Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T11:35:09.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Egg shell quality in Japanese quail: characteristics, heritabilities and genetic and phenotypic relationships

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2015

D. Narinc ,
A. Aygun ,
E. Karaman  and
T. Aksoy
D. Narinc*
Affiliation:
Department of Genetics, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Namik Kemal University, Tekirdag 59100, Turkey
A. Aygun
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Selcuk University, Konya 42075, Turkey
E. Karaman
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Akdeniz University, Antalya 07100, Turkey
T. Aksoy
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science, Faculty of Agriculture, Akdeniz University, Antalya 07100, Turkey
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to estimate heritabilities as well as genetic and phenotypic correlations for egg weight, specific gravity, shape index, shell ratio, egg shell strength, egg length, egg width and shell weight in Japanese quail eggs. External egg quality traits were measured on 5864 eggs of 934 female quails from a dam line selected for two generations. Within the Bayesian framework, using Gibbs Sampling algorithm, a multivariate animal model was applied to estimate heritabilities and genetic correlations for external egg quality traits. The heritability estimates for external egg quality traits were moderate to high and ranged from 0.29 to 0.81. The heritability estimates for egg and shell weight of 0.81 and 0.76 were fairly high. The genetic and phenotypic correlations between egg shell strength with specific gravity, shell ratio and shell weight ranging from 0.55 to 0.79 were relatively high. It can be concluded that it is possible to determine egg shell quality using the egg specific gravity values utilizing its high heritability and fairly high positive correlation with most of the egg shell quality traits. As a result, egg specific gravity may be the choice of selection criterion rather than other external egg traits for genetic improvement of egg shell quality in Japanese quails.

Keywords

quailegg shellqualityheritabilityBayesian
Type
Research Article
Information
animal , Volume 9 , Issue 7 , July 2015 , pp. 1091 - 1096
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 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

