Korean Journal of Agricultural Science (농업과학연구)

Institute of Agricultural Science, CNU (충남대학교 농업과학연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Laying performance of two pure-line Korean native ducks at different house types

토종오리 순종 2계통의 사육형태에 따른 산란능력

  • Kim, Hak-Kyu (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Hong, Eui-Chul (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kang, Bo-Seok (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Kim, Chong-Dae (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Heo, Kang-Nyeong (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • Choo, Hyo-Jun (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA) ;
  • HwangBo, Jong (Poultry Science Division, National Institute of Animal Science, RDA)
  • 김학규 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 홍의철 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 강보석 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 김종대 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 허강녕 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 추효준 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과) ;
  • 황보종 (농촌진흥청 국립축산과학원 가금과)
  • Received : 2011.12.26
  • Accepted : 2012.03.23
  • Published : 2012.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This work was conducted to evaluate the laying performance of Korean Native Ducks (KND) Pure-Line (PL). A total of 400 female pullets were hatched from PL to keep in National Institute of Animal Science, Korea. Twenty weeks old PL female ducks were divided into 4 groups (5 replications/group, 20 head/replications). Four groups were compared in a $2{\times}2$ factorial arrangement with strain (White strains, WW; Celadon strains, CC) and house type (flat house, cage house). On first egg laying day, CC strain laid eggs earlier compared to WW strain (P<0.01), but there was no significant difference between flat and cage house. Egg weight (EW) and body weight (BW) at first egg laying day have no difference among strains and houses. BW of CC strain was higher than WW strain at the age of 30 week (P<0.01). Weekly feed intake (FI) have no difference between flat and cage house, but FI of WW strain was high compared to CC strain during 20~30 weeks. There was no significant difference on EW between CC and WW strains, but EW was low at flat house compared to cage house (P<0.05). Weekly egg productions of WW strain and flat house were lower than CC strain and cage house, respectively (P<0.01). Finally, These results can provide the information that needed to introducing new strains.

Keywords

References

  1. Burn JM, Larzul C. 2003. Inheritance of reproductive traits of female common ducks (Anas platyrhynchos) in pure breeding and in inter-generic crossbreeding with muscovy ducks (Cairina moschata). Br. Poult. Sci. 44(1): 40-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/0007166031000085445a
  2. Cheng YS, Poivey JP, Rouvier R, Tai C. 1996. Prediction of genetic gains in body weight, egg production and shell quality traits in the Brown Tsaiya laying duck(Anas platyrhynchos). Genet. Sel. Evol. 28: 443-455. https://doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-28-5-443
  3. Cheng YS, Rouvier R, Poivey JP, Huang HC, Liu HL, Tai C. 2005. Selection responses in duation of fertility and its consequences on hatchability in the intergeneric crossbreeding of ducks. Br. Poult. Sci. 46(5): 565-571. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071660500273193
  4. Duncan DB. 1955. Multiple range and multiple F tests. Biometrics. 11: 1-42. https://doi.org/10.2307/3001478
  5. Han SW, Lee JH, Sang BC. 1995. Estimation of heritabilities and genetic correlations on major economic traits in Korean Native Chicken. K. J. Poult. Sci. 22(2): 67-75. [in Korean]
  6. Henderson CR. 1963. Selection index and expected genetic advance. In: Statistical Genetics and Plant Breeding, (WD Hanson, HF Robinson ed), National Academy of Sciences- National Research Council, Washington, DC, publication 982, 141-163.
  7. Hogsett ML, Nordskog AW. 1958. Genetic-economic value in selection for egg production rate, body weight and egg weight. Poult. Sci. 37: 1404-1419. https://doi.org/10.3382/ps.0371404
  8. Kang BS, Cheong IC, Lee SJ, Kim SH, Ohh BK, Choi KS. 1997. Estimation of heterosis for some economic traits in crossbreds between Korean Native Chicken and Rhode Island Red. II. Laying performance of Korean Native Chicken and Rhode Island Red Crossbreds. K. J. Poult. Sci. 24(3): 127-137. [in Korean]
  9. Kim HK, Hong EC, Kang BS, Park MN, Seo BY, Choo HJ, Na SH, Bang HT, Seo OS, Hwangbo J. 2010. Effect of crossbreeding of Korean native duck and broiler ducks on performance and carcass yield. K. J. Poult. Sci. 37(3): 229-235. [in Korean] https://doi.org/10.5536/KJPS.2010.37.3.229
  10. Ministry for Agriculture Forestry. 2006. The development of feed and meet processing for duck used organic agriculture method. Animal Testing Research Report. [in Korean].
  11. Minvielle, F. 1990. Pricipes d'amelioration genetique des animaur domestiques. INRA, Paris, Les presses de I'Universite de Lavel, Quebec.
  12. National Institute of Animal Science. 2007. Korean Feeding Standard for Poultry. RDA. [in Korean].
  13. National Livestock Research Institute. 1999. The Study on Characteristics of Housed Ducks. Animal Testing Research Report. [in Korean].
  14. National Research Council. 1994. Nutrient Requirements of Poultry. 9th ed. National Academy Press, Washington DC.
  15. Okruszek A, Ksiazkiewicz J, Woloszyn J, Kisiel T, Orkusz A, Biernat J. 2006. Effect of laying period and duck origin on egg characteristics. Arch Tierz Dummerstorf. 49(4): 400-410.
  16. Ren J, Lu L, Liu X, Tao Z, Zhang C, Wang D, Shen J, Liu W, Tian Y, Zhu Z. 2009. Paternity assessment: application on estimation of breeding value in body-weight at first egg trait of egg-laying duck(Anas platyrhynchos). Mol. Biol. Rep. 36: 2175-2181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-008-9432-z
  17. SAS. 2002. SAS/STAT Software for PC. SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA.