Halk Elinde Yetiştirilen Kaz, Ördek ve Hindi Yumurtalarının Bazı Dış Kalite Özelliklerinin İncelenmesi

Year 2019, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 21 - 25, 01.07.2019

Sema Alaşahan Mustafa Garip Tamer Çağlayan Cafer Tayyar Ateş

https://doi.org/10.31196/huvfd.590893

Cited By: 5

Abstract

Çalışma kaz, ördek ve hindi kanatlı hayvan
türlerinin yumurtalarına ait dış kalite özellik değerlerini belirlemek amacıyla
yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın materyalini Konya ilinde halk elinde yetiştirilen kaz,
ördek ve hindilerden temin edilen toplam 440 adet kaz (n=117), (n=260) ördek ve
hindi (n=63) yumurtası oluşturmuştur. Her bir yumurta bireysel olarak tartılmış
olup yumurta boyu ve eni saptanmıştır. Ölçümle belirlenen bu üç değer
kullanılarak matematiksel denklemler yardımıyla yumurta dış kalite özellik
değerleri tespit edilmiştir. Yumurtaların şeklini tanımlamada şekil indeksi ve
elongasyon değerleri kullanılmıştır. Kaz, ördek ve hindi yumurta kabuk
özellikleri olarak kabuk ağırlığı (11.32 ve 11.23 g; 5.69 ve 5.71 g; 5.31 ve
5.33 g), kabuk kalınlığı (0.45
ve 0.48 mm; 0.35 ve 0.35 mm; 0.32 ve 0.34 mm) ve kabuk
yoğunluğu (2.08 g/cm³; 2.06 g/cm³;
2.06 g/cm³)
sırasıyla belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca yumurta kabuk yüzey alanı ve yumurta kütlesi
saptanmıştır. Kaz, ördek ve hindi yumurtalarına ait şekil indeksi ve elongasyon
değerleri sırasıyla %68,13±0.39 ve 1.47±0.01, %71,76±0.19 ve 1.40±0.00,
%72,53±0.32 ve 1.38±0,01 olarak tespit edilmiştir. Bu çalışmada, yumurta
ağırlığı, yumurta boyu ve eni baz alınarak bazı küçük beden yapısına sahip
kanatlı hayvanların yumurta özellikleri için belirlenen matematiksel formüller
yardımıyla kaz, ördek ve hindi kanatlı türlerinin yumurta dış kalite özellik
değerleri hesaplanmıştır.

Keywords

Kaz yumurtası, Ördek yumurtası, Hindi yumurtası, Dış kalite özellikleri, Elongasyon

Examination of Some External Quality Traits of Goose, Duck and Turkey Eggs in Public Farms

Abstract

The present study aimed
at the determination of certain external quality traits of goose, duck and
turkey eggs. A total of 440 eggs obtained from geese (n=117), ducks (n=260) and
turkeys (n=63), which were raised by the local people of Konya province,
constituted the material of the study. Each egg was weighed individually, and
the length and width of the eggs were determined. Using these three
measurements and mathematical equations, the external quality traits of the
eggs were determined. For defining the shape of the eggs, both the shape
indices and elongation values were utilised. 
Goose, duck and turkey egg shell traits determined, included egg shell
weight (11.32 and 11.23 g; 5.69 and 5.71 g; 5.31 and 5.33
g), egg shell thickness (0.45 and 0.48 mm; 0.35 and
0.35 mm; 0.32 and 0.34 mm) and egg shell density (2.08 g/cm³; 2.06
g/cm^3; 2.06 g/cm³), respectively. Furthermore,
egg shell surface area and egg mass were calculated. Descriptive statistics
were used to determine the mean and standard errors for these types of poultry
eggs. The shape indices and elongation values detected for goose, duck and
turkey eggs were 68.13±0.39% and 1.47±0.01, 71.76±0.19% and 1.40±0.00, and
72.53±0.32% and 1.38±0.01, respectively. In this study, the external quality
traits of goose, duck and turkey eggs were calculated using mathematical
formulae established for small poultry species on the basis of egg weight, egg
length and egg width values. 

