Morphological and carcass traits of three chicken genotypes under free-range, semiintensive, and intensive housing systems

The present study evaluated the effect of housing system on morphometric and carcass traits of 3 chicken genotypes. In total,180 cockerels and 180 pullets of 6 weeks old were studied. A randomized complete block design in factorial arrangement, with 18experimental units of 20 birds each, was applied. Treatments consisted of 3 genotypes consisting of purebred Naked Neck (NN) birdsand two crossbreeds (Rhode Island Red × Naked Neck = RNN, Black Australorp × Naked Neck = BNN) and 3 housing systems (freerange,semiintensive, and intensive). Regarding males, RNN chickens had the highest weight at slaughter (1491.12 ± 64.10 vs. 1390.30 ±49.15 and 1333.76 ± 37.54 g; P = 0.0009), dressed weight (870.12 ± 32.32 vs. 794.07 ± 24.75 and 724.51 ± 10.50 g; P < 0.0001), and breastweight (158.35 ± 8.03 vs. 128.26 ± 11.06 and 118.37 ± 8.18 g; P < 0.0001) as compared to BNN and NN. In terms of housing system,keel length (10.66 ± 0.15 and 10.42 ± 0.11 vs. 9.93 ± 0.15 cm; P < 0.0004), weight at slaughter (1482.78 ± 50.15 and 1498.02 ± 33.65 vs.1234.37 ± 19.95 g; P < 0.0001), and dressed weight (829.78 ± 37.63 and 829.05 ± 24.74 vs. 729.87 ± 15.49 g; P = 0.0007) were higher insemiintensive and intensive birds as compared to free-range birds. Regarding females, drumstick length (11.66 ± 0.25 vs. 10.47 ± 0.23and 10.36 ± 0.31 cm; P = 0.0007), drumstick weight (124.93 ± 13.70 vs. 93.41 ± 2.91 and 86.43 ± 2.51 g; P < 0.0001), and thigh weight(132.85 ± 13.23 vs. 107.68 ± 2.05 and 97.13 ± 3.42 g; P < 0.0001) were higher in intensive birds than free-range and semiintensive systems.In conclusion, RNN and BNN chickens of both sexes had better morphological and carcass traits during the growing stage as comparedto NN.

