CC BY
0Effect of Floor Eggs on Hatchability, Candling, Water Loss, Chick Yield, Chick Weight and Dead in Shell
Adnan Jabbar1* and Yasir Allah Ditta2
1Manager Sadiq Poultry (Pvt) Limited, Chakri Hatchery Rawalpindi, Pakistan 2Assistant Professor, Department of Animal Nutrition, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences Lahore, Pakistan *Corresponding author's Email: sbhatcheryislamabad@gmail.com
Received: 17 Nov 2017 Accepted: 21 Dec 2017
ABSTRACT
A chicken with high quality resulted from a clean egg, not broken, and not containing cracks. This experiment was performed with the goal to evaluate the effect of contaminated eggs on hatchability, egg water loss, chick weight, chick yield, DIS, A grade and B grade chicks. Eggs (Cobb 300, Ross 308, Hubbard classic n=8616960) from six different farms were collected and divided into two groups. Group A containing good quality eggs and group B contaminated eggs or floor eggs. Each farm participated (n=1436160) eggs for sixteen replicates. Candling was significantly better (P<0.001) in all flocks of group A as compared to B regardless of the age and breed of broiler eggs. The eggs from group B presented significantly less water loss as compared to group A. Chick yield was significantly better for group A than group B. Similarly, Chick weight, quantity of A grade chicks was significantly better for group A than group B. In short floor or contaminated eggs negatively affects the hatchery parameters and becomes a source of contamination for chicks in the hatchery and farms. Keywords: Chick weight, Chick yield, Dead in shell, Floor Eggs, Hatchability, Water loss
JWPR
Journal of World's Poultry Research
2017, Scienceline Publication
J. World Poult. Res. 7(4): 154-158, Dec 25, 2017
Research Paper, PII: S2322455X1700019-7 License: CC BY 4.0
INTRODUCTION
Many scientists have proven that the quality of the breeder's egg influences the livability of embryo and post hatch performance (Yoho et al., 2008). When the shell and membranes are broken they become exposed to bacterial contamination. This contamination may lead to embryonic death at any stage of incubation depending upon severity of infection (Barnett et al., 2004). To get more profit and fulfill the meat requirement, Intensive production of broiler has been practiced regardless the quality and contamination. Floor eggs or dirty eggs from breeder's farm are the main source of contamination. Several bacterial transmission e-g salmonella and mycoplasma may start from ovule, just after ovulation. The egg is wet and warm when laid and prone to microbial transferring into the shell (Hameed et al., 2014). The infection spreads from the egg shell surface to shell membrane through shell pores (Berrang et al., 1999). Some viral infections e-g
corona virus responsible for internal as well as external egg quality deterioration leads to affecting overall egg production and decline hatchability. The quality parameters of a hatchery are badly affected through theses contamination (Gary et al., 2015). The washing of contaminated eggs has no effect on floor eggs. Bacterial contamination leads to decline hatchability and later life performance (van den Brand et al., 2016). The infected egg shell is unable for gaseous exchange as well as water loss during incubation becomes source of infection for other eggs and incubator due to expulsion and quality of chicks deteriorates. The factor water loss directly influences the chick yield that is necessary for quality chicks. Water loss, chick weight and chick yield are closely related and influence the post hatch performance (Jabbar et al., 2017). The infected birds are unable to perform result in poor FCR. The horizontal as well as vertical transmission of bacteria also effects hatchability (Saif et al., 2008). The egg contamination also increases
|To cite this paper: Jabbar A and Allah Ditta Y (2017). Effect of Floor Eggs on Hatchability, Candling, Water Loss, Chick Yield, Chick Weight and Dead in Shell. J. World Poult. Res., 7 (4): 154-158.
with the age of breeders. The young and prime age breeders have less contaminated eggs as compared to old age breeders (Jabbar et al., 2017). The aim of this experiment was to investigate the effects of contaminated/floor eggs on egg water loss, chick weight, chick yield, DIS, A grade and B grade chicks.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Ethical approval
This experiment was part of routine field work in a hatchery considering all rules and regulations regarding animal rights and ethic, university of veterinary and animal sciences, Lahore, Pakistan.
Site selection
The experiment was conducted at one of the biggest Poultry hatchery of Asia Sadiq Poultry (Pvt) Rawalpindi Punjab Pakistan. The hatchery is facilitated with latest Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) automation, having ISO (International standard organization) 1900-2000 certified and producing 6.5-7 million best quality chicks/month through single stage incubation system (Avida G4, Chick Master USA).
Selection of breeds
Sadiq Poultry flock no. 101 cobb 300, 102 ross 308, 103 ross 308, 105 ross 308, Arslan Poultry flock no. 23 hubbard classic, Sarghoda farms ross 308.
Selection of eggs
Good quality eggs free from any kind of contamination were selected and graded on the basis of weight through Moba 9A egg grader (Khan et al., 2016)
Experimental groups
The experimental eggs were divided into two groups on the basis of contamination. Group A contains A grade eggs free from any kind of contamination while group B contain contaminated eggs. Each group contain (n= 8616960) for 16 replicates.
Eggs fumigation
Automatic fumigation system recommended by Chick Master with 20g KMnO4 and 40ml formalin (40%) and 40 ml of water for 100ft 3areas and 15 minutes.
Incubation programme
Experimental eggs from both groups were pre-heated as recommended by (Jaabar et al., 2017). After pre-heated automatic setter incubation profile as recommended by chick master (USA)
Setter hall and hatcher hall
Environmental conditions in setter hall were at 75 0F temperatures and 40% Relative humidity; whereas in the hatcher hall temperature was at750F and relative humidity had been increased up to 60%. The positive pressure in setter and hatcher hall was 15 Pascal and 10 Pascal respectively, while negative pressure inside setter and hatcher plenum was -25 Pascal during the course of study.
Egg's weight loss
Eggs weight loss was measured by following formula for both groups individually.
Water Loss (%) =
Full tray weight at Setting - Full Tray Weight at Transfer - x 100
Full tray weight at Setting - Empty Tray Wight
Candling
Candling was performed automatic transfer table provided by KUHL (USA)
Chick grading
Chick grading and packing was performed on international standard through automatic grading table and chick counter provided by KUHL (USA).
A Grade chicks. Chicks with shining eyes, soft legs and nose, healed naval and healthy minimum weight of 38 grams were graded as A grade chick.
B grade chicks. Underweight less than 30 grams, weak and unhealed naval chicks were removed to mention as B grade.
Chick yield measure
Chick's yield was measure through by using following formula:
Chick Yield % = Weight of chicks x 100 Egg weight
Chicks with 69% yield were graded as A grade while more than 69% or less than 67% were graded as B grade (Aviagen. 2).
Dead in shell (DIS) analysis
Dead in shell analysis was performed to investigate the embryonic mortality in both groups. For that unhatched eggs from both groups were broken individually.
Statistical analyses
All data were analyzed by using Statistical Analysis System package software (SAS version 9.2, SAS Institute
Inc., Cary, NC, USA). All means were compared using t-test and results were presented as mean ± SEM (standard error of mean). Results were considered significant if P<0.001.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
All parameters from both groups were recorded individually. Candling was significantly better (P<0.001) in all flocks of group A as compared to B regardless of the age and breed of broiler eggs (Table 1). Candling also depends on age of breeders because decline in reproductive performance after 45 weeks has been well documented (Van de Ven, 2012). The farm management e-g mixing of male female, spiking and flock health condition also have impact on candling. The results clearly show that contaminated eggs have significant losses in term of candling.
Water loss is very important for good chick yield. The eggs from group B presented significantly (P<0.001) less water loss as compared to group A regardless the age and breed of broiler eggs (Table 2). For good quality chicks 12% water loss is recommended because less than 6% and more than 14% is difficult for chicks to hatch. For quality chicks water loss should be control in incubator from egg to chick. Water loss also depends upon the humidity levels in the incubators and humidity level in the fresh air coming to incubators. The hatch window is also affected by water loss. Adequate water level in incubators is essential to retain the required water inside eggs necessary to create air cell that helps chicks to come out from eggs in limited time. The air cell allows embryonic lung ventilation after internal piping for a successful hatch (Ar and Rahn, 1980).