Keywords

Geese egg, Duck egg, Turkey egg, External quality traits, Elongation

References

• Adeyeye EI, 2009: Comparative study on the characteristics of egg shells of some bird species. Bulletin of The Chemical Society of Ethiopia, 23(2), 159-166.
• Al-Obaidi FA and Al-Shadeedi SMJ, 2016: Comparison study of egg morphology, component and chemical composition of mallard duck and domestic peking duck. Journal of Bio Innovation, 5(4), 555-562.
• Amao SR, Olugbemiga KS, 2016: A study of quality traits of duck and goose eggs selected from different areas of oyo metropolis, southern quine zone of Nigeria. Continental J Agricultural Science, 10(1),1-7.
• Amao SR, Oyewumi OS, Ajayi JA, 2013: Effect of cage versus plastic box housing on the growth traits of Achatina achatina snails reared in southern guinea zone Nigeria. International Journal of Applied Research and Technology, 2(7), 53-58.
• Anna Anandh M, Richard Jagatheesan PN, Senthil Kumar P, Paramasivam A, Rajarajan G, 2012: Effect of rearing systems on reproductive performance of turkey. Veterinary World, 5(4), 226-229.
• Anna Anandh M, Richard Jagatheesan PN, 2015: Reproductive performance of beltsville small white and broad breasted bronze turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo) under hot humid climatic condition. Indian Journal of Animal Research, 49(6), 847-850.
• Ar A, Paganelli CV, Reeves RB, Greene DG, Rahn H, 1974: The avian egg: water vapor conductance, shell thick-ness and functional pore area.Condor,76,153-158.
• Arslan C, Saatci M, 2003: Kars yöresi yerli kazlarının yumurta verimi ve kuluçka özellikleri. Turkish Journal Veterinary and Animal Sciences, 27(6), 1361-1365.
• Balkan M ve Biricik M, 2008: Main egg characteristics in the peking duck. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 142-150.
• Bingöl SA, Deprem T, Karadağ Sarı E, Koral Taşçı S, Aslan Ş, 2016: Comparison between goose (Anser anser) and chicken (Gallus gallus domesticus) eggshells during embryonic development by scanning electron microscopy. Kafkas Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 22 (6): 937-943.
• Brun JM, Delaunay I, Sellıer N, Alletru B, Rouvıer R, Tixier-Boichard M, 2003: Analysis of laying traits in first cycle geese in two production systems. Animal Research, 52, 125-140.
• Erişir Z, Yıldız N, 2000: Bronz hindilerde damızlık yaşının kuluçka sonuçlarına etkileri. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Veteriner Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(2), 87-89.
• Galic A, Pliestic S, Janjecic Z, Bedekovic D, Filipovic D, Kovacev I, Copec K, 2018: Some physical, morphological, and mechanical characteristics of turkey (meleagris gallopavo) eggs. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 20(2), 317-324.
• Hristakieva P, Lalev M, Oblakova M, Mincheva N, Ivanova I, 2011: Effect of storage duration on the quality of hatchingturkey eggs.ArchivaZootechnica,14(3),57-65.
• Hristakieva P, Oblakova M, Lalev M, 2009: Incubation and vital morphological traits in eggs from age-related turkeys. Trakia Journal of Sciences, 7(1), 63-67.
• Hristakieva P, M. Oblakova, N. Mincheva, M. Lalev, K. Kaliasheva, 2017a: Evaluation of some eggshell parameters during the embryogenesis in turkeys. Slovak Journal of Animal Science, 50(1), 1-6.
• Hristakieva P, M. Oblakova, N. Mincheva, M. Lalev, K. Kaliasheva, 2017b: Phenotypic correlations between the egg weight, shape of egg, shell thickness, weight loss and hatchling weight of turkeys. Slovak Journal of Animal Science, 50(2), 90-94.
