Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences

Asian Australasian Association of Animal Production Societies (아세아태평양축산학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of line and floor type on growth performance and feather characterization during the growth period of White Roman geese

  • Lin, Min Jung (Changhua Animal Propagation Station, Livestock Research Institute, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan) ;
  • Chang, Shen Chang (Kaohsiung Animal Propagation Station, Livestock Research Institute, Council of Agriculture, Executive Yuan) ;
  • Chen, Tzu Jou (Department of Animal Science, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Lin, Wei Chih (Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University) ;
  • Peng, Shao Yu (Department of Animal Science, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology) ;
  • Lee, Tzu Tai (Department of Animal Science, National Chung Hsing University)
  • Received : 2019.08.22
  • Accepted : 2019.10.14
  • Published : 2020.09.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether goose growth and feather characteristics are influenced by their line and feeding surroundings, inclusive of floor materials and types, since there are no reports regarding these factors. Methods: The 240 White Roman geese which were hatched and sex identified came from 3 commercial goose farms. They were randomly distributed to 24 pens depending on a completely random design. The study continued for 13 weeks and included 3 lines of commercial geese and 2 floor types (cement strip floor [CSF] or cement floor [CF]). Results: The day one gosling weight from A farm was lower than other two farms (96 g vs 107 and 115 g; p<0.001). Afterwards, the body weight, back length, keel length, chest girth and main wing feather length among 3 farms showed no significance difference prior to 12 weeks. The CF group showed heavier body weight, shorter back length, longer keel length, shorter chest girth and shorter main wing feather length than the CSF group prior to 12 weeks. The down weight in the CF was heavier than the CSF group (57.1 g vs 41.8 g; p<0.01) prior to 13 weeks. Conclusion: The body weight showed the positive relations for dry feather weight (r = 0.59), down weight (r = 0.69), percent of the down weight of live body weight prior to 13 weeks (r = 0.61).