Chick yield was significantly (P<0.001) better for group A than for group B (Table 3). The recommended chick yield is 69% for quality chicks. Water loss and chick yield are related to each other. If chick yield excels more than 69 % it becomes a source of dehydration, creates difficulty for chicks to comes out from eggs and hatch window will increase (Aviagen. 2). The chicks yield with more than 69% becomes source of high mortality at farm. Chick yield less than 67%, the water retains in belly of chicks. The chicks become lethargic and refuse to take feed at the farm (Jabbar et al., 2017)
The quantity of A grade chicks increases with good quality eggs as shown in table 4.Chick yield ingroup A was significantly (P<0.005) better as compare to B. The A grade chicks quantity also depends upon health condition of flock, vertically and horizontal transmitted diseases e-g
(ND, IB, H9, EDS, MG, Salmonella etc.), and farm management issues (King'ori, 2011).
The percentage of B grade chicks/poor quality chicks were significantly (P<0.005) higher in B group as compared to A group (Table 5). The B grade chicks quantity were also affected by health condition of flock and vertically and horizontal transmitted diseases e-g (ND, IB, H9, EDS, MG, Salmonella etc.) and farm management issue (King'ori, 2011).
Table 1. Effect of floor eggs on candling percentage at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to
May 2017)
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb б5 13.51±0.28a 7.02±0.22ь
SP 102 ross б5 19.42±0.54 a 16.87±0.73 ь
SP 103 ross б0 18.30±0.45a 13.57±0.27ь
SP 105 ross б0 15.613±1.00!1 5.09±0.64ь
AP hubbard 45 6.84±0.20!1 5.25±0.03ь
SRA ross 45 6.84±0.20a 5.25±0.03ь
SRB ross 45 18.81±0.26a 12.465±0.29ь
a Different superscripts within each row show significant difference
Table 2. Effect of floor eggs on water loss at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb 65 11.18±0.45a 12.34±0.30ь
SP 102 ross б5 10.82±0.01a 11.88±0.01ь
SP 103 ross б0 11.28±0.25a 12.14±0.20ь
SP 105 ross б0 10.883 ± 0.26a 12.15±0.69ь
AP hubbard 45 10.26 ±0.15a 12.2б± 0.15ь
SRA ross 45 10.84±0.2a 11.523±0.30ь
SRB ross 45 10.06±0.21a 12.495±0.42ь
a Different superscript within each row show significant difference
Table 3. Effect of floor eggs on chick yield at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb 65 67.65±0.45a 68.81±0.30ь
SP 102 ross б5 68.18 ±0.01a 69.12±0.01ь
SP 103 ross б0 67.64±0.34a 68.972±0.27ь
SP 105 ross б0 66.819± 0.69a 69.247±0.2бь
AP hubbard 45 67.74 ±0.45a 68.2±0.45ь
SRA ross 45 67.16±0.2a 68.478±0.30ь
SRB ross 45 68.2±0.20a 69.288±0.40ь
ab Different superscript within each row show significant difference
Hatchability is complex thing effect by lot of factors e-g candling, water loss, DIS, chick yield, contaminated
eggs, crack eggs, flock health condition, flock age, horizontal and vertical transmitted diseases, farm management and incubator proper temperature and humidity set points (Jabbar et al., 2017). These factors are critical to achieve standard hatchability. The results showed that hatchability also significantly (P<0.001) affected by contaminated eggs (Table 6).
Chick weight is related to water loss and water loss is related to chick yield. The eggs with contamination on egg shell are unable to hold require water inside egg necessary for proper hatch window. The standard water loss 12% will not meet and chicks becomes unable to get require weight as shown in result (Table 7). i-e contaminated eggs have significantly (P<0.001) less weight. Chicks that are comfortable, i.e. in their thermo neutral zone (rectal temperature (40-40.6°C, 104-105°F) lose 1-2 grams of moisture per 24 hours. Chicks that are overheated (rectal temperature over 106°F, 41.1°C) lose 5-10 grams of moisture per 24 hours. This is true in any situation where the chicks have no access to water, whether the chicks are in the hatcher or in transport to the farm (Hill et al., 2011).
Standard water loss and chick yield are necessary for chicks to come out from eggs. Due to the contamination they require water loss and yield can't be achieved and it becomes difficult for chicks to come out from eggs results in increased mortality inside egg or during hatching as shown in table 8. The contamination may become source of embryo mortality at any stage of incubation depending on severity of infection. Most of embryo dies during last week due to malposition, malformation, adhesion and dehydration (Kalita et al., 2013)
Table 4. Effect of floor eggs on percentage of A grade chicks at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)_
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb 65 73.59±0.16a 87.38±0.29b
SP 102 ross 65 66.5±0.67a 79.19±0.54b
SP 103 ross 60 68.06±0.30a 80.11±0.41b
SP 105 ross 60 68.24± 0.35a 81.21±0.68b
AP hubbard 45 89.59 ±0.36a 90.58 ± 0.731
SRA ross 45 68.213±0.35a 81.258±0.25b
SRB ross 45 67.983±0.25a 80.95±0.40b
Table 5. Effect of floor eggs on percentage of B grade chicks at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)_
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb 65 2.37±0.26a 1.09±0.08b
SP 102 ross 65 2.07±0.15a 1.03±0.08b
SP 103 ross 60 2.34±0.08a 1.0705±0.07b
SP 105 ross 60 2.21±0.192a 1.06±0.04b
AP hubbard 45 1.37± 1.87a 0.97±0.94b
SRA ross 45 2.325±0.12a 1.025±0.05b
SRB ross 45 2.2±0.040a 1.1±0.040b
ab Different superscript within each show significant difference
Table 6. Effect of floor eggs on hatchability percentage at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)_
Flock Age (Weeks) Group B Group A
SP 101 cobb 65 73.59±0.16a 87.38±0.29b
SP 102 ross 65 66.5±0.67a 79.19±0.54b
SP 103 ross 60 68.06±0.30a 80.11±0.41b
SP 105 ross 60 68.24± 0.35a 81.21±0.68b
AP hubbard 45 89.59 ±0.36a 90.58 ± 0.73b
SRA ross 45 68.213±0.35a 81.258±0.25b
SRB ross 45 67.983±0.25a 80.95±0.40b
ab Different Superscript within each row show significant difference
Table 7. Effect of floor eggs on chick weight at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to May 2017)_
Ftock aL^ Group B(gr) Group A (gr)
SP 101 COBB 65 47.29±0.40a 48+0±0.40b
SP 102 ROSS 65 45±0.12a 47±0.12b
SP 103 ROSS 60 46.5±0.28a 48±0.01b
SP 105 ROSS 60 45±+0.01a 47±+0.50b
AP HUBBARD.C 45 40±0.17a 42±0.76b
SRA ROSS 45 45.5±0.20a 47.25±0.40b
SRB ROSS 45 40.92±0.04a 41.45±0.02b
ab Different superscript within each row show significant difference
Table 8. Effect of floor eggs on dead in shell percentage at Sadiq Hatchery Chakri Rawalpindi, Pakistan (January to
_May 2017)_
Age
Flock rwww> GrouP B GrouP A
( W eeks)
SP 101 cobb 65 10.71±0.24a 4.56±0.26b
SP 102 ross 65 9.71±0.23a 5.56±0.36b
SP 103 ross 60 10.71±0.24a 4.56±0.26b
SP 105 ross 60 5.88±0.21a 3.96±0.13b
AP hubbard 45 4.2±0.214a 3.2±0.31b
SRA ross 45 8.95±0.40a 6.48±0.40b
SRB ross 45 10.66±0.04a 5.31±0.03b
' Different superscript within each row show significant difference
ab Different superscript within each row show significant difference
CONCLUSION
The floor eggs or contaminated eggs must be avoided from hatching. They can be a source of infections in the hatchery and the quality of chicks deteriorates. All hatchery parameters are negatively affected by such kind of eggs.
