Banner

Indian Journal of Animal Research

  • Chief EditorM. R. Saseendranath

  • Print ISSN 0367-6722

  • Online ISSN 0976-0555

  • NAAS Rating 6.40

  • SJR 0.233, CiteScore: 0.606

  • Impact Factor 0.5 (2025)

Frequency :
Monthly (January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November and December)
Indexing Services :
Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Scopus, AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Research Article

Indian Journal of Animal Research, volume 52 issue 7 (july 2018) : 953-958

Genetic impact on  external and internal egg quality  traits of Vanaraja and Gramapriya birds and their crosses in Bihar

Beena Sinha, K.G. Mandal, Ragini Kumari, Anjali Kumari, D. S. Gonge
1Department of Animal Genetics and Breeding, Bihar Veterinary College, Patna - 800 014, Bihar, India.
Cite article:- Sinha Beena, Mandal K.G., Kumari Ragini, Kumari Anjali, Gonge S. D. (2017). Genetic impact on external and internal egg quality traits of Vanaraja and Gramapriya birds and their crosses in Bihar. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 52(7): 953-958. doi: 10.18805/ijar.B-3330.

ABSTRACT

Poultry farming is gaining strength in mitigating livelihood and nutritional security to the poor farmers which constitute 60% of the India’s population. Thus eggs of superior quality is prerequisite for profitable marketing and for hatchability too. The present study was conducted on two improved varieties,  Vanaraja (dual purpose type) and Gramapriya  (the layer type) chicken developed at PDP, Hyderabad and their crosses on random mating. The genetic groups taken were Gramapriya (male) x Gramapriya (female),Vanaraja(male) x Vanaraja(female), Gramapriya(male) x Vanaraja(female)and Vanaraja (male) x Gramapriya(female). 6 males and 30 females were taken from each genetic group and maintained separately under deep litter system with a mating ratio of 1 male : 5 females. To study the genetic effect on external and internal egg quality traits, a total of more than 50 eggs were collected at random from each of 4 genetic groups upto 28 weeks of age. The average shell thickness obtained to be ranged from 0.36 to 0.39 mm. The average albumen and yolk indices were found to be ranged from 7.396 to 8.656 and 41.749 to 43.888 respectively. The average shell weight and percentage of shell weight observed to be ranged from 4.147 to 5.627 g and 17.266 to 18.003% respectively.

REFERENCES

  1. Alewi, M., Melesse, A. and Teklegiorgis, Y. (2012). Crossbreeding effect on egg quality traits of local chickens and their f1 crosses with Rhode Island Red and Fayoumi Chicken breeds under farmers’ management conditions. J Anim Sci Adv., 2(8): 697-705 
  2. Bornstein, S. and Lipstein, B. (1962) Some characteristics of measures employed for determining the interior quality of chicken eggs. Br. Poult. Sci., 3: 127-139.
  3. Hall, G. O.(1939). Breed variation in egg characters. Poult. Sci., 18: 282-287.
  4. Harvey, W.R. (1990). Users guide for LSMLMW, mixed model least squares and maximum likelihood computer programme. PC-2 version. Mimeograph, Ohio State University, OH, US. Haugh, R. (1937) The Haugh unit for measuring egg quality. U.S. Egg & Poultry Magazine, 43: 552–555, 573.
  5. Haunshi, S.(2009). Production performance of indigenous chicken of northeastern region and improved varieties developed for backyard farming. Indian J. Anim.Sci., 79(9): 901-905. 
  6. Hrncar, C., Biesiada-Drzazga, B., Nikolova, N., Hanusová, E., Hanus, A., Bujko, J.(2016). Comparative analysis of the external and internal egg quality in different pure chicken breeds Acta fytotechn zootechn., 19: 123-127. 
  7. Islam, M., Dutta, R. (2010). Egg quality traits of indigenous, exotic and crossbred chickens (Gallus dometicus L.) in rajshahi, Bangladesh. J. Life. Earth. Sci., 5: 63-67. 
  8. Jha, D.K. and Prasad, S. (2013). Production performance of improved varieties and indigenous breed of chicken in Jharkhand. Indian J. Poultry Sci., 48(1):109-112.
  9. Kramer, C.Y. (1957). Extention of multiple range test to group correlated adjusted means. Biometrics., 13: 13-18.
  10. Kumar, N., Belay, Z.N., Asfaw, Y.T. and Kebede, E. (2014). Evaluation of egg quality traits of Rhode Island Red and Bovans White under intensive management in Mekelle, Ethopia. J. Agri. Vet. Sci., 7(2):71-75.
  11. Mohanty, P.K. and Nayak, Y.(2011). Comparative evaluation of egg quality traits of native chicken population of Bhubaneswar with other improved chicken breeds. Indian J. Poult. Sci. 46(3) : 390-395.
  12. Niranjan, M., Sharma, R., Rajkumar, U., Chatterjee, R., Reddy, B., Battacharya, T. (2008). Egg quality traits in chicken varieties developed for backyard poultry farming in India. Livest. Res. Rural. Dev., 20:12-20.
  13. Olawumi, S.O. and Ogunlade, J.T. (2008). Phenotypic correlations between some external and internal egg quality traits in the exotic isa brown layer breeders. Asian J. Poult. Sci 2(1): 30-35. 
  14. Padhi, M.K., Chatterjee, R.N., Haunshi, S. and Rajkumar, U. (2013). Effect of age on egg quality in chicken. Indian. J. Poult. Sci.,48(1): 122-125.
  15. Sarica, M., H. Onder and Yamak, U.S. (2012). Determining the most effective variables for egg quality traits of five different hen genotypes. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 14: 235–240
  16. Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G. (1994). Statistical Methods. 8th edn. Oxford and IBH Publication, New References Delhi.
  17. Sreenivas,D., Manthani G.P.,Mahender, M. and Chatterjee,R.N. (2013). Genetic analysis of egg quality traits in White Leghorn chicken. Vet world., 6(5): 263-266.
  18. Stadelman, W.J., (1995). Quality identification of shell eggs. Egg Science and Technology, pp: 39–66.
  19. Washburn, K.E. (1990). Genetic variation in egg production. In: Poultry Breeding and Genetics. Crawford, R.D. (ed.), Elsevier, New York, USA. , pp: 78–804.
  20. Zita. L, E. Tumova and L. Stolc(2009). Effect of genotype, age and their interaction on egg quality in Brown-egg laying hens. Actavet, Brno., 78S: 85-91. 
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)