Loading...

Indian Journal of Animal Research

Effect of egg mass of the white italian goose on fertilisation, loss of weight during the incubation period, hatchability and gosling quality

DOI: 10.18805/ijar.B-787    | Article Id: B-787 | Page : 1803-1808
Citation :- Effect of egg mass of the white italian goose on fertilisation, loss of weight during the incubation period, hatchability and gosling quality.Indian Journal of Animal Research.2018.(52):1803-1808
Sreten Mitrovic, Cvijan Mekic, Milena Milojevic, Maja Radoicic Dimitrijevic, Vera Ðekic and Vladan Ðermanovic milojevic.milena23@gmail.com
Address : University of Belgrade, Faculty of Agriculture, Serbia.
Submitted Date : 12-06-2017
Accepted Date : 7-03-2018
First Online:

Abstract

The main purpose of the study was to determine the effect of egg mass and egg weight groups (group I eggs under 160 g, group II egg mass 160 g to 180 g and group III eggs over 180 g) on incubation results, loss of egg weight (moist) during incubation, gosling hatchability and the relative share of the gosling in the egg mass. Eggs with mass between 160 g and 180 g (group II) demonstrated the highest fertilisation rate (91.28 %) and the highest hatchability out of the number of incubated eggs (83.14 %), while the eggs from the group I (lighter than 160 g) showed the highest number of gosling hatchability out of the number of fertilised eggs (91.08 %). The lowest embryo mortality was that of the group I (5.17 % and 6.06 %), while the highest is reported for the group III (14.29 % and 16.67 %). The lowest relative loss of egg mass (moist) by day 25 of the incubation period was established for the group I eggs (10.98 %), and the highest for the group III (11.71 %), with a statistically significant (P<0.01) difference of -0.73 %. Other differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). Gosling percentage in the egg mass was significantly higher (P<0.001) in the group III of incubated eggs (67.81 %) than in the group II (66.61 %) and the group I (65.24 %).

Keywords

Egg weight Geese Gosling weight Incubation Veight loss.

References

  1. Bednarczyk M., Rosiñski A. (1999): Comparison of Egg Hatchability and In Vitro Survival of Goose Embryos of various Origins. Poultry Science, 78:579-585
  2. Bobko M., Svetlik I.S. (2002): Weight losses of geese hatching eggs during incubation. Proc. of the International Scientific Conference Rearing of poultry and small livestock in the 3rd millennium, 17-18 September, Nitra, Slovakia, 115-119.
  3. Ðermanoviæ V., Anðelic-Buzadžic Gordana., Rajoviæ M., Puriæ V., Mitrovic S. (2008): The analysis of goose eggs incubation results of biracely half-breeds of geese. Proceedings of Research Papers, 14, (3-4): 135-142.
  4. Kucharska-Gaca Joanna, Adamski M., Joanna KuŸniacka, Emilia Kowalska (2016a): Goose eggs hatching technique improvement with the use of pre-incubation. Acta. Sci. Pol. Zootechnica, 15 (2): 37-46.
  5. Kucharska-Gaca Joanna, Adamski M., Joanna KuŸniacka, Emilia Kowalska (2016b): Influence of the weight of hatching eggs on the hatchability indices and on the body weight of geese in rearing and after fattening with oats. Acta. Sci. Pol. Zootechnica, 15(3): 67-82.
  6. Mazanowski A., Adamski M. (2002): Evaluation of reproductive traits and egg quality in Astra G geese during the first reproductive period. Ann.Anim. Sci., 2 (2): 67-78.
  7. Mazanowski A., Bernacki Z. (2006): Characteristics of reproductive traits and egg traits in Graylag goose (Anser anser L.) crossbreds. Arch. Geflügelk., 70 (2): 56-63.
  8. Mazanowski A., Chelmonska B. (2000): The effects of reciprocal crossing of White Koluda and Greylag crossbred geese with Slovakian geese. Ann.Anim. Sci. – Rocz. Nauk. Zoot., 27 (4): 85-103.
  9. Mitrovic S., Pandureviæ Tatjana., Milojevic Milena., Jokiæ Ž., Ðermanovoic V., Mièic Svjetlana., Vlaèiæ Jelena. (2016): Effects of egg weight and shape index on incubation results of the White Italian Goose. VII Internationalni Scientific Agriculture Symposium, „Agrosym 2016", 6-9 October 2016, Jahorina, Bosnia and Herzegovina.Proceedings 2016, 2534-2540
  10. Mitroviæ S., Milojeviæ Milena; Ðukiæ-Stojèiæ Mirjana (2017): Phenotype correlation of external and incubation traits of Italian white goose eggs and goslings after hatching. Indian J. Anim. Res. :52:497-501.
  11. Meir M., Ar A. (1991): Compensation for seasonal changes in eggshell conductance and hatchability of goose eggs by dynamic control of egg water loss. Br. Poult. Sci., 32 (4): 723-732.
  12. Meir M., Ar A. (2008): Changes in eggshell conductance, water loss and hatchability of layer hens with flock age and moulting. Br. Poult. Sci., 49 (6): 677-684.
  13. Pakulska E., Badowski J., Bielinska H., Bednarczyk M. (2003): Wplyw wieku na cechy fizyczne jaj i wylêgowœæ pisklat gêsi Bialych Koludzkich (Age effects of physical traits of eggs and hatchability of White Koluda goslings). Zesz. Nauk. Prz. Hod., 68(4): 71-77 (in Polish).
  14. Rachwal A. (2008): Wplyw masy jaja na wylêgowosc, wielkosc pisklêcia, jego tempo wzrostu oraz wykorzystanie paszy (The influence of egg weight on hatchability, size of chick, its growth rate and utilization of pesture). Pol. Drob., 10: 13-16 (in Polish).
  15. Rabsztyn A., Andres K., Dudek M. (2010): Variability, heritability and correlations of egg shape in the Zatorska goose. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 11(4): 433-436.
  16. Razmaite V., ŠveistienP Ruta., Švirmickas G.J. (2014): Effect of laying stage on egg characteristics and yolk fatty acid profile from different-aged geese. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 42 (2): 127-132.
  17. Rosiñski A. (2000): Analysis of direct and correlated effects of selection in two goose strains (in Polish). Rocz. AR Poznan, 309: 5-107.
  18. Saatci M., Kirmizibayrak T., Aksoy A.R., Tilki M. (2005): Egg Weight, Shape Index and Hatching Weight and Interrelationships among These Traits in Native Turkish Geese with Different Coloured Feathers. Turk. J. Vet. Anim. Sci., 29: 353-357.
  19. Scripnic Elena and Modvala Suzana (2010): Process of Increasing the Incubation Indices of Geese Eggs. Bulletin UASVM Animal Science and Biotechnologies, 67(1-2): 334-338.

Global Footprints