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to Director of Sadiq Poultry (Pvt) limited Mr. Salman Sadiq for their full support, motivation, fruitful suggestions and encouragement during the whole period of research work. We are also grateful to Engr. Jawad Kiwan Qazi, Engr. Mirza Shahbaz Baig, Mr. Muhammad Akhtar and Hatchery Head Supervisor Mr. Muhammad Ashfaq for their cooperation.
Author's contribution
Both authors have equally contribution in this work. Competing of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publications of this article.
REFERENCES
Ar A, Rahn H (1980). Water in the avian egg: Water in the Avian Egg Overall Budget of Incubation Integrative and Comparative Biology, 20(2): 383-384. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/20.2.373 Barnett DM, Kumpula BL, Petryk R, Robinson L, Renema RA and Robinson FE (2004). Hatchability and Early Chick Growth Potential of Broiler Breeder Eggs with Hairline Cracks. Poultry Science Association, 65-70. Doi: 10.1093/japr/13.1.65 Berrang ME, Cox NA, Frank JF and Buhr RJ (1999). Bacterial penetration of the eggshell and shell membranes of the chicken hatching egg. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 8: 499-504. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/japr/8.4.499 Gary D, Butcher and Miles R (2015). Infectious bronchitis and its Effects on Egg Production Quality IFAS Extension University of Florida. Gainesville, FL 32611 VM68:1-2. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/vm014 Hameed U, Akram W, and Anjum MS (2014). Effect of Salmonella on Hatchability and Fertility in Laying
Hen, an Assessment Veterinaria, 2: 20-23. http://thesciencepublishers.com/veterinaria/files/2014 005.pdf
Hill D (2011). The Hatch Window. American Poultry Congress.
http://hatchtechgroup.com/media/documenten/thehat chwindow.pdf
Jabbar A, Yousaf A and Yasir AD (2017). Effect of Pre-Warming on Broiler Breeder Eggs Hatchability and Post-Hatch Performance Journal of Animal Health and Production 5(1): 1-4. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14737/journal.jahp/2017/5.1.1.4 Kalita N, Pathak N, Ahmed M and Saikia GK (2013). Various causes related to dead-in-shell embryos of crossbred (PB-2 x Indigenous) chicken egg. 6(10): 774-777. Doi: 10.14202/vetworld.2013.774-777 King'ori AM (2011). Review of the factors that influence egg fertility and hatchability in poultry. Indian Journal of Poultry Science, 10:483-492. https://doi.org/10.3923/ijps.2011.483.492 Saif YM, Fadly AM, Glisson GR, McDougald LR, Nolan LK and Swayne DE (2008) .Diseases of poultry in, Gast RK (editor), Salmonella infections, Blackwell Publishing professional, 2121 State Avenue, Ames Iowa 50014, USA, 2008; pp 619. https://himakahaunhas.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/ disease-of-poultry.pdf Van den Brand H, SosefMP, Lourens Aand van Harn J(2016).Effects of floor eggs on hatchability and later life performance in broiler Chickens. Poultry Science, 95:1025-1032. DOI: 10.3382/ps/pew008 http://dx.doi.org/10.3382/ps/pew008 Van de Ven LJF (2012). Effects of hatching time and hatching system on broiler chick development. PhD thesis, The Netherlands, Wageningen University http ://edepot.wur. nl/237333
Yoho DE, Moyle JR, Swaffar AD and Bramwell RK (2009). Effect of Incubating Poor Quality Broiler Breeder Hatching Eggs on Overall Hatchability and Hatch of Fertile. Avian Advice, 10(4) http ://citeseerx. ist.psu. edu/viewdoc/download; Doi: 10.1.1.454.2492