• Hoyt DF, 1979: Practical methods of estimating volume and fresh weight of bird eggs. The Auk, 96, 73-77.
• Karabulut O, Ün H, Çamkerten İ, Garip M, Bulut G, 2017: Aksaray yöresi kazlarda kuluçka randımanı üzerine araştırmalar. Bahri Dağdaş Hayvancılık Araştırma Dergisi, 6(1), 13-22.
• Kavitha K, Manohar Raj G, Vairamuthu S, Ramamurthy N, 2017: Comparative study of egg quality traits in white pekin and indigenous ducks of Tamil Nadu. International Journal of Science, Environment and Technology, 6(6), 3520-3523.
• Kırmızıbayrak T, Boğa Kuru B, Yazıcı K, 2016: Kazlarda yumurta verimi ve kalite özellikleri ile kuluçka özellikleri. Turkiye Klinikleri J Reprod Artif Insemin-Special Topics, 2(1), 42-47.
• Kokoszynski D, Bernacki Z, Korytkowska H, 2007: Eggshell and egg content traits in peking duck eggs from the P44 reserve flock raised in Poland. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 8, 9-16.
• Mazanowski A, Adamsk M, 2006: The structure, chemical composition and time trends of egg quality characteristics in high-producing geese. Archiv fur Geflügelkunde, 70(3), 127-133.
• Mazanowski A, Bernacki Z, Kisiel T, 2005: Characteristics of reproductive traits and egg traits of crossbred geese with Graylag ancestry. Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences, 14, 549- 560.
• Mróz E, Stępińska M, Krawczyk M, 2014: Morphology and chemical composition of turkey eggs. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 23(2), 196-203.
• Narahari D, Abdul Mujeer K, Maqbool A, Asha Rajini R, Sundararasu V, 1991: Factors influencing the hatching performance of duck eggs. British Poultry Science, 32(2), 313-318.
• Narushin VG, 2005: Egg geometry calculation using the measurements of length and breadth. Poultry Science, 84, 482-484.
• Rabsztyn A, Anders K, Dudek M, 2010: Variability, heritability and correlations of egg shape in the Zatorska goose. Journal of Central European Agriculture, 11(4), 433-436.
• Rahman MM, Khan MJ, AIam MS, Islam MA, Rana M, 2010: Egg quality characteristics of three genotypes of duck reared in the coastal area of Bangladesh. J Bangladesh Soc Agric Sci Technol 7(3&4), 97-102.
• Rahn H, Ar A, Paganelli CV, 1979: How bird eggs breathe. Scientific American, 240, 46-55.
• Saatci M, Yardımcı M, Kaya İ, Poyraz Ö, 2002: Kars ili kazlarında bazı yumurta özellikleri. Lalahan Hayvancılık Araştırma Enstitüsü Dergisi, 42 (2), 37-45.
• Saatci M, Kırmızıbayrak T, Aksoy AR, Tilki M, 2005: 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 29, 353-357.
• Taşkın A, Karadavut U, Camcı Ö, 2017: Kırşehir ilindeki damızlık kaz yetiştiriciliğini etkileyen faktörlerin belirlenmesi. Türk Tarım ve Doğa Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(2), 138–144.
• Türkoğlu M, Sarıca M, 2009: Tavukçuluk Bilimi: Yetiştirme, Besleme, Hastalıklar. 3. Basım, Bey ofset Matbaacılık, Türkiye, Ankara.
• Tilki M, İnal Ş, 2004: Quality traits of goose eggs: 1. Effects of goose age and storage time of eggs. Archiv Geflügelkunde, 68(4), 182-186.
• Yuan J, Wang B, Huang Z, Fan Y, Huang C, Hou Z, 2013: Comparisons of egg quality traits, egg weight loss and hatchability between striped and normal duck eggs. British Poultry Science, 54(2), 265-269.
• Zhang J, Peng W, Tang W, Wang M, 2017: Experimental study on the geometrical and mechanical properties of goose eggshells. Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 19(3), 455-464.