Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of three-way crossbred chickens with reciprocal F1 crossbred chickens in a subtropical environment

Khawaja, Tabinda; Khan, Sohail; Mukhtar, Nasir; Parveen, Asia; Ahmed, Tanveer

doi:10.1080/09712119.2013.782869

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average 20-week BW of CHE and FAH were resembling with Nigerian native chicken (Sola-Ojo et al, 2011). Similarly, crossbred CF chickens' weight was consistent with the study of Khawaja et al (2013), who reported that the BW of 2-way and 3-way crossbred chickens were 1236.50 and 1288.73 g, respectively. However, some various weights of 20-week of age were published (Mosaad et al, 2010;Osei-Amponsah et al, 2012;Khadda et al, 2017;Sarma et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

“…Considering the average daily feed intake, the range of 48.72 to 50.76 was found in our chickens (data not shown). FI values in this study were lower than some previous publications (Kittichonthawat et al, 2003;Suayroop et al, 2012;Khawaja et al, 2013). Several authors reported that the various results of feed intake were a response of the breed differences (Van Marle-Köster and Casey, 2001;Castellini et al, 2002;Azharul et al, 2005;Castellini et al, 2016).…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…There was no significant difference in the percentage of viability among our chickens (p>0.05; Table 2). However, our percentages of viability fell into the range of previous studies (60.20 to 98.46%; Kittichonthawat et al, 2003;Hassen et al, 2006;Khawaja et al, 2013).The environmental factors such as disease, accident and farm management could reduce the percentage of viability, even if it has genetically enhanced to a maximum level (Hassen et al, 2006;Khawaja et al, 2013).…”

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 46%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Productive performance of purebred Thai native black-bone chickens (Chee Fah and Fah Luang) and their crossbreds

Laenoi

Buranawit

2019

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to compare productive performance between purebred Thai indigenous black-bone chickens and their reciprocal crossbreds. Four different genetic groups were studied: 2 purebreds (Chee Fah and Fah Luang) and 2 crossbreds (Chee Fah ´ Fah Luang and Fah Luang ´ Chee Fah). The results showed that Fah Luang ´ Chee Fah had the significantly highest body weight at birth and 20-week of age, while the lowest values were found in Chee Fah ´ Fah Luang (p less than 0.05). For feed conversion ratio, Fah Luang ´ Chee Fah had greater potential than purebreds and Chee Fah ´ Fah Luang (p less than 0.05). Additionally, Fah Luang ´ Chee Fah grew faster than the others (p less than 0.05). The productive performance of crossbred chickens was more favorable than purebreds. Considering crossbreds, Fah Luang ´ Chee Fah showed greater performance than Chee Fah ´ Fah Luang. Therefore, Fah Luang had more potential for using as a sire than Chee Fah.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 55%

Section: Resultscontrasting

confidence: 46%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Productive performance of purebred Thai native black-bone chickens (Chee Fah and Fah Luang) and their crossbreds

Laenoi

Buranawit

2019

IJAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chickens (males as a-c Means in a row with no common superscript differ significantly at P ≤ 0.05. 1 Values are least square mean ± standard error. RNN = Rhode Island Red × Naked Neck; BNN = Black Australorp × Naked Neck; NN = Naked Neck; FR = free-range; SI = semiintensive; I = intensive; WAS = weight at slaughter (g); DW = dressed weight (g); CY = carcass yield (%); LW = liver weight (g); HW = heart weight (g); GW = gizzard weight (g); BW = breast weight (g); IW = intestinal weight (g); IL = intestinal length (cm); NW = neck weight (g); WW = wings weight (g); DMW = drumstick weight (g); TW = thigh weight (g); R&BW = ribs and back weight (g).…”

