Characterization of Ghagus breed vis-a-vis PD-4 birds for production, adaptability, semen and egg quality traits


Abstract views: 168 / PDF downloads: 20

Authors

  • SANTOSH HAUNSHI Senior Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
  • M SHANMUGAM Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
  • U RAJKUMAR Principal Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India
  • M K PADHI Principal Scientist, CARI Regional Station, Bhubaneswar
  • M NIRANJAN ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad 500 030 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v85i12.54393

Keywords:

Adaptability, Egg quality, Ghagus, PD4, Production, Semen

Abstract

The present study was conducted to characterize Ghagus, a native breed of chicken for production, adaptability, semen and egg quality traits in comparison with PD4 birds. Sex wise body weight and shank length of Ghagus birds recorded at 40 weeks of age were significantly lesser than those of PD4 birds. Ghagus birds had significantly higher tonic immobility (TI) duration and asymmetry of shank length than those of PD4 birds but no differences were observed for number of attempts to induce TI and asymmetry of shank width and middle toe length. Mean shank width and middle toe lengths were significantly higher in PD4 birds. Ghagus birds produced significantly lesser number of eggs up to 40 weeks of age with smaller egg size. With respect to semen quality traits, Ghagus roosters had significantly better appearance and concentration of spermatozoa than PD4 birds. Study of egg quality traits revealed significantly better albumen index in Ghagus as compared to PD4 birds. However, significantly higher egg weight, yolk, albumen and shell weights were observed in PD4 birds as compared to Ghagus breed with no significant differences in other egg quality traits. The study indicated that, there is a scope for improvement of this important native chicken breed for growth and production traits as semen and egg quality traits were at desirable levels.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anonymous. 2011. Breed Descriptor of Chicken. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 81 (3): 310–23.

Biswas A, Mohan J and Sastry, K V H. 2009. Effect of higher dietary vitamin E concentration on physical and biochemical characteristics of semen in Kadankanth cockerels. British Poultry Science 50:733–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660903264369

Burrows W H and Quinn J P. 1937. The collection of spermatozoa from the domestic fowl and turkey. Poultry Science 16: 19– 24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0160019

Campbell R G, Hancock J L and Rothschild L. 1953. Counting live and dead bull spermatozoa. Journal of Experimental Biology 30: 44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.30.1.44

Chatterjee R N, Rai R B, Pramanik S C, Sunder J, Senani S and Kundu A. 2007. Comparative growth, production, egg and carcass traits of different crosses of Brown Nicobari with White Leghorn under intensive and extensive management systems in Andaman, India. Livestock Research for Rural Development 19: Article–193.

Chaudhuri D and Lake P E. 1988. A new diluent and methods of holding semen for up to 17 hours at high temperature. Proceedings of 18th World’s Poultry Congress, pp. 591–93. Nagoya, Japan.

Faure J M and Millis A D. 2014. Improving the adaptability of animals by selection. Genetics and the Behaviour of Domestic Animals, 2nd edn, pp. 291–316. (Eds) Grandin T and Deesing M J Academic Press, London, U.K. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394586-0.00008-1

Gallup G G Jr. 1979. Tonic immobility as a measure of fear in domestic fowl. Animal Behaviour 20: 166–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-3472(79)90159-3

Haunshi S, Doley S and Shakuntala I. 2009. Production performance of indigenous chickens of north-eastern region and improved varieties developed for backyard farming. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 79: 901–05.

Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Shanmugam M, Padhi M K, Reddy M R, Sunitha R, Rajkumar U and Panda A K. 2011. Characterization of two Indian native chicken breeds for production, egg and semen quality, and welfare traits. Poultry Science 90: 314– 20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2010-01013

Haunshi S, Shanmugam M, Padhi M K, Niranjan M, Rajkumar U, Reddy M R and Panda A K. 2012. Evaluation of two Indian native chicken breeds for reproduction traits and heritability of juvenile growth traits. Tropical Animal Health and Production 44: 969–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-011-9994-y

Haunshi S, Doley S and Kadirvel G. 2010. Comparative studies on egg, meat, and semen qualities of native and improved chicken varieties developed for backyard poultry production. Tropical Animal Health and Production 42: 1013– 19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-009-9524-3

Haunshi S, Padhi M K and Niranjan M. 2013. Sustainable rural poultry production through conservation and improvement of native chickens. Proceedings of National Conference on Agro-biodiversity Management for Sustainable Rural Development. pp. 72. 14–15th October 2013. NAARM, Hyderabad.

Hoffmann I. 2009. The global plan of action for animal genetic resources and the conservation of poultry genetic resources. World’s Poultry Science Journal 65 (2): 286–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933909000245

Jones R. B. 1996. Fear and adaptability in poultry: insights, implications and imperatives. World’s Poultry Science Journal 52 (2): 131–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS19960013

Jones R B and Faure J M. 1981. Sex and strain comparisons of tonic immobility (“righting time”) in the domestic fowl and the effects of various methods of induction. Behavioural Processes 6: 47–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(81)90015-2

Magothe T M, Okeno T O, Muhuyi W B and Kahi A K. 2012. Indigenous chicken production in Kenya: II. Prospects for research and development. World’s Poultry Science Journal 68: 133–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S004393391200013X

McDaniel G R and Craig J V. 1959. Behaviour traits, semen measurements and fertility of White Leghorn males. Poultry Science 38: 1005–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0381005

Satterlee D G, Cadd G G and Jones R B. 2000. Developmental instability in Japanese quail genetically selected for contrasting adrenocortical responsiveness. Poultry Science 79: 1710–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ps/79.12.1710

Singh R and Singh D P. 2000. Poultry genetic resources of India and their role in future poultry production. Domestic Animal Biodiversity-Conservation and Sustainable Management, pp. 256–62. (Eds) Sahai R and Vijh R K. S I Publications, Karnal.

Snedecor G W and Cochran W G. 1994. Statistical Methods. 8th edn. New Delhi: Affiliated East-West Press and Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.

Taneja G C and Gowe R S. 1961. Spermatozoa concentration in the semen of two breeds of fowl estimated by three different methods. Poultry Science 40: 608–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0400608

Vij P K, Tantia M S, Mishra B, Bharani Kumar S T and Vijh R K. 2006. Characterization of Aseel, Danki, Kalasthi and Ghagus breeds of chicken. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 76: 944– 49.

Downloads

Submitted

2015-12-18

Published

2015-12-18

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

HAUNSHI, S., SHANMUGAM, M., RAJKUMAR, U., PADHI, M. K., & NIRANJAN, M. (2015). Characterization of Ghagus breed vis-a-vis PD-4 birds for production, adaptability, semen and egg quality traits. The Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, 85(12), 1338–1342. https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v85i12.54393
Citation