Al-Daraji, HJ, Razuki, WM, Al-Hayani, WK and Al-Hassani, AS 2010. Effect of dietary linseed on egg quality of laying quail. International Journal Poultry Science 9, 584–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alkan, S, Karabağ, K, Galic, A, Karsli, T and Balcioğlu, MS 2010. Effects of selection for body weight and egg production on egg quality traits in Japanese quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica) of different lines and relationships between these traits. The Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine University of Kafkas 16, 239–244.Google Scholar
Aygun, A and Yetisir, R 2010. The relationships among egg quality characteristic of different hybrid layers to forced molting programs with and without feed withdrawal. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 9, 710–715.Google Scholar
Copur, G, Baylan, M and Canogullari, S 2010. Egg weight but not egg shape ındex, determines the hatchability in Japanase quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances 9, 1890–1895.Google Scholar
De Ketelaere, B, Govaerts, T, Coucke, P, Dewil, E, Visscher, J, Decuypere, E and De Baerdemaeker, J 2002. Measuring the egg shell strength of 6 different genetic strains of laying hens: techniques and comparisons. British Poultry Science 43, 238–244.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, IC, Bain, M, Edmond, A, Wilson, PW, Joseph, N, Solomon, S, De Ketelaere, B, De Baerdemaeker, J, Schmutz, M, Preisinger, R and Waddington, D 2005. Heritability and genetic correlation of measurements derived from acoustic resonance frequency analysis; a novel method of determining egg shell quality in domestic hens. British Poultry Science 46, 280–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Erensayin, C and Camci, O 2002. Effects of the oviposition time on egg quality in quails. Archiv fur Geflugelkunde 66, 283–284.Google Scholar
Grunder, AA, Hamilton, RMG, Fairfull, RW and Thompson, BK 1989. Genetic parameters of egg shell quality traits and percentage of eggs remaining intact between oviposition and grading. Poultry Science 68, 46–54.Google Scholar
Hartmann, C, Johansson, K, Strandberg, E and Rydhmer, L 2003. Genetic correlation between the maternal genetic effect on chick weight and direct genetic effects on egg composition traits in a White Leghorn line. Poultry Science 82, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hassan, SM, Mady, ME, Cartwright, AL, Sabri, HM and Mobarak, MS 2003. Effect of early feed restriction on reproductive performance in Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). Poultry Science 82, 1163–1169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khaldari, M, Pakdel, A, Mehrbani Yeganeh, H, Nejati Javaremi, A and Berg, P 2010. Response to selection and genetic parameters of body and carcass weights in Japanese quail selected for 4-week body weight. Poultry Science 89, 1834–1841.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kul, S and Seker, I 2004. Phenotypic correlations between some external and internal egg quality traits in the Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica). International Journal Poultry Science 3, 400–405.Google Scholar
Lotfi, E, Zerehdaran, S and Raoufi, Z 2012. Genetic properties of egg quality traits and their correlations with performance traits in Japanese quail. British Poultry Science 53, 585–591.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mielenz, N, Ronny, R and Schuler, L 2006. Estimation of additive and non-additive genetic variances of body weight, egg weight and egg production for quails (Coturnix coturnix japonica) with an animal model analysis. Archiv Tierzucht 49, 300–307.Google Scholar
Mignon-Grasteau, S and Minvielle, F 2003. Relation between tonic immobility and production estimated by factorial correspondence analysis in Japanese quail. Poultry Science 82, 1839–1844.Google Scholar
Minvielle, F 1998. Genetics and breeding of Japanese quail for production around the world. In Proceedings of 6th Asian Pacific Poultry Congress, 4–7th June 1998, Nagoya, Japan, pp. 122–127.Google Scholar
Minvielle, F and Oguz, I 2002. Effects of genetic and breeding on egg quality of Japanese quail. World’s Poultry Science Journal 58, 291–295.Google Scholar
Mrode, RA 2005. Linear models for the prediction of animal breeding values, 2nd edition. CABI Publishing, Oxfordshire, UK.Google Scholar
Narinc, D and Aksoy, T 2012. Effects of mass selection based on phenotype and early feed restriction on the performance and carcass characteristics in Japanese quails. The Journal of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine University of Kafkas 18, 425–430.Google Scholar
Narinc, D, Aksoy, T, Karaman, E and Firat, MZ 2014. Genetic parameter estimates of growth curve and reproduction traits in Japanese quail. Poultry Science 93, 24–30.Google Scholar
Nowaczewski, S, Kontecka, H, Rosinski, A, Koberling, S and Koronowski, P 2010. Egg quality of Japanese quail depends on layer age and storage time. Folia Biologica 58, 201–207.Google Scholar
Reddy, PM, Reddy, VR, Reddy, CV and Rao, PSP 1979. Egg weight, shape index and hatchability in Khaki Cambell duck eggs. Indian Journal of Poultry Science 14, 26–31.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team 2010. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Roberts, JR 2004. Factors affecting egg internal quality and egg shell quality in laying hens. Poultry Science 41, 161–177.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Navarro, A, Kalin, O, Nys, Y and Garcia-Ruiz, JM 2002. Influence of the microstructure on the shell strength of eggs laid by hens of different ages. British Poultry Science 9, 395–403.Google Scholar
Roland, DA 1988. Egg shell problems: estimates of Incidence and economic impact. Poultry Science 67, 1801–1803.Google Scholar
Roshdy, M, Khalil, HA, Hanafy, AM and Mady, ME 2010. Productive and reproductive traits of Japanese quail as affected by two housing system. Egypt Poultry Science 30, 55–67.Google Scholar
Sahin, N, Onderci, M and Sahin, K 2002. Effects of dietary chromium and zinc on egg production, egg quality and some blood metabolites of laying hens reared under low ambient temperature. Biological Trace Element Research 85, 47–58.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2009. SAS/STAT software release 9.3. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.Google Scholar
Sato, K, Ida, N and Ino, T 1989. Genetic parameters of egg characteristics in Japanese quail. Jikken Dobutsu 38, 55–59.Google Scholar
Sezer, M 2007. Heritability of exterior egg quality traits in Japanese quail. Journal of Applied Biological Sciences 2, 37–40.Google Scholar
Waldmann, P and Ericsson, T 2006. Comparison of REML and Gibbs sampling estimates of multi-trait genetic parameters in Scots pine. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 112, 1441–1451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, RG 1968. A study of the hen’s egg. In British egg marketing board symposium (ed. TC Carter), pp. 207–249. Oliver and Boyd Publishing, Edinburg, UK.Google Scholar
Wolc, A, White, IMS, Hill, WG and Olori, VE 2010. Genetic parameters of egg defects and egg quality in layer chickens. Poultry Science 91, 1292–1298.Google Scholar
Yannakopolous, AL and Tserveni-Gousi, AS 1986. Quality characteristics of quail eggs. British Poultry Science 27, 171–176.Google Scholar
Yapici, N, Aksoy, T and Narinc, D 2006. Looking at the quail production in Turkey: the case of Antalya. In Proceedings of 12nd European Symposium on the Quality of Eggs and Eggs Products, 10–14th September 2006, Verona, Italy, pp. 456–457.Google Scholar
Zhang, LC, Ning, ZH, Xu, GY, Chou, Z and Yang, N 2005. Heritability and genetic and phenotypic correlations of egg quality traits in brown-egg dwarf layers. Poultry Science 84, 1209–1213.Google Scholar