Section: Traitmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Ahmad¹,

Mahmud²,

Hussain³

et al. 2019

Turk J Vet Anim Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Genetic improvement in rural poultry can be accomplished by selection or crossbreeding while selection procedures are long-term but definite. Crossbreeding of indigenous germplasm with exotic breeds gives an advantage for artificial selection for performance of exotic breeds and natural selection for resistance and acclimatization of indigenous breeds for the local environment [1]. Crossbreeding results in the development of birds that have better growth, morphometric, and carcass characteristics and reproductive traits, hence reducing the total cost of production [2,3]. Birds under free-range housing systems have access to enriched environments that promote behavioral activities, i.e. scratching and foraging, and improve the overall welfare of the birds. Environmental enrichment can stimulate and encourage explorative behaviors and create a series of behavioral opportunities [4]. The benefits of such enrichments are numerous and give an opportunity to birds for more even distribution, which reduces aggression, stress, and fear response [5]. Such types of housing systems coupled with higher welfare standards can produced a better quality of poultry meat that is more suitable for consumer preferences in Europe, America, and Asia [4,6]. Meat quality attributes of organic and free-range housed chickens are considered more valued as far as quality is concerned. There are numerous factors that affect the quality of meat, such as genotype, nutrition, housing system, slaughter age, and motor activity [7-9]. Indigenous chicken breeds are generally nominated for free-range housing systems because of their hardy nature and better acclimatization in extreme weather conditions. Moreover, some studies reported that under intensive housing systems birds are unable to exploit their maximum genetic potential and their growth is limited because of deficient nutrition [10,11].

show abstract

“…In Pakistan, Lyallpur Silver Black breed was evolved by crossing Desi with three imported breeds; namely White Leghorn, White Cornish and New Hampshire in a four-line crossbreeding programme (Ashraf et al 2003). Chickens from White Leghorn male crossbred with F1 female (Fayoumi males crossed with Rhode Island Red females) gained better body weight and lower mortality and three-way crossbred chickens of Rural Leghorn showed better FCR and lower mortality than two-way reciprocal crossbred chickens of Fayoumi males crossed with Rhode Island Red females (Khawaja et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of growth performance and meat quality of three-line crossbred commercial group from Shanzhongxian and W-line chicken

Wang

Shen

et al. 2018

Italian Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growth performance and meat quality of commercial groups from two different three-line crossbreds, SWS and WSS, was compared. All birds were raised under the same condition and body weight was measured at two weeks interval. On d 70, 24 male chickens were randomly selected, and on d 180 and 240, 24 female chickens were randomly selected for euthanised. Carcass performance, meat quality and sensory was determined. At 6-12 weeks of age, body weight of chickens from WSS was higher than that of SWS (p < .05). Percentage of breast and leg muscle was higher in WSS as compared with birds from SWS in 70 d males (p < .05). At 240 d of age, chickens from WSS exhibited higher semi-eviscerate, breast muscle and liver percentage, lower abdominal fat content (p < .05). Male birds at 70 d, shear force, intramuscular fat content (IMF) and L Ã was higher in SWS (p < .05). A higher IMF of breast meat was detected in 180 d SWS female birds (p < .05). The appearance acceptability and flavour of WSS male chickens was more preferred by panellists (p < .05). The texture of breast meat from 180 d SWS chicken was more preferred (p < .05). Soup cooked from 240-d-old chickens was more preferred in SWS crossbred (p < .05). The WSS had better growth performance and meat quality in male chickens, while the SWS had more abdominal fat in female chickens which led it more flavour of its soup.

show abstract

Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of three-way crossbred chickens with reciprocal F1 crossbred chickens in a subtropical environment

Abstract: Ahmed (2013) Comparative study of growth performance, meat quality and haematological parameters of three-way crossbred chickens with reciprocal F1 crossbred chickens in a subtropical environment,

Cited by 15 publications

References 24 publications

Productive performance of purebred Thai native black-bone chickens (Chee Fah and Fah Luang) and their crossbreds

Productive performance of purebred Thai native black-bone chickens (Chee Fah and Fah Luang) and their crossbreds

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

Comparative study of growth performance and meat quality of three-line crossbred commercial group from Shanzhongxian and W-line chicken

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About