Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T16:30:40.178Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Significance of chick quality score in broiler production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2012

L. J. F. van de Ven ,
A. V. van Wagenberg ,
K. A. Uitdehaag ,
P. W. G. Groot Koerkamp ,
B. Kemp  and
H. van den Brand
L. J. F. van de Ven*
Affiliation:
Vencomatic BV, PO Box 160, 5520 AD Eersel, The Netherlands Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
A. V. van Wagenberg
Affiliation:
Vencomatic BV, PO Box 160, 5520 AD Eersel, The Netherlands
K. A. Uitdehaag
Affiliation:
Vencomatic BV, PO Box 160, 5520 AD Eersel, The Netherlands
P. W. G. Groot Koerkamp
Affiliation:
Farm Technology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 17, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
B. Kemp
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
H. van den Brand
Affiliation:
Adaptation Physiology Group, Wageningen University, PO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands
*
†E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The quality of day old chicks is crucial for profitable broiler production, but a difficult trait to define. In research, both qualitative and quantitative measures are used with variable predictive value for subsequent performance. In hatchery practice, chick quality is judged on a binomial scale, as chicks are divided into first grade (Q1-saleable) and second grade (Q2) chicks right after hatch. Incidences and reasons for classifying chicks as Q2, and potential of these chicks for survival and post-hatch performance have hardly been investigated, but may provide information for flock performance. We conducted an experiment to investigate (1) the quality of a broiler flock and the relation with post-hatch flock performance based on a qualitative score (Pasgar©score) of Q1 chicks and based on the incidence of Q2 chicks and (2) the reasons for classifying chicks as Q2, and the potential of these chicks for survival and post-hatch growth. The performance was followed of Q1 and Q2 chicks obtained from two breeder flocks that hatched in two different hatching systems (a traditional hatcher or a combined hatching and brooding system, named Patio). Eggs were incubated until embryo day 18, when they were transferred to one of the two hatching systems. At embryo day 21/post-hatch day 0, all chicks from the hatcher (including Q2 chicks) were brought to Patio, where the hatchery manager marked the Q2 chicks from both flocks and hatching systems and registered apparent reasons for classifying these chicks as Q2. Chick quality was assessed of 100 Q1 chicks from each flock and hatching system. Weights of all chicks were determined at days 0, 7, 21 and 42. There were no correlations between mean Pasgar©score and post-hatch growth or mortality, and suboptimal navel quality was the only quality trait associated with lower post-hatch growth. Growth was clearly affected by breeder flock and hatching system, which could not be linked to mean Pasgar©score or incidence of Q2 chicks. Q2 chicks showed lower post-hatch growth compared to Q1 chicks but effects on flock performance at slaughter weight were limited because early mortality in Q2 chicks was high (62.50% at 7 days). We concluded that chick qualitative scores and the incidence of Q2 chicks may be informative for the quality of incubation, but are not predictive for post-hatch flock performance. Culling Q2 chicks after hatch is well-founded in terms of both animal welfare and profitability.

Keywords

chick qualitysecond grade chickshatching systembroiler performance
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 6 , Issue 10 , October 2012 , pp. 1677 - 1683
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2012

