Evaluation of terminal crosses to assess the suitability of PD-6 line as a male line for Gramapriya chicken variety developed for rural poultry

U RAJKUMAR; C PASWAN; S HAUNSHI; M NIRANJAN

doi:10.56093/ijans.v88i4.78811

Authors

U RAJKUMAR Principal Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 030 India
C PASWAN Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 030 India
S HAUNSHI Principal Scientist, ICAR-Directorate of Poultry Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, Telangana 500 030 India
M NIRANJAN Principal Scientist, ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Barapani, Umium

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v88i4.78811

Keywords:

Backyard poultry, Body weight, Egg production, Gramapriya

Abstract

The comparative performance of the terminal crosses involving either Poultry Directorate-6 (PD-6) or Poultry Directorate-2 (PD-2) lines as male and Poultry Directorate-3 (PD-3) line as female parents was evaluated to study the suitability of PD-6 line for production of Gramapriya rural chicken variety utilizing the performance data on 534 birds belonging to PD-6×PD-3 (254) and PD-2×PD-3 (280) crosses. The body weights were significantly higher in PD-6×PD-3 cross from four weeks onwards to till 14 weeks of age. Similarly, the shank length was also significantly higher in PD-6×PD-3 than PD-2×PD-3 cross at 4, 6 and 8 weeks of age. Sex significantly influenced the body weights from 4th week onwards in PD-6×PD-3 cross and from 6th week onwards in PD-2×PD-3. The adult body weights of females in both the crosses did not vary significantly except at 52 weeks of age. The live weight and dressing percentage were significantly higher in PD-6×PD-3 cross. All the slaughter parameters were similar in both the crosses without any significant variation except gizzard and feather proportions, which were significantly higher in PD-2×PD-3.The annual egg production in PD-6×PD-2 and PD-2×PD-3 crosses was 247.33 and 255.73 eggs, respectively. Therefore, the study concluded that, PD-6 line might be a suitable male line for production of Gramapriya chicken variety without affecting the performance.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ajayi F O and Ejiofor O. 2009. Effect of genotype × sex interaction on growth and some development characteristics of Ross and Anak broiler strains in the high rain forest zone of Nigeria. Asian Journal of Poultry Science 3: 31–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/ajpsaj.2009.51.56

Ayyagari V. 2008. Development of varieties for rural poultry. Souvenir Seminar on Sustainable Poultry Production: Rural and Commercial Approach. 3rd March, Hyderabad, India, pp. 1–5.

Bogosavljevic-Bosokovic, Kurcubic V, Petrovic M D and Radovic V. 2006. The effect of sex and rearing system on carcass composition and cut yields of broiler chickens S. Czech Journal of Animal Science 51(1): 31–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17221/3906-CJAS

Gordon S and Charles D R. 2002. Niche and organic chicken products. Nottingham, UK. Nottingham University Press.

Gupta S C, Singh R V, Prasad R B and Singh B. 2001. Genetic analysis of growth, conformation and feed efficiency traits in broiler. Indian Journal of Poultry Science 36: 294–96.

Haunshi S, Doley S and Shakutala I. 2009. Production performance of indigenous chicken of northeastern region and improved varieties developed for backyard farming. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 79: 901–05.

Haunshi S, Sunitha R, Shanmugam M, Padhi M K and Niranjan M. 2013. Carcass characteristics and chemical composition of breast and thigh muscles of native chicken breeds. Indian Journal of Poultry Science 48: 219–22.

Muchadeyi F C, Sibanda S, Kusina N T, Kusina J F and Makuza S. 2004. The village chicken production system in Rushinga district of Zimbabwe. Livestock Research for Rural Development. Vol 16, Article 40. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/6/much16040.htm.

Niranjan M, Sharma R P, Rajkumar U, Reddy B L N, Chatterjee R N and Bhattacharya T K. 2008. Comparative evaluation of production performance in improved chicken varieties for backyard farming. International Journal of Poultry Science 7: 1126–31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2008.1128.1131

Ojo V, Fayeye T R, Ayorinde K L and Olojede H. 2014. Relationship between body weight and linear body measurements in Japanese Quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Journal of Scientific Research 6(1): 175–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3329/jsr.v6i1.16368

Padhi M K, Rajkumar U, Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Panda A K, Bhattacharya T K, Reddy M R, Bhanja S K and Reddy B L N. 2012. Comparative evaluation of male line of Vanaraja, control broiler, Vanaraja commercial in respect to juvenile and carcass quality traits. Indian Journal of Poultry Science 47: 136–39.

Padhi M K and Chatterjee R N. 2013. Carcass quality traits in four different crossbreds developed for backyard poultry and the effect of age on carcass quality under intensive system of rearing. Indian Journal of Animal Sciences 83: 1102–08.

Padhi M K, Chatterjee R N, Rajkumar U, Niranjan M and Haunshi S. 2016. Evaluation of a three-way cross chicken developed for backyard poultry in respect to growth, production and carcass quality traits under intensive system of rearing. Journal of Applied Animal Research 44: 390–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2015.1091336

Padhi M K, Chatterjee R N and Rajkumar U. 2014. A study on performance of a crossbred chicken developed using both exotic and indigenous breeds under backyard system of rearing. Journal of Poultry Science and Technology 2: 26–29.

Rajkumar U and Rama Rao S V. 2015. Gramapriya, a prolific brown egg layer for rural backyards. Indian Farming 65: 32–34.

Rajkumar U, Rama Rao S V and Sharma R P. 2010. Backyard poultry farming: Changing the face of rural India. Indian Farming 59: 20–23.

Rajkumar U, Muthukumar M, Haunshi S, Niranjan M, Raju M V L N, Rama Rao S V and Chatterjee R N. 2016. Comparative evaluation of carcass traits and meat quality in native Aseel chickens and commercial broilers. British Poultry Science 57: 339–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071668.2016.1162282

Rajkumar U, Sharma R P, Haunshi S, Padhi M K, Rajaravindra K S, Reddy B L N, Niranjan M, Bhattacharya T K, Haunshi S and Chatterjee R N. 2011. Genetic analysis of juvenile growth and carcass traits in a full diallel mating in selected coloured broiler lines. Tropical Animal Health and Production 43: 1129– 36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-011-9812-6

Rajkumar U, Haunshi S, Paswan C, Raju M V L N, Rama Rao S V and Chatterjee R N. 2017. Characterization of indigenous Aseel chicken breed for morphological, growth, production and meat composition traits from India. Poultry Science 96: 2120–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew492

Pica-ciamarra U and Otte J. 2010. Poultry food security and poverty in India: looking beyond the farm-gate. World’s Poultry Science Journal 66: 309–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933910000358

Sambo E, Betridge J, Dessie T, Amare A, Habte T, Wigley P and Chridtley R M. 2015. Participatory evaluation of chicken health and production constraints in Ethiopia. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 118: 117–27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.10.014

Sarsenbek, Wan T, Zhao J K and Jiang W. 2013. Comparison of carcass yields and meat quality between Baicheng-You chickens and Arbor Acres broilers. Poultry Science 92: 2776– 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02841

Snedecor G W and Cochran W G. 1994. Statistical methods. 8th edn. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, USA.

Yin Li, Chenglong Luo, Jie Wang and Fuyou Guo. 2017. Effects of different raising systems on growth performance, carcass, and meat quality of medium-growing chickens. Journal of Applied Animal Research 45(1): 326–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09712119.2016.1190735