Yujian SUI, Qiong LIU, Chenguang XU, Wei YANG

The effects of upgrading and intersecting cross-breeding strategies on the geese economic traits

Routine, upgrading, and intersecting cross-breeding strategies are three methods frequently used in poultry breeding. But, till now, comparative assessment of the effects on the improvement of geese economic traits with these strategies is largely unknown. Here, using Carlos goose and Zi goose, these three strategies were employed and compared. The main economic traits, including egg production capability, egg quality, growth performance, meat production capability, and down feather production capability were all measured systematically. For egg production capability and egg quality, the upgrading group had the highest egg-laying rate, and the intersecting group had the biggest egg size compared with the routine group (p < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the egg shape index (p > 0.05). The routine group had the best fertility and hatchability (p < 0.05). For growth performance, the intersect group had the biggest hatch weight (p < 0.05), and the upgrading group had the fastest growth rate (p < 0.05). For meat production capability and down feather production capability, no significant difference was observed (p > 0.05). We found that different cross-breeding strategies had different superiority on economic traits. The economic value of each economic trait should be taken into account so that an optimized cross-breeding strategy could be made to get the most of the benefits.

PDF

___

1. Phocas F, Belloc C, Bidanel J, Delaby L, Dourmad JY et al. Review: Towards the agroecological management of ruminants, pigs and poultry through the development of sustainable breeding programmes. II. Breeding strategies. Animal 2016; 10 (11): 1760-1769. doi: 10.1017/S1751731116001051
2. Mehlhorn J, Petow S. Smaller brains in laying hens: New insights into the influence of pure breeding and housing conditions on brain size and brain composition. Poultry Science 2020; 99 (7): 3319-3327. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2020.03.039
3. Zhao XY, Yang W, Zhang Y, Zhu DH. Chicken genome project and its application in genetic research. Hereditas 2006; 28 (8): 1002-1008 (in Chinese with an abstract in English). doi: 10.16288/j.yczz.2006.08.017
4. Matz B. Crossing, grading, and keeping pure: animal breeding and exchange around 1860. Endeavour 2011; 35 (1): 7-15. doi: 10.1016/j.endeavour.2010.12.001
5. Chowdhury VS, Sultana H, Furuse M. International perspectives on impacts of reproductive technologies for world food production in Asia associated with poultry production. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 2014; 752: 229-237. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-8887-3_12
6. Zhang Y, Yao Y, Wang MM, Yang YZ, Gu TT et al. Comparisons in geese of the courtship, mating behaviors and fertility of the Carlos and Sichuan breeds and the breed crosses. Animal Reproduction Science 2019; 204: 86-94. doi: 10.1016/j. anireprosci.2019.03.008
7. Ji H, Wang JF, Liu JX, Guo JR, Wang ZW et al. Selection of reliable reference genes for real-time qRT-PCR analysis of Zi geese (Anser anser domestica) gene expression. AsianAustralasian Journal of Animal Sciences 2013; 26 (3): 423-432. doi: 10.5713/ajas.2012.12417
8. Yao Y, Yang YZ, Gu TT, Cao ZF, Zhao WM et al. Comparison of the broody behavior characteristics of different breeds of geese. Poultry Science 2019; 98 (11): 5226-5233. doi: 10.3382/ ps/pez366
9. Li Z, Yu N, Yu JC, Zhao H. Study on the meat performances of Huoyan Goose, Sichuan White Goose and their crossbred. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences 2017; 45 (9): 101-104 (in Chinese with an abstract in English)
10. Sun XX, Niu JW, Yang B, Xia LL, Wang QQ et al. Study on body weight, body size and slaughter performance of hybrid offspring of white Landes Goose and Yangzhou Goose. China Poultry 2015; 37 (1): 64-66 (in Chinese)
11. Kowalczyk A, Adamski M, Lukaszewicz E. Slaughter yield and meat quality of hybrid derived from crosses between Canada Goose (Branta canadensis L.) males and White Koluda (Anser anser L.) goose females. Archiv Fur Geflugelkunde. 2013; 77 (1): 66-71.
12. Su YH, Song YD, Liu R, Wang B, Mu CY et al. Measurement and correlation analysis of body weight, body size and feather production of Yangzhou Goose and its crossed combinations. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin 2015; 31 (17): 12-15 (in Chinese with an abstract in English)
13. Juodka R, Kiskiene A, Skurdeniene I, Ribikauskas V, Nainiene R. Lithuanian vishtines goose breed. World’s Poultry Science Journal 2012; 68 (1): 51-62. doi: 10.1017/S0043933912000062
14. Mazanowski A, Kisiel T, Adamski M. Evaluation of some regional varieties of geese for reproductive traits, egg structure and egg chemical composition. Annals of Animal Science 2005; 5 (1): 67-83.
15. Önk K, Kirmizibayrak T. The egg production, hatchability, growing, slaughter and carcass characteristics of geese (Anser anser) reared under breeders conditions in Kars province; I. Egg production and hatchability characteristics. Turkish Journal of Agriculture-Food Science and Technology 2019; 7 (3): 543-549 (in Turkish with an abstract in English). doi: 10.24925/turjaf.v7i3.543-549.2355
16. Tilki M, İnal Ş. Yield traits of geese of different origins reared in Turkey. I. Hatching traits. Turkish Journal of Veterinary and Animal Sciences 2004; 28 (1): 149-155 (in Turkish with an abstract in English)
17. Attila S. Fertility and hatchability in goose eggs: a review. International Journal of Poultry Science 2020; 19 (2): 51-65. doi: 10.3923/ijps.2020.51.65
18. Chen XY, Bai HC, Li L, Zhang W, Jiang RS et al. Follicle characteristics and follicle developmental related Wnt6 polymorphism in Chinese indigenous Wanxi-white goose. Molecular Biology Reports 2012; 39 (11): 9843-9848. doi: 10.1007/s11033-012-1850-2
19. Liu C, Sello CT, Sun YF, Zhou YX, Lu HT et al. De Novo transcriptome sequencing analysis of goose (Anser anser) embryonic skin and the identification of genes related to feather follicle morphogenesis at three stages of development. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2018; 19 (10): 3170. doi: 10.3390/ijms19103170
20. Misztal I, Lourenco D, Legarra A. Current status of genomic evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 2020; 98 (4): 1-14. doi: 10.1093/jas/skaa101
21. Tan C, Bian C, Yang D, Li N, Wu ZF et al. Application of genomic selection in farm animal breeding. Hereditas 2017; 39 (11): 1033-1045 (in Chinese with an abstract in English)