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

Boerjan, M 2002. Programs for single stage incubation and chick quality. Avian Poultry Biology Reviews 13, 237–238.Google Scholar
Careghi, C, Tona, K, Onagbesan, O, Buyse, J, Decuypere, E, Bruggeman, V 2005. The effects of the spread of hatch and interaction with delayed feed access after hatch on broiler performance until 7 days of age. Poultry Science 84, 1314–1320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Decuypere, E, Bruggeman, V 2007. The endocrine interface of environmental and egg factors affecting chick quality. Poultry Science 86, 1037–1042.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
European Union 2007. Council Directive 2007/43/EC. Laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production. Official Journal of the European Union L 182, 19–28.Google Scholar
Fasenko, GM, O'Dea, EE 2008. Evaluating broiler growth and mortality in chicks with minor navel conditions at hatching. Poultry Science 87, 594–597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gonzales, E, Kondo, N, Saldanha, ESPB, Loddy, MM, Careghi, C, Decuypere, E 2003. Performance and physiological parameters of broiler chickens subjected to fasting on the neonatal period. Poultry Science 82, 1250–1256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kwalilak, LT, Ulmer Franco, AM, Fasenko, GJ 2010. Impaired intestinal villi growth in broiler chicks with unhealed navels. Poultry Science 89, 82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leksrisompong, N, Romero-Sanchez, H, Plumstead, PW, Brannan, KE, Brake, J 2007. Broiler incubation. 1. Effect of elevated temperature during late incubation on body weight and organs of chicks. Poultry Science 86, 2685–2691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lourens, A, van den Brand, H, Meijerhof, R, Kemp, B 2005. Effect of eggshell temperature during incubation on embryo development, hatchability and post-hatch development. Poultry Science 84, 914–920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noy, Y, Sklan, D 1999. Energy utilization in newly hatched chicks. Poultry Science 75, 1750–1756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reijrink, IAM, Meijerhof, R, Kemp, B, Graat, EAM, van den Brand, H 2009. Influence of prestorage incubation on embryonic development, hatchability, and chick quality. Poultry Science 88, 2649–2660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reijrink, IAM, Berghmans, D, Meijerhof, R, Kemp, B, van den Brand, H 2010. Influence of egg storage time and preincubation warming profile on embryonic development, hatchability and chick quality. Poultry Science 89, 1225–1238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Romanoff, AL 1960. The avian embryo. Structural and functional development. The Macmillan Company, New York.Google Scholar
SAS Institute 2004. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 9.1. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC.Google Scholar
Szdzuy, K, Fong, LM, Mortola, JP 2008. Oxygenation and establishment of thermogenesis in the avian embryo. Life Sciences 82, 50–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tona, K, Onagbesan, O, De Ketelaere, B, Decuypere, E, Bruggeman, V 2004. Effects of age of broiler breeders and egg storage on egg quality, hatchability, chick quality, chick weight, and chick post-hatch growth to forty-two days. Journal of Applied Poultry Research 13, 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tona, K, Onagbesan, O, De Ketelaere, B, Bruggeman, V, Decuypere, E 2005. Interrelationships between chick quality traits and the effect of individual parameter on broiler relative growth to 7 days of age. Archiv für Geflügelkunde 69, 67–72.Google Scholar
Tona, K, Bamelis, F, De Ketelaere, B, Bruggeman, V, Moraes, VMB, Buyse, J, Onagbesan, O, Decuypere, E 2003. Effects of egg storage time on spread of hatch, chick quality and chick juvenile growth. Poultry Science 82, 736–741.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ulmer-Franco, AM, Fasenko, GM, O'Dea Christopher, EE 2010. Hatching egg characteristics, chick quality, and broiler performance at 2 breeder flock ages and from 3 egg weights. Poultry Science 89, 2735–2742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van de Ven, LJF, van Wagenberg, AV, Groot Koerkamp, PWG, Kemp, B, van den Brand, H 2009. Effects of a combined hatching and brooding system on hatchability, chick weight, and mortality in broilers. Poultry Science 88, 2273–2279.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van de Ven, LJF, van Wagenberg, AV, Debonne, M, Decuypere, E, Kemp, B, van den Brand, H 2011. Hatching system and time effects on broiler physiology and posthatch growth. Poultry Science 90, 1267–1275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Willemsen, H, Everaert, N, Witters, A, De Smit, L, Debonne, M, Verschuere, F, Garain, P, Berckmans, D, Decuypere, E, Bruggeman, V 2008. Critical assessment of chick quality measurements as an indicator of post-hatch performance. Poultry Science 87, 2358–2366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, HR 2004. Hatchability problem analysis. 1. University of Florida IFAS Extension CIR1112. University of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar