Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:27:00.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phenotypic characterization of local Ghanaian chickens: egg-laying performance under improved management conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2015

R. Osei-Amponsah
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana
B.B. Kayang*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana
A. Naazie
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Centre (ARC), University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana
M. Tiexier-Boichard
Affiliation:
INRA/AgroParis Tech, UMR 1236 Génétique et Diversité Animales 78352 Jous-en Josas, France
X. Rognon
Affiliation:
INRA/AgroParis Tech, UMR 1236 Génétique et Diversité Animales 78352 Jous-en Josas, France
*
Correspondence to: B.B. Kayang, Department of Animal Science, University of Ghana, Legon, Ghana. email: [email protected]/[email protected]
Get access

Summary

Egg production performance of 571 local Ghanaian chickens and 107 SASSO T44 chickens kept under improved management conditions were analysed. Average egg weight, hen-day egg production and feed conversion ratio (FCR) were determined for the three experimental chicken ecotypes. Hen-day production was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the savannah local chicken ecotype than the forest ecotype and SASSO T44 chickens. Egg weights of local Ghanaian chickens compared favourably with values reported for local chickens in Africa. On the average, SASSO T44 had significantly (P < 0.05) higher egg weights and feed intake compared with the local chicken ecotypes. The local chicken ecotypes on the other hand, had significantly (P < 0.05) better feed conversion ratios than SASSO T44 chicken. Local Ghanaian chicken ecotypes have a more efficient FCR per every unit of egg produced compared with the control population. Low feed intake, good feed conversion ratios and adaptation to the environment are traits local chicken harbour which can be exploited in future breeding programmes to improve on chicken meat and egg production in Ghana. Ghanaian local chickens could thus be a valuable genetic resource for the development of an efficient egg production chicken breed adaptable to the humid tropical climates.

Résumé

Des paramètres en rapport avec la production d’œufs ont été analysés chez 571 poules locales ghanéennes et chez 107 poules SASSO T44 soumises à des pratiques d’élevage perfectionnées. Le poids moyen des œufs, la production d’œufs par poule et jour et la conversion alimentaire ont été évalués chez trois écotypes de poule. La production quotidienne d’œufs par poule a été significativement (P < 0.05) plus élevée chez l’écotype local de poule de la savane que chez l’écotype de la forêt et que chez les poules SASSO T44. Compte tenu des valeurs de référence pour les poules locales africaines, les œufs des poules locales ghanéennes ont atteint un poids plutôt élevé. En moyenne, le poids des œufs et la consommation d'aliment ont été significativement (P < 0.05) plus élevés chez les poules SASSO T44 que chez les écotypes locaux de poule. Cependant, les écotypes locaux de poule ont présenté un taux de conversion alimentaire significativement (P < 0.05) meilleur que celui des poules SASSO T44. Les écotypes locaux de poule ghanéenne ont présenté une conversion alimentaire par unité d’œuf produite plus efficiente que celle de la population contrôle. Une moindre consommation d'aliment, un bon taux de conversion alimentaire et l'adaptation à l'environnement sont des traits caractéristiques des poules locales qui peuvent être exploités dans des futurs programmes de sélection afin d'améliorer les productions de viande de poulet et d’œufs au Ghana. Ainsi, les poules locales ghanéennes pourraient constituer une ressource génétique précieuse pour le développement d'une race de poule efficiente dans la production d’œufs et capable de s'adapter à des climats tropicaux humides.

Resumen

Se analizaron parámetros de producción de huevos en 571 gallinas locales ghanesas y en 107 gallinas SASSO T44 explotadas bajo condiciones de manejo mejoradas. Se evaluaron el peso medio de los huevos, la producción de huevos por gallina y día y la conversión del alimento para tres ecotipos de gallina. La producción de huevos por gallina y día fue significativamente (P < 0.05) mayor en el ecotipo local de gallinas de la sabana que en el ecotipo de la selva o que en las gallinas SASSO T44. Teniendo en cuenta los valores de referencia para las gallinas locales de África, los huevos de las gallinas locales ghanesas alcanzaron un peso más bien alto. De media, el peso de los huevos y el consumo de alimento fueron significativamente (P < 0.05) mayores en las gallinas SASSO T44 que en los ecotipos locales de gallina. Sin embargo, los ecotipos locales de gallina presentaron un índice de conversión del alimento significativamente (P < 0.05) mejor que el de las gallinas SASSO T44. Los ecotipos locales de gallina ghanesa mostraron una conversión del alimento por unidad de huevo producida más eficiente que la de la población control. Un bajo consumo de alimento, un buen índice de conversión del pienso y la adaptación al entorno son rasgos característicos de las gallinas locales que pueden ser explotados en futuros programas de selección con el fin de mejorar las producciones de carne de pollo y de huevos en Ghana. Así, las gallinas locales ghanesas podrían representar un valioso recurso genético para el desarrollo de una raza de gallina eficiente en la producción de huevos y con capacidad de adaptación a climas tropicales húmedos.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aboe, P.A.T., Boa-Amponsem, K., Okantah, S.A., Dorward, P.T. & Bryant, M.J. 2006. Free-range village chickens on the Accra Plains, Ghana: their contribution to households. Tropical Animal Health and Production 38(3): 223234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Addison, D., Adomako, K., Olympio, O.S., Hamidu, J.A., Aboagye-Poku, R. & Djan-Fordjour, H. 2013. The effect of three different genotypes on the laying performance of two lines of layer parents. In Proceedings of the Ghana Society of Animal Production (GSAP) Conference held at the University of Ghana, Legon, Accra, pp. 320–325.Google Scholar
Adomako, K., Hagan, J.K. & Olympio, O.S. 2010. Egg production performance of first and second filial generation naked neck (NaNa, Nana) and normal feathered (nana) birds of a cross between indigenous naked neck (NaNa, Nana) males and exotic commercial females (nana). Livestock Research for Rural Development 22: Article #223. Retrieved April 10, 2015, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd22/12/adom22223.htm Google Scholar
Adomako, K., Olympio, O.S., Hagan, J.K. & Hamidu, J.A. 2014. Growth performance of crossbred naked neck and normal feathered laying hens kept in tropical villages. British Poultry Science 55(6): 701708.Google Scholar
Afolabi, O.I., Adegbite, D.A., Ashaolu, O.F. & Akinbode, S.O. 2013. Profitability and resource-use efficiency in poultry egg farming in Ogun State. Nigeria African Journal of Business Management 7(16): 15361540.Google Scholar
Aganga, A.A., Tshwenyane, S.O. & Molefhe, L. 2003. Influence of feed type on egg production of Tawn laying chickens. International Journal of Poultry Science 2(4): 256258.Google Scholar
Ahmad, F., Ahsan-ul-Haq, , Ashraf, M., Hussain, J. & Siddiqui, M.Z. 2010. Production performance of White Leghorn Hens under different lighting regimes. Pakistan Veterinary Journal 30(1): 2124.Google Scholar
Al-Rawi, A.A. & AL-Athari, A.K. 2002. Characteristics of indigenous chicken in Iraq. Animal Genetic Resources Information Bulletin 32: 8793.Google Scholar
Amakye-Anim, J. 2000. V4/I2 Newcastle disease project. Ghana Veterinary Medical Association Newsletter 5: 1517.Google Scholar
Anderson, K.E. 2002. North Carolina layer performance and management test. First Cycle Report 34: 135.Google Scholar
Aning, K.G. 2006. The structure and importance of commercial and village based poultry in Ghana. FAO Animal Production and Health Paper, Rome, Vol. 5.Google Scholar
Ayim-Akonor, M. & Akonor, P.T. 2014. Egg consumption: patterns, preferences and perceptions among consumers in Accra metropolitan area. International Food Research Journal 21(4): 14571463.Google Scholar