Keywords

References

  1. FAO. FAOSTAT Database Results. Rome, Italy: FAO; 2017.
  2. de Almeida EA, Sant'anna AC, Crowe TG, Macari M, Furlan RL. Poultry rearing on perforated plastic floors and the effect on air quality, growth performance, and carcass injuries Experiment 2: Heat stress situation. Poult Sci 2018;97:1954-60. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey048
  3. Chuppava B, Keller B, MeiBner J, Kietzmann M, Visscher C. Effects of different types of flooring design on the development of antimicrobial resistance in commensal Escherichia coli in fattening turkeys. Vet Microbiol 2018;217:18-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetmic.2018.02.018
  4. Liu BY, Wang ZY, Yang HM, et al. Influence of rearing system on growth performance, carcass traits, and meat quality of Yangzhou geese. Poult Sci 2011;90:653-9. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2009-00591
  5. Del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J. Handbook of the birds of the world. Vol. l. Ostrich to Ducks. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions; 1992.
  6. Szigeti M. Poultry waste utilization in poultry industry. Baromfitenyeszteses Feldolgozas 1987;34:39-45.
  7. Schneider KH. Geese - A guide to their breeding, keeping, feeding. Germany: Deutscher. Landwirtschaftsverlag Berlin GmbH, Berlin; 1995.
  8. Kozák J. An overview of feathers formation, moults and down production in geese. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2011;24:881-7. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.2011.10325
  9. Yin LY, Wang ZY, Yang HM, Xu L, Zhang J, Xing H. Effects of stocking density on growth performance, feather growth, intestinal development, and serum parameters of geese. Poult Sci 2017;96:3163-8. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pex136
  10. Saatci M. Effects of age, sex, feather colour, body measurements, and body weight on down and feather yield in Native Turkish geese. Turk J Vet Anim Sci 2008;32:293-7.
  11. Van de Wetering D, Cooke F. Body weight and feather growth of male barrow's goldeneye during wing molt. Condor 2000;102:228-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/condor/102.1.228
  12. Kozak J, Bodi L, Karsai KM, Monostori K. The effect of sex on the feather production of geese. Proceeding of 1997 Australian Poultry Symposium, University of Sydney; Sydney, Australia. vol 9 pp. 199-202.
  13. Yin L, Yang H, Xu L, Zhang J, Xing H, Wang Z. Feather performance, walking ability, and behavioral changes of geese in response to different stocking densities. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2017;196:108-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2017.06.017
  14. Mehmet AB, Sarica M, Yamak US. Effect of production system on foot pad dermatitis (FPD) and plumage quality of geese. Eur Poult Sci 2017;81. https://doi.org/10.1399/eps.2017.216
  15. Kozak J, Gara I, Kawada T. Production and welfare aspects of goose down and feather harvesting. World's Poult Sci 2010;66:767-78. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043933910000723
  16. Japanese Standards Association. 2011. JIS L 1903:2011 Testing methods for feathers. Tokyo, Japan: Japanese Standards Association; 2011.
  17. SAS Institute. Sas/Stat Guide for Personal Computers. Version 9.01. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Inst. Inc.; 2014.
  18. Hamadani H, Khan AA, Ganai TAS, Banday MT, Hamadani A. Growth and production traits of domestic geese in local conditions of Kashmir, India. Indian J Anim Sci 2014;84:578-9.
  19. Sole M, Pena F, Domenech V, et al. Carcass and meat quality traits in an embden$\times$toulouse goose cross raised in organic Dehesa. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 2016;29:838-44. https://doi.org/10.5713/ajas.15.0583
  20. El-Hanoun AM, Attia YA, Gad HAM, Abdella MM. Effect of different managerial systems on productive and reproductive traits, blood plasma hormones and biochemical constituents of geese. Animal 2012;6:1795-802. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112000808
  21. El-Hanoun AM, Attia YA, AL-Harthi MA, Habiba HI, Oliveira MC. Magnetized drinking water improves productivity and blood parameters in geese. Rev Colomb Cienc Pecu 2017;30:209-18. https://dx.doi.org/10.17533/udea.rccp.v30n3a04
  22. Kucharska-Gaca J, Adamski M, Kuźniacka J, Kowalska E. 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 2016;15:67-82. https://doi.org/10.21005/asp.2016.15.3.06
  23. Saatci M, Kirmizibayrak T, Aksoy AR, Tilki M. 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 2005;29:353-7.
  24. Wilson HR. Interrelationships of egg size, chick size, posthatching growth and hatchability. World's Poult Sci 1991;47:5-20. https://doi.org/10.1079/WPS19910002
  25. Fisinin VI, Lukashenko VS, Saleyeva IP, et al. Meat quality in broilers reared in different housing systems. Voprosy Pitaniia 2018;87:77-84. https://doi.org/10.24411/0042-8833-2018-10056.
  26. Farghly MFA, Mahrose KM, Cooper RG, Ullah Z, Rehman Z, Ding C. Sustainable floor type for managing turkey production in a hot climate. Poult Sci 2018;97:3884-90. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps/pey280
  27. Szado J, Pakulska E, Kapkowska E. Influence of production factors on feather quality. In: Proceedings of the 10th European Symposium on Waterfowl, Halle (Saale), Germany. World's Poultry Science Association; 1995. pp. 331-41.
  28. Toth S, Szelne Szeri M, Nguyen DV. Factors affecting feather production of geese. Allattenyesztes es Takarmanyozas 1988;37:174-9.
  29. Tilki M, Saatci M, Kirmizibayrak T, Aksoy A. Effect of age on growth and carcass composition of Native Turkish Geese. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde 2005;69:77-83.
  30. Yiliz D, Bozkurt EU, Akturks SH. Determination of goose feather morphology by using SEM. J Anim Vet Adv 2009;8:2650-4.
  31. Kozak J. Poultry Industry of Hungary and its EU-conform regulation. Technologies, market regulation and animal welfare. Budapest, Hungary: Agroinform Kiado; 1999.
  32. Fraley SM, Fraley GS, Karcher DM, Makagon MM, Lilburn MS. Influence of plastic slatted floors compared with pine shaving litter on Pekin Duck condition during the summer months. Poult Sci 2013;92:1706-11. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.2012-02992

Cited by

  1. Preparation, characterization of feather protein-g-poly(sodium allyl sulfonate) and its application as a low-temperature adhesive to cotton and viscose fibers for warp sizing vol.136, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2020.109945
  2. Effects of Different Swimming Pool Conditions and Floor Types on Growth Performance and Footpad Dermatitis in Indoor-Reared White Roman Geese vol.11, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11061705
  3. The association of social rank with paternity efficiency in competitive mating flocks of Zi goose ganders (Anser cygnoides L.) vol.100, pp.11, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psj.2021.101415