Banner
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First Articles
Current IssueEditorial BoardOnline First Articles
Indian Journal of
Animal Research
Print ISSN: 0367-6722
Online ISSN: 0976-0555
NASS Rating
6.40
SJR
0.233
CiteScore
0.606

Chief Editor:
M. R. Saseendranath
Kerala Veterinary and Animal Science University, Mannuthy, Thrissur, INDIA
Frequency:Monthly
Indexing:
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, ...

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 36 issue 1 (january to june 2002) : 35 - 38

MEAT YIELD AND COOKED MEAT TASTE OF HYBRIDS FROM DIFFERENT GENETIC GROUPS IN A HOT-HUMID CLIMATE

M.A. Islam), G. Seeland2, S.M. Bulbul, M.A.R. Howlider
1Department of Poultry Science, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Islam) M.A., Seeland2 G., Bulbul S.M., Howlider M.A.R. (2025). MEAT YIELD AND COOKED MEAT TASTE OF HYBRIDS FROM DIFFERENT GENETIC GROUPS IN A HOT-HUMID CLIMATE. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 36(1): 35 - 38. doi: .

ABSTRACT

Sixty males and sixty one females day-old chicken belonging to 9 genetic groups, reared on littered floor were slaughtered at 8 weeks of age to compare meat yield traits. Organoleptic taste of their and shaver tropicbro broiler cooked meat were evaluated to compare the genetic groups on taste basis. The exotic purebreds, and exotic with indigenous crossbreds produced higher meat in winter than in summer. The exotic pure group r*r (392.4 g/bird), and r*n (285g/bird) produced the highest edible meat in both seasons. But r*n group was the best in terms of edible meat yield ratio. The edible meat yield ratio of r*n and r*r in both summer and winter were 34% and 32% respectively. The organoleptic taste value ranked the genetic groups sequentially as d*r, d*d, r*n, d*n, iv*iv, n*n, r*r and r*d.

KEYWORDS

    REFERENCES

    1. Adebangjo, A. and OIuyemi, JA (1981). Bllllet. ofAnim.Health and PrcxJ. jn Africa. 29:425-429.
    2. Alam, M5. et al. (1995). Bangladesh J. Anim. Sci. 24(1&2): 173·183.
    3. Barua, A. and Howlider. MAR (1991). IndianJ Anim. Sci.. 61:772-775.
    4. Barua, A. and Yoshimura, Y. (1997). World's POlllt. Sci. J. 53:388-394.
    5. Barua, A. et al. (1998). World's POlllt. Sci.. J. 54:279-286.
    6. Cahaner, A. et al. (1993). POlllt. Sci.: 72:767-775.
    7. Cowan, P.J. and Michie, W. (1978). Blit. POlllt. Sci.. 19(5):601-605.
    8. Gueye, EI Hadji Fallou (1998). World's POlllt. Sci. J, 54:73-86.
    9. Hanjl,. C.J. and Somes, Jr. RG. (1983). Poult. Sci.. 62: 934-941.
    10. Hanzl. C.J. and Somes, Jr. RG. (1983). Poult. Sci., 62:942-946.
    11. Haque, NA (1993). M.Sc. Thesis. Dept. of Poult. Sci.. BAU, Mymensingh
    12. Hermes, T.H. et al. (1984). Ann. Agril. Sci.. Ain-Shams-Universify, 29 281-298.
    13. Horst. P. (1989). Arch. Geflugelk,53:93-101.
    14. Howlider. MAR and Rose. S.P. (1987). World Poult. Sci. J. 43:228-237.
    15. Huque, Q.M.E.. (1996). World's Poult. Congress. New Delhi. India 2-5 Septem.. 1:47-60.
    16. Hussain. M.M. etal. (1991). Bangladesh Veterinarian 8 (1-2): 4-7.
    17. Joseph. J.K. et al. (1992). Bull. ofAnim. Health and PrcxJ. in Ahica. 40:97-102.
    18. Mafeni. Mase Joseph (1995). 1': I.D. thesis in Tropical Animal production. Prince Leopold Institute of Tropical Medicine nDepartment of Tropical Animal Production and Health. Antwerpen. Belgium.
    19. Mahapatra. C.M. et al. (1989). Indian J Anim. Sci. 59: 1562-1564.
    20. Obioha. F.J. et al. (1983). World Review ofAnimal PrcxJuctio{/.. 19:59-64
    21. Paul, B.P. etal. (1990). IndianJ Anim. Sci.. 60:866-868.
    22. Sharma. D. et al. (1995). Indian J Vet. Res. 4:36-43.
    23. Sharma, D.P. et al. (1971). Indian J Anim Sci., 41: 185-9i.
    24. Udaipur PI-480 final technical report (1974). Performance of desi bird and Crossbred progeny
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)