Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler

Çiğdem Şeremet; Hüseyin Cem Güler

doi:10.29185/hayuretim.1579936

EN TR

Relationships Between Some Quality Characteristics and Formation of Blood and Meat Spots in Organic Table Eggs

Öz

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine the incidence of blood and meat spots in organic chicken eggs, to investigate the factors influencing the occurrence of these spots using multinomial logistic regression analysis, and to identify the phenotypic relationships among various egg quality traits. Materials and Methods: The experimental material consisted of organic eggs produced in different regions of Turkey. For this purpose, quality analyses were performed on a total of 188 brown-shelled eggs from 9 different producers, and meat and/or blood spots were identified. Results: It was found that a significant percentage of the evaluated eggs (63.043%) had meat and blood spots, with varying intensities of spotting. The results of the regression analysis indicated that egg weight and sharp end thickness had a significant effect on the formation of meat spots, with the likelihood of severe spotting decreasing as weight increased. In blood-spotted eggs, the only significant difference was found in the “slightly spotted and heavily spotted” group for egg weight. Additionally, significant phenotypic relationships among egg quality characteristics were identified. Conclusion: It has been determined that egg weight and sharp end thickness may influence spot intensity, particularly with an observed tendency for increased egg weight to reduce the occurrence of blood and meat spots.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Organic egg, meat and/or blood spot, quality, regression, correlation

Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, organik tavuk yumurtalarında et ve kan lekesi görülme sıklığını belirlemek, multinomial lojistik regresyon analizi kullanarak bu lekelerin oluşumuna etki eden faktörleri incelemek ve çeşitli yumurta kalite özellikleri arasındaki fenotipik ilişkileri saptamaktır. Materyal ve Metot: Deneme materyalini, Türkiye’nin farklı bölgelerinde üretilen organik yumurtalar oluşturmuştur. Bu amaçla, 9 farklı üreticiye ait toplam 188 adet kahverengi kabuklu yumurtada, kalite analizleri yapılmış ve et ve/veya kan lekeleri belirlenmiştir. Bulgular: Çalışmada değerlendirilen yumurtaların önemli bir kısmında (%63.043) et ve kan lekesi bulunduğu ve leke yoğunluğunun çeşitlilik gösterdiği saptanmıştır. Regresyon analiz sonuçlarında, yumurta ağırlığı ve sivri uç kalınlığının et lekesi oluşumu üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi olduğu görülmüş ve ağırlık arttıkça yoğun leke görülme olasılığının azaldığı belirlenmiştir. Kan lekeli yumurtalarda tek anlamlı farklılık yumurta ağırlığı için “az lekeli ve yoğun lekeli” grubunda saptanmıştır. Ayrıca, yumurta kalite özellikleri arasında önemli fenotipik ilişkiler belirlenmiştir. Sonuç: Yumurta ağırlığı ve sivri uç kalınlığının leke yoğunluğunu etkileyebileceği, özellikle yumurta ağırlığındaki artışın et ve kan lekesi oluşumunu azaltma eğiliminde olduğu saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Organik yumurta, et ve/veya kan lekesi, kalite, regresyon, korelasyon

Kaynakça

Aboonajmi M, Mostafaei Z. 2022. Non-destructive quality assessment of table eggs for online sorting. In Informatics in Poultry Production: A Technical Guidebook for Egg and Poultry Education, Research and Industry (pp. 35-51). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
Alexandratos N, Bruinsma J. 2012. World agriculture towards 2030/2050: the 2012 revision.
Anonim, 2024. https://layinghens.hendrix-genetics.com/en/articles/eggshell-color-eggsplained/#:~:text=The%20genetics%20of%20a%20chicken,eggshell%20colors%20among%20different%20breeds. Erişim tarihi: 04 Aralık 2024.
Alkan S, Galiç A, Karsli T, Karabağ K. 2015. Effects of egg weight on egg quality traits in partridge (Alectoris Chukar). Journal of applied animal research, 43(4), 450-456.
Bain MM. 2005. Recent advances in the assessment of eggshell quality and their future application. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 61: 268–277. doi:10.1079/WPS200459.
Bearse GE, McClary CF, Saxena HC. 1960. Blood spot incidence in chicken eggs and vitamin A level of the diet. Poultry Science, 39(4), 860-865.
Berg C. 2002. Health and welfare in organic poultry production. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 43(1), 1-9.
Boateng M, Atuahene PY, Amoah KO, Frimpong YO, Okai DB. 2022. Incidence of blood and meat spots in eggs from a commercial poultry farm. Ghana Journal of Science, 63(1), 90-96.
Boateng M, Okai DB, Amoah KO, Boateng JO, Frimpong YO, Atuahene PY. 2019. Occurrence of blood and meat spots in eggs processed and sold by commercial fried eggs (chibom) sellers at three locations in the Ashanti Region of Ghana. Ghanaian Journal of Animal Science, 10(1), 51-57.
Brade W, Flachowsky G, Schrader L. 2008. Legehuhnzucht und Eiererzeugung. Empfehlungen für die Praxis. Landbauforschung, Sonderheft, 322.

Brant AW, Norris KH, Chin G. 1953. A spectrophotometric method for detecting blood in white-shell eggs. Poultry Science, 32(2), 357-363.
Card LE, Nalbandov A. 1944. Controlling blood and meat spots. Poultry Science, 23, 551.
Chen M, Zhang L, Xu H. 2015. On-line detection of blood spot introduced into brown-shell eggs using visible absorbance spectroscopy. Biosystems Engineering, 131, 95-101.
Drewnowski A. 2010. The nutrient rich foods index helps to identify healthy, affordable foods. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 91, 1095–1101.
Duman M, Şekeroğlu A, Yıldırım A, Eleroğlu H, Camcı Ö. 2016. Relation between egg shape index and egg quality characteristics. European Poultry Science/Archiv für Geflügelkunde, 80(117).
Fajemilehin SOK. 2008. Predicting post-broken traits using the pre-broken traits as regressors in the eggs of helmeted guinea fowl. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 3: 578-580.
Fathi MM, Galal A, Ali UM, Abou-Emera OK. 2019. Physical and mechanical properties of eggshell as affected by chicken breed and flock age. British Poultry Science, 60(5), 506-512.
Flock DK, Schmutz M, Preisinger R. 2007. Optimierung der Eiqualität aus züchterischer Sicht. Züchtungskunde, 79(4), 309-319.
Guni FS, Mbaga SH, Katule AM and Goromela EH. 2021. Effects of breed and management system on egg quality traits of two improved dual-purposes chicken breeds. Livestock Research for Rural Development, 33(12), pp.552-555.
Hammershøj M, Kristiansen GH, Steenfeldt S. 2021. Dual-purpose poultry in organic egg production and effects on egg quality parameters. Foods, 10(4), 897.
Hidalgo A, Galbiati D, Cavanna D, Suman M. 2020. Evaluation of chemical indices for the identification of incubator-reject eggs in egg products. Food Control, 107, 106767.
Hisasaga C, Griffin SE and Tarrant KJ. 2020. Survey of egg quality in commercially available table eggs. Poultry Science, 99(12), pp.7202-7206.
Hocking PM, Bain M, Channing CE, Fleming R, Wilson S. 2003. Genetic variation for egg production, egg quality and bone strength in selected and traditional breeds of laying fowl. British Poultry Science, 44(3), 365-373.
Istiak MS, Khaliduzzaman A. 2022. Poultry and egg production: an overview. Informatics in Poultry Production: A Technical Guidebook for Egg and Poultry Education, Research and Industry, 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2556-6_1.
Ketta M, Tůmová E. 2018. Relationship between eggshell thickness and other eggshell measurements in eggs from litter and cages. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 17(1), 234-239.
Kibala L, Rozempolska-Rucinska I, Kasperek K, Zieba G and Lukaszewicz M. 2015. Ultrasonic eggshell thickness measurement for selection of layers. Poultry Science, 94(10), pp.2360-2363.
Lordelo M, Cid J, Cordovil CM, Alves SP, Bessa RJ, Carolino I. 2020. A comparison between the quality of eggs from indigenous chicken breeds and that from commercial layers. Poultry Science, 99(3), 1768-1776.
Mine Y, Guyonnet V, Hatta H, Nau F, Qiu N. (Eds.). 2023. Handbook of egg science and technology. CRC Press.
Mottet A, Tempio G. 2017. Global poultry production: current state and future outlook and challenges. World's Poultry Science Journal, 73(2), 245-256.
Nalbandov AV, Card LE. 1944. The problem of blood clots and meat spots in chicken eggs. Poultry Science, 23(3), 170-180.
Narinc D, Aygun A, Karaman E, and Aksoy T. 2015. Egg shell quality in Japanese quail: characteristics, heritabilities and genetic and phenotypic relationships. Animal, 9(7), 1091-1096.
Nys Y, Sauveur B. 2004. Valeur nutritionnelle des oeufs. INRA. Productions Animales, 17, 385–393.
Patterson PH, Koelkebeck KW, Bell DD, Carey JB, Darre MJ, Anderson KE. 2001. Egg marketing in national supermarkets: Specialty eggs–part 2. Poultry Science, 80(4), 390-395.
Perić L, Stojčić MĐ, Bjedov S. 2017. The effect of storage and age of hens on the quality of table eggs. Advanced Research in Life Sciences, 1(1), 64-67.
Reis TL, Quintero JCP, Moraes JE, Pizzolante CC, Calixto LFL. 2019. Correlation among the main parameters of eggshell quality analysis of hen and quail eggs. Boletim de Indùstria Animal, 76, 1-6.
Rizzi C. 2020. Yield performance, laying behaviour traits and egg quality of purebred and hybrid hens reared under outdoor conditions. Animals, 10(4), 584.
Roberts JR. 2004. Factors affecting internal quality and egg shell quality in laying hens. Journal of Poultry Science, 41 (3), 161-177.
SAS. 2009. JMP (Version 8), Computer software. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
Sokołowicz Z, Krawczyk J, Dykiel M. 2018. The effect of the type of alternative housing system, genotype and age of laying hens on egg quality. Annals of Animal Science, 18(2), 541-556.
Stadelman WJ and Cotterill OJ. 2001. Egg Science and Technology. 4th ed. Avi Publ. Co., Westport, CT.
Stadelman WJ. 1950. What the consumer thinks of our eggs. Proceedings of the Third Pacific Northwest Chicken and Turkey Breeder’s Roundtable.
Stadelman WJ. 1977. Quality identification of shell eggs in egg science and technology. 2nd ed. Westport, Connecticut: AVI Publishing Company Inc., 33pp.
Szőllősi L. 2021. Current state and future prospects of the egg sector–an International outlook. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus, 86(2), 95-105.
Şeremet Ç, Güler HC. 2024. Meat and blood spots as a quality trait on table eggs: Causes and solutions. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, 7(6), 27-28. DOI: 10.47115/bsagriculture.150488.
Tatara MR, Charuta A, Krupski W, Łuszczewska-Sierakowska I, Korwin-Kossakowska A, Sartowska K, Szpetnar M and Horbańczuk JO. 2015. Interrelationships between morphological, densitometric and mechanical properties of eggs in Japanese quails (Coturnix Japonica). The Journal of Poultry Science, 53(1), pp.51-57.
TUİK. 2024. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Kategori/GetKategori?p=Tarim-111. Erişim tarihi: 27 Eylül 2024.
Worldometer. 2024. https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/world-population-projections/. Erişim tarihi: 27 Eylül 2024.
Yan YY, Sun CJ, Lian L, Zheng JX, Xu GY, Yang N. 2014. Effect of uniformity of eggshell thickness on eggshell quality in chickens. The Journal of Poultry Science, 51(3), 338-342.
YUM-BİR. 2012. https://www.yum-bir.org/UserFiles/File/yumurta-tavukculugu-2012.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 03 Ekim 2024.
YUM-BİR. 2021. https://www.yum-bir.org/UserFiles/File/Veri-2021.pdf. Erişim tarihi: 03 Ekim 2024.
Zhang LC, Ning ZH, Xu GY, Hou ZC, Yang AN. 2005. Heritabilities and genetic and phenotypic correlations of egg quality traits in brown-egg dwarf layers. Poultry Science, 84(8), 1209-1213.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil

Türkçe

Konular

Kanatlı Hayvan Yetiştirme ve Islahı

Bölüm

Araştırma Makalesi

Yazarlar

Çiğdem Şeremet ^*
0000-0002-9642-1648
Türkiye

Hüseyin Cem Güler
0000-0002-1527-1562
Türkiye

Erken Görünüm Tarihi

31 Aralık 2024

Yayımlanma Tarihi

31 Aralık 2024

Gönderilme Tarihi

5 Kasım 2024

Kabul Tarihi

17 Aralık 2024

Yayımlandığı Sayı

Yıl 2024 Cilt: 65 Sayı: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.29185/hayuretim.1579936

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA62NL53RD

APA

Şeremet, Ç., & Güler, H. C. (2024). Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler. Journal of Animal Production, 65(2), 172-185. https://doi.org/10.29185/hayuretim.1579936

AMA

1.Şeremet Ç, Güler HC. Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler. Journal of Animal Production. 2024;65(2):172-185. doi:10.29185/hayuretim.1579936

Chicago

Şeremet, Çiğdem, ve Hüseyin Cem Güler. 2024. “Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler”. Journal of Animal Production 65 (2): 172-85. https://doi.org/10.29185/hayuretim.1579936.

EndNote

Şeremet Ç, Güler HC (01 Aralık 2024) Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler. Journal of Animal Production 65 2 172–185.

IEEE

[1]Ç. Şeremet ve H. C. Güler, “Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler”, Journal of Animal Production, c. 65, sy 2, ss. 172–185, Ara. 2024, doi: 10.29185/hayuretim.1579936.

ISNAD

Şeremet, Çiğdem - Güler, Hüseyin Cem. “Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler”. Journal of Animal Production 65/2 (01 Aralık 2024): 172-185. https://doi.org/10.29185/hayuretim.1579936.

JAMA

1.Şeremet Ç, Güler HC. Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler. Journal of Animal Production. 2024;65:172–185.

MLA

Şeremet, Çiğdem, ve Hüseyin Cem Güler. “Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler”. Journal of Animal Production, c. 65, sy 2, Aralık 2024, ss. 172-85, doi:10.29185/hayuretim.1579936.

Vancouver

1.Çiğdem Şeremet, Hüseyin Cem Güler. Organik Sofralık Yumurtalarda Bazı Kalite Özellikleri ile Et ve Kan Lekesi Oluşumu Arasındaki İlişkiler. Journal of Animal Production. 01 Aralık 2024;65(2):172-85. doi:10.29185/hayuretim.1579936

26405

Creative Commons License Journal of Animal Production is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

26407 26406 26408 26409 26410 26399 26411 26412 26413 26414 26415