2016
DOI: 10.15414/afz.2016.19.si.123-127
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative analysis of the external and internal egg quality in different pure chicken breeds

Abstract: The present study was conducted to evaluate some parameters of external and internal egg quality of some dual purpose chicken breeds. A total of 500 eggs (100 eggs from each breed) were collected to study for egg (weight, shape index), albumen (weight, percentage), yolk (weight, percentage) and shell (weight, percentage, thickness, strength) quality. The results showed that the egg weight and egg length of New Hampshire were significantly higher (P < 0.05) than that of Oravka whereas difference in egg shape in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Shape index is thus an important trait not only in production, but in trade as well. Irrespective of the breed of hen, among the morphological components the share of white was the highest and that of the shell was the lowest, which is in agreement with other studies (Banaszewska et al, 2018;Biesiada-Drzazga and Janocha, 2009;Hrnćar et al, 2016;Roberts, 2004). The analysis of parameters of morphological components revealed statistical differences depending on the hen's genotype (Table 3).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Shape index is thus an important trait not only in production, but in trade as well. Irrespective of the breed of hen, among the morphological components the share of white was the highest and that of the shell was the lowest, which is in agreement with other studies (Banaszewska et al, 2018;Biesiada-Drzazga and Janocha, 2009;Hrnćar et al, 2016;Roberts, 2004). The analysis of parameters of morphological components revealed statistical differences depending on the hen's genotype (Table 3).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The shell thickness was in the recommended range of 0.25-0.45 mm. Biesiada-Drzazga and Janocha (2009) report similar results for Hy-Line Brown, but Hrnćar et al (2016) noted thicker shells and determined that this parameter was influenced by the hen's genotype. It should be noted that shell thickness depends on genetic and environmental factors, mainly diet (Biesiada-Drzazga et al, 2014;Czaja and Gornowicz, 2006;Roberts, 2004;Van Den Brand et al, 2004).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…The average shell thickness decreased from 429.30 ±1.25 µm to 420.98 ±1.30 µm (P <0.0001) during the laying. The egg shell thickness values were somewhat higher in comparison to Hanusová et al (2015) and Hrnčár et al (2016).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 71%