PDF

___

1. Khawaja T, Khan SH, Mukhtar N, Parveen A, Ahmed T. Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of three-way crossbred chickens with reciprocal F1 crossbred chickens in a subtropical environment. Journal of Applied Animal Research 2013; 41 (3): 300-308. doi: 10.1080/09712119.2013.782869
2. Adebambo AO, Ikeobi CON, Ozoje MO, Oduguwa OO, Adebambo OA. Combining abilities of growth traits among pure and crossbred meat type chickens. Archivos de Zootecnia 2011; 60: 953-963.
3. Khawaja T, Khan SH, Mukhtar N, Parveen A. Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of Fayoumi, Rhode Island Red and their reciprocal crossbred chickens. Italian Journal of Animal Science 2012; 11: 2. doi: 10.4081/ijas.2012.e39
4. Zhao Z, Li J, Li X, Bao J. Effects of housing systems on behaviour, performance and welfare of fast-growing broilers. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 2014; 27 (1): 140-146. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13167
5. Bizeray D, Estevez I, Leterrier C, Faure JM. Influence of increased environmental complexity on leg condition, performance, and level of fearfulness in broilers. Poultry Science 2002; 81: 767-773. doi: 10.1093/ps/81.6.767
6. Fanatico AC, Pillai PB, Cavitt LC, Emmert JL, Meullenet JF et el. Evaluation of slower growing broiler genotypes grown with and without outdoor access: sensory attributes. Poultry Science 2006; 85: 337-343. doi: 10.1093/ps/85.2.337
7. Dal Bosco A, Mugnai C, Rosati A, Paoletti A, Caporali S et al. Effect of range enrichment on performance, behavior and forage intake of free-range chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2014; 23: 137-145. https:// doi.org/10.3382/japr.2013-00814
8. Fanatico AC, Brewer VB, Owens-Hanning CM, Donoghue DJ, Donoghue AM. Free-choice feeding of free-range meat chickens. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 2013; 22: 750- 758. https://doi.org/10.3382/japr.2012-00687
9. Castellini C, Berri C, Le Bihan-Duval E, Martino G. Qualitative attributes and consumer perception of organic and free range poultry meat. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2008; 64: 500– 513. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933908000172
10. Batkowska J, Brodacki A, Zieba G, Horbanczuk JO, Lukaszewicz M. Growth performance, carcass traits and physical properties of chicken meat as affected by genotype and production system. Archives Animal Breeding 2015; 58: 325-333. doi: 10.5194/ aab-58-325-2015
11. Gondwe TN, Wollny CBA. Evaluation of the growth potential of local chickens in Malawi. International Journal of Poultry Science 2005; 4: 64-70.
12. Devatkal SK, Vishnuraj MR, Kulkarni VV, Kotaiah T. Carcass and meat quality characterization of indigenous and improved variety of chicken genotypes. Poultry Science 2018; 97 (8): 2947-2956. doi: 10.3382/ps/pey108
13. NRC. Nutrient Requirement Table of Poultry. 9th ed. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press; 1994.
14. Leeson S, Summers JD. Commercial Poultry Nutrition. 3rd ed. Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press; 2005. pp. 297- 305.
15. Raphulu T, van Rensberg CJ, Coertze RJ. Carcass composition of Venda indigenous scavenging chickens under village management. Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development in the Tropics and Subtropics 2015; 116(1): 27-35.
16. SAS Institute. SAS® Users Guide: Statistics. Version 9.01. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute; 2002.
17. Tukey JW. The Collected Works of John W. Tukey, VIII. Multiple Comparisons. New York, NY, USA: Chapman and Hall; 1953.
18. Fadare AO. Morphometric and growth performance variations of naked neck, frizzled feathered and normal feather crosses with exotic Giri-raja chickens. Jordan Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2014; 10 (4): 811-820.
19. Qureshi M, Qadri AH, Gachal GS. Morphological study of various varieties of Aseel chicken breed inhabiting district Hyderabad. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 2018; 6 (2): 2043-2045.
20. Tong HB, Wang Q, Lu J, Zou JM, Chang LL et al. Effect of free-range days on a local chicken breed: growth performance, carcass yield, meat quality, and lymphoid organ index. Poultry Science 2014; 93: 1883-1889. doi: 10.3382/ps.2013-03470
21. Castellini C, Mugnai C, Dal Bosco A. Effect of organic production system on broiler carcass and meat quality. Meat Science 2002; 60: 219-225. doi: 10.1016/S0309-1740(01)00124-3
22. Martínez-Pérez M, Sarmiento-Franco L, Santos-Ricalde RH, Sandoval-Castro CA. Poultry meat production in free-range systems: perspectives for tropical areas. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2017; 73: 1-11. doi: 10.1017/S0043933917000034
23. Kim GD, Kim BW, Jeong JY, Hur SJ, Cho IC et al. Relationship of carcass weight to muscle fiber characteristics and pork quality of crossbred (Korean native black pig × Landrace) F2 pigs. Food and Bioprocess Technology 2013; 6: 522-529. doi: 10.1007/s11947-011-0724-2
24. Tang H, Gong YZ, Wu CX, Jiang J, Wang Y et al. Variation of meat quality traits among five genotypes of chicken. Poultry Science 2009; 88: 2212-2218. doi: 10.3382/ps.2008-00036
25. Jaturasitha S, Kayan A, Wicke M. Carcass and meat characteristics of male chickens between Thai indigenous compared with improved layer breeds and their crossbred. Archiv fur Tierzucht 2008; 51 (3): 283-294.