egg water loss and partridge chick weight (Rhynchotus rufescens). RevistaBrasileira de CiˆenciaAv´ıcola 5(2): 131-135. doi: 10.1590/S1516635X2003000200007.
  • Ohpagu P, Nwosu A (2016) Development and Temperature Control of Smart Egg Incubator System for Various Types Egg. European Journal of Engineering and Technology 4(2): 13-21.
  • Pankaj D, Rupam B, Luit M (2016) Design and Evaluation of a Low Cost Domestic Incubator for Hatching Japanese Quail Eggs. International Journal of Livestock Research 6(1): 92-97. doi: 10.5455/ijlr.20160109075228.
  • Ramli M, Lim H, Wahab M, Zin M (2015) Egg Hatching Incubator Using Conveyor Rotation System. Procedia Manufacturing 2(2): 527-531. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.091.
  • Ramli M, Wahab M, Zain B, Raus A, Kamarudin K, Sa`ude N, Haq R, Ibrahim A (2017) Effect Of Incubation Temperature On Ikta’s Quail Breed With New Rolling Mechanism System/Mohd Badli Ramli. [et al.]. Journal of Mechanical Engineering 4(3): 78-88.
  • Randall M, Bolla G (2008) Raising Japanese Quail Prime fact 602 second edition (New South Wales: Department of Primary Industry).
  • Rashid Azhar, Tyagi, J, Sirajudeen M, Mohan, Jag, Akbar, Nasir, Narayan R (2014) Effect of incubation temperatures on the hatching performance in Japanese quail. Indian Journal of Poultry Science 49(2): 220-223.
  • Schmitt D (2015) A Novel Fully Automated Incubation, Manipulation and Documentation System for the Avian Embryogenesis. Journal of Biotechnology and Biomaterials 5(3): 1-6.
  • Stokes M, Davis C, Koch G (2012) Categorical Data Analysis Using SAS; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA.
  • Umar A, Lawal K, Mukhtar M, Adamu M (2016) Construction of an Electrically-Operated Egg Incubator. International Journal of Modern Engineering Sciences 5(1): 1-18.
  • Yoshizaki N, Saito H (2002) Changes in shell membranes during the development of quail embryos. Poultry Science 81: 246-251. doi: 10.1093/ps/81.2.246.