Benabdeljelil, K., Lahbabi, S. & Bordas, A. 2003. Comparaison de croisements incluant une race locale ou une lignée expérimentale à un témoin commercial pour la production d'oeufs au Maroc. Revue D′élevage et de Médecine Vétérinaire Des Pays Tropicaux 56(3–4): 193198.Google Scholar
Branckaert, R.D.S., Gavirna, L., Jallade, J. & Seiders, R.W. 2000. Transfer of technology in poultry production for developing countries, sustainable development. Rome, FAO.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, R.N., Sharma, R.P., Mishra, A., Dange, M. & Bhattacharya, T.K. 2008. Variability of microsatellites and their association with egg production traits in chicken. International Journal of Poultry Science 7(1): 7780.Google Scholar
Dana, N. 2009. Would the growing concerns over animal well-being and emerging environmental challenges set a new interface between the commercial industries and the traditional chicken? Ethiopian Society of Animal Production (ESAP) Newsletter Issue No. 21.Google Scholar
Das, S.C., Chowdhury, S.D., Khatun, M.A., Nishibori, M., Isobe, N. & Yishimura, Y. 2007. Poultry production profile and expected future projection in Bangladesh. World's Poultry Science Journal 64: 99118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutta, R.K., Islam, M.S. & Kabir, M.A. 2013. Production performance of indigenous chickens (Gallus domesticus L.) in some selected areas of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. American Journal of Experimental Agriculture 3(2): 308323.Google Scholar
Etim, N.A.A., Etim, N.A.N., Edem, E.A., Offiong, E.E.A. & Essang, E.U. 2013. Resource-use efficiency in small-holder poultry egg production in rural Nigeria. Global Journal for Biology, Agriculture and Health Sciences 2(3): 146149.Google Scholar
FAOSTAT. 2013. FAOSTAT database. Rome, Italy, Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations.Google Scholar
GAIN. 2013. Ghana Poultry Annual Report Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN) Report Number 1304. USDA Foreign Agricultural Service.Google Scholar
Galal, A., Ahmed, A.M.H., Ali, U.M. & Younis, H.H. 2007. Influence of naked neck gene on laying performance and some haematological parameters of dwarfing hens. International Journal of Poultry Science 6(11): 807813.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grobas, S., Mendez, J., Lazaro, R., De Blas, C. & Mateos, G.G. 2001. Influence of source and percentage of fat added to diet on performance and fatty acid composition of egg yolks of two strains of laying hens. Poultry Science 80: 11711179.Google Scholar
Grobbelaar, J.A.N., Sutherland, B. & Molalakgotla, N.M. 2010. Egg production potentials of certain indigenous chicken breeds from South Africa. Animal Genetic Resources 46: 2532, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grossman, M. & Koops, W.J. 2001. A model for individual egg production in chickens. Poultry Science 80: 859867.Google Scholar
Guèye, E.F. 1998. Village egg and fowl meat production in Africa. World Poultry Science Journal 54: 7385.Google Scholar
Gyening, K.O. 2006. The future of the poultry industry in Ghana, Paper prepared for the Ghana Veterinary Medical Association, p. 7.Google Scholar
Jacob, J.P., Miles, R.D. & Mather, F.B. 2000. Egg Quality. Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS), University of Florida PS 24.Google Scholar
Khawaja, T., Khan, S.H., Mukhtar, N., Ullah, N. & Parveen, A. 2013. Production performance, egg quality and biochemical parameters of Fayoumi, Rhode Island Red and their reciprocal crossbred chickens. Journal of Applied Animal Research 41(2): 208217.Google Scholar
Kitalyi, A.J. 1998. Village Chicken Production systems in Rural Africa. FAO Animal Health and Production Paper, Rome, Vol. 142, 12 pp.Google Scholar
Leeson, S., Caston, L. & Summers, J.D. 1997. Layer performance of four strains of leghorn pullets subjected to various rearing programs. Poultry Science 76: 15.Google Scholar
Mogesse, H.H. 2007. Phenotypic and genetic characterization of indigenous chicken populations in Northwest Ethiopia. University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa. (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis).Google Scholar
Moula, N., Diaw, M.T., Salhi, A., Farnir, F., Antoine-Moussiaux, N. & Leroy, P. 2013. Egg production performance of local Kabyle hen and its crossbreds with ISA-Brown strain in semi-intensive conditions. International Journal of Poultry Science 12(3): 148152.Google Scholar
Nthimo, A.M. 2004. The phenotypic characterization of native Lesotho chickens. University of the Free State, South Africa. (M.Sc. dissertation).Google Scholar
Okantah, S.A., Aboe, P.A.T., Boa-Amponsem, K., Dorward, P.T. & Bryant, M.J. 2003. Small-scale poultry production in peri-urban areas in Ghana, Livestock Production Research Paper. United Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID).Google Scholar
Osei-Amponsah, R., Kayang, B.B. & Naazie, A. 2012. Age, genotype and sex effects on growth performance of local chickens kept under improved management in Ghana. Tropical Animal and Health Production 44: 2934.Google Scholar
Osei-Amponsah, R., Kayang, B.B. & Naazie, A. 2013. Phenotypic and genetic parameters for production traits of local chickens in Ghana. Animal Genetic Resources 53: 4550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, R.W., Harding, S.A., Muray, D.A., Soutar, D.M., Baird, D.B., Welham, S.J., Kane, A.F., Gilmour, A.R., Thompson, R., Webster, R. & Wilson, T.G. 2007. GenStat release 10. Hemel, Hempstead, UK, VSN International.Google Scholar
Penderson, C.V. 2002. Production of semi-scavenging chickens in Zimbabwe. Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, Copenhagan, Denmark. (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis).Google Scholar
Rahman, M.M., Baqui, M.A. & Howlider, M.A.R. 2004. Egg production performance of RIR × Fayoumi and Fayoumi × RIR crossbreed chicken under intensive management in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16: Article #92. Retrieved April 10, 2015, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/11/rahm16092.htm Google Scholar
Roberts, J.A. 1992. The scavenging feed resource base in assessments of the productivity of scavenging chickens, Newcastle disease in village chickens: control with thermostable oral vaccines. In Proceedings of an International Workshop, October 6–10, 1991, Kualar Lumpur, Malaysia; P.B. Spradbrow, Ed.Google Scholar
Sazzad, H.M. 1992. Comparative study on egg production and feed efficiency of different breeds of poultry under intensive and rural conditions in Bangladesh. Livestock Research for Rural Development 4: Article #29. Retrieved April 10, 2015, from http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd4/3/bangla1.htm Google Scholar
Smith, A.J. 1974. Changes in the average weight and shell thickness of eggs produced by hens exposed to high environmental temperatures, a review. Tropical Animal Health and Production 6: 6371.Google Scholar
Tadelle, D. 2003. Phenotypic and genetic characterization of local chicken ecotypes of Ethiopia. Berlin, Verlag: Dr. Hans-Joachim Koster, 209 p.Google Scholar
Tadesse, D., Singh, H., Mengistu, A., Esatu, W. & Dessie, T. 2013. Study on productive performances and egg quality traits of exotic chickens under village production system in East Shewa, Ethiopia. African Journal of Agricultural Research 8(13): 11231128.Google Scholar
van Marle-Köster, E. & Casey, N.H. 2001. Phenotypic characterization of native chicken lines of South Africa. Animal Genetic Resources Information Bulletin 29: 7178.Google Scholar
Varguez-Montero, G., Sarmiento-Franco, L., Santos-Ricalde, R. & Jose Segura-Correa, J. 2012. Egg production and quality under three housing systems in the tropics. Tropical Animal Health and Production 44(2): 201204.Google Scholar
Vij, P.K., Tantia, M.S. & Vijh, R.K. 2006. Characterisation of Punjab Brown chicken. Animal Genetic Resources Information (FAO, Rome, Italy) 39: 6576.Google Scholar
Willems, O.W., Miller, S.P. & Wood, B.J. 2013. Aspects of selection for feed efficiency in meat producing poultry. World's Poultry Science 69: 7788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolc, A., Jesus, A., Petek, S., O'Sullivan, N.P. & Dekkers, J.C.M. 2011. Evaluation of egg production in layers using random regression models. Animal Industry Report: AS 657, ASL R2622 (available at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ans_air/vol657/iss1/46).Google Scholar
Yeasmin, T., Howlider, M.A.R. & Ahammad, M.U. 2003. Effect of introgressing Dwarf gene from Bangladeshi indigenous to exotic breeds on egg production. International Journal of Poultry Science 2(4): 264266.Google Scholar
Zaman, M.A., Sørensen, P. & Howlider, M.A.R. 2004. Egg production performances of a breed and three crossbreds under semi-scavenging systems of management. Livestock Research for Rural Development 16(8): Art #60. Retrieved 12 September 2013 (available at http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd16/8/zama16060.htm).Google Scholar